S2000 Under The Hood S2000 Technical and Mechanical discussions.

STS Turbo - Remote Mounted Turbo Systems

Thread Tools
 
Old 12-07-2004, 10:07 AM
  #11  

Thread Starter
 
LiQUiD iCE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Potomac Falls, VA
Posts: 2,472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by jackalope,Dec 7 2004, 01:46 PM
hmm seems like a kit like this would be really easy to piece together as well...I mean, all you would really need to do is run some intake piping all the way backj, then have a muffler shop add a flange to your current piping, then throw a little muffler off the side.

the major costs would be intake piping, turbo, methanol injection and tuning
I'm not sure if the turbo they're using is a 'custom' turbo, but their website says that their turbo is made to run in the back of the car and if you tried to drop their turbo under the hood, it wouldn't work ... likewise if you tried to drop a normal turbo into this system it wouldn't work.

I sent an e-mail to their sales department and they said that they had no plans to create a kit just for the S2000 but that they make universal kits and I could talk to a local dealer about it. If its cost effective enough and the gains sound reasonable, I might try this instead of supercharging

BTW- Here's a review of one of their kits on an LS1 engine from Popular Hotrodding:
http://popularhotrodding.com/tech/0411phr_sts/
Old 12-07-2004, 10:14 AM
  #12  

Thread Starter
 
LiQUiD iCE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Potomac Falls, VA
Posts: 2,472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by SLO-S2000,Dec 7 2004, 02:03 PM
Personally I've heard of this before...I really think it is rediculous unless you are running a pathetically small turbo...

The PRINCIPLE of turbos IS HEAT...HEAT spins the turbine wheel, because the hotter exhaust gasses have a higher pressure and move faster than cooler gasses...this is BASIC fluid principles...

if you were running a very small turbo, with a small turbine that does not require as much energy to spin, then yes it will eventually spool up...but there is a reason F1 and other pro-race cars put the turbo right after the manifold...

These things are retarded IMO
According to their FAQ (BTW- Just so its clear, I'm not defending them or trying to say you're wrong, I'm just providing what they say about turbos and not necessarily needing heat ... I don't know enough about turbos to say if their method will work well or not):

Doesn't heat create the velocity in the exhaust gasses to spool the turbo?

No, heat doesn't create velocity. Heat creates volume. If you look at any of the physics laws for gasses, you will find that pressure and volume and heat are related. PV=NRT is a popular one, The V isn't for velocity, it is for Volume.

The turbine housing is what creates the velocity. The scrolling design that reduces the volume of the exhaust chamber as it scrolls around causes the gasses to have to increase in velocity and pressure to maintain the same flow rate.

Hotter gasses have more volume, thus requiring a higher A/R which in effect means that it starts at say 3" and scrolls down to approximately 1". Lower temperature gasses are denser and have less volume, so they require a lower A/R housing which would start at the same 3" volume, as the turbine housings use standard flanges, and scroll down to say 3/4".

Now if you were to reverse the housings in application, the conventional turbo would spool up extremely quick, at say around 1500 rpm but would cause too much backpressure at higher rpms because the higher volume of gas couldn't squeeze through the 3/4" hole without requiring a lot of pressure to force it through. On the reverse side, the remote mounted turbo with its cooler denser gasses, wouldn't spool up till say around 4000 rpms but once spooled up would make efficient power because it doesn't require hardly any backpressure to push the lower volume of gas through the larger 1" hole.
Additionally:
Don't turbos have to be really hot to work properly?
Putting a torch to your turbo and getting it hot doesn't produce boost. What produces boost is airflow across the turbine which causes the turbine to spin. If turbochargers required very high temperatures to produce boost, Diesel trucks and Methanol Race cars wouldn't be able to run turbos. However, each of these "Low Exhaust Temperature" vehicles work very well with turbochargers when, like any turbo application, the turbocharger is sized correctly.

In a conventional, exhaust manifold mounted turbocharger system, the extra heat causes the air molecules to separate and the gas becomes "thinner" because of the extra space between the molecules. This extra space increases the volume of air but doesn't increase the mass of the air. Because the volume is higher, the velocity of the gas has to be higher to get it out in the same amount of time.

By mounting the turbo further downstream, the gasses do lose heat energy and velocity, however, there is just as much mass (the amount of air) coming out of the tailpipe as there is coming out of the heads. So you are driving the turbine with a "denser" gas charge. The same number of molecules per second are striking the turbine and flowing across the turbine at 1200F as there is at 1700F.

Front mounted turbos typically run an A/R ratio turbine housing about 2 sizes larger because the velocity is already in the gasses and the volume is so big that the turbine housing must be larger to not cause a major restriction in the exhaust system which would cause more backpressure. With the remote mounted turbo, the gasses have condensed and the volume is less, so a smaller A/R ratio turbine housing can be used which increases the velocity of the gasses while not causing any extra backpressure because the gas volume is smaller and denser.

Sizing is everything with turbos. There is more to sizing a turbo for an application than cubic inches, Volumetric Efficiency, and RPM ranges. A turbo must also be sized for the exhaust temperatures. A turbine housing sized for 1700F gasses would have lag if the gasses were 1200F. This is why turbo cars have lag when they are cold and not warmed up yet. Both systems work well if sized correctly.
Old 12-07-2004, 10:26 AM
  #13  

 
Silver9k's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

"With the turbo so far back, don't you get a lot of turbo lag?
No, our turbochargers are sized to operate at this remote location. Just like any turbocharger, once the turbo is up to temperature and in the rpm range for which it was designed to operate. The boost comes on hard and fast. All of our systems will produce full boost below 3000 rpm.

If you were to take a conventional turbo and place it at the rear, you would have lots of lag and consequently, our turbo wouldn't work properly if mounted up front." (STS)
Exactly...because a normal sized turbo that flows enough air to make REAL power is not going to spool up in any driveable amount of time back there.

"Doesn't heat create the velocity in the exhaust gasses to spool the turbo?
No, heat doesn't create velocity. Heat creates volume. If you look at any of the physics laws for gasses, you will find that pressure and volume and heat are related. PV=NRT is a popular one, The V isn't for velocity, it is for Volume.
The turbine housing is what creates the velocity. The scrolling design that reduces the volume of the exhaust chamber as it scrolls around causes the gasses to have to increase in velocity and pressure to maintain the same flow rate.


Hotter gasses have more volume, thus requiring a higher A/R which in effect means that it starts at say 3" and scrolls down to approximately 1". Lower temperature gasses are denser and have less volume, so they require a lower A/R housing which would start at the same 3" volume, as the turbine housings use standard flanges, and scroll down to say 3/4".
Now if you were to reverse the housings in application, the conventional turbo would spool up extremely quick, at say around 1500 rpm but would cause too much backpressure at higher rpms because the higher volume of gas couldn't squeeze through the 3/4" hole without requiring a lot of pressure to force it through. On the reverse side, the remote mounted turbo with its cooler denser gasses, wouldn't spool up till say around 4000 rpms but once spooled up would make efficient power because it doesn't require hardly any backpressure to push the lower volume of gas through the larger 1" hole." (STS)

Ok...true, higher temp does create higher volume...PV=nRT...yes, however, if you keep the volume constant and increase the temperature, what happens to pressure? Correct, it increases...so with an increase in pressure, you have a increase in velocity because the gases need somewhere to go and with more pressure pushing them, they move faster...

Now the whole 3"-1" and 3"-3/4", A/R's, these are things people look at concerning two main things, spool up and top-end flow...which they sort of tried to state. the 3"-3/4" will spool faster, but will reduce top-end flow and vice versa...

"In a conventional, exhaust manifold mounted turbocharger system, the extra heat causes the air molecules to separate and the gas becomes "thinner" because of the extra space between the molecules. This extra space increases the volume of air but doesn't increase the mass of the air. Because the volume is higher, the velocity of the gas has to be higher to get it out in the same amount of time." (STS)
Hey, they basically said it themselves...however the volume can't be higher...it is set, you can't change the size of your manifold in mid driving...velocity becomes higher.

"A turbine housing sized for 1700F gasses would have lag if the gasses were 1200F. This is why turbo cars have lag when they are cold and not warmed up yet."(STS)
HAHA...lol...turbo guys, your cars have LOTS of lag when they are cold huh? hehe...EGT's will increase whether or not your car is warmed up...

also EGT's after the cat are normally below 600 F and even 500 F
And while the mass of the air hasn't changed towards the end of the exhaust, because of the lack much larger lack in velocity, you can't spin normal sized turbine at the speeds necessary (150,000-180,000 rpms) to spin a large enough compressor that flows enough air. Remember turbos are about airflow...not psi.

Sorry for the long post...just trying to make sure you guys understand...
Old 12-07-2004, 10:28 AM
  #14  

 
Silver9k's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

hehe...I was looking at the FAQ when you wrote that...I'm going to edit my post now to make it look more clear...thats better

BTW, I'm not saying that these kits CAN'T work...however I don't think that it would flow nearly enough air to make the power a conventional turbo or supercharger makes

It will make some additional power, also, with an S2000's 9000rpm redline, it could be interesting to see what a turbo sized to spool at 6000rpm (rather lofty) could create, but I still highly doubt it would be as much as a conventional turbo set to spool at the same rpm for the same psi.
Old 12-07-2004, 10:42 AM
  #15  

 
vader1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: MAHT-O-MEDI
Posts: 11,853
Received 437 Likes on 307 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by jackalope,Dec 7 2004, 12:46 PM
hmm seems like a kit like this would be really easy to piece together as well...I mean, all you would really need to do is run some intake piping all the way backj, then have a muffler shop add a flange to your current piping, then throw a little muffler off the side.

the major costs would be intake piping, turbo, methanol injection and tuning
plumbing for coolant and oil to the turbo would be an issue. and depending on how you run the lines, they could be subject to more abuse underneath the car than in the engine bay.
Old 12-07-2004, 10:50 AM
  #16  

 
Silver9k's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
Default

Another thing, that SS...I noticed it took an extra 500rpms to spool from 5psi to 7psi, and also that SS has 5.7L...correct? to spool the turbo, vs. 2

As an example, a 4g63 2.0L should spool a conventional turbo capable producing 470whp (47lbs air/min) by 4500-4700pms, and thats up to ehh...21-23psi or so, *(thinking of a T3/T4 60trim, .62a/r stage 3)

See the difference? 3x the displacement with maybe 1000-1200rpm spool up sooner to the same airflow...
edit*, found and example, sort of another LS1, but this one with normal turbos, http://turbotechnologyinc.com/ls1_race_system.htm
you can see that it makes the same amount of torque at about the same rpm ~3700, however this conventional turbo is a big tubo, it not made to spool fast its made to have high top-end...I don't know if this does the best job at getting my point across...but we'll see...

anyway, it is your money, just personally I would either go SC, or normal Turbo
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
CRXsir29
NYC Metro Stock Exchange
1
07-16-2011 02:31 PM
9000revolutions
Mid-Atlantic S2000 Owners
10
05-27-2009 07:45 PM
batikan
S2000 Forced Induction
10
07-07-2007 03:37 PM
magikcow
S2000 Talk
0
03-22-2007 07:55 AM



Quick Reply: STS Turbo - Remote Mounted Turbo Systems



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:29 AM.