Mia, that's exactly my point. The stock cats sit lower than the Z's floor pan - that's why you scrape them.

The concern you raised regarding the placement of the turbocharger which is well above the floor pan is the issue you raised, and consequently the effort we have put into demonstrating that your issue is unfounded.

Look at it realistically, if you lower your car, you increase the chances of scraping the components that sit lower than the floor pan. The components above the floor pan however are still well protected - and in the case of the turbocharger even more so because of the rails and cross member.

George

 

I don't think I bashed their kit in my initial response. The original poster asked a question regarding some misconceptions of turbo placement and I answered them. If thats bashing ok I'll accept that. And yes by all means do they have a right to respond. However I have never and will never go into a thread specifically about their kit and post my feelings on it.

 

Right excpet that you did not show pics to prove that. You showed my front and side pics of the car but none of the turbo placement. My point is you can't see my stock cats from the angles you took pics of either. But they are in fact below the floorpan. As are the pics of the turbo placement that you currently have available.

 

ZZ I submit this statement to you:

That is what I consider bashing. I never said which one was better. I pointed out the pros and cons of the two mounting locations.

 

Regardless of the actual title of this thread, the APS kit was brought into question in the first couple of posts. To attack their business ethics for particpating in this thread is way out of line.

I do agree with you, however, that a better photo showing the actual height/placement of the turbo is needed, to satisfy me, anyway.

 

On the first statement I can agree to disagree, I think we have danced that dance before...

For the second I'm with you 100%

 

I can see how diffcult it might be to actually get a photo showing the exact relationship of the turbo to other components......tough to get a camera high enough against the underside to show exactly where the turbo sits. It might be something you have to judge in person....which makes choosing this system a little more difficult.

 

Ehh if you have a lift and a little time it can be done... I got pics of how my midpipe on my Apex exhaust fits in relation to the underside with just jacks.

 

Mia, follow the pipe a bit further and look at the area that Peter asked you to. You should find that the tube diameter necks down to 2.75 inches.

So what you may ask?

The cross sectional area of the down pipe is critical in removing exhaust gasses from the engine. For the sake of this argument, you may say that when comparing inner diameter (ID), the 3.5" OD pipe is only 1.3 times larger than the 2.75 OD pipe. However, cross sectional area is the real measurement that matters, and when that is compared, the 3.5" OD pipe (8.94 sq inches internal) is nearly 1.7 times larger than the 2.75" OD (5.40 sq inches internal) pipe - or 70% larger.

This has a huge impact upon the engine's performance and turbocharger response but above all, it lowers the back pressure and high temperature at the exhaust valves resulting in enhanced engine durability. It's no accident that there is such a huge difference in low to mid RPM turbocharger boost (hence power and torque) between the two approaches and this is an area where size does matter – particularly as many Z enthusiasts place great importance on high power and engine reliability.

Please note that the above information is presented in order to assist those who have an interest in this issue and it is in now way meant to be inflammatory or controversial.

George

 

As I said before my car is in the body shop at the moment and I am unable to take these measurements myself. I called the body shop and asked a favor of the guy. He said he measured it "right after the turbo" but thats all I can state as I am not there and my car will not be available for at LEAST another week. All I can say is that the measurement done was stated as 3" piping. my question to you then is How do you know what the dimensions of the Turbonetics piping are?

 

Mia, we have seen the product in the flesh and we prototyped a turbo in that position over 12 months ago, so we have direct experience with the limitations of routing exhaust piping in that area. There is nothing sinister or underhanded about this.

Regardless of what others do, APS will always investigate all areas thoroughly before we weigh up the benefits of each approach prior to building prototypes for testing.

George

 

I have seen it in the flesh as well but that does not mean I took a precise measurement of the piping. Furthermore I don't doubt you have prototyped a similar design, but again this is not your design. I'm not suggesting there is anything sinister in what you are saying. I merely trying to point out that unless you yourself measured the Turbonetics kit piping you have no way of knowing what it is. I'm sorry I cannot be of more assistance here but my car is simply not available.

 

If they have protoyped a similar design, then they most likely they know what space is available in area that the pipe fits.

 

Right but Turbonetics may not be routing the piping etc the same way and may have found more room some other way...

 

At the time it looked like 2.5" and we thought it strange that 2.75" was not used (but it was 2.75" which is pretty much the largest diameter tube you can fit).

Regardless, even when you do the sums on 3" OD tube, the extra 1/2" in going 3.5" OD results in a 40% increase in cross sectional area. This is significant in terms of gas flow.

Mia, must we battle over each and every point?

George

 

Perhaps someone from Turbonetics could actually participate and clear up this point.

 

No we don't have to... You guys post stuff to make your money I'm just posting my opinions. You don't have to agree with me... we are getting away from my major concern with your kit. Which happens to be YOUR turbo placement. Got any pics?

 

Indeed... Or another approach could be along the lines of my son making room for a particularly large component. He used an FBH to solve the problem.

George

 

Sorry but ???? I dont get it...

 

FBH = F....n Big Hammer

Made a mess but it worked.

George