yeah, i should get one of those

None of these variables favor a remote setup, except as capitlj mentioned they can sometimes have a cooler inlet charge with no intercooler by drawing air in farther away from the motor and by letting it cool down because of the huge length and resulting surface area of the piping going back to the motor. This doesn't negate everything that is wrong with them or make them better by any means though.

As far as the sts kits, yeah they're probably the most popular ones, but everything that I have ever heard about them other than by sts theirselves or people that are trying to sell them have said they are complete crap. Pretty much everyone on all the lsx boards seem to be in agreement that they are junk.

I would say the only reason for ever running a remote mount setup ever is if you absolutely positively could not run a decent conventional setup.

beachbum_jon;312287 wrote:
thanks everyone for the replies, i showed him all of this and he is still in denial. So it looks like i will need some real numbers from actual cars. If he isnt careful, i just might have to do it myself...

If your "friend" is that much of a dumb ass, I would no longer be his friend. Seriously. If he is that stupid in this situation,would you trust his decision making in a time of need? I have no time at all for ignorance and thick headed people that push the issue get a blast in the cocksucker.

If the remote turbo was sooooo great, more companies would be selling complete kits. Heck, then you may even see them factory installed on vehicles. :bom:

First, the lag required to pressurize all of the tubes is going to be huge. Lag doesn't really effect the power being made, so it's kind of a moot point.

Second, there will be a small amount of pressure loss from the temperature change (info that I've gathered from a few other things I've read), but a potential gain: cooler air is denser. As a huge bonus, (unless I misremember) I've seen remote-mounted turbos that pull air from outside the engine bay (bonus!).

zbrown;312216 wrote:
friend....

awww well shucks

SPANISH-RICE;312209 wrote:
Exactly what zach said. It pretty damn simple to understand. You are moving the same amount of air no matter what, hotter air has more volume. Tell your buddy learn things.

friend....

This is taking place at the turbine housing and wheel to the downpipe. On a remote mounted system you are lessening the effect of the potential of hot to cold, and have to make up for it by INCREASING the potential of high to low pressure. This is accomplished by running smaller turbines and housings to attain the same response and leverage at the compressor wheel.

BUT, where the problem arises is in the fact that increasing pressure at the turbine by default creates a power loss. Power isnt made so much by the compressor with boost, power is made on backpressure ratio. This is the ratio of pressure in the turbine housing/boost pressure in the intake manifold. At the end of the day, the lower the backpressure ratio, the more power you will make

beachbum_jon;312198 wrote:
So me and a friend have been having this argument for a good 4 months or so now, and i keep giving him facts after facts about how you lose energy in the exhaust with having the turbo so far from the turbo. His argument is that the exhaust is colder thus making it more dense and spinning the turbine more and that the charged air cools off because of the distance that it has to travel. But he is extremely thick headed and will not beleive a thing unless he is shown actual real world numbers. So what i am asking is this: I am looking for any info where this has been tested on the exact same car, same tune, same turbo, nothing on the car changed, except the placement of turbo.

Thanks, Jon

Ps: I think remote mounted turbos are a joke and are for people who are to lazy to fab up a conventional/front mounted setup.

lol your friend is definitely thick headed

doesn't take a braniac to understand that lost heat on the way back is energy that could have been available for use

explain to him that it is flow across the turbine that counts.....

you have X molecules of hot exhaust up at the engine..... and you have the same X amount of molecules of exhaust down stream that you had upstream, it has just cooled off

though you have the same amount of exhaust molecules the hot exhaust is occupying alot more space volume compared to the cold exhaust....

thus giving you more volume of gas powering the turbine

you shouldn't have to show any real world testing.... it is simple physics

if he can't follow that he is brain dead