General information on the shortcomings and usefullness of the sts turbo system

[Teufel Hunden]

Originally posted by nocutt:

The condensation issue is lost in the wind really...don't all turbos sit in the same exhaust path? So because it is further down means what exactly?...

I'm surprised you didn't know the answer to this one. The difference is whether the water is hot vapor, or water drops. Guess what causes more damage... water vapor (close to the manifolds) or standing water that collects in drops (end of the tail pipes). When you turn off the car, that water will still be standing in the end of the pipes, and in the turbo. Ever seen what even alittle bit of water can do to cast iron? I have..

[nocutt]

Originally posted by Teufel Hunden:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by nocutt:

The condensation issue is lost in the wind really...don't all turbos sit in the same exhaust path? So because it is further down means what exactly?...

I'm surprised you didn't know the answer to this one. The difference is whether the water is hot vapor, or water drops. Guess what causes more damage... water vapor (close to the manifolds) or standing water that collects in drops (end of the tail pipes). When you turn off the car, that water will still be standing in the end of the pipes, and in the turbo. Ever seen what even alittle bit of water can do to cast iron? I have.. </font>[/QUOTE]TH,
What about those who run water-cooled turbos? (water condenses in the part of the housing that matters) I live in california, I don't run coolant, just plain 'ol distilled water in a copper-brass radiator...
I think my point is the parts that really matter are either bath in enough oil or don't care about corrosion ...and the parts that don't really matter get a nice cool down from the turbo...however we are still both speculating! I just think this is a small point lost in the wind... ;)

[mrbako]

Originally posted by Teufel Hunden:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by nocutt:

The condensation issue is lost in the wind really...don't all turbos sit in the same exhaust path? So because it is further down means what exactly?...

I'm surprised you didn't know the answer to this one. The difference is whether the water is hot vapor, or water drops. Guess what causes more damage... water vapor (close to the manifolds) or standing water that collects in drops (end of the tail pipes). When you turn off the car, that water will still be standing in the end of the pipes, and in the turbo. Ever seen what even alittle bit of water can do to cast iron? I have.. </font>[/QUOTE]i'm suprised you didn't know the correct answer!

the water you see dripping from exhaust pipes comes from the exchange that takes place in the catalytic converter. i'd have to look up the specifics, but hydrocarbons are convertedinto h2o. CO & NOx are also converted or burned. i don't think that there is any water vapor in the exhaust path before the cat.

[HAZ-Matt]

No that isn't correct either. Combustion produces water vapor. It is therefore present the entire length of the exhaust system. However, you are correct that the catalytic converter produces more water through the oxidation of hydrocarbons.

With regards to condensation, why do you think it is more noticable on cold mornings? Before the exhaust pipes heat, water vapor from combustion can condense on the walls.

I think there was also a lot of bad physics thrown around. I also think that good physics will in fact be able to predict which systems will be superior to other systems, as long as you don't make too many simplifying assumptions or make the right ones.

[Teufel Hunden]

Originally posted by mrbako:
i'm suprised you didn't know the correct answer!

the water you see dripping from exhaust pipes comes from the exchange that takes place in the catalytic converter. i'd have to look up the specifics, but hydrocarbons are convertedinto h2o. CO & NOx are also converted or burned. i don't think that there is any water vapor in the exhaust path before the cat.

I suggest you retake your high school chemistry class, then come back and tell me that combustion does not produce water. Even if you were 100% correct in that post, my original point was still valid.. water will settle in the exhaust housing of the turbo, corrode it, and eventually damage it.

Nocutt...

I'm talking about water settling in the exhaust housing, and corrosion from that eventually damaging the turbine... that's why i asked you if you had ever seen what water does to cast iron, because the exhaust housing is cast. Water cooled turbos don't put any water on the iron parts of the turbo, so that was a bad example. Using distilled water in your coolant is fine, because that water is free of impurities, and corrosion on cast iron happens when air is also allowed into the mix. In your cooling system in the car, ideally there should be no air bubbles, but even if there were, there isn't enough to facilitate a large amount of corrosion over a short period of time in your cast iron cylinder block.

[GN-T66]

Originally posted by OneQuickV6:
Fact is, if these "dyno queens" make the power on the rollers, with a good driver, they will make the timeslip too.

Bull****! They call some cars dyno queens for a reason. If you dont understand the concept, and how it applies to STS in particular, then I dont know why you're posting in this thread.... It's already been proven that with an STS kit on the V8 cars (LT1/LS1).. that you spool the turbo just like a 3 liter supra motor. There were two dyno graphs posted, one an STS V8 car with a GT67 headunit. Then, a 3 liter supra with exact same turbo. the graphs were almost identical, in spool characteristics, and boost threshold... But wait.. I'm sure you're saying that plenty of supras are fast, right? Well, if in those dyno graphs, the turbos spool at 3500rpm on each, the f body has 2000 rpm of usable boost.... the supra, over 3000rpm spent in boost.... Point here is that STS cars do not spend nearly as much rpm in boost as a traditional kit on the same car would, with the identical turbo. And it's no speculation, it's a fact. An STS car can make the exact same peak numbers as another traditional kitted car, but if it doesnt have the nice broad curves and usable boost rpm range, then it wont be as fast, plain and simple...

And there has been plenty of time for people to test STS systems. Plenty of people have times too, they just wont post the times.. Why you ask??? because they spent so much time talking up the STS system, that they wont dare come online and post up that their results were disappointing. People make the excuse that no STS cars have been setup for drag racing yet.... Bull****!!!! I dont believe it for one second. So every person they've sold one too,, their car isnt setup to make the STS system work well..... Unfortunately, they make a point in saying that in order to get an STS setup to work well on a car, the car has to be specifically setup for the STS... ie the car has to be built around the turbo to make it work well. that must suck....

Then, you've got two LT1 guys with PTK kits ( traditional style) One with a stock motor went 11.00@ over 120. And no, this wasnt an all out drag car by any means. It was a 6 speed with stock gearing. The other LT1 guy had a built motor and went 10.0@150+ on race gas, and it too was a 6 speed..... Funny, those guys didnt have to build their cars real special to go fast... :rolleyes:

[GN-T66]

Originally posted by Teufel Hunden:
I suggest you retake your high school chemistry class, then come back and tell me that combustion does not produce water. Even if you were 100% correct in that post, my original point was still valid.. water will settle in the exhaust housing of the turbo, corrode it, and eventually damage it.

Nocutt...

I'm talking about water settling in the exhaust housing, and corrosion from that eventually damaging the turbine... that's why i asked you if you had ever seen what water does to cast iron, because the exhaust housing is cast. Water cooled turbos don't put any water on the iron parts of the turbo, so that was a bad example. Using distilled water in your coolant is fine, because that water is free of impurities, and corrosion on cast iron happens when air is also allowed into the mix. In your cooling system in the car, ideally there should be no air bubbles, but even if there were, there isn't enough to facilitate a large amount of corrosion over a short period of time in your cast iron cylinder block.

Not to mention wastegates, they are especially prone to water damage. and the way it is setup on the STS cars, I see potential reliability issues. all the parts on the back of STS cars are in a dangerous spot. and the pipes that run under the floor are like 3 inches off the ground... hell that's lower than tiago's crapfest kit where the pipes just go right under the k frame. Wonder how long it takes to bang that pipe on a speedbump [img]graemlins/rofl.gif[/img]

[nocutt]

Originally posted by Teufel Hunden:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by mrbako:
i'm suprised you didn't know the correct answer!

the water you see dripping from exhaust pipes comes from the exchange that takes place in the catalytic converter. i'd have to look up the specifics, but hydrocarbons are convertedinto h2o. CO & NOx are also converted or burned. i don't think that there is any water vapor in the exhaust path before the cat.

I suggest you retake your high school chemistry class, then come back and tell me that combustion does not produce water. Even if you were 100% correct in that post, my original point was still valid.. water will settle in the exhaust housing of the turbo, corrode it, and eventually damage it.

Nocutt...

I'm talking about water settling in the exhaust housing, and corrosion from that eventually damaging the turbine... that's why i asked you if you had ever seen what water does to cast iron, because the exhaust housing is cast. Water cooled turbos don't put any water on the iron parts of the turbo, so that was a bad example. Using distilled water in your coolant is fine, because that water is free of impurities, and corrosion on cast iron happens when air is also allowed into the mix. In your cooling system in the car, ideally there should be no air bubbles, but even if there were, there isn't enough to facilitate a large amount of corrosion over a short period of time in your cast iron cylinder block. </font>[/QUOTE]Disagree to agree
The water-cooled turbo run water over the bearing housing within a CAST-IRON JACKET!! Also air is not the only 'cancer accelerator' (rust) but also oxides of oxygen... I digress ;)
I think we should all wait and see the outcome...why are ppl almost getting ^^^ heart attacks for an alternate setup???
We are taking this ...ish toooo serious. I honestly feel if the aforementioned unit can create a broader curve( ON A 3800 )over a sufficient an usable powerband then the kit will be potent on the street. 231 ci doesn't need a small dog of a turbo...I think the answer lies with the type of trim and exhaust housing been used, let us discount the other nittpicking issues and assume they are trivial... CAN IT PERFORM on a 3800?

[OneQuickV6]

So you all think that even though it makes power on even a mustang dyno, that on the drag strip it all of a sudden doesn't anymore??? It still makes boosts, which is better than none at all.

It may not be the best, but since there is really only one other kit available readily (well kind of) on the market for us...it's a viable option.

I wasn't even planning on going rear-mount, but after reading so much of you all's BS...I am tempted to just to shut you up. Because if I do run it, it will run at the track.

And for the record, of the 6 cars and trucks with the STS kit I've seen dyno and run at the track here in West Texas...all but 1 ran pretty impressive gains over their NA times!

[Turbo V6 Camaro]

Originally posted by GN-T66:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Teufel Hunden:
I suggest you retake your high school chemistry class, then come back and tell me that combustion does not produce water. Even if you were 100% correct in that post, my original point was still valid.. water will settle in the exhaust housing of the turbo, corrode it, and eventually damage it.

Nocutt...

I'm talking about water settling in the exhaust housing, and corrosion from that eventually damaging the turbine... that's why i asked you if you had ever seen what water does to cast iron, because the exhaust housing is cast. Water cooled turbos don't put any water on the iron parts of the turbo, so that was a bad example. Using distilled water in your coolant is fine, because that water is free of impurities, and corrosion on cast iron happens when air is also allowed into the mix. In your cooling system in the car, ideally there should be no air bubbles, but even if there were, there isn't enough to facilitate a large amount of corrosion over a short period of time in your cast iron cylinder block.

Not to mention wastegates, they are especially prone to water damage. and the way it is setup on the STS cars, I see potential reliability issues. all the parts on the back of STS cars are in a dangerous spot. and the pipes that run under the floor are like 3 inches off the ground... hell that's lower than tiago's crapfest kit where the pipes just go right under the k frame. Wonder how long it takes to bang that pipe on a speedbump [img]graemlins/rofl.gif[/img] </font>[/QUOTE]i don't care if you don't like/agree with the kit but you don't need to use the word "crapfest"

also Radcat has ahd the kit over a year and has not had only problems hitting the pipes on the ground.

no personal bashing please.

[T-Punk]

wow do ya think we can get both the sts, and FFF flames going in the same thread? i really dont see why you posted that viper. If he doesnt like a product he is allowed to say what he wants about it. I dissagree with his opinion but i dont see the need to tell him that all the time.

[CM boyd]

Well, Like I have told everyone before this is a
project. If there are a bunch of people using
remote style turbos for V8 cars and trucks, then
why can't we use them? STS is already selling a
kit that fits on a 6 cylinder Toyota Tacoma.
People are swearing by them and performance is still better over a NA powered vehicle.
I am not trying to get people startled over this
craze but I want to see for myself. Can it work
for a V6 Firebird or camaro? I know it does, but
how far and how much data will I need to prove the
point?
We already know that a front mount is the way to
go by far! Stick the two types of kits together
on the track with the same boost settings, tuning,
fuel, etc and the front mount will win. It is not
ideal and there are some long term issues, but any
sensible person can see that they are truly minimal!
I get the impression also that nobody wants to look at the timeslips and dyno graphs of the Ls1
powered cars on the Ls1 Tech messageboard. There
is no question of the power that this system can
produce. Ok, so drop the fact that it is a V8 but
there is a guy pushing 600 horses with it. I know it is not the "best" type of turbocharging to
use, but I just want to try. I get my new turbo
with a warranty back tomorrow. The external wastegate should be here by Thursday. I won't have any excuses for not posting performance by
next week.

[John_D.]

The most common argument against the STS, is that a front mount is "superior" to it...

That may be true.

It could also be said that a 5.7 is superior to a 3.8. Or that a 383 is superior to a 346. Or a 402, 427, etc. is superior to a 383.

As far as which engine is superior, I say "so what"... And the same can be said for which turbo setup is superior.

You can mod a 3.8 to go fast. You can mod a 383 to go fast. You can run a rear mount turbo or you can run a front mount turbo. Either one is going to improve the hp.

It's not necessary to have the "superior" setup when making mods. Otherwise we'd all have to be running 6 or 7 liter engines, right?

[ January 11, 2005, 03:27 PM: Message edited by: John_D. ]

[kahouna23]

Originally posted by John_D.:


Otherwise we'd all have to be running 6 or 7 liter engines, right?

that just sounds sexy..... :D

[mrbako]

Originally posted by Teufel Hunden:
I suggest you retake your high school chemistry class, then come back and tell me that combustion does not produce water. Even if you were 100% correct in that post, my original point was still valid.. water will settle in the exhaust housing of the turbo, corrode it, and eventually damage it.

i never said that combustion didn't produce water vapor. i said i didn't THINK there was water vapor...i've never heard of combustion producing water vapor...but i'm not a chemist. all i was trying to point out is that the dripping water, collected and dripping out the tailpipes comes from the exchange in the cat. w/o the cat i don't think there would be enough to collect into droplets unless you sit @ idle in lots of traffic. nontheless, the vapor isn't good either. i AGREE it will damage a rear mounted turbo and i think the idea is (IMO) trash.