[torquecars]

What are your thoughts on remote turbos and remote turbo kits?

Are they really a low hassle way to add forced induction? Has anyone tried a remote turbo and what were your thoughts?

[Trick Tuners]

I will never have one. Turbos need heat and how the hell can you get enough heat to the rear of the car. Its a stupid design, designed to get around the emissions BS. There is a higher possibility of oil flow issues as well. There is a reason the high performance guys mount the turbo to the manifold, as close as possible to the exhaust ports. Granted remote turbos will make power, but not near as much as a real turbo, and the lag will be worse. Low hassle? Are you kidding me? Running oil and intake air from the rear bumper to the front intercooler is no hassle?

[WLJohnson05]

Originally Posted by Trick Tuners I will never have one. Turbos need heat and how the hell can you get enough heat to the rear of the car. Its a stupid design, designed to get around the emissions BS. There is a higher possibility of oil flow issues as well. There is a reason the high performance guys mount the turbo to the manifold, as close as possible to the exhaust ports. Granted remote turbos will make power, but not near as much as a real turbo, and the lag will be worse. Low hassle? Are you kidding me? Running oil and intake air from the rear bumper to the front intercooler is no hassle?

have to agree 100%

[Matt Cramer]

They're more complicated than an underhood setup because of the oiling issues, and the extra piping and loss of heat in the exhaust makes their performance something of a compromise. I'd only use them on a car with serious space restrictions under the hood. Mustangs do not fall into this category.

[Redrocket06]

My buddy has a rear mount single on his vette, he built the kit out of his garage, and the car is SICK. It is all about turbine size and compressor size. Properly matched it will run like a top. It is not the heat that turbos run off of, the gas takes up more volume when it is hot and the more volume of gas passing through the turbine the faster the compressor spins. Use a smaller turbine on a rear mount to offset the lack of volume, you can also wrap the exhaust pipe.

[Trick Tuners]

Originally Posted by Redrocket06 Use a smaller turbine on a rear mount to offset the lack of volume, you can also wrap the exhaust pipe.

But that is the compromise with that type of kit. Small turbo for low lag that chokes in the upper rpms, or a proper sized turbo that has tons of lag due to the piping to the rear, or a turbo on the headers with little lag and lots of capacity. I guess you could size them like this.


Ok, just playin, that is the ecoboost turbo.

[Lefty]

^

[uedlose]

Originally Posted by Trick Tuners But that is the compromise with that type of kit. Small turbo for low lag that chokes in the upper rpms, or a proper sized turbo that has tons of lag due to the piping to the rear, or a turbo on the headers with little lag and lots of capacity. I guess you could size them like this. Ok, just playin, that is the ecoboost turbo.

Exactly. While there is now doubt that the rear mounts work all in all the same move them to the front and the front mount is just gone to run better. IMO. I have seen a few on race cars they just did not work to good. And you are very right HEAT is ENERGY..

[98Cobra_sleeper]

i know someone as well with a rear mounted single turbo on a vette, its an 80 something mm turbo and it has nearly NO lag and it. the turbo runs nice and cool and it makes close to 600hp

[96sickstang]

waste of money

you really dont need heat that bad, remote turbos to me are better, they will last longer then turbos that attaches straight to the manifold, think about it, its phsysics what happens if you put heat to metal then it gets cold then heat it up again it will eventually warp and/or the metal will be weaker and end up breaking/craking/or the turbines will shatter. thats how i think of it , you will still get alittle heat but not as much heat really doesnt matter to much. if u look at the dyno sheets a STS(squires turbo system) brings more power and torque then a turbo bolted straight on the manifold. but the down fall part is that what he said, rocks and all sorts of objects can get caught in the turbine and break, or water like puddles and whatnot..remote would be only good fo like a drag car but not a everyday driving car

[uedlose]

Originally Posted by yeah_itsa_v6 you really dont need heat that bad, remote turbos to me are better, they will last longer then turbos that attaches straight to the manifold, think about it, its phsysics what happens if you put heat to metal then it gets cold then heat it up again it will eventually warp and/or the metal will be weaker and end up breaking/craking/or the turbines will shatter. thats how i think of it , you will still get alittle heat but not as much heat really doesnt matter to much. if u look at the dyno sheets a STS(squires turbo system) brings more power and torque then a turbo bolted straight on the manifold. but the down fall part is that what he said, rocks and all sorts of objects can get caught in the turbine and break, or water like puddles and whatnot..remote would be only good fo like a drag car but not a everyday driving car

DO turbos on road tractors that see 1 million + miles do they just crack up and fall apart and the turbines just fall apart I would think not or they would not be using them .. No matter how you look at it heat is energy do some reading. I also would not believe dyno graphs from many company's maybe a neutral party graph but I would much more like to see it with my own eyes. As far as metal warping and cracking when you heat it and cool it what do you think you do to your engine and exhaust every time you start your car?

[cyberdude47]

I knew a guy that had them and didnt like em