What do you think about this turbo system and modifing it to the Fiero?

http://www.ststurbo.com/

Since it replaces the muffler. I wonder how loud our cars would sound with something like that? It would be a much simpler installation that a regular turbo setup.

For the modification that is going to be required for the Fiero, you'd be better off building one from scratch.

On a side note, I know a guy here locally that has one, and while it dose work like a champ, and sounds killer when spooled up, it DOES TAKE TIME TO GET THERE. The lag is slightly less than annoying.

Plus, the filter for the placement into an F-Body is just wrong, as there is NO protection for it at all, and will fill with gunk rather quickly.

--Allen

------------------

quote Originally posted by avengador1: Since it replaces the muffler. I wonder how loud our cars would sound with something like that? It would be a much simpler installation that a regular turbo setup.

I'm not sure if you've ever been in a turbo car or not, but a turbo does make a car much, much quieter. My Turbo saturn is slightly louder than stock, and i mean slightly louder, it's not very noticable, and i went from the stock exhaust (which i think was 1 7/8's inch) to a 2.5 inch exhaust with a higher flow car, and a glasspack, and a straight pipe, and it's not noticably louder than stock.

On the other hand, that turbo would lag like heck.

It's a neat design and simple to use but it's not all that practical on a Fiero. Further, one was installed here locally on an LS1 f-body and only picked up 100hp on 5psi. By contrast my LT1 kit picked up 200hp at 7psi.

Cooguyfish, I'm on my second turbo car. My first was a 2002 WRX now I have a 2005 Legacy GT Turbo. Most turbos are mounted upstream of the catalytic converter and the mufflers. This setup replaces the muffler, that is why I ask, I guess the cat itself would leesen the exhaust noise level, that is if you have a cat installed. I couldn't hear the turbo itself on either car and my exhaust is very quiet, but I can certainly feel it. The only difference I noticed was in my WRX, the engine tone would change once it started building boost. In the new car it doesn't make that big of a difference and has almost no lag compared to the WRX.

[This message has been edited by avengador1 (edited 02-10-2005).]

quote Originally posted by caddyrocket: It's a neat design and simple to use but it's not all that practical on a Fiero. Further, one was installed here locally on an LS1 f-body and only picked up 100hp on 5psi. By contrast my LT1 kit picked up 200hp at 7psi.

Something else we really need to consider here, there is more to power than just boost. For example, If the LS1 was tuned rich, and the LT1 was leaned out considerably more, Combined with the fact that maybe the LS1 was using a small turbo, whereas the LT1 was using a bigger turbo, combined with any supporting mods, such as, if the LS1 had an otherwise stock exhaust, and the LT1 used straight pipes.

considering the things i mentioned above, i can easily see 100 HP more on just 2 PSI if all things were considered.

I've built and tested enough turbo systems to know the parameters. Here is the difference.. The LS1, a better flowing engine, picked up 1/2 the horsepower the LT1 did using 2psi more. Boost pressure isn't an order of magnitude higher. I know how both cars were configured also. The LT1 car has zero computer tuning while the LS1 car had a baseline turbo tune. I'm using this as example because I know the most about both cars involved. That being said, there are many other ls1 cars which have dynoed better than that at the same boost but I don't have any intention of looking up references. I don't need to because I'm using my own experiences as examples.

Point being, the STS kit is functional and pretty neat. However, beyond those who just want some boost or novelty, the STS kit doesn't have a place. It has catered to an entry level market and currently has excellent market share and good for them. But the fundimental operation of the system will prevent it from making the same power on the same car as a traditional turbo system.

quote Originally posted by cooguyfish: Something else we really need to consider here, there is more to power than just boost. For example, If the LS1 was tuned rich, and the LT1 was leaned out considerably more, Combined with the fact that maybe the LS1 was using a small turbo, whereas the LT1 was using a bigger turbo, combined with any supporting mods, such as, if the LS1 had an otherwise stock exhaust, and the LT1 used straight pipes. considering the things i mentioned above, i can easily see 100 HP more on just 2 PSI if all things were considered.

not to mention, the air from an STS type system is going to be MUCH cooler than a system where the turbo is mounted inside the engine compartment. I would venture to guess that there would be a few hundred degree drop in air temperatures that are generated from that turbo setup, elimnating the need for an intercoller at high boost levels

quote Originally posted by caddyrocket: Btw, the above post wasnt intended to sound like a hot reply. Just an educated guess and explanation of the logic.

Actually, you're fine, and after I started reading your post I started remembering that you have a lot of experince in hot rodding and i was thinking "DOH!" But, I guess it's good though that we have someone here with experience with both, I just really loved reading there turbo VS. supercharger argument on there page where the turbo has no disadvantages and the supercharger is evil...

anyway, I'd still think it would be interesting for a fiero, since it wouldn't have to travel as far, but i don't think it'd be as great as they say it is. And no matter what they say, I still think it will lag like heck.

I'll let you know how it does later in the summer, with the "pipe run" being shorter than a front engined car who knows?

quote Originally posted by aaronrus: not to mention, the air from an STS type system is going to be MUCH cooler than a system where the turbo is mounted inside the engine compartment. I would venture to guess that there would be a few hundred degree drop in air temperatures that are generated from that turbo setup, elimnating the need for an intercoller at high boost levels

Actually the air in the engine bay of a running car isn't hundreds of degrees hotter than ambient air temps anyway. Maybe if you were sitting still and the heat from the exhaust system collected under the hood and the hood was sealed. Most cars have a path to vent air heated under the hood anyway. As the heated air rises, it escapes through vents (very often along the rear of the hood). That rising/escaping air draws cooler ambient air in from under the car. It's not designed to keep it cold in there but if the air temps were running several hundred degrees at all times through out the engine bay, you would heat soke and cause rapidly increased component failure.

But all of that is really irrelevent because there is only a miniscule amout of time you will be using your turbocharger while stopped anyway and that is you prestage and stage time where you are spooling your turbocharger. After that, as you move, air moves through the radiator and under the car and floods the engine bay with ambient air. The venting detailed above, helps prevent excessive high pressure from building up under your hood and making your car increasingly unstable at speed. This lack of good venting is why Fiero's headlights pop up and feel 'floaty' when running 90-100 mph, speeds not uncommon on the race track.

Further, an engine bay on an average car might be what, 15-20 cubic feet? A turbocharged car might move 700 cfm under heavy boost? That means the it replaces the pure volume of the engine bay about every 2 seconds. Most newer cars fill that volume by atleast 80%. That means there could be 4 cubic feet of actual air in the engine bay. That gets us closer to replacing that volume more like 3 times every second. Obvoius a turbo in the lower part of the engine bay up front toward that radiator will not be pulling air from behind the engine. Most of it will come through and around the radiator.

Infact, the vast majority of heat comes from compression of the air, not heat soke. The STS kit using smaller turbochargers to compensate for the losses incured by placing the turbo so far to the back. The issue is that the smaller compressor must work harder to compress the same volume, at the same pressure. This generally causes a decrease in efficency. The excessively long IC pumping might work to cool the temps at lower boost levels but the dwell time in that pipe will be measured in parts of a second. At any boost level, even that kit will benifit from the addition of an intercooler and some folks have done just that.

Whether or whether not, I think it's a neat kit and fits a nitch in the market. I don't think to many people will argue that the setup is ideal vs traditional mounting but it works for what it is. The one thing I've always thought was funny about the STS site was a picture of a glowing hot turbocharger asking if you wanted it under your hood? I guess my response would be I prefer a glowing hot turbo under my hood instead of under my gas tank!

I've actually been looking at the STS system for my GTO. They are based here in Utah. There are some people on ls1gto.com with the system and they seem to be happy with it.

There are actually quite a few people with them that are happy. Compared to N/A, any boost would feel awesome!