95.5-2004 Tacomas & 96-2002 4Runners 4th gen pickups and 3rd gen 4Runners

STS Turbo kits

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 10, 2004 | 09:59 PM
  #1  
03TundraTRD's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
From: Barrigada,Guam
STS Turbo kits

www.ststurbo.com
They have kits already for the V6 Tacoma and V8 Tundra.
So what do you guys think.
Reply
Old Feb 11, 2004 | 03:57 AM
  #2  
MTL_4runner's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 8,807
Likes: 3
From: Montreal, QC Canada
I'd go S/C first, look at all that ductwork!!!
The turbo needs to be much closer to the exhaust on the heads to be efficient.
I bet that system is not very efficient at all.

Last edited by MTL_4runner; Feb 11, 2004 at 04:50 PM.
Reply
Old Feb 11, 2004 | 04:37 AM
  #3  
Vato Loco's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 3,644
Likes: 0
From: Hamilton, ON
This was posted awhile ago and from what I read, not many people would be interested in the kit because of the location of the turbo.
Reply
Old Feb 11, 2004 | 07:07 AM
  #4  
WolfpackTLC's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 825
Likes: 0
From: Raleigh, NC
I don't think I'd want that, even for a street rig. Why?

1. Location of Turbo... not only is it odd, but it leaves the turbo out in the elements, along w/ the air cleaner. Can you say water ingestion?

2. # of bends in the piping. For every 90 degree radius in piping, you lose 1 psi of boost. For every 24" of piping you lose 1 psi of boost efficiency. That means that poor turbo is working OVERTIME to make just 6 psi. That translates into poor efficiency, and excess heating of the charge air.

3. Did I mention that it's a piss poor location for the turbo?


While I have no doubt that the turbo system from STS produces it's claimed power, it's not a well thought out kit.. ESP. for a wheeler...

J
Reply
Old Feb 11, 2004 | 04:23 PM
  #5  
gn86r's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 230
Likes: 1
From: jacksonville, fl
im kinda curious about this kit as well. they claim since they place the turbo under the car away from the motor, allowing the turbo to dissipate heat better, allowing them to run the turbo efficently without an intercooler. i thought the same thing at first, like wtf why put the turbo there. but all their turbo kits are like that. really its interesting stuff.
Reply
Old Feb 11, 2004 | 05:00 PM
  #6  
Strider's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
From: Johnson City, TN
Weird...

I don't understand thier overall thought process if they are trying to compete with the TRD supercharger... Not very practical mounting place for a turbo on an offroad vehicle. (You could pipe a small house with all of that pipe)
Reply
Old Feb 11, 2004 | 05:22 PM
  #7  
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
From: Greensboro, NC
I guess there marketing it toward truck owners that dont see much mud action, and do more boat towing. I dont like the location either, but some of the benefits they listed are valid reasons.

Imagine installing a turbo in a conventional manner on that truck, new headers, brackets, ect, I bet it would easily escilate the cost another 50% of what it is now, not to mention the nightmare installation!!

Id go with a charger myself!

John
Reply
Old Feb 11, 2004 | 08:18 PM
  #8  
HaveBlue's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,657
Likes: 0
From: Colorado
I'd say for the price of one of those kits, you could buy an Eaton M90 and fabricate the brackets to make it work on the 5VZ. You could also plumb an intercooler on the M90 if you so chose.
Reply
Old Feb 11, 2004 | 09:36 PM
  #9  
arjan's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,610
Likes: 0
From: Mission, British Columbia
Originally posted by HaveBlue
I'd say for the price of one of those kits, you could buy an Eaton M90 and fabricate the brackets to make it work on the 5VZ. You could also plumb an intercooler on the M90 if you so chose.
The same thing crossed my mind. How much would just a M90 be?
I would for sure be running an intercooler.
Reply
Old Feb 12, 2004 | 04:44 AM
  #10  
MTL_4runner's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 8,807
Likes: 3
From: Montreal, QC Canada
Why would you not just run the TRD unit for S/C?....unless you are dying for something unique.

A turbo could be fabbed up with a bit of work but a centrifugal S/C would be the best for an intercooler.
Roots style blowers do have intercoolers too but they are $$$$ and not as efficient.
Check it out:
http://www.thrashercharged.com/L67_htm/new_cooler.shtm
Reply
Old Feb 12, 2004 | 05:45 AM
  #11  
arjan's Avatar
Contributing Member
 
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 1,610
Likes: 0
From: Mission, British Columbia
Jamie, I'm not sure what the price difference is between the two. If the M90 is a lot cheaper then it might be interesting, if not then I would probaly also just use the TRD unit.

Arjan
Reply
Old Feb 12, 2004 | 08:57 AM
  #12  
gn86r's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 230
Likes: 1
From: jacksonville, fl
actually this kit is listed at 3495.00, but to me that seems kinda pricey considering you're just getting a turbo, manifold, piping and lines. but they do claim to be able to be installed in just 4-6 hours and put back to stock in about 2-3 hours. like i said its pretty interesting stuff, if you read the faq there.
Reply
Old Feb 12, 2004 | 09:03 AM
  #13  
Dave85zxt's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
First of all I don't trust any data from a Gtech Pro. I'd rather see numbers from a dyno.

If it does make that much power I bet the boost response is absolutley horrible. All of that piping will cause a huge loss in exhaust gas energy before it hits the turbine.

I think the supercharger is a much better route. The boost will come on instantly. For trucks I like to see the performance in the lower RPM range, My Z is a different story though!
Reply
Old Feb 12, 2004 | 10:35 AM
  #14  
HOK's Avatar
HOK
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
wow... from what i know about turbos you want the heat to stay in the exhaust side and any wind wouldn't be enough to cool the cool side to make it any more efficient not even close to an intercooler. I can't beleive they would make something that makes less HP and costs the same as a factory warranteed option for the V8.

thumbs down like the rest
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
user 82300
Items Wanted
3
Jan 19, 2016 02:01 PM
smithyboy69
Newbie Tech Section
7
Nov 28, 2015 04:13 PM
shalom
Engines - Transmissions
2
Sep 8, 2015 10:02 PM
Ryall
86-95 Trucks & 4Runners
2
Sep 2, 2015 06:48 AM




All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:52 PM.