STS remote mount turbo
#55
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: 07-15-06
Location: Pocomoke City, MD
Posts: 3,765
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#56
Senior Member
Join Date: 02-18-06
Location: Jacksonville AL
Posts: 1,723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#57
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: 07-15-06
Location: Pocomoke City, MD
Posts: 3,765
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yep, ill be running everything the same. the engine i built to handle it. i had bought everything that was designed for nitrous and turbo combo aplications. the valves, all of it.
this engine is ready to go. if i wanted to i could change out the crank and then the engine would be good to 600 hp. after that i would have to sleve the engine and thats just too much work.
I'm perfectly happy with being able to put down 390 to 420 whp
this engine is ready to go. if i wanted to i could change out the crank and then the engine would be good to 600 hp. after that i would have to sleve the engine and thats just too much work.
I'm perfectly happy with being able to put down 390 to 420 whp
#60
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: 07-15-06
Location: Pocomoke City, MD
Posts: 3,765
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
there is a shop back in michigan the deals exculively w/ rebuilding automatic transmissions.
they are going to rebuild my trany to handle 900 wtrq. he tried to explaine to me what exactly was going to be done to it but the only part that i could understand was that all the gearing and mechanical parts of it are going to be replaced with titanium machined duplacets. the cost was qoted to me at $1,800 + labor to remove and re install the trany
they are going to rebuild my trany to handle 900 wtrq. he tried to explaine to me what exactly was going to be done to it but the only part that i could understand was that all the gearing and mechanical parts of it are going to be replaced with titanium machined duplacets. the cost was qoted to me at $1,800 + labor to remove and re install the trany
#61
Senior Member
Join Date: 09-25-06
Location: USAG Stuttgart, GER
Posts: 1,860
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Honestly you dont need new valves and retainers for 500hp. you wont be able to rev it any higher then 6500 anyways so theres not any extra load on the valvetrain. Also you could EASILY run 600hp on the stock crank. The sleeves are good for 600hp but they RECOMMEND you replace them because in the race engines, at 750hp they roasted them. meaning they got too hot and warped. So you could EASILY run 600hp on a built l61 without replaceing valves/springs/retainers/crank/sleeves.
#62
LSX RWD S/C conversion
iTrader: (2)
yep, ill be running everything the same. the engine i built to handle it. i had bought everything that was designed for nitrous and turbo combo aplications. the valves, all of it.
this engine is ready to go. if i wanted to i could change out the crank and then the engine would be good to 600 hp. after that i would have to sleve the engine and thats just too much work.
I'm perfectly happy with being able to put down 390 to 420 whp
this engine is ready to go. if i wanted to i could change out the crank and then the engine would be good to 600 hp. after that i would have to sleve the engine and thats just too much work.
I'm perfectly happy with being able to put down 390 to 420 whp
#66
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: 07-15-06
Location: Pocomoke City, MD
Posts: 3,765
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Also just wanted to update everyone on everything that is going on with this build. Everyone knows that im going to be using the AEM f/ic for my tuning and nothing is going to change my mind about that, not even with what my uncle had done right now.
I got an email today from him letting me know that one of his buddies took the SMT-6 out of his current tuner car because he wanted to see what this set up on my car was capable of doing. (i told them after they were done testing to take the SMT-6 out because i dont want to use a 5th injector)
The rigged up the SMT-6 to the car and then put on the dyno and then tuned the SMT-6. This is what they came up with
268whp 207wtrq on 7psi and NO NITROUS.
My uncle asked me if he could go a head and see what the numbers would be if he ran it on the nitrous and i told him no because since this set up is putting down 207wtrq the nitrous would rocket the trq to high and break my transmission.
So now i guess its time to get the transmission worked so i can see what im putting down w/ the nitrous and the trubo on a worked transmission.
Im going to have to do the guess work here. 125hp shot of nitrous minus the % loss to the wheels is 100whp shot of nitrous. add that to the current dyno of 268whp and that will put me sitting on 368whp on the bottle with the trubo set up for 7psi.
Again that is just going to be my guesstamate for this but its more of an educated guess then just a guesstamate here.
Also i just got my bonus installment from my re-enlistment. I gave my uncle the go ahead on getting the transmission work done for me. Should be 3 weeks before you will hear back from me on this build project i have going. I'm also going to have him find someone out there that can get their hands on the ecotec 2.2 venom intake manifold and crank the boost up to 14psi and see what the numbers will be w/ out the nitrous being used. I'd very much like to not be on the bottle as little as possible
#67
Senior Member
Join Date: 09-25-06
Location: USAG Stuttgart, GER
Posts: 1,860
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Congrats on being boosted. But what i dont get is why are you so against the 5th injector. Your nitrous works the same way. Its basically a 5th fuel/nitrous injector that goes into your intake.
Whats that turbo your running? Because those #'s dont seem to make sense in my mind if your running a small turbo like you said you were. Its all about CFM but on a small turbo, with 8.9:1 CR your making 268whp? Doesnt make sense. Are you sure he didnt run the 50shot with it cuz that would make those numbers more believable.
Whats that turbo your running? Because those #'s dont seem to make sense in my mind if your running a small turbo like you said you were. Its all about CFM but on a small turbo, with 8.9:1 CR your making 268whp? Doesnt make sense. Are you sure he didnt run the 50shot with it cuz that would make those numbers more believable.
#68
Senior Member
Congrats on being boosted. But what i dont get is why are you so against the 5th injector. Your nitrous works the same way. Its basically a 5th fuel/nitrous injector that goes into your intake.
Whats that turbo your running? Because those #'s dont seem to make sense in my mind if your running a small turbo like you said you were. Its all about CFM but on a small turbo, with 8.9:1 CR your making 268whp? Doesnt make sense. Are you sure he didnt run the 50shot with it cuz that would make those numbers more believable.
Whats that turbo your running? Because those #'s dont seem to make sense in my mind if your running a small turbo like you said you were. Its all about CFM but on a small turbo, with 8.9:1 CR your making 268whp? Doesnt make sense. Are you sure he didnt run the 50shot with it cuz that would make those numbers more believable.
And typically, smaller turbochargers give greater torque output than horsepower...
Soo...
Where is this dyno sheet?
#69
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: 07-15-06
Location: Pocomoke City, MD
Posts: 3,765
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Congrats on being boosted. But what i dont get is why are you so against the 5th injector. Your nitrous works the same way. Its basically a 5th fuel/nitrous injector that goes into your intake.
Whats that turbo your running? Because those #'s dont seem to make sense in my mind if your running a small turbo like you said you were. Its all about CFM but on a small turbo, with 8.9:1 CR your making 268whp? Doesnt make sense. Are you sure he didnt run the 50shot with it cuz that would make those numbers more believable.
Whats that turbo your running? Because those #'s dont seem to make sense in my mind if your running a small turbo like you said you were. Its all about CFM but on a small turbo, with 8.9:1 CR your making 268whp? Doesnt make sense. Are you sure he didnt run the 50shot with it cuz that would make those numbers more believable.
I'm against the 5th in jector becasue that is limited to just one injector of a larger size. the aem f/ic allows me to swap out all 4 of my injectors to larger size in jectors. it controls pulse width allowing for it. it intercepts the signal coming from the factory ecu and sends back the factory injector signal back to the ecu preventing CEL
I'll see if my uncle saved the dyno runs w/ his test and tunes and have them send them to me via email. if not we are all SOL on that till i come back from deployment
i believe none of what i hear and only half of what i see. i'm going to stop posting any further on this until i get back from deployment and produce video proof and dyno sheets so that a few of you can stop being a hater/critic.
so for those of you that have been following this im glad you are watching. but this is my last post on this till i get back to save arguments because all that is happening right now is me getting P.O
so until march of next year, see ya in other threads
Last edited by xCobalt05x; 10-15-2007 at 06:49 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
#70
Senior Member
Join Date: 02-18-06
Location: Jacksonville AL
Posts: 1,723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only thing I don't like about using a 5th injector setup is the delay in the fuel getting to the combustion chamber. The regular injectors pump fuel straight into the head. A fifth injector would have to pump fuel from further down in the intake manifold. The delay might not take THAT long, but at higher rpms I would start to worry about the fuel getting there after the intake process is done
I think you're going a little overboard on this. I don't see anyone "hating" on you. It's just that normal turbo kits for our cars don't put up #s like that and we'd like to know the differences that make this kit put up the #s it does. I really don't see why you're getting pissed off...
its the way the sts remote mount works. the air is cooler and more dense, as explained to me by STS turbo tech reps, their for it takes less effort to spin the turbo faster. Thats how they explained it to me. After all it is their set up, ill take their word for it epecially when no one else on here has the ***** to try something different (w/ the exception of a 2 or 3 others).
I'm against the 5th in jector becasue that is limited to just one injector of a larger size. the aem f/ic allows me to swap out all 4 of my injectors to larger size in jectors. it controls pulse width allowing for it. it intercepts the signal coming from the factory ecu and sends back the factory injector signal back to the ecu preventing CEL
Im in the middle of the mediterainean sea on deployment. i didnt excatly bring the dyno sheet with me w/ the 251whp pull.
I'll see if my uncle saved the dyno runs w/ his test and tunes and have them send them to me via email. if not we are all SOL on that till i come back from deployment
i believe none of what i hear and only half of what i see. i'm going to stop posting any further on this until i get back from deployment and produce video proof and dyno sheets so that a few of you can stop being a hater/critic.
so for those of you that have been following this im glad you are watching. but this is my last post on this till i get back to save arguments because all that is happening right now is me getting P.O
so until march of next year, see ya in other threads
I'm against the 5th in jector becasue that is limited to just one injector of a larger size. the aem f/ic allows me to swap out all 4 of my injectors to larger size in jectors. it controls pulse width allowing for it. it intercepts the signal coming from the factory ecu and sends back the factory injector signal back to the ecu preventing CEL
Im in the middle of the mediterainean sea on deployment. i didnt excatly bring the dyno sheet with me w/ the 251whp pull.
I'll see if my uncle saved the dyno runs w/ his test and tunes and have them send them to me via email. if not we are all SOL on that till i come back from deployment
i believe none of what i hear and only half of what i see. i'm going to stop posting any further on this until i get back from deployment and produce video proof and dyno sheets so that a few of you can stop being a hater/critic.
so for those of you that have been following this im glad you are watching. but this is my last post on this till i get back to save arguments because all that is happening right now is me getting P.O
so until march of next year, see ya in other threads
Last edited by Novajoe; 10-15-2007 at 06:55 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
#71
Senior Member
Join Date: 09-25-06
Location: USAG Stuttgart, GER
Posts: 1,860
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
its the way the sts remote mount works. the air is cooler and more dense, as explained to me by STS turbo tech reps, their for it takes less effort to spin the turbo faster. Thats how they explained it to me. After all it is their set up, ill take their word for it epecially when no one else on here has the ***** to try something different (w/ the exception of a 2 or 3 others).
I'm against the 5th in jector becasue that is limited to just one injector of a larger size. the aem f/ic allows me to swap out all 4 of my injectors to larger size in jectors. it controls pulse width allowing for it. it intercepts the signal coming from the factory ecu and sends back the factory injector signal back to the ecu preventing CEL
I'm against the 5th in jector becasue that is limited to just one injector of a larger size. the aem f/ic allows me to swap out all 4 of my injectors to larger size in jectors. it controls pulse width allowing for it. it intercepts the signal coming from the factory ecu and sends back the factory injector signal back to the ecu preventing CEL
Do you realize that the 1 5th injector supplies fuel for each cyl. Say you have a 60lb injector as the 5th, plus the stock 24's. That gives you 60lb/hr fuel over EACH cylinder. So your 4 60's is actually LESS fuel supply then the 24's PLUS a 60lb 5th injector. Why? Because not all the valves are open on each cylinder sucking in that fuel at once.
#72
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: 07-15-06
Location: Pocomoke City, MD
Posts: 3,765
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you have to see the STS perform side by side with a conventional turbo system on the dyno.
STS has just made a kit for the V6 mustangs on 7psi of boost taking it to 400hp.
i just get irrataded really easy. thats how my engine got jacked up the first time i started messing with it.
oh, also by the way. If anyone wants to see some screen shots of the AEM tuning software and some pics of the equipment itself. let me know and ill have em up tomorrow. have to get back on watch in combat before i get busted by the watch supervisor
ive seen too many people with CEL's using the 5th injector and a few people blow up their intake manifolds from puddling fuel. I under stand what you are talking about. but they also make 1200 CC injectors as well. ive also seen somewhere on the net some 1600cc injectors.
STS has just made a kit for the V6 mustangs on 7psi of boost taking it to 400hp.
i just get irrataded really easy. thats how my engine got jacked up the first time i started messing with it.
oh, also by the way. If anyone wants to see some screen shots of the AEM tuning software and some pics of the equipment itself. let me know and ill have em up tomorrow. have to get back on watch in combat before i get busted by the watch supervisor
Im not hating, just the numbers are kinda funky man. And you dont have to explain the FIC to me, i know exactly how it works. I was the one who posted most of the information on it and actually researched it long before anyone else. Also i've been boosted since january...
Do you realize that the 1 5th injector supplies fuel for each cyl. Say you have a 60lb injector as the 5th, plus the stock 24's. That gives you 60lb/hr fuel over EACH cylinder. So your 4 60's is actually LESS fuel supply then the 24's PLUS a 60lb 5th injector. Why? Because not all the valves are open on each cylinder sucking in that fuel at once.
Do you realize that the 1 5th injector supplies fuel for each cyl. Say you have a 60lb injector as the 5th, plus the stock 24's. That gives you 60lb/hr fuel over EACH cylinder. So your 4 60's is actually LESS fuel supply then the 24's PLUS a 60lb 5th injector. Why? Because not all the valves are open on each cylinder sucking in that fuel at once.
Last edited by xCobalt05x; 10-15-2007 at 07:24 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
#73
Senior Member
It's a larger engine in displacement and saying "7 psi of boost" means nothing when you don't even mention the size/type of the turbocharger.
It's not making 400 HP cause it's a magical STS remote mount setup, it's making 400 HP because it's turbocharged in general and larger engines require less air pressure in combination with higher CFM producing turbochargers to produce great numbers like that.
#75
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: 07-15-06
Location: Pocomoke City, MD
Posts: 3,765
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And that has to do with your setup how?
It's a larger engine in displacement and saying "7 psi of boost" means nothing when you don't even mention the size/type of the turbocharger.
It's not making 400 HP cause it's a magical STS remote mount setup, it's making 400 HP because it's turbocharged in general and larger engines require less air pressure in combination with higher CFM producing turbochargers to produce great numbers like that.
It's a larger engine in displacement and saying "7 psi of boost" means nothing when you don't even mention the size/type of the turbocharger.
It's not making 400 HP cause it's a magical STS remote mount setup, it's making 400 HP because it's turbocharged in general and larger engines require less air pressure in combination with higher CFM producing turbochargers to produce great numbers like that.
they have dyno sheets of vehicals with simaler size engine to my own that are 190bhp and the sts is taking them to 314 bhp on a stage 1 STS set up