sts turbo worth it?
01-29-2007 | 04:16 PM
#46
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 5,645
From: Bridgewater, MA
01-30-2007 | 12:57 AM
#47
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 971
From: Colorado
What exactly is a "snap" factor? And explain this KILLER underhood temps theory for me. My turbo is under the hood and has never caused a problem. Neither have the millions of turbochargers under the hoods of millions of production cars since the first production turbo car, the Corvair, was built.
None of the piping on my car is coated. It's 304 stainless. This is also how the PTK kit comes by defualt. I don't know of any production turbo cars that came with coated piping from the factory, either. Again, no problems on those millions of cars. If this whole "running cooler" theory is the STS nuthuggers' reason for thinking this thing is a great idea, then why don't they design a kit to sit on the roof of the car? It will run even cooler up there.
One more thing. If the rear mount is such an amazing idea then why don't the high horsepower cars use them? Pro cars don't have a restriction on where the turbo is mounted, yet they all put them up front. You want to know why they don't put them in the back? Because it makes less power and it's less efficient. Talk to pro series driver some time about putting the turbo in the back. They'll laugh you off the racetrack.
-Chris
None of the piping on my car is coated. It's 304 stainless. This is also how the PTK kit comes by defualt. I don't know of any production turbo cars that came with coated piping from the factory, either. Again, no problems on those millions of cars. If this whole "running cooler" theory is the STS nuthuggers' reason for thinking this thing is a great idea, then why don't they design a kit to sit on the roof of the car? It will run even cooler up there.
One more thing. If the rear mount is such an amazing idea then why don't the high horsepower cars use them? Pro cars don't have a restriction on where the turbo is mounted, yet they all put them up front. You want to know why they don't put them in the back? Because it makes less power and it's less efficient. Talk to pro series driver some time about putting the turbo in the back. They'll laugh you off the racetrack.
-Chris
If you picked apart the STS website, and all the rediculous bull**** on it, it'd probably take you all day
BTW, all the turbodiesel pickup truck and semi tractor owners better take notice... Their underhood turbos could be causing them major heat problems!!!! And even though they've been designed that way for decades, they should all change to the inferior STS design. At least those underhood temps would go down!!!!
01-30-2007 | 07:35 AM
#48
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 534
From: aurora ontario
hey im not saying for everyone to swap, all my friends who drive rigs have huge intercoolers..... nothing at all with running underhood turbo's i have 4 cars that are conventional turbo's.... so nothing at all wrong with them... but for someone who wants an easy turbo install, with no bs, ect... sts is a perfetct way to go
02-01-2007 | 09:52 PM
#49
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 290
From: South FLA
I have had the STS system on my car for at least 3 years now. No problems. Past 2 years I have been driving it on the street with 500+ rwhp 600+ rwtq. Front mounts work great, Superchargers are great, and STS system has worked great for me. Each system has pros and cons.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
cmsmith
2010 - 2015 Camaro News, Sightings, Pictures, and Multimedia
0
09-14-2015 09:09 PM
NewsBot
2010 - 2015 Camaro News, Sightings, Pictures, and Multimedia
0
09-14-2015 02:02 AM