Remote turbo...

[Kenrik]

Seems like you would have a hellovalota LAG...

Gain 1-3 MPG.. WTF> ? every turbocharged car I have driven sucks gas like a bum drinks beer.

Discuss...

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors...ZWDVW

[Gimli G35]

probally running stock enternals and for 4k thats cheap ... but i wouldnt trust it

Most turbos DO drink tons of gas. .. because they run at 5-10 PSI and involve ECU mods and Fuel Mods

You can try out that turbo though , tell me how it turns out and if your engine is still running after 8 months

its alot more work then normal also .. because running CUSTOM tubing and then mounting of the oil pump for the turbos

Ive seen videos of installs on engines with small bays , ( Vettes for example)

[JeromeS13]

I've seen the dyno charts for that kit, and they're not too bad. IIRC, new they're about $5600 for the basic bolt-on kit.

-Jerome

[joe603]

The only thing I don't like is that it's really easy to steal...and the intake is under the car, close to the ground.

But it is a turbo kit that you can install yourself!

[Gimli G35]

, i thought about this , wont your Filters get even dirtier faster than CIA ? and ... what if you run over something , POW! they fall off?

Video of installs!!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMB14OOfgss - part 1http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2B2mwgsvikY - part 2

[C-Kwik]

If you visit the KA turbo forum, you'll know it's no secret that I don't care for remote turbo systems for many reasons. They can work, but it's not ideal. If I were considering such a system, then cost is probably the bigger cooncern. For the money, The Turbonetics kit would be much higher on the list than the STS kit. The Turbonetics kit is not ideal in that it still has a lot of distance between the engine and the turbine (pipe length), but it is less of an issue than the STS kit. The STS kit in question uses a T3. That is a very small compressor to be running on a 3.5L motor. Especially one making almost 300 HP. The 60-1 that the turbonetics kit uses is much better matched to the VQ.