Supercharger or STS Turbo?
07-05-2006, 09:54 AM
#11
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location:
Posts: 759
RE: Supercharger or STS Turbo?
The only issue with STS turbos is the rear mount location. They get terrible oil pressure from the long *** oil feed line that has to run from the back to the front of the car...therefore causing you to lock up turbos quite often
07-05-2006, 11:00 AM
#12
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Palmer, Alaska
Posts: 954
RE: Supercharger or STS Turbo?
ORIGINAL: CainMotorsports2102
The only issue with STS turbos is the rear mount location. They get terrible oil pressure from the long *** oil feed line that has to run from the back to the front of the car...therefore causing you to lock up turbos quite often
The only issue with STS turbos is the rear mount location. They get terrible oil pressure from the long *** oil feed line that has to run from the back to the front of the car...therefore causing you to lock up turbos quite often
07-05-2006, 11:09 AM
#13
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location:
Posts: 759
RE: Supercharger or STS Turbo?
I helped a local shop do one on an LS1 camaro. They talked about the system as justa cheap way out fo doing a proper turbo setup....ouch. It was cool, and loud....and different, but extremely powerful and right foot pleasing it was not.
07-05-2006, 02:12 PM
#14
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 2
RE: Supercharger or STS Turbo?
The ever lasting fued between SC and turbos! I also had a VR4 3000GT twin turbo. At about 40k miles my power was down 20% and then at 70k It was down almost 50%!!! When I took it to the dealer I was told this was normal and that the turbos need to be rebuilt. I know that it is a heavy car, but having both vehicles - SC and turbo. I prefer the SC. It seemed as if they required less maint. and I loved the twin screw not having the lag that the even the twin turbo setup had. Just my 2 cents as everyone will have a different opinion.
ORIGINAL: 05SDI
Sorry not to be mean but you are incorrect!
Having owned a Twin turbo Dodge Stealth and put 100K miles on it before it was retired for our 06 Convertible GT. When done correctly (list of factory stock cars inserted here) turbos are very nice. With slight mods stock turbos can put out real power! Turbo lag is all but a thing of the past in modern cars. Are they instant boost like a twin screw type S/C? No, but if you would compare modern turbos to S/Cs like procharger, vortech, and any of the centrifical S/Cs they are very close to each other in how they develope boost! It's a matter of opinion but even those are very close (some feel better) then the roots or twin screw type blowers in some applications. Our TT/RT Stealth was putting out right at 400hp (after slight mods) and got 26mpg highway. Any RPM above 2800 it is at full boost 100% of the time! Please read NO turbo lag in any real world situation. Yes leave it in 6th gear @ 65 mph and think it'll take off like a rocket, well NO! But neither will our 4.6 (lol IF it had a 6th gear) Check it out many will call BS but anyone want to guess the top speed of a twin turbo stealth ...... 171 mph No I have never been that fast in ours but I have seen 155+ and backed off. Was 171 possible in our car? I don't know but more then 155 was for sure. Now you might think that last sentence proves your point, well I left out that a stock TT/RT Stealth or Misubishi VR4 (same car mechanicaly) 0-60 and 1/4 mile times are almost exactly the same as our 06 Mustang GTs. This AWD/AWS twin turbo car was heavier then the GT and they stopped making them back in '96 becuase it was replace with, oh now what it the name of that car from Dodge...... Oh yea, the Viper! Hmm slow to 190 I don't think so. Go find one on the street or strip and play a little. Turbos have their place and it's right up at the top WITH superchargers.
All that being said.. I just bought a Saleen S/C and upgrade kit for the 06 vert GT. So I guess either work for me!
05SDI
Sorry not to be mean but you are incorrect!
Having owned a Twin turbo Dodge Stealth and put 100K miles on it before it was retired for our 06 Convertible GT. When done correctly (list of factory stock cars inserted here) turbos are very nice. With slight mods stock turbos can put out real power! Turbo lag is all but a thing of the past in modern cars. Are they instant boost like a twin screw type S/C? No, but if you would compare modern turbos to S/Cs like procharger, vortech, and any of the centrifical S/Cs they are very close to each other in how they develope boost! It's a matter of opinion but even those are very close (some feel better) then the roots or twin screw type blowers in some applications. Our TT/RT Stealth was putting out right at 400hp (after slight mods) and got 26mpg highway. Any RPM above 2800 it is at full boost 100% of the time! Please read NO turbo lag in any real world situation. Yes leave it in 6th gear @ 65 mph and think it'll take off like a rocket, well NO! But neither will our 4.6 (lol IF it had a 6th gear) Check it out many will call BS but anyone want to guess the top speed of a twin turbo stealth ...... 171 mph No I have never been that fast in ours but I have seen 155+ and backed off. Was 171 possible in our car? I don't know but more then 155 was for sure. Now you might think that last sentence proves your point, well I left out that a stock TT/RT Stealth or Misubishi VR4 (same car mechanicaly) 0-60 and 1/4 mile times are almost exactly the same as our 06 Mustang GTs. This AWD/AWS twin turbo car was heavier then the GT and they stopped making them back in '96 becuase it was replace with, oh now what it the name of that car from Dodge...... Oh yea, the Viper! Hmm slow to 190 I don't think so. Go find one on the street or strip and play a little. Turbos have their place and it's right up at the top WITH superchargers.
All that being said.. I just bought a Saleen S/C and upgrade kit for the 06 vert GT. So I guess either work for me!
05SDI
ORIGINAL: bl1nkage
I myself dont like turbos on cars like ours, theyre all fine and dandy on cars that want to hit 190+ but take 2 years to get there. I would personally rather have the convenience of having the supercharger power at any moment I might need it instead of waiting for a turbo to spool up... JMO
I myself dont like turbos on cars like ours, theyre all fine and dandy on cars that want to hit 190+ but take 2 years to get there. I would personally rather have the convenience of having the supercharger power at any moment I might need it instead of waiting for a turbo to spool up... JMO
07-05-2006, 03:34 PM
#15
Join Date: May 2006
Location:
Posts: 25
RE: Supercharger or STS Turbo?
ORIGINAL: CainMotorsports2102
The only issue with STS turbos is the rear mount location. They get terrible oil pressure from the long *** oil feed line that has to run from the back to the front of the car...therefore causing you to lock up turbos quite often
The only issue with STS turbos is the rear mount location. They get terrible oil pressure from the long *** oil feed line that has to run from the back to the front of the car...therefore causing you to lock up turbos quite often
I don't think that the only reason they did the systems was because they wanted a 'cheaper' way to do them, as they really aren't cheap. Main reason the system is setup the way it is is because you are not going to get heat soak with the system. The system runs cooler. You don't need a turbo timer and certain applications, you won't need an intercooler. Another reason behind the system, you can remove the system easily at any time.
07-08-2006, 12:53 PM
#17
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Palmer, Alaska
Posts: 954
RE: Supercharger or STS Turbo?
ORIGINAL: mgress
The ever lasting fued between SC and turbos! I also had a VR4 3000GT twin turbo. At about 40k miles my power was down 20% and then at 70k It was down almost 50%!!!
The ever lasting fued between SC and turbos! I also had a VR4 3000GT twin turbo. At about 40k miles my power was down 20% and then at 70k It was down almost 50%!!!
SorryI'm not buying that crap! So what your saying is @ 70K miles your Twin turbo VR4 had like close to only 165 HP. NOT! SO that would mean power to weight ratio was down to Cavalier status or keeping within the Ford brand a Tempo or stock Focus! Now could it be down on power @ 70K miles, Yes if you never or were lame at getting regular oil changes and ran crappy oil. Those turbos could have been close to 100% @ 70K miles if you would have done timely oil changes and ran good synthetic oil early on. There are way to many high mileage Twin Turbo VR4/Stealths running around still notching kills for this statement to be accurate.
05SDI
09-25-2006, 07:31 PM
#18
4th Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: CA
Posts: 1,486
RE: Supercharger or STS Turbo?
My issue is that I still want the mean muscle car sound.
From what I heard, the STS Turbo usually has a high pitch sound that I don't care for. On the other hand, the Supercharger would be deaper in sound and meaner.
I try listening to soundclips but I think that you never get the true sound coming from a computer speaker, you know?
From what I heard, the STS Turbo usually has a high pitch sound that I don't care for. On the other hand, the Supercharger would be deaper in sound and meaner.
I try listening to soundclips but I think that you never get the true sound coming from a computer speaker, you know?
09-25-2006, 07:49 PM
#19
1st Gear Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location:
Posts: 147
RE: Supercharger or STS Turbo?
I think most people who hate on the STS turbo system haven't experienced it. The STS shop isn't too far away from me, and having seen their cars, they aren't bad. If you use the spooling excuse, it's not a big deal, smaller turbos spool faster, so already you could make up for that, and they do their research on that, they know they won't sell any kits if the turbo spools at 5000RPM. I'm not saying it's the best system out there, but it's great if you plan to return your car to stock at some point.