So I’d like to start a discussion. Are there any pros/cons to a rear mount turbo setup vs. the traditional style? if so what? How is the lag? is it worse? I have some ideas floating around in my head and would like to get some input. thanks!
Front mount is better, less weight, quicker spool, less to go wrong, etc…
With that said, there have been some VERY fast rear mount turbo cars local, and they do perform very well. Adam’s GTO made 650+ whp, Stry’s vette made 1000+ whp. To say rear mount is stupid, is ignorant. But, I still prefer the traditional turbo setup if you are able to fit it.
–mark
from what I gather, the pro to a rear-mount setup is that due to the length of piping both hot and cold side, intercooling is much less necessary, and the lag isnt too much worse. this also allows you to place the turbo post-catalytic converter and whatnot…
actually, if you read “maximum boost” by corkey bell…he actually goes into detail on why having a turbo AFTER the cat is a good idea…
your not doing a rear mount on a crx are you?
front mount > ass mount. nuff said
rear mount has been made to work, of course… look at “MAJOR SPRAY” on ls1tech. fastest turbo ls1 car. keep in mind his car was FAR FAR FARRRRRRRRRRRRRR more advanced than an sts setup car. stry’s car is also another good example. my experience with sts was that it was 10lbs of poo in a 5lb bag.
I would argue that you need to use an intercooler just as much. A pipe does not do a good job of cooling extremely hot charge air.
I can see how a rear-mount setup would weigh more, not to to the point where it would hurt performance. You would still use the same amount of piping for the exhaust, just the charge piping would be longer. maybe 20lbs extra weight?
I assumed less cooling would be needed because the charge piping is getting hit by the air passing underneath the car. I’ve been meaning to pick up “maximum boost” I’ll check it out thanks.
the CRX is gone
Did you do a rear mount setup? That may have been before my time here.
Yes he ran a rear mount setup for a couple years…stupid n00bs
Well this wouldn’t be an STS kit, I would fab everything.
Now is a rearmount less effective because the air has to travel farther to the intake?
I mean, I can understand if there is more lag but it cant be much more, as soon as you start a car you can feel the exhaust gases from the tailpipe.
plus a sump and oil pump. not a ton, but it still adds up.
Anthony don’t waste the extra effort, just do the traditional setup that’s been proven on the SS’s. It wouldn’t be very cost effective either.
i can see a psi drop of 1-2 maybe?
correct me if im wrong.what vehicle are you doing it on jdmjunky?
You can get that from a bad intercooler too. Just turn the boost up more, problem solved.
ya. it was nothing but problems for me. it was just a sloppy setup in every sense of the word. it sucked. for 1/4 the money i could have done heads and cam and had a stronger, more solid car.
my experience:
sts - shit
76gts front mount “kit” - very fast, well rounded, little things about it bothered me enough to ditch it
self-built S88 setup - insane, complete, clean
the comparison between the front and rear mounts i’ve ran are almost non-existent. i could write a dissertation on the benefits of the front mount. everyone who has experienced my car with the different setups would agree. the “lesser intercooling needed, you use the same amount of pipe anyway, less under hood heat, space constraints” reasonings on behalf of rearmounts are really shitty arguments
1 summer
COBALT SS.
fucking caps lock
Thats all it took huh?
How hard was the fitment on that? Seems like there was alot of shoehorning going on in that engine bay.