Bet you've never seen or heard this!
 

This CAN'T be efficient!


Check it out...http://www.ststurbo.com/how_it_works

Did the videos on that site work for anyone. Or was I the only one who couldn't watch them.

seen it before.

so what's the bet?

You are on top of things! lol...what do u think of that tho? I mean...WHY? I guess it would work if u can't the turbo to fit into the engine bay and u really want to have a turbo, what ever it takes! lmfao...can u say twin turbo? lmfao

It worked fine for me...probably the browser your using:gotme:

:topic:
firefox 2.0 is out.... awsome update...


ok back on topic...

are you going to be doing that or something? or just showing

I just thought everyone should see this...

there was one of those set ups on a corvette a couple years ago, interesting idea

It's no problem to have it located back there... using that much pipe has never been a issue for me. Iv'e not seen this setup in person but the method and principal is good. I'd do it in a second.
Alot of applications already... hope they keep up the good work!

I'm a bit sceptical. Wouldn't blocking the gases from the exhaust bring your horsepower down?

If you want more torque and less horsepower, make your exhaust thinner.

If you want more horsepower and less torque, make your exhaust wider.

Everone that turbo's usually gets wider exhaust to free up the extra ponies and let the spent gasses easily escape. When you force air down the intake and tighten the exhaust it seems to me that this vicious cycle will wreak havok on these engines...especially those without CNC gasket-matched heads.

Only time'll tell.

http://www.geocities.com/indiextronic/turbonated.jpg
________
Sr500
________
Squirting tits

yeah im a little sceptical too, i was under the impression that you wanted the exhaust side of the turbo as close to the engine as possible to benefit from hotter and faster moving exhaust gasses to provide faster spool. with the turbo at the back of the car the exhaust gasses cool and slow down making it less than ideal for spinning up the turbo

well... i think at a car show... (durr) i saw a G6 i think... i totally forgot exactly what it was... but i actually saw a rear mounted turbo before... freaked me out... just though you guys should know


either a G6 or a Mustang... i forgot :yeahright

You lost the bet.
I've seen it, it works, it's just a bit unconventional.

So would this idea be a yes or no to conventional turbo setups?

F bodies, a few years ago

I don't like the design

There was a youtube or some other site with a video of truck with a rear turbo, it had a slight spool up time ( <3sec I think) but after that it took off.

I'd do it just to have less hassel of trying to fit a turbo underneath the hood. Now if the price is reasonable, I'd do it when I get the money.:bustrun:

Seen it.....

I've seen this set up on a z06 vette making close to 700hp and Banks Turbo just started making them for domestic pick-ups/suv's.

I guess we all have seen it before lol...my bad!

I thought turbos reduce gas mileage?

It all depends on how you drive and how your engine is tuned.

There is some backpressure with turbos and extra weight, but that wont drain the tank faster than WOT with a turbo or monster NA motor.

Universal Single Turbo System - Tuner
Price: $2,995.00 = :shock: :bawling:

...still, the idea is sound.

It works, and works quite well. As long as you size the turbo correctly it'll still spool quite fast and have tons of power. You can't use a normal size turbo that you would mount on the manifolds, the exhaust housing has to be smaller. Its likely that it will be slightly less efficient overall than a standard setup but for most street applications it'll work quite well. Heck, they can still go fast as well. There's a 9 second Corvette with one of those systems.

I'm likely going to do a similar setup on my Z. It'll definitely be fun.

Seen it. I view it as a desperate measure, but given engine compartment restraints on many vehicles, a necessary step. With proper sheilding from elements beneath vehicle, the turbo will have to compress more air up to the intake, so I don't think most effecient....this issue really already addressed with prior posts related to turbo size, tuning, and exhaust size. Interesting, but not related or needed in reference to our cars that can easily be boosted under the hood.

it needs a water deflection plate
Cold water + hot turbo = massive exhaust leak

Can I kill one mis-conception that's rampant among turbo dreaming?

turbos work because of PRESSURE, not heat. heat is a byproduct.
as long as the turbo is sized right (a little smaller) to make up for the cooler/denser exhaust gas, it puts the same back-pressure on the engine and therefore does the same amount of work.
As long as exhuast volume doesn't get rediculous, but you'd have to have about 25 feet of pipe for that to happen.

don't believe me? do the math.

Actually, Garrett says differently. You would pretty much have to submerge the thing in cold water when running very hot to make it crack.

They're definitely overpriced... exactly why I'd just do it myself. I was thinking about trying a similar setup on the Maxima myself but since I already have my current turbo setup there's no reason. :lol:

Now that I see this, something else becomes painfully obvious:

Why not just turbo the exhaust itself? Create negative pressure at the exhaust as opposed to positive pressure at the intake in a traditional turbo.

That way pressure will be lowered in the cylinders at the exhaust stage further than in NA and they will automatically pull in more air instead of using the turbo to push it in.

ok... a turbo USES exhaust pressure to CREATE pressure in the intake. there is a turbine and a compressor. exhaust passes thru the turbine and spins a shaft which is connected to the compressor. this shaft spins up in the compressor and compresses the air into the intake. it is essentially two fans connected: exhaust spins one fan that makes the other one spin to force air into the intake

a supercharger only has a compressor for the intake BUT it is spun by a belt attached to the engine so it is a little less efficient

ok why it works: it forces more air into the cylinder which allows you to burn more fuel. when air is drawn into the cylinder, the exhaust valves are CLOSED so no exhaust is leaving the cylinder and any suction you have on the exhaust side will not help you draw more air into the engine.

look at the diagram of the cylinder and pay attention to the valves: http://www.howstuffworks.com/engine.htm

also most NA engines benefit from backpressure in the exhaust

I live in Chicago, that is pretty easy to do here.

I know how a turbo works, so way to go waisting all your time typing.

What I was talking about is decreasing air pressure within the cylinder during the exhaust stage. Although after some additional pondering, I realize this is impossible without an electrically or belt -powered suction on the exhaust side (cant use gas flow to speed up the flow of the same gas, violates conservation of momentum and such), however decreasing pressure inside the cylinder is the same thing as increasing it on the intake side. This is because you simply need a pressure gradient, a turbo/supercharger raises it
on the right side, but a decrease in pressure inside the cylinder would just lower it on the left. You still end up with the same deltaP.

You didnt read my entire post

that means you cannot create pressure on the exhaust side while you are drawing air into the engine so you cannot create any deltaP INSIDE the cylinder

I am only trying to help you understand more about engines so no need to get snotty

anyway if you really did know how turbos and 4 stroke engines work you wouldnt have suggested this in the first place, check out that link it explains 4 stroke engines pretty well and you should be able to see how suction on the exhaust side of the cylinder cannot draw more air into the cylinder during the intake stroke.

Back pressure doesn't help any engine. Its velocity that people confuse with back pressure on an n/a engine. Basically, if the exhaust is too large you lose velocity... when you go back to a smaller exhaust the velocity goes back up helping the exhaust to leave, which people confuse as back pressure helping out.

On an N/A engine the way race guys get the engines to go over 100% VE (or any N/A engine for that matter) is the valve timing and exhaust. They have overlap in the timing (intake and exhaust open at the same time) which, if done right, the exhaust will help suck fresh air into the cylinder allowing the engine to take in more air than it can just using the piston to pull it down.

On a turbo setup this is just the opposite. The pressure in the exhaust before the turbo will always be higher than the pressure the compressor is able to put into the intake, therefore, the overlap needs to be changed so that the exhaust isn't able to go back into the cylinder or even the intake when the intake valve opens.

I don't see why it wouldn't work... I mean, the idea in a turbo setup is to create the greatest difference in pressure on the inlet and outlet side of the turbo (exhaust side), right? The greater the difference in pressure, the more the high pressure exhaust gas will try to equalize with the low pressure environment. As long as the exhaust pressure at the manifold and the muffler are at the same potential (which they should be), it shouldn't make a difference where, in the exhaust system, you put the turbo.

It still seems a little gimmicky to me. If you have room in the engine bay, you're just asking for ducting headaches putting it anywhere else.