Who is interested in a turbo kit??
- Thread starter xoxbxfx
- Start date
4MuscleMachines
Member
I don't know what kinda turbos 300 bucks will bring ya. For blo thru carb apps, that will only see 8-9 psi, I won't even get a IC. No need for it with that amount of boost. I certainly wouldn't buy a blow thru carb from a turbo dealer. They are not the same for every app. I am thinking about making some kits for guys with 67 and 68's. Small and simple for some people. Might be convincing someone for a remounted 347 here pretty soon. Doing someone else kit will be different than mine. I learned a ton on this build. I was in a huge rush, no regrets, but would do a few things differently.
4MuscleMachines said:
well this is going to be a month or two out before anythign is for sale. We are going to build our first kit on a carb'd 302 68 fastback. Im hoping to build it sorta tight so that it would fit in a 65--66 but we will see. im ordering parts today and hopefully begin fabbing next week.
65ShelbyClone
Founding Member
xoxbxfx said:
I hope the kit isnt going to come just one of those. The T3 turbine will be way too small to run as a single. The only reason to run two T3/T4s is if you can get the bigger compressor to run more efficiently in this application. You can still split a 302 with two .60/.63 A/R T3s.
65ShelbyClone
Founding Member
Very interested in this topic as well. Although I have already done the shock tower removal on my 66 'vert, I am not sure if I want to go that route on the 65 or not...so I would be curious as to what kind of turbo setup would fit with a different suspension approach. Also, a 351 block moves the heads higher up in the engine compartment. Will that help with the turbo plumbing?
mtbdoc said:
well, this turbo kit idea is on hold. Ihave ran into many problems with these setups due to the fact everyone is running something different. Some people are running 302's some 351's (in 3 different body styles) then some are using serpentine pulleys, some vbelt, some a/c some not. Some have custom brackets to hold the accessories.
Until I can come up with a better way to have a universal kit (not lookin good) Im not going to be building these kits. I have put in many many hours lately looking over the different options with the cars and motors I have at the house and its just not workin like I want it to. If I did it for all the different combonations, I would have something like 15 kits to make which just isnt cost effective nor labor effective.
Did you consider making it a rear turbo kit? It seems like that configuration would be easier to make a universal kit out of. The system basically picks up at the header collector, and routes the exhaust into a Y-connector then to a single turbo, then ducts the pressurized intake air back up to the engine compartment. All the turbo hardware mounts in the rear, around the axle and fuel tank, where there's not a lot of variation from year to year. I know the Fays2 Watts link I installed in my kids' '65 is the same for all years, '65 through '73. You could also consider oval exhaust pipes from Dr. Gas, for additional ground clearance.
Here's a pic of an off-the-shelf kit, sold by Squires Turbo Systems ("STS") for $4000 complete, installed in a '95 Firebird:
This is all you see under the hood:
Here's the writeup I stole these pix from: http://chevyhiperformance.com/techarticles/148_0502_turbo/#
Here's a quote:
"Since these systems are uniquely designed to function at the rear of the vehicle, it operates without any noticeable lag and will produce full boost below 3,000 rpm. This is because the intake-tubing volume is about the same size as most traditional turbos that are front-mounted with an intercooler. The system is a true bolt-on kit that can usually be installed in an afternoon. In an F-body, the intake tubing is routed under the car on the driver's side. The tubing's exposure to ambient air alongside the car also serves to cool the charge. Tests have shown that turbo outlet temps with 5-psi boost measured 175 degrees F (at the rear of the car) and dropped to 115 degrees F at the intake discharge up front. The pressure drop was 1/4 to 3/4 psi. The bottom line is that the intake tube acts as an intercooler, dropping the rear-mounted turbo temp (which is already lower than engine compartment installations) about 50 percent and with a very small drop in psi."
This magazine story includes a dyno chart showing a stock 347 ci LT-1 at 273 rwhp @ 5000, 302 lb-ft @ 4000, and one with a kit, running at 7 psi, at 385 hp @ 5300, 445 lb-ft @ 4000. Torque was over 400 lb-ft from 3000 to 5000.
Granted 5-7 psi is not much boost, but keep in mind this kit is designed as a bolt on for a fairly high compression stock engine (10.1:1 - 10.4:1 for a Cambird LT1, depending on model year). Also, how many old Stangs can handle 400-450 lb-ft at the wheels anyway?
Here's STS's site: www.ststurbo.com
Here's a pic of an off-the-shelf kit, sold by Squires Turbo Systems ("STS") for $4000 complete, installed in a '95 Firebird:
This is all you see under the hood:
Here's the writeup I stole these pix from: http://chevyhiperformance.com/techarticles/148_0502_turbo/#
Here's a quote:
"Since these systems are uniquely designed to function at the rear of the vehicle, it operates without any noticeable lag and will produce full boost below 3,000 rpm. This is because the intake-tubing volume is about the same size as most traditional turbos that are front-mounted with an intercooler. The system is a true bolt-on kit that can usually be installed in an afternoon. In an F-body, the intake tubing is routed under the car on the driver's side. The tubing's exposure to ambient air alongside the car also serves to cool the charge. Tests have shown that turbo outlet temps with 5-psi boost measured 175 degrees F (at the rear of the car) and dropped to 115 degrees F at the intake discharge up front. The pressure drop was 1/4 to 3/4 psi. The bottom line is that the intake tube acts as an intercooler, dropping the rear-mounted turbo temp (which is already lower than engine compartment installations) about 50 percent and with a very small drop in psi."
This magazine story includes a dyno chart showing a stock 347 ci LT-1 at 273 rwhp @ 5000, 302 lb-ft @ 4000, and one with a kit, running at 7 psi, at 385 hp @ 5300, 445 lb-ft @ 4000. Torque was over 400 lb-ft from 3000 to 5000.
Granted 5-7 psi is not much boost, but keep in mind this kit is designed as a bolt on for a fairly high compression stock engine (10.1:1 - 10.4:1 for a Cambird LT1, depending on model year). Also, how many old Stangs can handle 400-450 lb-ft at the wheels anyway?
Here's STS's site: www.ststurbo.com
180 Out said:Did you consider making it a rear turbo kit? It seems like that configuration would be easier to make a universal kit out of. The system basically picks up at the header collector, and routes the exhaust into a Y-connector then to a single turbo, then ducts the pressurized intake air back up to the engine compartment. All the turbo hardware mounts in the rear, around the axle and fuel tank, where there's not a lot of variation from year to year. I know the Fays2 Watts link I installed in my kids' '65 is the same for all years, '65 through '73. You could also consider oval exhaust pipes from Dr. Gas, for additional ground clearance.
Here's a pic of an off-the-shelf kit, sold by Squires Turbo Systems ("STS") for $4000 complete, installed in a '95 Firebird:
This is all you see under the hood:
Here's the writeup I stole these pix from: http://chevyhiperformance.com/techarticles/148_0502_turbo/#
Here's a quote:
"Since these systems are uniquely designed to function at the rear of the vehicle, it operates without any noticeable lag and will produce full boost below 3,000 rpm. This is because the intake-tubing volume is about the same size as most traditional turbos that are front-mounted with an intercooler. The system is a true bolt-on kit that can usually be installed in an afternoon. In an F-body, the intake tubing is routed under the car on the driver's side. The tubing's exposure to ambient air alongside the car also serves to cool the charge. Tests have shown that turbo outlet temps with 5-psi boost measured 175 degrees F (at the rear of the car) and dropped to 115 degrees F at the intake discharge up front. The pressure drop was 1/4 to 3/4 psi. The bottom line is that the intake tube acts as an intercooler, dropping the rear-mounted turbo temp (which is already lower than engine compartment installations) about 50 percent and with a very small drop in psi."
This magazine story includes a dyno chart showing a stock 347 ci LT-1 at 273 rwhp @ 5000, 302 lb-ft @ 4000, and one with a kit, running at 7 psi, at 385 hp @ 5300, 445 lb-ft @ 4000. Torque was over 400 lb-ft from 3000 to 5000.
Granted 5-7 psi is not much boost, but keep in mind this kit is designed as a bolt on for a fairly high compression stock engine (10.1:1 - 10.4:1 for a Cambird LT1, depending on model year). Also, how many old Stangs can handle 400-450 lb-ft at the wheels anyway?
Here's STS's site: www.ststurbo.com
i dont even onsider rear setups an option. The problem is the fact if you spool that turbo and it gets nice and hit, a simple puddle is going to kill the turbo casing. Rear turbo units are great for weekend warriors but it defeats the purpose. Turbo cars make power and are reliable enough for daily driving. A rear turbo kit is not for a daily.
Are you sure about that? STS offers all these kits, some of them for brand new cars and trucks:xoxbxfx said:
* LS1 Camaro/Trans-Am - $3995 MSRP
* LT1 Camaro/Trans-Am - $3995 MSRP
* Chevrolet/GMC/Cadillac Trucks - $3995 MSRP
* Chevrolet/GMC/Cadillac SUVs - $3995 MSRP
* Pontiac GTO - $4495 MSRP
* H2 Hummer - $5195 MSRP
* Toyota Tacoma - $3595 MSRP
* Toyota Tundra - $3995 MSRP
* Dodge RAM 1500 Hemi - $4995 MSRP
* 1990-1993 Acura Integra (Tuner kit) - $3595
* '99-'04 C5 Corvette (Twin Turbo) - $7995
* '97-'04 C5 Corvette Tuner System (Twin Turbo) - $6995
* 2004-2005 SRT10 - $8495
* 2005 Mustang GT (Twin Turbo) - $7995
It's hard to believe that guys would buy brand new cars and trucks and spend $4000 - $8500 to turn them into weekend-only toys, all for the sake of another 100-200 hp. The Chevy mag writeup I linked to specifically says something about putting a K&N sock over the K&N air filter to protect it from mud and rain. I don't know why you'd worry about weatherproofing the air filter if you're going to warp or crack your turbo housing the first time you hit a puddle. What I'm thinking is the tailpipe is always A LOT cooler than the exhaust manifold, so maybe the turbo doesn't get all that hot way back there.
Hey, just asking, I have no idea of the answers myself.
180 Out said:
saw one on a camaro on the net taht showd the aftermath of a hot turbo and a bit of water...
There is also a guy locally (dfw area of tx) with one on his camaro and he destoryed his turbo on a speedbump. The reason you dont see many of these setups on the road is simply because its not a great setup. They may offer lots of kits, but why would everyone put them in the engine bay and not rear mounted? Im just sayin if it was a better setup, stock turbo cars and trucks would have them from the factory like that.
Actually, the rear turbo is FINE for a daily driver. I happen to have one on my 2005 GTO! The turbo gets no where near as hot in the rear as one gets in the front. I have had and built turbo cars before...trust me when I tell you it just isn't flaming hot! And, if it is wet outside, you aren't going to WANT boost, so the turbo stays relatively cool. It is a good compromise in the GTO, as the LS2 engine is already producing a lot of heat in the engine compartment; turbo(s) in there just add to the problem. The STS has a bit of lag, but with a STRONG V8 under it, it's not a problem. OTOH, the inlet air temps are a lot cooler than any front mount turbo. Here is a link to something I posted earlier today: http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4114999&postcount=23 And, for more info on my setup, you can go to LS1GTO.com and search for threads started by MTBDOC.
It would not be hard to do this in an older car...BUT:
Underhood heat isn't an issue in the old cars, as there just aren't a gazillion electronic doo-dads there waiting to be cooked. For me, I want the somewhat better performance of the front mount setup. Either a decent sized single or smaller twins would work. Also would like to add plumbing for an intercooler.
It would not be hard to do this in an older car...BUT:
Underhood heat isn't an issue in the old cars, as there just aren't a gazillion electronic doo-dads there waiting to be cooked. For me, I want the somewhat better performance of the front mount setup. Either a decent sized single or smaller twins would work. Also would like to add plumbing for an intercooler.
Hope this is not 
, but from the STS FAQ page -- http://www.ststurbo.com/f_a_q :
If water hits the hot turbo, will it crack?
Seems like it might when you first think about it, however, when I asked the Garrett engineers this questions they just laughed. There is a big difference in water splashing on a hot turbo and submerging it in enough water and fast enough to really cool it down fast. Both the new turbocharged Vette systems and the new Porsche systems sit the turbo down low and exposed to water and anything else that goes under a car.
Plus, our turbos just don't get that hot and when weather conditions are such that there is a lot of water around, you can't push enough boost to get the turbo hot anyway because you'd just spin the tires.
, but from the STS FAQ page -- http://www.ststurbo.com/f_a_q :If water hits the hot turbo, will it crack?
Seems like it might when you first think about it, however, when I asked the Garrett engineers this questions they just laughed. There is a big difference in water splashing on a hot turbo and submerging it in enough water and fast enough to really cool it down fast. Both the new turbocharged Vette systems and the new Porsche systems sit the turbo down low and exposed to water and anything else that goes under a car.
Plus, our turbos just don't get that hot and when weather conditions are such that there is a lot of water around, you can't push enough boost to get the turbo hot anyway because you'd just spin the tires.
Similar threads
