Man, this crap never ends does it???

So many people are happy with their STS kits yet still people try to tell you how horrible they are....

Some of you have good points but you know what. Who gives a flying leap if one system is better than other. There may be reasons they want a particular kit. Just like you bought a GM instead of a Ford. Is one better than the other, yes and no... Personal choice peole...

 

A problem with the other kits is that I have found none that are smog-friendly. I'm not talking about having an actual CARB #, but just being setup so that I don't have to remove emissions equipment. Some of us don't have a choice.

 

Ok since I have personally seen the track results for an STS kit I'll put in my $.02...
This IS NOT a race turbo! It's just fine for use on a truck where you need more mid range power for towing and that's it. It's great for that application and I'd recommend it for that and that alone.
The example I give you is an LS1 Z28 that has run a best of 12.18 @ 114+ with a few bolt-ons and a STOCK converter. After the STS install the car went 12.5 @ 114 or 115. My God... I ran 12.53 N/A on a 100% internally stock LT1 at 3600 lbs!
Once again... if you have a truck and want to tow better then buy an STS. If you want to race buy a true turbo set up that does NOT try to circumvent the laws of physics.
Anyway there are quite a few of these kits out there already installed and making peaky #'s... where are the track times???
As always the proof is in the timeslip...
Steve...

 

Guys, sometimes common sense goes a long way. Steve, this isnt a shot at you, more like a statemnt to all those that think the STS just isnt good. If someone gains 100rwhp and 100rwtq @ 5psi, it doesnt matter how peaky it is, it should run faster with such a big increase. People are gonna say area under the curve, well I have seen quite a few dyno sheets and a N/A motor wont produce the same as an STS for area under the curve. Regardless, something isnt right with the setup Steve saw. i am guessing weak stock valvesprings. This is a possible problem in my area. A guy went from dynoing 330rwhp to 41#rwhp/43#rwtq. He only trapped 112mph with an M6. They are changing out his stock valvesprings and going up again. Another car has already gone 12.0 @ 118ish stock with STS. Dont just jump the gun and assume the STS is the problem. If someone was to gain 30hp/30tq from a set of heads and and still ran the same as before, then we'd all assume the heads produced peakier numbers. However, when you gain 100rwhp/100rwtq, I dont think peakiness is going to slow down the car to show no increase at all. We need to wait and see. A local guy is installing a T-70 version STS on his LS1 z28 and he sees 12-13psi by 3500rpm. He can break 3rd loose from a roll. He is probably gonna have dyno numbers by this weekend.

 

LOL

Hows this for peaky?



You'll have to excuse the lack of top end gain. We didn't know how to tune for methanol and were dumping too much up top. We started the run at 4000rpm or so to keep the truck from downshifting into 2nd. My shift points were set to keep me in 2nd gear well into the 90mph range ( I have 31" tall tires).

I have to disagree with your comment that the proof is in the timeslip also. There is too many other factors that will affect a 1/4mile run than just HP/TQ. Gearing, stall converters/clutch, shift points, shift speed, traction etc etc....

Every timeslip I have seen for an STS car is run by a vehicle that is not setup for drag racing at all. Stock converters, radials or DRs at best, no loading of the converter etc. You also have to remember that just cuz a car traps something N/A doesn't mean that should be the starting point for MPH to be added on by the turbo. Too many things change once you add the turbo, headers become usless, your timing drops to nothing, no more lid, and junk like that. If a standard weight F-body goes 116-118 bone stock with an STS kit I think that's pretty damn good. That would mean the car is making 400+rwhp just like it should on such little boost. Are there any other DRAG RACE kits out there doing much more than that on a bone stock setup?

 

This is on a stock LT1 with no tuning and peak torque just over 3k.

http://www.jlturbo.com/lt1_dyno.htm

 

A friend took his 00 Ram Air with an STS to the dyno @ TSP and put down 705 hp & 83x tq with a stock displacement LS1, forged bottom end and a little n2o.

 

what you gusy aren't noticing is that steve said this same car..with the same stock gears...same stock converter..same headers, etc. etc. etc. ran a 12.18. No slouch by any means for a bolt on stock converter/gear ls1. All they changed was to put the turbo on the car and tune for it. Picked up 101 rwhp peak. This car went a best of 12.5x next time at the track. If anything this is a true test of what just slapping the turbo on will do. The car went from 1.8x 60's to a best of 2.2..with a 2.3 and a 2.5 on top of that. The car wasn't spinning either. They tried to load the converter..couldn't get any spool before the car would start pushing.

and as for what other kits are doing on bone stock setups... the ptk kit on a stock lt1 6 speed just went 11.2s at 126 at 8 psi.

 

Actually it went faster.... with a master power T70 and 10psi, all on 93 octane..just read the update.... in the same PTK post.

60ft- 1.84
1/8th-7.25@104.49
1/4- 11.03@130.47

 

104 in the 8th wonder what a setup would do on my car if I lowered teh CR some..heheheheh

 

Actually on the last pass, the stock rings/pistons finally went after the 1/8th...no suprise..hehe, BUT he did manage a 105 in the 1/8th. An easy 10 sec pass at 131 or so IF it would have held.

60ft- 1.78
1/8th- 7.18@105.12
1/4 -16.98@57

 

I wish all the STS groupies would quit posting dyno numbers; nobody disputes that STS kits lay down nice numbers, peak numbers anyway. They spool like supras!!! You can see that in the graphs and there is no counter arguement for that. They spool later and slower than a traditional kit, which makes sense if you know anything about physics (which BTW you cant defy the laws of last time I checked).

What about the STS car that was written about in GMHTP, the poster car for STS. Had a built 396 LS1, a 9 inch rear axle, and possibly a converter. that car ran mid 12s at 118. I dont remember what it dynoed, but it was power enough that SHOULD make for 120+ traps easily. What was the excuse with that car? And dont say altitude, I've seen normally aspirated stock shortblock LS1s trap 112 in Colorado with 400rwhp CORRECTED and 8000+ DAs.


Bull****! If they gain that much power for a span of 1000rpm how much faster do you really think it could be? It does matter how peaky it is! Those cars just do not see enough time in boost. There are quick supras out there, but they didnt earn the reputation of (what do 400rwhp and 600rwhp supras have in common?? answer, they both run 12s) for nothing. There will surely eventually be some quick STS cars, but most of them are going to have narrow powerbands akin to boosted engines half their displacement.


STS fans: Is there any STS car that can post a quicker time than 11.0? PTK did it with a stock motor and a 6 speed. Whenever we hear about STS dynos the motors are always "stockish" or mostly stock, or semi-stock. Where are the track times for stock motor LT1 cars, I would seriously like to see them.

 

Did I make my dyno sheet link to obscure???



I don't see how you can call that peaky... True it's not a great dyno but not too bad for a noob tune on a 5.3L with mad drivetrain loss.(inherently 70-90rwhp less than a 5.7L LS1 car). I know of a 6.0L with a T76 front mount that dyno'd 500rwhp on 11psi and a built 6.0L that dyno'd 556rwhp on 15psi. So I'd say not too far off the mark considering I am now near the 480rwhp area judging form weight vs trap speed....

I'm not gonna argue the STS being better or even the equal to a front mount kit because judging from results posted and the opinions of those I consider knowledgeable on the subject it isn't. But I will agrue that not all setups are peaky and have no power under the curve.

I just can't wait till I can afford a front mount kit so I can try both and be one of the very few that can actually talk **** about a particular setup and have the experience to back it up.

 

I was gonna post about how this dipstick convieniently chose to ignore your post, dyno, track times, for your truck F8L. Imagine that.. a 12.6 out of a 5000lb truck.. with a 5.3L... with lower compression... possibly a limping stock tranny.... and what this madness? MORE PIPING INCLUDING A FMIC.

If that doesnt say something about the STS kits then WTF does.

 

dipstick? Are you insulting me purely out of your own insecurity? hmm, must be.


Anyway, this kit was designed for trucks, no surprise it seems to be working decently on one. I dont care at all what these kits are doing on trucks, you'll notice this is an f body board. All I'm comparing here is what these kits are doing on f bodies. Besides, I asked for track times on an LT1 car, so why you thought that track times and dynos for a 5.3L full size truck applied is beyond me. I'm glad things are working out for him. With results like that STS ought to stick to truck kits