Ray, I was informed that you are building a remote mount turbo system for your vehicle and wanted to contact you. FYI - STS owns the patent on building and installing remote mounted turbo systems. We do offer individual and bulk licensing agreements so that people can legally fabricate remote mount turbos so please contact us. Operating under our license is the best way to ensure that you are not infringing on our patents and also ensures that you will get the proper parts and engineering/technical support to do the job properly and end up with a system that works well.
Best Regards,
Rick Squires
Squires Turbo Systems, Inc
165 N. 1330 W. Suite A-4
Orem, Utah 84057
Phone: 866-WE TURBO
Fax: (801) 607-6846
http://www.STSTurbo.com
Funny huh? I was just kicking the idea around, but never got around to it because a guy I chatted with who built one was having issues with his setup that I was going to replicate.
Oddest thing is, it has been a good number of months since I last spoke about doing the project. Bunch of bums can't read time stamps on forums.
I want to reply with something cunning and witty.
Whatcha'll got?
Post Title: Re: STS Turbos wants to ring my neck!! (frapjap)
Posted by: Bwana at 2:23 PM 3/21/2007
| Quote, originally posted by frapjap » |
I want to reply with something cunning and witty. |
how about.......I do what I want.
they cannot put a patent on the placement of a part. unless you are using sts parts and reselling it, they dont have a case.
Post Title:
Posted by: dickie at 2:32 PM 3/21/2007
Keep it comin'!
Post Title: Re: (dickie)
Posted by: yelnatsch517 at 2:36 PM 3/21/2007
By remote mounted turbo, you mean a rear-mounted turbo?
They hold the PATENT to the entire idea of doing it?
Don't people do that all the time? I know I've heard a lot of Corvette owners talk about it.
Post Title: Re: (yelnatsch517)
Posted by: frapjap at 2:40 PM 3/21/2007
| Quote, originally posted by yelnatsch517 » |
| Ask to see the patent and then post it on here so we can find loopholes and render it completely useless. |
Will do! I hope I actually get it!
Post Title:
Posted by: frapjap at 2:46 PM 3/21/2007
Good Afternoon Rick,
Thanks for the FYI. I am concerned. May I see the patent written out word for word, and possibly high light where "STS owns the patent on building and installing remote mounted turbo systems," for me. You could also scan it onto an email attachment for further clarity. I've seen quite the number of Corvette owners who seem to be doing pretty well with their own DIY mimics of your product.
Also, as far as I'm aware, I'm fairly certain that you can't patent a location. This comes logically to me considering that many other companies such as Greedy don't have a claim against anyone who builds or pieces together their own system that mimics their product.
Looking forward to hearing from you soon!
Ray
Post Title: Re: (frapjap)
Posted by: srpowered240sx at 2:55 PM 3/21/2007
| Quote, originally posted by frapjap » |
| location. This comes logically to me considering that many other companies such as Greedy don't have a claim against anyone who builds or pieces together their own system that mimics their product. Ray |
way to be professional, you spelled greddy wrong. jk.
Post Title:
Posted by: daconkiftador at 3:06 PM 3/21/2007
and for the record, as you seem well aware of, as long as you make everything yourself, and dont use their parts... you can do whatever the hell you want.. you can even market the system as your own, as long as you do not directly copy their parts.
its the same thing as "greddy style" blow off valves, and other "____ style" like parts.
Post Title: Re: STS Turbos wants to ring my neck!! (frapjap)
Posted by: OldmanPurdy at 3:37 PM 3/21/2007
| Quote, originally posted by Jesda » |
| I clicked on this expecting to see: http://youtube.com/watch?v=_ytocPEdmsk |
Post Title: Re: (jiggy180)
Posted by: Maverick7687 at 4:12 PM 3/21/2007
| Quote, originally posted by jiggy180 » |
|
Jeers at STS for threatening you.
Post Title: Re: (Spectre)
Posted by: frapjap at 6:04 PM 3/21/2007
I’d be glad to send you some information. The patent information is located on our website - http://www.ststurbo.com/patent - and it does cover the location as it is ‘turbo system and method of installation’. There have been some violators out there and we have shut a lot of them down and are continuing to enforce our patent and IP. Most people don’t understand the extent of coverage and protection that a patent provides. Our patents are very extensive and cover just about everything concerned with remote mounting a turbocharger. Greddy doesn’t have the patent on a front mount turbo system as that is the conventional way of doing it and you can’t patent something that everyone is already doing. So you are free to build your own front mount turbo system and nobody would care. STS pioneered this technology years ago and consequently was awarded patents for it. We are pretty easy to work with and have programs set up to help people do exactly what you are trying to figure out.
Best Regards,
Rick Squires
Squires Turbo Systems, Inc
165 N. 1330 W. Suite A-4
Orem, Utah 84057
Phone: 866-WE TURBO
Fax: (801) 607-6846
Post Title: Re: (Spectre)
Posted by: Jesda at 6:05 PM 3/21/2007
| Quote, originally posted by Spectre » |
| Jeers at STS for threatening you. |
Seconded.
Post Title:
Posted by: frapjap at 6:06 PM 3/21/2007
Doesn't seem to thorough to me... ::shrug::
Witty replies anyone?
Post Title:
Posted by: C-Kwik at 7:10 PM 3/21/2007
I guess it's a good thing I never cared for remote mounted turbos.
Post Title: Re: (C-Kwik)
Posted by: NSR_s30 at 7:12 PM 3/21/2007
1st one: http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi...5,568
2nd one:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi...4,282
Post Title: Re: (NSR_S13)
Posted by: ddgsxr504 at 7:46 PM 3/21/2007
This might make front-page news.
Rick, I hope you're reading this... You're about to make your company look very, very silly.
You can mount a turbocharger on your car anywhere you want, and there's not a DAMN thing STS can do about it.
Someone link this on the F-Body forums, this is a hoot. 
http://www.google.com/search?r...earch
Post Title: Re: (AZhitman)
Posted by: OpeLok at 8:41 PM 3/21/2007
| Quote, originally posted by AZhitman » |
| HAHAHHAHAHAHAA!!! This might make front-page news.
|
Done!
Post Title: Re: (beancooker)
Posted by: Dieselman at 9:48 PM 3/21/2007
| Quote, originally posted by beancooker » |
| [QUOTE=AZhitman]HAHAHHAHAHAHAA!!! This might make front-page news.
QUOTE] Done! |
Damn Noah.....way to fail at teh html's.........LOL
The gheyness of that patent know no bounds
Post Title:
Posted by: skylndrftr at 9:57 PM 3/21/2007
| Quote » |
| A turbocharger system for a combustion engine and method of installing a turbocharger system includes a turbocharger having an oil inlet configured for being coupled to a pressure side of an oiling system and an oil outlet. An oil pump is connected to the oil outlet of the turbocharger and is further connected to the oiling system. The turbocharger system also includes mounting hardware for mounting the turbocharger to an exhaust pipe away from the engine at or below the oil level of the oiling system. In one embodiment, the method of installing the turbocharger system includes removing an existing muffler from the vehicle and mounting the turbocharger in the location of the existing muffler. |
First of all its THE not A pressure side theres only one
Second the part about the pump? Lotsa people do that already on front mount turbos (pretty common on foci) thats not patentable and should pretty much invalidate this.
Third, as long as you don't mount the turbo in the exact locatio nthe original muffler was in your fine...read the last line.
STS SUCKS BAWLS...we should so spread this one around.
Post Title:
Posted by: AZhitman at 9:59 PM 3/21/2007
None of you clowns better build a blinged-out, high-hp droptop, I'd hate to sue you for coppin' my style.
BTW, I think Knight is doing some remote turbo stuff too, IIRC.
Post Title: Re: (AZhitman)
Posted by: Joe at 10:42 PM 3/21/2007
we have looked at doing a couple systems for customers from them but will now EMPHATICALLY suggest someone else
way to bully the little guy you ****ing greedy pricks.
this is going on LS1 tech if its not already there. what a crock of bull****
Post Title:
Posted by: AZhitman at 10:43 PM 3/21/2007
Not violating your precious patent now are we rico swarve!!!
PS. I'm in Australia, and I am going to go into business remote mounting turbos.... everyone can copy my idea for free, I give you full permission. So come and get me STS nut jobs!!!
IT'S MY IDEA NOW BISHES!!!
Post Title: Re: (ozzie!)
Posted by: ozzie! at 10:50 PM 3/21/2007
I'll do anything I want to my own car, and if you don't like it, I have a nice hairy nutsack you can suck on.
BTW: Anyone who wants to do a remote mount turbo setup, make sure you tell everyone it's an ozzie! "style" remote mount system, not that lame STS jive....
Post Title: Re: (AZhitman)
Posted by: Joe at 10:54 PM 3/21/2007
| Quote, originally posted by AZhitman » |
| Link it up, Big Dawg! |
http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/...80779
i hate it when corporations play gorilla chest pounding bull**** with the little guy.
STS is on my **** list.
Post Title:
Posted by: C-Kwik at 1:38 AM 3/22/2007
The sections about the novelty and nonobviousness tends to get to me. Depending on how it's worded in the actual law, the remote aspect of the design would appear to be pretty obvious. I would say the big reasoning behind not seeing such a product sooner is two-fold. Turbocharging didn't become commonly used in the aftermarket until the early 90's. And from a performance aspect, it offered too much compromise. If anything could be patented perhaps his spin on the "benefits" of the remote mounted turbo.
All said and done though, if he were to actually file a suit against an individual, the potential award amount would likely be less than the legal costs to even file such a suit, let alone litigate. If I truly desired to build a remote mount system for my own use, I'd simply call his bluff in this little poker game he's playing.
Considering if I were to consider this licensing cost he wants to collect, the better option then clearly becomes going to a traditional mounted turbo system. Especially since it will perform better anyways.
Post Title: Re: (C-Kwik)
Posted by: audtatious at 3:20 AM 3/22/2007
I should patent increasing the total displacement of an engine with the goal of creating more power
Post Title:
Posted by: The Count at 4:54 AM 3/22/2007
I'M GONNA PATENT THE PROCESS EATING, you're effed world, all your money are belong to me.
Post Title: Re: (The Count)
Posted by: frapjap at 4:59 AM 3/22/2007
Hi again Rick,
So, should I have built said system and decided I wanted to mount the assorted pieces (oil pump, lines, turbo, intake, etc) in places that are unconventional or not directly associated with STS method, (not to mention that I don't plan on selling my method for my own personal gain), how is it that I am infringing a patent? Who says I didn't decide to keep my muffler and put the turbo directly after my catalytic converter? What if my intercooler happens to be on the top of my engine or under the chassis itself. There isn't any consistency with that fabled setup versus STS. Its similar to copy writing a recipe. I can change the amount of heat used, or add an ingredient, after which, it is my own.
FYI, on your patent it reads "to a pressure side of an oiling system and an oil outlet." Last I checked, there was only THE pressure side. You might want to get that changed for legality's sake. Also, you may be in infringement of other patent or copy rights where individual owners (or manufactures for that matter), decide to use an oil pump for lubricate their turbo. If you are getting that scrupulous, go inform the Focus guys, they love using pumps to ensure their investment doesn't over heat.
Finally, it is lovely that you guys managed to pick out the smaller person, who may or may not have designed a system for themselves, and in a few words or less give an inkling to legal action. Regardless of your more friendly invitation to help with engineering. Furthermore, it is aggravating to think that I could possibly pose even the slightest nuisance (or competition) to your corporation. I have no monetary gain planned, no intention to sell or distribute, and enough sense to know the afore mentioned points.
Thanks for your time, and do consider changing that wording on the patent.
Ray
I'll be in VA this weekend, probably with little access to a computer. There will be little new news unless you guys link this around; So feel free do do with all of this you guys like- I'm NOT going to patent it.
Post Title: Re: (frapjap)
Posted by: Alfador at 10:52 AM 3/22/2007
BTW, that thread was deleted on LS1 - STS is a sponsor there... 
Post Title:
Posted by: dickie at 11:17 AM 3/22/2007
I'll do my best to post again if I receive anything over the weekend.
Post Title: Re: (frapjap)
Posted by: PapaSmurf2k3 at 12:14 PM 3/22/2007
LOL *cough*
Post Title: Re: (surfwax95)
Posted by: Florida240sx at 2:17 PM 3/22/2007
| Quote, originally posted by surfwax95 » |
| Tell them to BLOW it up their @ss. LOL *cough* |
My vert might be in trouble in a couple months then 
Think I'll mail some pictures to them...
Post Title:
Posted by: skylndrftr at 3:10 PM 3/22/2007
if you had...did you talk to them? then I could sorta understand the logic behind sending the first email (although I still disagree with the content).
if you hadn't ever heard of them...way to go in losing your butts a lot of potential customers by being douchebags.
Their whole attitude is a lot like Hennesy's was before he imploded. Always sad to see another member of the brotherhood trying to scam us
Post Title:
Posted by: WDRacing at 6:28 PM 3/22/2007
STSP.S.guys heres the loop hole
embodiment, the method of installing the turbocharger system includes removing an existing muffler from the vehicle and mounting the turbocharger at or near the location of the existing muffler.
dont remove the muffler and they dont have a leg to stand on
Modified by paulie240sxr at 9:18 PM 3/22/2007
Post Title:
Posted by: C-Kwik at 10:44 PM 3/22/2007
bah, whatever, this thread is giving them more exposure than they will ever deserve.
Post Title: Re: (AZhitman)
Posted by: Katapl at 11:52 PM 3/22/2007
| Quote, originally posted by AZhitman » |
| BTW, that thread was deleted on LS1 - STS is a sponsor there... |
Was I the only one who broke out laughing upon reading that? 
Post Title:
Posted by: AZhitman at 7:42 AM 3/23/2007
It'd be funny if it weren't so absurd and pathetic.
Post Title: Re: (Katapl)
Posted by: Veriest1 at 9:49 AM 3/23/2007
| Quote, originally posted by Katapl » |
| Was I the only one who broke out laughing upon reading that? |
Nope.
And now this thread is the number one reason to do a remote mount turbo. I never really liked the idea before.
Post Title: Re: (Veriest1)
Posted by: corey240 at 12:23 PM 3/23/2007
and i laughed hard when he said they deleted that thread.
Post Title: Re: (corey240)
Posted by: Veriest1 at 12:51 PM 3/23/2007
| Quote, originally posted by corey240 » |
| so the point is to take the turbo and move it under the car, as in further down the exhaust system? is there a gain in doing this over a normal mount position? the only thing iv heard of befor on the hole thing is dentsport puting the turbo on there s13 infront of the motor a bit. and i laughed hard when he said they deleted that thread. |
Yeah, they replace the rear muffler with it. It's easier to mount in the sense of not having to mess with a turbo manifold and they claim the large charge piping has an intercooler effect and a bunch of other stuff that's probably on their website.
The major issue is water+hot exhuast housing and I think it takes a bit longer to spool.
Post Title: Re: (AZhitman)
Posted by: PoorManQ45 at 1:25 PM 3/23/2007
| Quote, originally posted by AZhitman » |
| Chano is right - This definitely means patent reform is needed. |
How does this happen?
Post Title: Re: (PoorManQ45)
Posted by: themadscientist at 4:01 PM 3/23/2007
| Quote, originally posted by redtop91 » |
| Oh God. Google that for pics. At work. I lose. |
mannnn... something told me when i seen that word. "don't google image it" then i read your responce.. which SHOULD have been a second warning.. to not google image it.
...yeh.. i regret it now
Post Title: Re: (NIGHTfall_240sx)
Posted by: redtop91 at 5:56 PM 3/23/2007
| Quote, originally posted by frapjap » |
| Here is my new email from them: I’d be glad to send you some information. The patent information is located on our website - http://www.ststurbo.com/patent - and it does cover the location as it is ‘turbo system and method of installation’. There have been some violators out there and we have shut a lot of them down and are continuing to enforce our patent and IP. Most people don’t understand the extent of coverage and protection that a patent provides. Our patents are very extensive and cover just about everything concerned with remote mounting a turbocharger. Greddy doesn’t have the patent on a front mount turbo system as that is the conventional way of doing it and you can’t patent something that everyone is already doing. So you are free to build your own front mount turbo system and nobody would care. STS pioneered this technology years ago and consequently was awarded patents for it. We are pretty easy to work with and have programs set up to help people do exactly what you are trying to figure out. Best Regards,
165 N. 1330 W. Suite A-4 Orem, Utah 84057 Phone: 866-WE TURBO Fax: (801) 607-6846 |
| Quote, originally posted by themadscientist » |
| no more mapelthorpes you sick bastard. I still have nightmares. |
I had to work to get the correct spelling and all. 
tell them to get ****ed from me too.
Post Title: Re: (rexhunta)
Posted by: otterman at 2:29 PM 3/24/2007
Mmmmmm. Lag.| Quote, originally posted by redtop91 » |
| Mmmmmm. Lag. |
Engine
Type: Twin-turbo V10
Displacement cu in (cc): 301 (4941)
Power bhp (kW) at RPM: 810(604) / n.a.
Torque lb-ft (Nm) at RPM: 733(994) / n.a.
Redline at RPM: n.a.
Brakes & Tires
Brakes F/R: ABS, vented disc/vented disc
Tires F-R: R20
Driveline: Rear Wheel Drive
Exterior Dimensions & Weight
Length × Width × Height in: 191.1 × 72.7 × 74.3
Weight lb (kg): 4033 (1830)
Performance
Acceleration 0-60 mph s: 3.6
Top Speed mph (km/h): 240 (386)
i'll put with up some lag for 810HP
.
Modified by rexhunta at 7:50 AM 3/25/2007
Post Title: Re: (rexhunta)
Posted by: otterman at 2:42 PM 3/24/2007
| Quote, originally posted by rexhunta » |
Engine
|
weeeeaak lol
Post Title:
Posted by: AZhitman at 2:42 PM 3/24/2007
Pete, I'd give ANYTHING to have you drive that out to STS's shop and do a big fat smoky donut in their parking lot.
Post Title: Re: (rexhunta)
Posted by: brisknfade at 2:43 PM 3/24/2007
Friggin' schweet and probably isn't to laggy... it is a 500ish horsepower v10 stock ya know. It probably kicks you in the nuts... then proceeds to kick you in the nuts even harder once you start to get back up.
Post Title: Re: (Veriest1)
Posted by: Maverick7687 at 10:07 AM 3/25/2007
| Quote, originally posted by Veriest1 » |
| So that thing really is turboed (first under car shots I've seen and there was a huge stink about it a while back). Friggin' schweet and probably isn't to laggy... it is a 500ish horsepower v10 stock ya know. It probably kicks you in the nuts... then proceeds to kick you in the nuts even harder once you start to get back up. |
I'll take 2!
Post Title:
Posted by: Luke at 10:10 AM 3/25/2007
Anyway, STS looks like a bunch of greedy punks with their heads up their asses. That and it sounds like ls1tech is puts them on a pedestal as with any sponsor.
Post Title: Re: (Luke)
Posted by: USsil80 at 7:03 PM 3/25/2007
if you read it it said the turbo is hooked up to the engine oil system... use a remote oiling system... that is what i could see.. at first glance
Post Title:
Posted by: frapjap at 2:12 AM 3/26/2007
Lets talk about checks. What kind of graphics are in your bakground of your checks?
(post 'em up if you want, but NOT your account number!!)
Post Title: Re: (frapjap)
Posted by: PapaSmurf2k3 at 2:36 AM 3/26/2007
I have a couple hundred sitting at home in America...
JKLOLROFLBBQWTF
Post Title: Re: (C-Kwik)
Posted by: Eikon at 5:14 AM 3/26/2007
Since it's a non-standard practice, I'll surely be awarded a patent for the idea of putting larger high performance non-oem brakes on a sports car. Now any of you fools who want to do a Z32 or Q45 etc.. upgrade will have to pay me a licensing free. I'm about to call Wilwood and Stoptech and tell them they need to cease and desist..
Hey.. frapjap.. just tell them that your not remote mounting the turbo... you're just using a really really long turbo manifold.
Or put some aluminum underneath your car and PATENT the idea of expanding your engine bay underneath and toward the rear of the car..
STS is going to go down in flames for this lunacy!
Congrats Frapjap.. you are going to be famous.. (Just like other forum wildfire threads like the dude caught whacking off, the guy with the trannyporn on his desktop, and the nutswingers and Hennessey.)
Post Title: Re: (Eikon)
Posted by: redtop91 at 7:33 AM 3/26/2007
| Quote, originally posted by Eikon » |
Congrats Frapjap.. you are going to be famous.. (Just like other forum wildfire threads like the dude caught whacking off, the guy with the trannyporn on his desktop, and the nutswingers and Hennessey.) |
Link to said hilarity!
Post Title:
Posted by: skylndrftr at 8:53 AM 3/26/2007
No, wait, I should patent Giant wings, Neons, plywood/cardboard body kits/body effects and other ricey stuff. Who's with me? we'll be RICH!
Post Title: Re: (PantherRacer)
Posted by: DuaneG at 11:43 AM 3/26/2007
http://anti-rice.com/smf/index.php?topic=24956.0
And...
http://www.clubgp.com/newforum...ode=1
Thump your chest on that, STS b*tches.
EDIT: BTW, yes, I created just so I could do this
Post Title:
Posted by: Jesda at 5:41 AM 4/8/2007
http://www.geocities.com/Motor...2.jpg
and if the photo isnt coming up, just google porsche 935, and then go to images, youll find it.
Modified by Blacdout96 at 9:33 AM 4/8/2007
Post Title: Re: (Blacdout96)
Posted by: wa-chiss at 11:20 PM 5/3/2007
| Quote, originally posted by PantherRacer » |
| I'm gonna patent Front end conversions. and Rear end conversions. adding sunroofs, moon roofs, t-tops, No, wait, I should patent Giant wings, Neons, plywood/cardboard body kits/body effects and other ricey stuff. Who's with me? we'll be RICH! |
and im going to patent porn and sex. make trillions!
Post Title: Re: (Beez_S13)
Posted by: NASCARLANCE at 10:26 PM 5/27/2007
| Quote, originally posted by NASCARLANCE » |
| I'm going to patent patents so all the patenters are going to have to pay me for their patents. |
Post Title:
Posted by: jdmfreak at 11:01 PM 5/27/2007
| Quote, originally posted by NASCARLANCE » |
| I'm going to patent patents so all the patenters are going to have to pay me for their patents. |
STS Turbos was founded in 2003
(according to their website but who believes the internet anyways)
That Porsche might be a bit older, would that invalidate the patent?
sorry to interrupt, resume pattenting pattents on pattenting pattents
Post Title: Re: (skylndrftr)
Posted by: zanilth at 10:27 PM 6/11/2007
They are just trying to bully someone into buying their product.
Only way anyone would be prosecuted for patent violation is if they produced a system that was exactly (or very close to) theirs, and then marketed it as a completely new system. Otherwise, they have no leg to stand on.
So, they sit here and 'threaten' base level consumers with legal action as to try to scare people into buying their system, or not doing anything. It is quite simple to be making something similar to someone else's setup, and actually make it better in the process. So, they don't want to risk someone enhancing their idea.
Besides, they aren't the first people to think or come up with this. I was reading a magazine in 2001 (I know the year, because I was in AIT) that spoke of remote mount turbos....If STS wasn't created until 2003, then they are a little behind. Sure they might have been the first company to patent the idea, but unless you are putting a patent on a completely new invention, then its just pointless.
Putting a patent on a completely new style of ignition module - acceptable.
Putting a patent on a different way to mount a turbo - unacceptable and ignorant.
Post Title:
Posted by: Florida240sx at 11:21 PM 6/11/2007
| Quote, originally posted by Florida240sx » |
| Only legal standpoint they have is if someone starts selling kits.. But if they haven't done that to a vehicle can they still? So if I make a kit for the 240.... |
Basically, if someone starts manufacturing a system using 90% or more of the same components, and doing it exactly how they do their system, and selling it as their own original idea, then they would be in violation of patent infringement.
You could make a system out of the same materials that you purchased from a different source, put it on your vehicle, and drive around in front of the courthouse and STS's company building, and they can't do **** to you.
Now, another company can come along and change their setup significantly, so by looking at it, it is a different setup (moving the turbo up or down, other side of the car, etc) and it still isn't illegal. However, with them threatening a consumer, that is just stupid, since they have no leg to stand on.
Oh, I know that because I have a good friend who is an attorney, and I asked him about it out of curiosity.
Post Title:
Posted by: frapjap at 6:29 PM 4/14/2008
| Quote, originally posted by r34 gtr » |
| In my bum? |
Probably not. But I heard you had one of these:
Modified by frapjap at 10:01 PM 4/14/2008
Post Title:
Posted by: r34 gtr at 7:45 PM 4/14/2008
I bet he was spewing BS.
Post Title: Re: (FlatBlackIan)
Posted by: brizanden at 9:03 PM 9/8/2008
| Quote, originally posted by brizanden » |
| no offense to any one who likes this idea. (and i am speaking out of complete ignorance) but isnt that a bad idea to put the turbo way in the back unless u really have to? |
It has its pros and cons like anything else.
Think about it, with 8 feet of charge piping, do you really need an intercooler?
Sure you dont get the greatest throttle response, but hey, its a V8 who cares.
Post Title:
Posted by: dusred at 9:29 PM 9/8/2008
Post Title: Re: (FlatBlackIan)
Posted by: brizanden at 10:11 PM 9/8/2008
| Quote, originally posted by FlatBlackIan » |
It has its pros and cons like anything else. Think about it, with 8 feet of charge piping, do you really need an intercooler? Sure you dont get the greatest throttle response, but hey, its a V8 who cares. |
< Contact Us - NICO
>
Visit G37Driver.com for Infiniti G37 Information
NICOclub's Nissan forums and Infiniti forums and all affiliated sites are the property of HDS Holdings, Inc.
They are independent publications and are not affiliated with or endorsed by Nissan Motor Company or Nissan North America.
Information © Copyright © 2000-2009 by NICOclub
All rights reserved. Material may not be copied or reprinted without written permission.
Visit 370zclub.org for Nissan 370z Information