Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I have never seen that before! he's keen!

http://www.khturbo.net/images/Z24images/Ph...-6%20Phase2.jpg

http://www.khturbo.net/images/Z24images/Z2...12-9-05%20B.jpg

um... soo... would it work well? i cbf reading all his writing... not that Im getting any ideas... but interesting thought...

I've seen it a lot, it's pretty common with Corvette's. It's to do with engine bay size restriction. I've seen them mounted just near the transmission on newer Corvette's. Dunno how it would go with response though but maybe that HUGE V8 makes up for the loss.

Tight squeeze!

12101-2006-Chevrolet-Corvette.jpg

http://www.vetteweb.com/tech/vemp_0802_c6_..._kit/index.html

IMG_2176.jpg

vemp_0802_02_s%20c6_corvette%20STS_twin_turbo_kit.jpg

sts-turbo.JPG

Interesting.

The Yanks got some different ideas.

I noticed the car does not have an intercooler.

So the way I see it, by installing the turbo under the car on the outside, (Cold) air can easily get to the turbo.

Also since the turbo is exposed to the outside air, the turbo housing can act as the intercooler.

Only down fall is if the car is too low, something might hit the turbo and the pod will suck in a lot of dirt and shit from the ground.

funny because the link you posted says they are certified and legal in some of the usa states...thats pretty cool..

epa would have a field day with that here :)

no mufflers, external gate, yet its ok for US emissions..sucks to be us

Not to mention water from puddles etc.

True, sucking water is not a good idea.

funny because the link you posted says they are certified and legal in some of the usa states...thats pretty cool..

epa would have a field day with that here :D

no mufflers, external gate, yet its ok for US emissions..sucks to be us

And the USA were not allow to import the R34 GTR because it did not meet the USA emission test... :)

Here is a Mustang with a similar application, air cooled turbo.

post-46584-1213322478_thumb.jpg

Edited by (00)SKYLINE(00)

Yep a tuning company over in the ol' US of A has been doing this to BMW's for ages. They were also placing the turbos right at the back of the car.

When I questioned the lag of such a setup it was pointed out to me that as there is almost a constant flow of exhaust gases to turn the turbo it is almost constantly providing boost and hence the lag wouldn't be as noticable as you would think. I wasn't entirely convinced but it does make sense.

Yep a tuning company over in the ol' US of A has been doing this to BMW's for ages. They were also placing the turbos right at the back of the car.

When I questioned the lag of such a setup it was pointed out to me that as there is almost a constant flow of exhaust gases to turn the turbo it is almost constantly providing boost and hence the lag wouldn't be as noticable as you would think. I wasn't entirely convinced but it does make sense.

bah, i would have thought that it would face the same problems in terms of response as any other turbo. The big difference being that it has to pressurize an extra 2.5m of pipe before entering the inlet.

If u got pulled over here with that setup because the officer thought you had illegally turbo'd your Excel or something you could pop the hood and say "Look, no turbos!" He wouldn't be able to see them either without a hoist if it's in the midde of the underbody.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...