I'll admit I don't spend a lot of time over here, but the article in the latest CHP magazine about a turbo mounted in a 4th gen where the muffler used to be sounded interesting. They claimed the ducting length wasn't any more than your typical intercooled system. Having the ducting under the car accomplished the effect desired of an intercooler, and having the turbo out back reduced underhood temps significantly. About the only "unusual" part was an electric pump to get the lube oil back to the engine.

I didn't see it mentioned in search here, nor on their website, so thought I'd see what you all think.

 

The article is titled: "Riders on the Storm - Rear mounted turbos from Squires Turbo Systems".

 

https://www.thirdgen.org/techbb2/sho...ight=STS+Turbo

 

Dang. Wrong search term/didn't look back far enough.

NM.

 

"Since the turbo is mounted at the rear of the car, there is no added heat build up and the system is cooled from fresh ambient air, which creates denser exhaust molecules to propel the turbo's turbine wheel more efficiently." - CHP

Huh?!?! Hugh MacInnes must be full of crap!

 

If you look over at the camaroz28.com website you'll see it has become very popular with the 4th gen crowd.

 

I laughed at the RMT (remote mount turbo) at first, but I got to wondering how well it works. It would be about the easiest way to turbocharge a car without serious work. I tried it on my 89 Cavalier, and was happy with the results. The response is decent, full 10psi of boost by 3000 rpm, and it has run a 13.9 at 99 mph in hot weather and more recently a 14.1 at 103mph on a cool day with a horrible launch (2.39 60'!). Should be capable of a mid 13 second timeslip once I get a good launch (it was hard to launch because the clutch would slip if it got hot on the launch, so I had to side-step it- almost stalled the engine!). This is on a bone stock 180,000 mile 2.8 v6 (high 15s stock). I built the system and installed it in two days! It has been installed now for almost 10,000 miles, and is daily driven.

It may not be ideal performance wise, but it would be ideal for a low budget system for a 3rd gen. They really do work (at least mine does, I haven't tried STS systems myself).

 

Like someone else said on another board, there is a way to do something, and then there is the Right way to do it. This is the latter.

While an inventive idea and 'can' (by 'can' I mean 'can like absolutely any other idea') make serious HP, it's inefficient for one, It takes more than a split second for the exhaust to get to the back, spool the turbo, and get back to the intake. It's not a big deal if you're sitting on your converter at the track, but on the street it could be a real pain in the ***. The only up-side to this over a turbo in the engine bay is that you don't have to spend ridiculous amounts on turbo headers.

 

Not being a power adder myself, but having watched and considered for several years, it seems to address several issues, such as the just-mentioned headers, plus reduced underhood heat. The mag article was clear that turbolag wasn't a problem - probably because the turbo is small enough to spool up quickly. However, I'm definately not up on all of the thermodynamic issues to judge whether all the claims are trustworthy.

The "Issues" you guys have brought up that weren't addressed in the article that I see are the exposure of expensive hardware to thieves (alarms always work, though, right?), and the air inlet. I think I'd want to at least address the latter, as I don't think much of having the air source right by a tire that's kicking up dust and road debris. The oil return was also something I wondered about.

 

Hell it works... Who cares if it is the "best" route to use. The biggest thing for me is oiling. IIRC the STS setup uses a pump to scavange the oil back to the pan. I'd rather setup a seperate system using a high pressure pump, a reserve, and a remote mounted cooler.

 

The problem with the STS turbo system, is they have to use a TINY exhaust housing, to have any sort of spool characteristics with the extremely cool exhaust (Comparatively speaking) - this will and DOES cause a HUGE amount of backpressure at any sort of mid to high level boost conditions (10+ psi)

Personally, I'd love to see what compressor side they are using - fact is, if it's actually a compressor wheel that the engine would WANT (aka, EFFICIENT) then you have the problem of bearing longetivity (large wheel on one end, and a small on the other - major pain to balance properly!) - otherwise, I completely see the need for the methanol injection - to cool the completely too-hot intake air flow!

Does it make power? Yes. For $4000, though, I'd be pissed to only be running 12s I'd also be pissed at exact what you get - about $1000 worth of stuff. $3k for R&D? Rip off.

 

They seem to work pretty well, but a statement like that would make Steven Hawking stand up and choke that guy if he ever said that in front of him.

 

at least it gives us another option to try to run a turbo, but I'd do it my self and as someone else said use a seperate oil resevour and run it closer to the engine like the sledgehammer, if it wasn't so damn far from the engine it might not look so freakin retarded lol but it works lol.

 

The idea is proven that it'll generate some HP, however, the price tag is waaaay too high IMO.

 

There has to be some advantage to having the turbo after the cat.

 

I bet you could do a junkyard setup on a thirdgen if you placed it better, the only problems I am seeing are thieves, turbo lag (I read the article and they said it had no more, but it is obvious to me that it will have more lag)...I'm suprised no one has addressed the fact of water on the turbo, what would happen if you went through a dip at low speeds and soaked it? Those turbos are HOTTTTT and I'm sure it could warp or totally ruin turbo.

Advantages:

DIY much more simple
Cheaper (No expensive headers)
Less Heat underhood

Disadvantages:

Thieves
Lag
Puddles
Less boost (less exhaust pressure correct?)


They need to perfect it a bit, seems to be in the developing stages to me plus the whole idea seems a little to hondaish for me

 

My thoughts exactly.

 

I think most perceived problems with this system come from a few distinct points of view.

First, it's new and "different". There is a skepticism (which is generally healthy) regarding the next new-and-improved thing out there. Fortunately, we're now seeing good results from people like 89JYturbo who aren't trying to sell us something. With time and more people posting results, this issue should go away.

Second, STS's physics are questionable at best. Their theory of operation is humorous at points. Unfortunately, they do sprinkle in some truth/fact to make things seem correct. Hopefully, discussions like this and forums like these will help sort out the right and wrong.

Finally, there are philosophical differences. Just like someone might consider using NOS "cheating" or the individual who says "there's no replacement for displacement" buying the largest CI motor he can while shunning power adders, there are people who just won't like this setup because they don't like it.

I think your post is a good concise list of the potential advantages and disadvantages. It's up to the individual to determine how much weight to give each. (I personally don't believe theft is very probable. By the time someone could have taken the time and made the noise necessary to remove the RMT, they could have made off with the tires/wheels or a host of other pieces from the car. And, regarding puddles, the turbo won't be as HOT in an RMT setup compared to conventional setups. Given exhaust pipes and mufflers survive occasional water contact, I'd imagine the turbo could do the same.)

 

eh I would steal a $4000 turbo set up before I stole rims Plus who needs a jack stand? Just a saw

 

Wow. I couldn't have put it better myself.

Many people don't like the system because they don't understand it. I get the "what about water puddles" question all the time. My turbo can be seen through the LR wheel well, and it has been happy there for over 10k miles now (it is not directly behind the wheel , just right beside it, where the stock muffler used to be). I drive it rain or shine, every day of the week. It has also been handling the few sub-zero temps we had around my area a few weeks ago. Just drove it to and from work today in heavy rain.

The lag is not an issue if the turbo is sized properly (I get full 10 psi by 3000rpm, and have run 13psi for some tesiting), and my turbo is not sized properly (I used a turbo from my TT IROC when I upgraded). That said, a properly sized RMT turbo will have an exhaust turbine housing that is smaller than what is otherwise ideal, slightly restricting the max HP output. IMO, this is a minor problem when budget and ease of installation are important.

Not to many V8 3rd gen/Mustang owners question it when my 183,000 mile 2.8 spanks them in the quarter.

 

You lose the muffler with this setup though right? I dont see this being a good setup without one for everyday driving. I do like the easy install with min modifications.

 

With a turbo... a muffler is optional.

 

Pipes and mufflers do not have any moving parts with very tight clearances.

I agree with you 100% on the new and different part, so people will not like it because of that. It 'seems' a little hokey, but I'm willing to wait and see people's results.

-Dave

 

Results:

First track outing:
13.9 @ 99 MPH on a hot day (85-90°F IIRC -2.09 60')

2nd track day:
14.1 @103mph on a cool day with a bad clutch, poor launch (embarrassing 2.4 60'!)
14.0 @97mph better launch this time, but clutch was toast (clutch slipped on the line, so there was no tire spin, but it also slipped when the boost came in on 3rd and 4th gears, which explains the low MPH- 2.2 60')

This was running 10psi on the otherwise stock 180,000 mile 2.8V6 and Getrag 5 Speed. I'm running a mismatched Garrett T3 Turbo (I'm on the far right of the map over 5000 rpm). This was an old turbo from my TT IROC that I used because I had it, not because it was properly sized.

I now replaced the stock clutch with a Bully Stage III. I'm pretty sure it will go into the mid 13's once I get it to the track and can get a decent launch. Maple Grove opens in the spring, I will be there opening day!

 

Ditto.

I have no muffler. Before I installed the turbo I had a straight- thru muffler on my car (similar to a glasspack) for about a week, and then took it off and install a stock tye muffler because it was too loud. Now with the turbo on and no muffler, it is right between a stock muffler and that 'straight-thru' type muffler. The turbo is very effective as a muffler, plus it gives that distinct turbine whistle (I love that sound!). With a RMT, you can actually here the turbine whistle over the exhaust note- it sounds about as good as a V6 can IMO.

 

STS turbo:
What about exhaust leaks?
How many people have a full exhaust that can hold pressure?
Ever see that water comeing out of your tail pipe when it's cool out?
Water is not a good thing to have in side a turbine device.
Now centrifical turbine compressores can suck up some water it dosen't seem to bother them, now the turbine it different it will rust realy badly.
I wish I took pictures of the gas trubine compressor I had to help change a plentum gasket out on, the inside SS load bearing parts (mainly around where bolts were torqued) were rusted all to hell. It was real bad, combinding the corrosive exhaust gases and rain that they suck up were able to rust Aero space turbine engine grade SS all to h3ll. This was an old engine any way it had about 5000 hours on it. The only thing that didn't rust were the Hastealloy parts, a Cobalt and Chromium base alloy. Nothing can touch that ****.
Do you think turbos are made of materals with the quality of what a $120,000 turbine engine are made with?
I think they will rust just a little faster.
Water is poison for turbines.
The best thing about turbos is they have an air oil seal on the turbine side a lot like a piston ring. Letting exhasut gas, water or what ever into the bearing cavity.
How may of these daily driven STS kits are going to be around 3 years form now with the orignal turbo?
What about the waste gate, i'm sure water will rust that too?
On turbo that is close to the engine where it should be is only cool enough for water to be in liquid form for about the first minute of operation if that.
I think it is the most minimalist way you can say "I have a turbo".
I have stayed silent about the STS turbo for far to long.

 

Just watched that show on the Speed channel concerning this. Way interesting! Details:

2 Guys Garage "This Week"

Squires Turbo Systems Page

The dyno tests were impressive. An LS1 4th Gen Camaro went from 269 RWHP and added anonther 135 RWHP without and tuning. The dyno curves looked good too. Lag was not obvious there at least. Price for this mod is prohibitive.

Wish I had and LT1 or TPI. Well, it' not like I can dish out 4K for this anyway... sheesh!

(another thing I noticed was a pitch for "Steele Rubber Products" on the following show. Their website can't handle the traffic around that promotion... funny!)

 

That's a new one. People will think of anything to complain about something they don't understand. I always thought turbo guru's were of the innovative type?

My RMT has been on for a almost a year and over 10k miles. The only contamination on the turbine end of the turbo is soot from the exhaust, just like any other turbo would have, remote mounted or not. There is no rust on the inside of the exhaust turbine.

Your complaints are mute. I get tired of people talking about this system that haven't tried it themselves.

BTW, how fast is your TT 3.4 Camaro?

 

This is how everybody should do their homework before coming up with opinions.
I used to think a lot like you guys did when the kit first came out. After doing my research I came up with the some conclusions. First off, it works, nothing can dispute this fact. The REASON it works is because of the turbine. With the turbine being so far from the exhaust the kenetic energy has been decreased. This is the reason you can't just bolt up any old "normal" hot turbo.
Now for the interesting way around this; using a turbo made for high boast small engines seems to work well. This is nothing more than a hybrid like the T4/T3 where the compressor is large and the turbine is small. Looking at the compressor maps should be a good indication of which turbo's would work.
Now for the tricky part, getting rid of that huge restriction at high engine speeds and boost. The easiest is to have a LARGE external wastegate. This is all the info I'm going to give out for now. Everybody should understand how and why the rear mount turbos work so if you want to run an inefficient turbo then go for it . I actually like the idea only if I was going to go turbo I'd be running a hot setup to maximize efficiency. Remember, energy is heat and heat lost from the exhaust is wasted gas. Then again if you're worried about gas milage like me you probably should have picked something with less displacement, lol.

 

It depends on your definition of “works.” Yes it is worth some boost and some power, OTOH, it is nowhere near the best way to do it. Basically, you end up giving up the broader efficiency range of a turbo and end up with a setup that has very close to the power and boost curve of a centrifugal blower but without the total efficiency… largely worthless down low, perfect boost in a narrow range and then too much if you keep going.



Actually, if the turbo was actually optimized for high boost on a small engine it WOULD NOT work well at all. Most turbo compressors have a broader efficiency range around roughly the 3:1 pressure ratio range, so if you’re planning on forcing a lot of boost through a small engine you’ll really need a smaller compressor.

The optimum combination for this setup is one with a large compressor and a largish turbine with a small A/R. What STS appears to be doing is going with a largish compressor and then just using a small turbine like you would on a medium to smaller HP twin setup on the same engine.

Again, a large turbine with a small A/R would go a long way in getting this to work optimally, but I’m not even sure that what would work best even exists to be put together into a turbo.

A big wastegate definitely isn’t an answer unless you believe that the OEM approach (basically focusing on driveablility and not worrying about ultimate power). Once the wastegate is open you’re giving up on keeping the turbine working efficiently and just dumping energy and killing any efficiency that you had (usually you can see this as exhaust to intake pressure ratios skyrocket). A VVT style turbo might be an interesting solution…

 

Yeah, i thought a turbo works on thermal energy. You would think colder exhaust would be less effiencent. I could be wrong though.

 

Before 83 Crossfire TRIES to correct you let me add my .
Yes a turbo works with thermal energy but not directly. Thermal energy is heat, using ideal gas law increase heat means higher pressure for the same volume. This doesn't mean a turbo won't work without heat. When there is no heat in the exhaust there is still air being pumped through the turbine causing it to spin. The purpose of having a turbo is to increase the engines efficiency by converting some of the exhaust energy (which would normally be lost to heat) into mechanical energy, kinetic if you will.
For this reason you can design a turbo to work efficiently at low heat, it just has to have a propertly sized turbine and wastegate. Some of the members think it's a half-*** way to turbocharge, I think it's a different way with very real results. For something this new I'm actually impressed they're getting the power curves they are! Imagine if they did go with a VVD turbine .
The problem with long exhaust piping is that gas is compressible. So instead of all your energy going into spooling up the turbo it ALSO has to compress the exhaust gas through engine cycles. To spool up a turbo you want the least amount of exhaust piping possible to decrease it's "lag". This being my only major issue with the systems and why I'd go with a short exhaust twin turbo for a street car. I bet for a dragster the system would work very well to help soft launch. Now if our engines were liquid pumps we could run really long exhaust without any lag .

 

You guys can talk about RMT systems all you want. The proof for me is that when I leave work tonight and nail the throttle in my remote turboed Z24, I will be happy.

I built my system on the Z24 because I was tired of theorizing about it. I like my system, and feel it works very well for what it is and the $ invested. Not too many people can argue with the results. And yes, I do understand the limitations of the system, and why it doesn't look good on paper (you will probably never see a real race car run this system). I am happy with it, isn't that what really matters in the end?

 

Did you even read my replys or are you just jumping in and generalizing everybody's views on RMTs?
(hint, read my 4th sentance in 1st reply if that's the case).
I'd like to know if you could compare a hot turbo setup car similar to yours. What has been their results? Isn't that what matters when people start talking about behing "happy"? I'm happy with my TBI 350 but I can't tell somebody else that they'd be happy with it. I feel obligated to also post the shortcomings that others might find. A good example in your case would be the cost. I know you didn't spend a lot of money on it and so any performance would make you (and anybody) happy for the price. But what if it cost you $3000? Would you still be happy with your results?

 

Yes, I read your entire post- I didn't think you were against it. Just saying it is worth a try. I certainly wasn't bashing anyone (especially not you!). If you read any of my other info posted about this system, you will know that I did indeed post the short-comings of the system (over and over again). I'm not trying to hide anything, and I'm not even trying to sell anything either. Too many people complain about RMT system when they have absolutely no experience with them.

The performance is hard to compare with standard turbo systems, as everyone that I've seen build a standard turbo system on a J-body has done extensive engine work as well. Curtis Walker (TurboZ24.com) had done serious engine work and was only a few tenths quicker than my car in his early system (I ran a 13.9@ 99mpoh the second time down the track with a bone stock 183k mile 2.8 @10psi of boost- the turbo is even too small for the application- esp the compressor side). Curtis is now in the low 12's, but he has serious $$ into his 3.1 (a completely different league than my car). Another guy from V6Z24 has a turbo 3.1 with a bigger cam, custom comtuter tuning, and other engine mods and only ran a 14.0 @ 97mph with his car. So yes, the performance is very close to that of a standard turbo system. Wait until this spring- I feel mid 13's are going to be easy with the new clutch (I ran a 14.1@103mph with a 2.4 60' my last drag strip pass- there is better times in the mix for sure!).

 

I have been here in japan for the last 2 years unable to work on my car back home, so :shrug: .
I have bought a lot of parts (turbo and non turbo related), lately suspention mods. Should be a lot of fun after there installed.
For $4000 it is to much money, if you build your own cool.
If we can class them as a moderate power adder and stop trying to make them out to be some thing there not then we will be better off.

 

Looks like a nice project. I'm anxious to see how it runs when you get it up and running.

 

I'd say you've done very well and that RMTs are worth a look if you want a power adder and can DIY. For the price though it's not what I'd call an economical alternative for thirdgeners. 4th gens, yes, 3rd gens, not yet.
I wish I had a welder so I could through a GN turbo on this engine. My cam isn't really turbo friendly so maybe not with this setup. I've got a stock 97 lt1 cam... hmm....

 

OK, I skipped most of the post above, sorry.

BUT, I want to point out the cost advantage of the RMT system. I have a '99 Camaro SS which had about 289 RWHP stock. I put in over $5,000 into the car to get me to 400 RWHP, a net gain of 111 RWHP.

Sooo, If a RMT for about $4000 to $4200 will get you 135 more RWHP, then it seems to be a bargain to me.

In addition, I sent STS an email inquiring about a 3rd gen RMT and they said that the LT1 kit would fit with some modifications. They did not say anything about a 3rd gen kit at all, so I assume that they have no plans to do one for us.

 

Doc, just read my last reply .
I'm kind of glad they haven't done a RMT for thirdgens. This way it won't cost $4000 . A DIYer RMT kit that has similar results would be nice to see.
I did a price out of the parts in the STS kit and came up with about $1000 in materials which includes the external wastegate and turbo. So $4000 is nice but if they offered it for $2500 they'd sell a lot more .

 

They are a little pricey but they will come down. they are just new. i cant wait to get one on an lt1.

 

What price did you get for the oil pump that they’re using? I have a hard time believing that the turbo, wastegate and oil pump add up to under $1K, forget about plumbing, labor, misc odds and ends…. Does the $4K number include engine management/fuel (their meth injection?), blowoff…? Typical profit margin in the industry is about 50% or better if the company intends to stay in business, and although I still don’t see $4K, I can definitely see over $3K, so I don’t see the price dropping much.

 

I'd say a $500, 150 shot of spay is a bargin, but thats not what i like. I like boost. I think you can do a DIY RMT system for alot less than $4000-$4200

 

$203.95 for the bronze oil pump.
Depends on where you buy your turbo I guess, because that wastegate in their kit is the el-cheapo $170 35mm "comes with flange and gaskets".
So that leaves me with $626 for a turbo. I'm not going to tell you exactly what oil pump they're using because I don't know if they had it custom made or not. From the looks of the rest of the kit I doubt they did but I did my homework and it's mine, do your own . Obviously it would cost more than $1000 to by individually but in bulk I bet $1500 in parts isn't exagurating.
If it was my shop making these I'd do exactly what they're doing but quickly lower the prices to keep my men busy and the roads full of high horsepower f-body's. Think about the publicity they'd get by having a "cheap version" and then doing custom jobs for the same % mark-up with more labor. I think that's where it's at, just look at Mufflex. He makes 4" exhaust kits but he doesn't charge NEARLY as much of a mark-up as STS is doing.
To each his own but I could do it for less then $1000 . Think about how popular the name would be if he dropped his prices! It would be the new vortech, or procharger, and with the awards he's won... well, I still like them even though I think the price mark-up is too high .

 

If its so easy then start a business and give him competition, if its so easy you should run him into the ground.

Thats what capitalism is all about.

 

Could you quote me where I said or implied it was easy?
Capitalism is great for these reasons, lots of options always pushing improvement and refinement.
I wonder why he's got such high mark-up. Maybe to pay for the R&D, or maybe he's selling at his current capacity so might as well keep the price hot while it's hot.

 

Just an idea, if I was gonna do a DIY rear mount turbo-

Why not just cut out the floor pan in the back seat area and mount the turbo there? I'm not running back seats anyway and placing the turbo a couple feet behind the Ypipe would eliminate 6 feet of exhaust losses and cut another 6ft. of intake pipe.

Heck, why not run the intake pipe through the center console area and up through the firewall. I've seen a 4th gen drag car with the intercooler in the passenger seat. A lot of fabbing would be involved, just one bonus would be having the weight of the turbo as low and far back as possible. With some work the intake pipe could be somewhat hidden and you'd have a stealth turbo'd car.

 

Uh hu… riiigghttt.

So you’re basically saying that you could build it for that and that he should build it for that, but you wouldn’t do it. You’re suggesting that he’s making a 300% profit but you wouldn’t do it for that amount.

Start factoring in some real costs, labor… and you’ll find that you will not make a profit charging much lower then what they’re charging. And don’t read this as I’m a big proponent of the thing or something… I actually feel that it’s a rather mediocre design with a lot of associated problems, I just find it amusing how different the f-body performance parts market is in how it values parts and labor then what it is with most other cars.



huh, I don’t see it… having done both custom turbo and custom exhaust stuff, hell, being the person that got spintech making the 4” muffler that mufflex is using (I’ve got one of 2 of the original prototypes of that muffler in the garage, the other was sent to mufflex) I don’t see any way that mufflex is making a lower percent profit then STS. I wouldn’t be surprised if exhaust products have one of the biggest profit margins of any of the performance parts market.