booostedek

I personally think thats a pretty awesome setup, nothing to do with being "different" either, know about ---- before you talk about ----....half the kids on here have never even driven a turbo car w/ the exception of their moms volvo...not to mention the percentage of losers who dont even have cars....to say remote mount turbos have lag is talking out of your *** (considering most of you have probably never driven a remote mounted turbo car, or seen one in action) neither have I nor am I claiming to have...physics makes it seem as if their would be turbo lag but the kits are designed ways for certain reasons, no ones gonna pay 5 g stacks for a kit if you get full boost at 8k, think about it

ifly87

This setup looks like it wouldnt be so bad, it seems like an ok spot to put a turbo but charge piping would be a pain.


there's probably a good reason too, if it worked so great more people would be doing it.

soccerking3000

a lot of people who do have the STS systems get them because they lack the space in the engine bay to fit the turbo and all of the components. Its not a very good system compared to a turbo on manifold system with the shortest possible piping route, not to mention you want to have the exhaust at a high temperature because it is still expanding over the turbine blades, while if you have a remote mounted turbo the exhaust gas has already started cooling making it harder to spool the turbo...

booostedek

All in all thats true, this setup looks pretty good, charge piping would be a pain compared to normal standards...if all turbo kits were done this way it would be considered a pain...we're just use to the normal turbo on manifold set up and the way the piping usually goes....also a lot of people do remote mount turbo setups...on a c6 non zo6 vette at 8-10 psi it netted 550 some odd wheel hp....so it does seem to work well (for those who need to do this type of setup..realizing that is a v8, but point made)....and as for the heat and turbo thing..turbos do not like heat...look at what happens when you do stupid ---- like top speed runs on a turbo car, not to mention its going to take a lot more to cool that hotter air before it gets back to the throttle body...so at the same time you have to realize the ups and downs of both setups...I'm sure the charge going into the throttle body would be a bit cooler on a remote mount kit as opposed to a turbo on mani set up

Cray91

Is that a fuel filter on the return line??

Cool lookn' kit but the fab seems a little much for the benefeits.

soccerking3000

i think he is just running the fuel the other way through the fuel rail so the feed is on the right and return is on the left

Hellbert

ive always heard people biotch about the rear mounts long charge pipes...i dont see where it would be any worse than a set up like mine. i come out of the turbo behind the headlight through the hole in the side around the front and abck up the other hole with a 12x31x3 intercooler...thats a LOT of square footage to cover in such a short time. run a small intercooler and there wouldnt really be as much more space between the compressor and the TB as everyone makes out to be

Slo_crx1

Son, get back in line...I probably have done more boosted setups than you've had sex yet. The STS remote mounts were originally intended for vehicles such as the newer dodge ram's and tight clearance cars like the corvette. From what I've seen so far the STS sytem for Honda/Acura never really made it much farther than the prototype stages, simply due to the fact that front mount setups are much more economicle to build. As for lag on the STS, I know there is...ever try out a relocated style manifold (such as the elephant style being used on here lately) as compared to a standard log/ram style manifold? I have...and yes, it lagged a bit more than usual. I'm not saying the STS has "8k rpm" lag like you stated, but more than a normal setup.It's exponential, noob. Turbo's run hot, it's their nature. Engines on the other hand, do not like hot intake charge temps. Hotter air leads to hotter combustion, leads to *gasp* hotter egt's. Fuel and timing also adds into the egt equation. Top speed runs have nothing to do with how "hot" a turbo is...it has to do with how much stress is placed on the motor at high speeds, i.e. detonation and such under load. The motor is working harder because there is a higher load on it, egt temps raise because of said load. Egt's heat the turbine housing, and transfers heat to the compressor housing that compounds to the fact that the compressor is generating heat of it's own trying to push the air through. Now you have a higher intake air temp, which leads to detonation under load, and creates very high cylinder pressures when detonating...which leads to cracked sleeves and blown motors. I have personal experience in this, my old b18a1 block is testimony to detonation under a high load with 1 cracked sleeve (both inner and outer), 1 bent rod, and 2 broken piston skirts. Nice try, but next time do a little more research before you try to spout your "infinite wisdom".

JonDouglas

Looks like a great intake manifold heater to me.