Rear mount?

User avatar
Potts1
Posts: 1953
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 3:08 am

Rear mount?

Post by Potts1 »

Potts1;21505 wrote:how does it work?
....
-Potts
You don't know what you're talking about. You're not very smart, and the things you're saying are nonsense. And I'm not angry. But you do need to shut up.
budget_crx
Posts: 2722
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:49 pm

Rear mount?

Post by budget_crx »

Kolk1;21691 wrote:On LS1 cars, owners claim to have virtually no lag.

And supposedly, the charge pipe length only cuts down on .5 psi, BUT due to the length of the pipe the charge temps are lowered so much, that its actually has more power than what it looses with that minus .5 psi.
virtually no lag compared to what though? has anyone actually taken the same setup and mounted it in the front of the car to see the differences? I am certain a front mounted system will make much more power.
Image
User avatar
Kolk1
Posts: 670
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2007 4:44 am

Rear mount?

Post by Kolk1 »

Potts1;21697 wrote:....
Sorry...

Rear mount turbos work the same as any turbo system. But instead of building turbo exhaust manifolds, you can use your stock headers, or aftermarket headers and you just put the turbo inplace of your old muffler. You then have a long pipe go from the back of the car back up to the front to the Throttle body. Then you have to run an oil line, and a return line to the back of the car as well.

Works the exact same, just alot longer tubing, and hoses.
1 Hyundai + 1 Kawasaki = 558whp 519wtq
budget_crx
Posts: 2722
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:49 pm

Rear mount?

Post by budget_crx »

Potts1;21697 wrote:....
the turbo is mounted on the back portion of the exhuast sytem since there is no room in the engine compartment of some cars. the air cleaner, wastgate, and turbo are all installed in the back with a long section of chargepiping running to the engine.
Image
Image
User avatar
Kolk1
Posts: 670
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2007 4:44 am

Rear mount?

Post by Kolk1 »

budget_crx;21700 wrote:virtually no lag compared to what though? has anyone actually taken the same setup and mounted it in the front of the car to see the differences? I am certain a front mounted system will make much more power.
Well, I dont have the specs, but they claim that throttle response is instant, and full boost is almost immediate.

Im not saying they are the best. But for lack of room, maintenance and so on. They are great systems. I had plenty of room to work under the hood of my Turbo Civic, but it was hell just to change spark plugs on a NA LS1 camaro, let alone a turboed one.
1 Hyundai + 1 Kawasaki = 558whp 519wtq
budget_crx
Posts: 2722
Joined: Wed Nov 08, 2006 9:49 pm

Rear mount?

Post by budget_crx »

Kolk1;21705 wrote:Well, I dont have the specs, but they claim that throttle response is instant, and full boost is almost immediate.

Im not saying they are the best. But for lack of room, maintenance and so on. They are great systems. I had plenty of room to work under the hood of my Turbo Civic, but it was hell just to change spark plugs on a NA LS1 camaro, let alone a turboed one.
haha i could imagine. but what about doing it like the systems for the 3rd gens with the turbo mounted sirectly behind the front bumber? wouldnt that work, or do the 4th gens not have enough room back there?
Image
User avatar
Kolk1
Posts: 670
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2007 4:44 am

Rear mount?

Post by Kolk1 »

budget_crx;21707 wrote:haha i could imagine. but what about doing it like the systems for the 3rd gens with the turbo mounted sirectly behind the front bumber? wouldnt that work, or do the 4th gens not have enough room back there?
Well, from the factory, the front bumper is filled with a black piece of large Styrofoam surrounding your impact bumper. On my camaro, all of that was removed, In that case you would have tons of room for one no problem.

I would bet, as the times have changed, They dont want to make kits that wont be 50 state legal, since most states would bitch about removing that. For a personal, one off kit, its a great idea to put it in the front bumper as long as the heat didnt melt the plastic. But most companies are probably going to stick to fabricating up one universal kit.
1 Hyundai + 1 Kawasaki = 558whp 519wtq
User avatar
SikofFalln
Posts: 1065
Joined: Tue Nov 28, 2006 6:50 am

Rear mount?

Post by SikofFalln »

Kolk1;21691 wrote:On LS1 cars, owners claim to have virtually no lag.

And supposedly, the charge pipe length only cuts down on .5 psi, BUT due to the length of the pipe the charge temps are lowered so much, that its actually has more power than what it looses with that minus .5 psi.

You are comparing apples to oranges though. Most honda's are between 1.6 and 1.8 liters compared to 5.7 in an LS1. That is ALOT more exhaust velocity to get that turbo spinning.

And anyways, if it was really great on Honda's you would see quite a few examples floating around. Becuase everyones knows that if it can be done to a honda, it already has been, probally a few times, and someone on H-T has posted about it, and then that someone was flamed for it being a repost, and then told to do a search on becuase it has already been covered 100 times. Holy run on sentence... lol
User avatar
m6speed
Posts: 1003
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 6:12 pm

Rear mount?

Post by m6speed »

there is no point to putting one on a honda, there is plenty of room for a turbo under the hood.
User avatar
Midori
Posts: 2877
Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 5:28 am

Rear mount?

Post by Midori »

its cool for like a drag car or something but its irrelivant for the street, too much water and other stuff flying around. looks cool from the back tho.
-'11 Taffeta White CR-V
-'09 Crystal Black Pearl Fit sport