Lethal Z

Have some experience in that deptartment do you?


http://www.ststurbo.com/

Do what you like boys, this is the route im going. I refuse to place a turbocharger in an already overcrowded engine compartment. Not only do you have to make room for the turbo itself. Any thing that is located next to or near the turbocharger or any of the related exhaust ducting has to be relocated or extremely insulated to ensure that it is protected from the heat produced by the turbocharger. Can it be done? Yes, but not without major modifications and relocation of parts, harnesses, hoses, etc. On top of that you can imagine what the underhood temperatures can reach with the turbocharger and other related piping.

So before you jump on the bandwagon of front mounted turbochargers you might wanna think about it first.

HBHRacing

I belive you are a little confused. There is no front mount "bandwagon". Front mount is convention, rear mount is the "bandwagon" that the want you to join on with. The point is that we all have thought about it, have you? I honestly don't belive you have really looked much into front mount turbo technology, temp isn't a huge problem is you take steps in the right direction.

Oso Vega

iTrader: (4)

hit a nerve, eh homo?

I have seen STS systems in person, they suck IMO. I would take one if it was given to me, that's about it.

Lethal Z

You brought up prison sex you tell me.

Bottom line I have looked into both. I've seen and experienced the ride. IMO awsome power. Not knocking front mount if thats what you prefer but Im going with rear mounted. So buy what you like, makes me no difference.

myc4ltwon

iTrader: (4)

I say go with the rear mount!

formula355LT1

I say rear mount unless u have a lot of $ for a front mount.

NemeSS

iTrader: (127)

thats not necesarily true
there are some proper priced systems and
some way over priced systems as well
it comes down to the quality of work and parts used
that determine the price, i have seen some turd quality in supposed
proven kits

sleeperMULLET

iTrader: (4)

front mount is more efficent and will make more power. Turbos are spun my exhaust expansion not exhaust velocity. A front mount is closer to the heads so there is more heat expansion to spin the turbo. A rear mount is not going to work as well as a front mount but it will still make power. As for not enough room in the engine bay take a look at this pic.

http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j9...llet/ttLT1.jpg

97MysticZ

iTrader: (16)

I was watching Horsepower TV last weekend and they put twin STS rear mounted turbos on a C5 vette. They said that having the turbos in the rear as opposed to the front cost you approximately 1 psi of boost, but it is equaled out by the fact that the temperature drop of the air is decreased by over 100 degrees, and we all know that cooler air = more horsepower.

NOTAV6

iTrader: (3)

it depends on what you want to do ... ill prolly go the route of rear mount because im only looking to make 600 or so whp if i do it and with a built 396 and a good rearmount that is perfectly capable setup for it ...... yeah the front mount can make more power but unless you specifically want 700+ whats the point when you can do the rear mount in most cases cheaper and still get the power you want, along with not having to relocate, protect stuff in the engine bay from the heat of the turbo

comes down to this i think if you want straight up power front mount is the way to go

if your looking for a turbo setup that will get a you a good increase in power and your not looking for insane power just something to give it more umph why not consider the rearmount because of the usually cheaper costs, and not having to worry as much about heat problems under the hood

testimonial from a LT1 camaro owner from STS website
I can't say enough about my STS turbocharger. After seeing what a STS turbo did for my brother's Tundra, I had to have one. My car is so fast now! I gained 69% HP and increased my 1/4 mile speed by 14 mph at only 7 psi. It drives like a stock Camaro until you stick your foot into it and the boost hits. With a few mods and 10 psi boost I am pounding on Bullet Bikes! Talk about the ultimate street sleeper: 522 rwhp and 620 rwtq through stock heads, cam, and exhaust. I pop the hood and people have no idea that it is even turbocharged.

ToxicTA

My Vote is for the rear mount. IMO the STS technology is different in a few aspects that have been mentioned but what comes to mind is if I am correct on this is the Turbo Fins (Vanes) are different also and they advantage of the fact that at the turbo you now have stablized air flow and do not need a Intercooler because that is built into the system.

Quote IMO these are the differences and advantages.
Front Turbos are spun my exhaust expansion
Rear are spun on exhaust velocity

speed_demon24

iTrader: (6)

I don't know what you mean by "stablized airflow" but you still need an intercooler.

ToxicTA

Denser exhaust gasses drive the turbo turbine wheel more efficiently.

Built-in intercooling. Intake piping provides ~50% intercooler efficiency. There is no need for the expense, pressure drop, and installation problems associated with a front mounted intercooler.
No Intercooler is needed on a rear mount.

Speed Density

iTrader: (38)

Fershizzle!

Its all in those few words.

Rear is easy to install and access, but wont make as much power.

Front is more custom work and harder to maintain compared to rear, but will seek kick *** numbers.

Tony.

Turbo LS1 SS

iTrader: (7)

ive had both. rearmounts are defenitely fun in the street, cruising around, but a front mount FAR exceeds the sts in the performance department.

no comparison whatsoever

RealQuick

iTrader: (14)

I have been in both (front mount with T76 @ 9psi) and (rearmount with T70 @11psi). The front mount kit spooled significantly faster, even with the bigger turbo and felt faster than the STS kit (even tough the sts car was making ~100rwhp more). Either way though, that same STS LS1 kit still made 700rwhp with T70, numbers that have not been matched by another LS1 with a front mount T70. The efficiency is different between front mount and rearmount.

Can rearmounts make a ton of power? yeah.
Will lag be more? yeah

Do whats best for you.

Built LT1

iTrader: (3)

I recently posed this very question (with a public voting poll) in the forced induction section. Here is a link to the locked thread.

https://ls1tech.com/forums/forced-induction/567146-what-would-make-more-power-throttle-response.html

I voted front mount.

Built LT1

iTrader: (3)

Does ANYONE find this public and private disparity in results interesting?

I find it interesting that if a poll is "private" that more people are willing to vote that the STS makes more power than if the poll is public. Having a private poll SKEWS results because people do not have to be held accountable for their choices and or support them with evidence. On my poll relating to this very question, only 1 person voted STS; AND failed to support their point OR offer ANY evidence that would support their choice.

https://ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=567146


I find it incredible that after all these debates, people still think you can have your cake and eat it too.

koolaid_kid

iTrader: (21)

IMO, this poll is flawed. Does an STS system at 15 psi make more power than a front mount system at 8 psi? Certainly.
Does an STS system at 8 psi make more power than a front mount system at 8 psi? How could it, pressure is pressure.
Is a front mount system more efficient? Yes.
Not trying to flame you, but you need to understand the question before you interpret the answer.

RealQuick

iTrader: (14)

Here is a DIY LT1 front mount setup fo sale for those interested...

https://ls1tech.com/forums/lsx-parts-sale/605455-lt1-turbo-hotparts-wastegate-sale-cheap.html