tannji

Here is the guy that ran 630HP with the D1 SC.... Removed the D1, swapped cams for a turbo cam, and I think swapped FMIC's as well. Installed the STS kit with a GT70 turbo.

Oh... dearie me, I got a good laugh out of that one.... It seems that every so often we set off a cascade of events, usually painful or harmful, that are pretty funny after the fact. To others anyway.... hope you are ok, dude, dont maim yourself before you get a chance to put some miles on that beautiful car, anyway. I once took a bad step while using a chainsaw on a brushpile, and the blade ended up ripping a bunch of bluejean material off the inner thigh of my jeans. I managed to get away from the deadly (and now inert) tool, and ended up on my arse in a nasty red ant pile. The guys already laughing at my foolish and dangerous antics went into histerics. I had to completely write off my jeans and my dignity. The ant stings eventually healed.

I would imagine that car developes boost a little late, and I dont need that kind of potential.... but interesting none the less.

Actually, a point about that last post: PV=nRT is a formula meant to be applied to gas in a chamber, static. It can not be directly, accurately applied to a dynamic, flowing gas, such as in turbo systems, as it is an open system, with velocity AND volume, and whose pressure MUST drop over the length of the tubing, or there would be no flow. That being said, I am sure that it is close enough to demonstrate certain concepts.... but most people who quote it in relation to turbos, and especially to the STS system are forgetting about gas Density, as opposed to velocity and volume. You can achieve the same turbo spool with a lower velocity gas, as long as it is dense, and the aperture of the turbo is sized appropriately. Does the STS system completely compensate for lower pressure and velocity? No, i doubt it does, even under the best of circumstances. It does however provide sufficient boost for certain people, and is not limited to around 5#'s, as suggested a few posts ago. The Z71 truck that is running 12's is doing so at 12#'s of boost, and there is apparently a car being assembled whose owner apparently intends to attain somewhere around 800 to 900 HP from his STS system. I would obviously want no where near that kind of power, but I wonder if the Z71 owner spent more, or less than others who have the same performance. As for the STS requiring methanol over 5#'s of boost, not true, it requires charge cooling, whether by methanol or IC, just as a normal turbo. Nor would it be a concern to run out of methanol, unless you didnt read the installation instruction, it has provisions to automatically switch back to your predetermined low boost setting if you exhaust your methanol. STS does not Require methanol, it is an option, along with intercooling, to lower your charge temp, or raise the effective octane rating of the fuel. I wasnt even certain how to interpret that quote, but I assume it to mean that I made a criticizm of someone for not having an STS, and that it not being produced for Zcars meant that I was off-base.... but I never criticized anyone for having it or not.... and this IS HybridZ, where the majority of us have components "not produced for a Zcar". The only reason I even got involved in this thread was that I have been following the evolution of the STS system, and thot the thread title was a little harsh for a pruduct that none of us own, or have experience with, and didnt deserve comparison the the electric turbo systems that caused so much amusement. I think the Zcar caused a certain amount of amusement in certain circles when it was announced.... but it was cheap and effective.... and managed to attract a devoted following, in spite of its detractors..... I keep getting hung up on some of the track times STS vehicles have already posted.... if a Z71 truck can run a 12.6 second 1/4, what would the same setup do in a car 3000 pounds lighter? Hmmm, let me dig out PV=nRT and do some figuring.....

Wow, thanks for the pics and info..... that makes the job look a LOT less intimidating.... and the shot of the 240SX rear assembly out of the car is good, I like its design a lot.... including the front mount for the diff, looks to be much better than the native Z setup. thanks again dude!

JohnC is such a cynic....

I was leaving West Palm Beach in FL after a weekend of leave to visit my GF, heading back to Orlando. Woke up late, and had to make muster that morning, so I was flying, in a borrowed 1987 Ford Escort GT. Pretty quick car, considering. I passed some small town, and was doing about 125 when I saw the lights way back (still dark, very early) and I decided that I might as well get a little closer to Orlando, and I wasnt even sure it was me they were after. Well, the officer finally got close enough for me to choose discretion, and I pulled over. He had his gun loose and plunked handcuffs down on my roof before even saying anything. Upshot was, he pulled Navy boys over all the time on that stretch, and gave me a break, cut the ticket from 125 to 80, which apparently saved me approx $2000.... I was doing 100 again within minutes.... and promptly FELL ASLEEP at the wheel. I opened my eyes to see guard rail approaching, and threw the car into a very loud and very impressive succession of 360's, at something over 80MPH. Dunno how many, but the rubber left on the road went for a long ways, and I was very awake at that point. I got back in and didnt start speeding again until the trembling subsided.... Funny thing is, I forgot to pay that ticket, and it turned up on my record like 15 years later, when I lived in Colorado. Florida couldnt figure out why my license was suspended, so I got off pretty much completely.

LOL, I clicked on the link before reading the other posts.... you know it is Darius's Z as soon as you hear it... Arent we about due for another update on that car? Or is he back into the bikes again?

Thanks for the reply and post.... I do have two immediate questions, before I go back to reading and pondering. Q45 lsd... compatible in your setup? and width of the 240SX subframe, vs stock 240. Am I looking at immediately having to go with some rear quarter widening, or with the right wheel and offset will it work as is? Oh, sorry, one more... how did you deal with anchoring the struts up top? stock strut towers, or? Thanks man, you rock. (please keep that other thread up to date with frequent updates!!)

Very nice stuff! Did I understand your correctly? You have the complete IRS from a 240SX under there? I was just about to try and search for someone else here who has that swap, forget his name.... could you supply any pics and info into your swap? I have been thinking about this a lot (when your car is not on the road and your garage is limited to standing room only, thinking is about the only option.) I am looking to get any info on this swap, and if it works with the Q45 diff... I will start a thread later, after I do the requesite searching, but any info you could share would be great. Did I mention how much I like your VR??

Z portion of the show is on in 2 minutes... looking forward to checking out Z's on film and hat sizes of certain members.... Thank god my GF HAS to have some of the garbage channels, I get some cool ones as a by-product, tho Fine Living hasnt been on my radar before.

Here is the comment by someone who just drove a LS1 F-body with STS: Oh, here is that guys non-turbo car he is comparing the STS car too:

I dont mind devils advocate at all..... and the lack of rolling eyes or insults is nice too.... = ) However, the temp isnt as critical in this situation. Moving the turbo under the hood reduced its efficiency, because it was designed for high temp, low density exhaust. In that situation, temps are desirable. But temps dont spin the turbo, they produce the conditions to make the turbo spin more efficiently. (besides, we are still talking approx 1100+ degrees here, we still have heat, Houston, lol) If you move the turbo, you go with a different design in the blades and chamber. As for the turbo coming on like a slingshot, that is to some extent tuneable... and more true of high PSI setups than low PSI. I experienced it on a friends motorcycle. One second I was easing the bike thru first gear, the next I was trying to stand on the footpegs without bruising my chest on the gauges. I swore off turbo bikes right then. In a Z with the LS1, choosing the correct turbo and aperture would not only lower the powerband in RPMs, but keep it a little more predictable, and that is what owners are reporting. Part of the reason people have sucha mania about conserving heat in turbos near the manifold is that those turbos were designed with heat as part of the equation..... and since people cant usually afford to experiment with turbo setup as easily as they could carb jets, they learned to not screw with turbo location. In this setup, I will have the throttle to control the volume of air.... The V8 engine puts out a huge volume of exhaust.... the turbo is going to spin fine. I am far more interested or concerned about having a narrower powerband than whether or not I will have sufficient power. Regardless, I to think a Z with this would be both cool and fun. Like I really need much more HP than the LS1 already supplies..... lol Still, I can see some interesting highway runs, especially next to someone's new Vette or Viper toy.

LOL.... sure, if temps are the same. But if you are running a much cooler intake, the charge is denser, and the person that bought a 5 PSI system is getting a decent boost. Someone looking for 25 PSI (in a V8, that is sick! lol) isnt going to be looking at this system to begin with. Apples to apples, people are doing some interesting things with 5 PSI. 5 PSI and 25 PSI isnt apples to apples. If you are looking for 420 to 500 HP that is mostly bolt-on, this is decent option. If you want 15 PSI+, you are looking at several thousands more in related mods, and a much more complicated install. Oh, and that 3 feet of pipe is going to have a large IC attached, so it is both more pipe and lower PSI. It is still higher PSI than the STS, but that is also more PSI than I want, and I dont think that there are too many here intending to go with a Mondo turboed LSI either. I saw several dyno sheets from STS installs, and while some looked to need some tuning, the owners descriptions of their first driving experience with this install matched what I was invisioning pretty well. Just enough lag to make it comfortable for daily driving, with a nice curve and fat enough band for me to live with. I cant even imagine using first gear or reverse with with high PSI in a LS1 Z, but I can with this.

I kinda saw the accident coming, thought it would be a fumble tho.....

I do not believe IC's have a set number for PSI loss, it depends on the size of the IC, the design, the routing of the tubing, ect. I also didnt see where anyone ever said STS was better, or more efficient. I think that if your intake temps are not too high to begin with (on the STS system) not only do you not need a IC at low PSI, but adding an IC would add PSI drop and lag. It seems to me to be a bit contradictory to say that the STS will be losing PSI because of the "15 feet of tubing" and then say it should have an IC.... which would add more pressure drop and lag to what the STS supposedly already has. Now, if I were to go with that system, and use a larger turbo as well as trying for 15PSI or so... I would be using an IC. (truth be told, if my main objectives were faster scroll and 15PSI+, I would go with a conventional turbo system.) In the little I remember from my thermal dynamics and fluid flow studies in the navy, (Nuke Subs) heat is not the only factor, density of the medium and aperture of the scroll count for a lot too. I dont see anyone addressing or acknowledging this. With a denser media flow, you can push the scroll without having to have as much heat or pressure in a conventional setup. Some of our circulation systems in subs work in either high or low pressure systems... the variables being aperture size and density of the media, which is hugely affected by temp. As far as advantages, there are a couple that intrigue me: ease of installation, and lower operating temps. I have driven many miles in hot V8 Zs.... and that is one less heat source under my hood, that I am already looking at modding to remove heat. Also, as crazy as it sounds, I want some lag in my turbo, as long as it makes up for it with eventual HP and torque. My Z has an inherent limitation.... I want to drive it daily (weather permitting) and I want to do so without having to be constantly on the lookout for huge power at say 1900 RPMs.... and my GF wants to drive it occasionally as well. I think I can cure her of this with a couple of launches, but if I fail at that, I want it to be driveable for a noob, and still allow me to hit the boost control later. I read the posts by resellers of STS with a grain of salt, obviously. I still havent found any users who were dissatisfied. This says something to me. I am waiting for a guy with a D1SC-Camero who is swapping for a higher-end STS system. He is used to good perf and 630 HP. If HE has good things to say after installation, test drives, and dyno runs, I will be a little more sold. That install is expected sometime this month. On the positive side, I dont see any wild claims from the manufacturer, their customer support seems to be stellar, and the only people who seem to have problems with the system are people who dont own it, nor driven a car with it. I still cant get over a truck just shy of 6000 lbs getting a 3.5+ second improvement in the 1/4, and hitting 12.6 seconds. On an inefficient system, no less! That is good enough for me to watch and follow developements.

http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/showthread.php?t=225013

That car will be such a tight car.... as much as I love my Z that is right there beside it on my wow-factor list. Keep us posted.

Nice, a complete thread where NO ONE own the system in question. In some of MY links, there were track times and slips, even Dyno numbers. I loved your link tho.... obviously some talent and knowledge in there, when applied to higher efficiency, higher boost systems. Not one person there owned the system tho, or had seen it in a car. The best point they brought up was the turbo's proximity to the gas tank.... tho I imagine this is mitigated by the lower RPMs, lower temps, and lower pressure of the STS system. I still find it interesting that of all the people already using STS (including some fairly knowledgable types in their own right) I have been unable to find ANYONE unhappy with the product. I am certain that if I post some upcoming success stories, with Dyno sheets, time slips, ect.... the first reply will be how it could have been done faster at higher compression (and higher cost) by using what everyone else already has. Does your personality flaw allow for reading posts by existing owners, or are you restricted to just opining as to how impossible that system is? It just seems to me that some people are over-anxious to bash something they not only dont have, but obviously never will get. Doesnt seem to go with the general vibe of HybridZ all that well. I understand how some of what STS is doing flies in the face of convention, but this site kinda stands for doing that, and discouraging bashing, unless there is something concrete to show, like an owner telling us how bad his experience was. I found the darn thing interesting, and partially because it flew in the face of the very little I knew about turbos on car engines. I probably wouldnt have given it a second thought, but I talked to a guy that had it in his Tacoma.... and was thrilled with it. I had to jump online as soon as I got home, becauser it seemed wrong. All I have really seen since is happy owners, and non-owners who are either curious, or run the gamut between indifferent to hating.

LOL, Bastaad.... note that there are people running 15 pounds on optional turbos with STS, but that IS a quality quote.

belt-driven or Gear-driven? that is possibly the worst design idea I have ever heard. You should just do it the way everyone else does, and always has. Just because this is the Hybrid area doesnt mean everyone should post any old crackpot idea and expect interest.... In fact, why did you even bother to post such an obviously hair-brained idea? I would go and ask others who have that if it works, but I can tell just by looking at it you couldnt take your Z to a swamp buggy meet, alligators and eels would get sucked into that gay intake...... Oh wait, you just thot it might be a cool and novel way to do something, run with less heat, and possibly save some money in the meantime? You arent trying to run 30PSI and crack 1000HP? You would be happy with a high 12 second pass? Never mind, please disregard the above.

oh yeah.... AUX... please stop already.... you are raising my blood pressure with these "stupid" posts.....

After reading the first paragraph, my conservative, skeptic and REALIST mind had already called bullshit, and come up with the objection quoted above, albeit in slightly more colorful language. What the hell do the socialist (as in commies) leftist excuse makers we call educators think caused red, (as in commies) [which is SO many peoples favorite color] to be construed as "negative"? God.... no wonder every time I see a fire engine red sports car, I flash back to my spelling grades. Thank every thing I find influential and providential that I managed to skip school until high school..... I dont even like to think of who I might have become were I exposed to our education system for 12 years, instead of only 4 1/2.

no one is reading the links with people commenting on the STS systems they have had running for months already. No matter, I like what I am hearing, and if you read the links, you would know why. Particualry, This is answered very nicely by quite a few people over in the LS1tech forums.Another point made in the LS1tech forums.... No one who has the STS system is complaining about it, (and there are quite a few now) and ALL the major talk against it is by people who dont have it. One person who does have it made the most relevant comment so far. In a nutshell, he said that you get more performance with less heat penalty at a better price than any other system delivering 5 pounds of boost. He acknowledged that to go significantly higher than 5 pounds requires spending more money for the normal hardware that other IC or turbo systems require, just as you would be doing if you went with a different system. No one claims it is the highest perfomance possible, or the most efficient. For the performance promised and delivered, this is an easier install, less costly, and has fewer issues with heat. THATS ALL!!!!! Oh, if I WERE to use this on a truck, (I am not) and I were to tow a boat (I dont own) out of a ramp.... I would probably go with the recommended relocation kit for the intake filter. But that is just me.