Live for TAs

I got my rear mount done, but need to fine tune a few things. I was only able to run it in 2nd gear (& stay close enough to walk home if I had a catastrophic failure ) but saw about 6 PSI boost (at the intake via the Autometer gauge) with the electronic boost control set on 50% (this was with a Supertrapp 3" inlet muffler & all baffles as well). The interesting thing is when you think about it, air enters in a 4" tube from the left rear end of the car, is compressed and pushed forward into a 2.25" tube then into a 3" in/out front mount IC and then up into the MAF & TB. A long trip anyway you look at it.

I need to rehang the unit as it is too low (about 3" clearance to shop floor) thanks to the muffler shop welding the flange on at the wrong angle . I'm going to add a V-band & flanges so I can adjust the turbo inlet pipe angle like you can the outlet.

I think the boost controller (Greddy Profec) may have a memory for high boost, if so I'll edit & repost later. At any rate, once it is tested more & rehung, I will have it dyno tuned and will post the results here.

EDIT
I bought the EBC used, and it still had 19 PSI on the gauge as the max pressure reading . I know I didn't see that with my limited run. I'm hoping to have the unit remounted this weekend & can possibly get the dyno tune next week.

Live for TAs

I got the unit rehung tonight & added a gasket between the turbo & the inlet pipe. I welded in a v-band flange on the inlet pipe so I could swivel the turbo as needed to get the ground clearance I wanted. I also tightened up the clamp/hanger on the inlet side to help it stay up higher.

Now for the good stuff:

I played around with the Greddy Electronic Boost Control and set it pretty conservative so I didn't lunch the motor. I set it for 25% on the low setting & 50% on the high. On the test drive tonight, keeping it on the low setting, I saw 9 PSI on the gauge and the EBC went into the red (warning setting) & cut off the boost (I also set the limit pretty tight so as not to overboost). I have to read up on this device some more, as it does not deal with PSI on all settings, but % on some and PSI on others.

I'm not running the car real hard until I get it dyno tuned, and will post the numbers here once this is done. I still have that annoying surge around 2K RPM.

I'm really impressed with this setup as compared to the P600B, which only gave me 6 PSI on a 12# pulley through the same FMIC. Of course, it was 3" piping throughout, and this setup has a 2.5" outlet necked down to 2.25" until the FMIC.

Another positive thing as well is the operating temp staying cool since I still have my stock fans in place & no extra heat in the engine bay.

1982z28with18s

Live, what et's/mph are you shooting for and at what boost level?

Live for TAs

Haven't given much thought to ET/MPH, although I do have a G-Tech now, but I need to dial it in for the TA. The car is being built for open road racing out west. As for boost, I'd say the limiting factor will be fuel at this point, probably 11-12 PSI.

Kredz28

Im with 5.0 THIS 100%....hes saying that an under hood turbo setup will make more power sooner because of less air in transit. I personally dont like STS turbos because i like boost sooner rather than later. Hes not going around tell you to stfu or that your wrong or right, hes stating his opinion, and in many ways, he is right. It seems to me that you are butt hurt about the fact that STS turbos arent the best setup

Cerwin Vega Fan

The STS will do just fine if your launching from a roll but from a dig a front mount turbo would make a difference.

Live for TAs

I just don't get all this bickering about the turbos. In my case, if all I ever drove was 1/4 mile at a time, then a front mount would work fine for me.

I tried a "front mount" Procharger & my car overheated. The FM turbo requires cooling system mods that in my case would have the same results.

If I can get 10-12 PSI & sit in traffic in 90+ degrees w/ AC and go fast around corners, I'm happy . For these reasons I chose a rear mount setup.

If GM had put more room in the engine bay (like Datsun did in 1970 for an inline 6, my next LT1 project ), then this would be a moot point and I would go with a FM. I don't condemn or name call anyone that elects to do that, because it is their car and they can do with it as they please. If a FM is the best solution for what they need to do, so be it & I'm glad they got what they wanted and I will appreciate the work they put into getting their car completed.

As one that has engineered many things automotive, I appreciate the "outside the box" (or engine bay as the case may be) thinking of STS.

<rant>
I think it is more appropriate to base an opinion on something you have experience with as opposed to bench racing & air dynos. What I don't appreciate is the juvenile mindset of slamming/flaming something or someone when you have no experience with what they are doing.
</rant>

5.0THIS

1/4 mile at a time? Front mounts perform better everywhere, track and street. Just racing at a dragstrip has nothing to do with anything.

I can do all of those things with a front mount turbo kit. Many have already done it. So what was your point?

snorkelface

Maybe before you post somewhere, you should do some research. This point has already been discused 100 X in other threads. Everybody is aware of this, and no one disputes it.

The problem is that 5.0THIS goes into every thread regarding an STS setup and bashes it. Sometimes his posts are off topic, repetitive, and overly negative. He's seemed to have made it his personal life mission to sway people away from the STS setup due to some personal vendetta.

Live for TAs

Point #1
With a FM setup, which requires the removal of the driver side cooling fan and replacement with a less efficient pusher fan, my car would overheat. If I only drove it 1/4 mile at a time, this would not be a factor. My point here? You can't "do all of those things" I mentioned in an area with hot weather such as South Florida. I had a FM SC (P600B) which required removal of the stock fans (replaced w/ thinner ones and a pusher), and the car overheated. The experienced & well informed guy I have spoken to here with a FM (Geoff) lives up north where you can get away with less cooling. Engine cooling is something I learned about first hand when I put a 383 into an RX7, and also with the P600B install on the TA.

Point #2
"I can do all those things with a front mount turbo..." I've read most of the STS threads here where you have replied and have not said anything about this until now. What front mount is/was on your vehicle? I don't see it listed in your signature. What is your hands on/actual experience with FI setups on vehicles? You seem to have a wealth of information regarding turbochargers, yet you do not appear to have one in use on your own vehicle. I speak from having installed a used P600B and having had to fabricate items for that install and also now from having scratch-built a rear mount setup. My point here? You would enjoy more respect and credibility here if you had actual experience with a RM OR a FM.

As an example:
I have driven/owned Corvairs (GM's original rear mount turbo ) since the late 70's. I've had many (older folks- the younger ones think it is a foreign car) people tell me how terrible the car is from a design/engineering standpoint. When I ask them which model they owned or drove, I found without exception that they never owned or drove one, they were going on what they had read/heard about it. Ralph Nader sold a lot of books back in the 60's and this created a perception about all of the cars, even though the suspension "problems" he mentioned (same layout as the VW Beetle BTW) were corrected by the 1964 model year. I'll even share one story with you:

While working at the local Lincoln dealer, the service manager told me how badly my Corvair sucked (yes, he had never owned one), and how when he worked at Chevrolet, every day there was a line of Corvairs outside the shop to be fixed. I pointed to the line of Lincolns outside of our shop and asked him if he knew the difference? I pointed out to him that the people paid 2-3 times as much for the Lincoln than the ones with the Corvairs, yet they ended up at the same place.

Yes, this is the Internet, yes you can voice your opinion, and of course yes I can chose to disregard it 100% based on your lack of any credible related experience. This is all I will say about this aspect of the thread, since it is going off-topic and I don't care to feed that animal.

5.0THIS

So because I dont own a turbo charged vehicle RIGHT NOW I cant possess knowledge on the subject? Whenever anything remotely negative (true or not) is posted about STS, STS groupies go off the deep end flame the **** out of whoever said it. <----true story.....

Kredz28

did you think for a second that maybe he is right? I mean...you and others seem to think that kit is from the gods, and im saying i feel that there are way better ways to achieve FI. If you want to get an STS kit, go for it, hope you are happy. I think they are overpriced, less time in boost, and generally a cheesy turbo setup

5-liter-eater

wow big surprise, your from colorado too, just like 5.0..im shocked. You guys related?

F8L Z71

I don't think it's a kit from the gods. I do think that I am faster than a lot of people bashing the kit on this board and others. LOL

Kredz28

Oh because living in the same state makes us related...Why dont you post something with intelligence rather than being an ***? Just because I dont prefer the kit makes me a bad guy in this thread?