Remote mounted turbo's are BADASS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's the HMT version of Chevy camaro's and ----.

There has been ZERO proof to show in-efficiency over a header mounted turbo... No dyno numbers. Boost works on pressure, not flow. So all of you guys can shove it that say remote mounted turbo's suck... I'm a fan of the STS kit... it's badass...

PLUS>>>> it's similar to what i'm doing with my LS1 s10 project in the F.I. forum on here.

header mounted turbo's are for people with engine bay space and lotsa $... Remote mounted turbo's are badass.

Except for those little things called the Laws of Physics. Or do cars not obey those? Is heat energy?

That isn't a point in its favor, in fact, just the opposite.

Of your entirely ignorant post, this is the highlight. I have less engine bay space than anyone on this forum. And I not only have one of the biggest turbochargers here that I've seen, I also have it mounted in the engine bay. As for the money, my project was no more expensive than a rear mount kit would have been. Oil pumps and 8 foot oil lines aren't cheap. Unless they're half-assed like your's are.

What are physics?

Numbers and sh!t over IowaTCoupe's head.

Hate i missed the pics... I have always thought rear mounts were kind of neat but seems like they could end up having problems considering the length of all the lines and such. Of course im a noob soo my opinion really isnt valid.

Based on that enlightened logic, I should block off the inlet to my engine between the turbo and intake, and crank the turbo WAY up, and I should make a million HP, I mean, like you said, its alll about pressure, who needs flow.

More like 2 Million HP.

looks dope man

holy might max

dang