Wow, thanks for not addressing either of the posts I made above APS I would suggest reading both before posting, because I clarified in the second post (although it was partially directed to another person also).

 

Hi Phile, sorry, but I glanced over them and I wasn't sure how to answer your scenarios. Some were pretty much way out there, but I'll give it a go.

I guess that if you raise the car on a crane and drop it onto a large obstacle that is directly under the cross member and turbo I guess you would drive the cross member up, snap the exhaust manifold and move the turbo up. The turbo would most likely survive, but dare I say that the other components wouldn't. We're talking about some fairly stout castings on the turbo.

The impact shield that sits under the turbocharger is a sturdy component and functions to offer protection on the odd chance that a rock shoots sideways from a tyre, an obstacle somehow misses the cross member and heads for the turbine housing (which I can't see how this will happen but we address it never the less) and to keep the turbo relatively clean from road grime. Quite frankly, I can't really think of situations where it will act as an impact shield in the full sense of the word, but it's there in case there's some weird act of God that has a remote chance of occurring.

Regardless, if you hit something hard enough to mark the turbo, there are other components that will be so damaged that you won't be driving the car any further.

Water is a non issue as far as I can see. If however one was to set up a dyno on the edge of a lake and they ran the car at full throttle with no air flow for sufficient time to get the turbocharger white hot (not just red hot) and then released the car and it shot into the water totally submerging the vehicle, then I guess it is possible to damage the turbo. But again, I think that situations this bizarre are, well, bizarre.

When reversing the car, you would need a bump that is higher than the lowest point of the turbocharger to cause impact. In this case, you would most likely take out the rear cross member, floor pan, exhaust and finally possibly make contact with the turbo. I say possibly because by that stage, the vehicle would have been bounced up on its suspension. If however you were reversing slowly to keep the suspension movement to a minimum and ignored the scraping sounds, then I guess you deserve to cause damage, but again I doubt that you would still have drive from the wheels.

Regarding additional photographs, I will take more and post them when that development vehicle returns after our Easter break. The car is currently on the road for testing (testing other components that have no place being discussed in this thread) and will be for the next week or more.

Now, let's get back to the real world. What are the chances of having a frontal impact with another vehicle or immovable object? Now compare the chances of this happening to some of the above scenarios. I hope that you will agree that the ratio is far in favour of running into the back of someone. Now, let's expand on the implications of this. With the location of the turbocharger in the production APS system the turbo will most likely be undamaged. If we had located the turbocharger toward the front of the engine bay over the air conditioning compressor as we did 12 months ago before scrapping that project, then it would be more than likely damaged during that frontal impact.

So, if one wants to play the probability game, one must be prepared to do so with probabilities a modest number of standard deviations out from the mean, but playing out in the extremities of the bell curve can get very confusing and costly.

I could actually argue that the position of the APS turbo results in greater safety for the turbo, but to do so would no doubt bring on an onslaught from those who have not considered the issue in great enough depth.

George

PS I thought that Wicked4u2c's cheesy line drawings were cute (and valid). Besides it gave ZZtopp the rare opportunity to show us what James Brown looks like in a Z

 

this made me smerk.

i fear that this thread has turned into nothing but, be it civalized, endless indirect bickering. i feel like i'm watching congress go at it. anyways, thank you both for the factual evidence given on the boards in countless posts. this has made me change my mind from wanting to just spray, to now really really wanting turbo!

 

Yeah Acree, I know what you mean, though active and informative debate is healthy. When of course we are discussing meaningful topics. And quite frankly, genuine questions deserve genuine and factual answers.

Also, spray is good, but turbo, great! I don't think that I will ever own a car that does not have a snail....or two.

George

 

This is first I've read about the "impact shield." I must have stupidly missed any direct reference to it in the hundreds of posts I've read in the last few days. I was sold on the system anyway, but now I'm totally convinced that possible damage exclusive to the turbo is truly a non-issue.

 

The James Brown thing was just a stupid joke, but one of my favorite people on the planet, BB King, is a horsepower junkie. I recenlty produced a network spot for the NBA featuring the master bluesman. We talked cars for at least an hour, and he knew his ****. HE showed me his custom TT Brabus Mercedes S. He said it had about 700 HP.....and I beleive him.

Here'a shot of me (on the left) with BB and my video crew.

 

No need to apologize, I knew you'd get to it. That's why I threw in the smiley :P


Oops! I thought it was BEHIND the cross member, not under it. The crane explanation was used to prove that if the car could be placed on the bump at the location of the turbo, then in some akward cases where the car isn't moving in a predictable manner, it would be possible that it could be damaged by a bump. In other words, it would prove that the turbo wasn't totally shielded. However, I must have misread previous posts. So that's all cleared up I guess.

See, I just wanted you to admit it was possible. That's all

I'm looking forward to it. I hope the price is right, because I'm very interested in the kit. If this kit is priced close to the Turbonetics kit *cough or below*cough , i'm sold.

Well, sometimes what you consider to be an outlier can occur more often than you initially account for. But in this case I'm pretty sure the scenarios I brought up are indeed rare.


I got a chuckle from them. They were only partially valid because they didn't take into account the car driving around a corner and encountering a bump at an arc. (sorry I'm being picky)


Phile

 

WOW! Very cool!

 

To me, too many of you are worried about pesky speed bumps. Why would you drive so fast over a speed bump in a lowered car that you would risk damaging anything under the car much less the turbo? My advise, slow down. To me the picture shows VERY clearly that the cross member is lower than the turbo.

 

ok, im a little confused now, after all this discussion whats the better turbo kit? i goot too busy reading all the posts that i lost the point of this thread. anyways, if possible, whats the price for a aps single turbo kit? and when does it come out? i need one asap! i have the money, bu im still debating one either aps or turbonetics, the only thing is, im not patient. whats the rated hp on the aps and turbonetics kit anyway, i get all different kinds of numbers. thanks.[B]

 

how about a vote? all you gotta do is type aps or turbonetics, whichever you preffer. this will make my decision. im gonna get one, but dont know which one yet, keep in mind: price, performance, looks, everything! its a vote off!

 

Aps

 

All I can say is patience has its virtue....EVERYONE AND THEIR MOTHER WERE PREST FOR GREDDY when it first came out... now people are debating which leaf blower is best?
My two cents: 1. Practice with what you got (a turbo wont do swaqt if the driver sucks) 2. Lets leave the geniuses behind FI to develop and test out the yingyang and let the little ones with plenty of cheese to buy and blow engines until the best of the best will be aparent. 3. People forgeting the Z is a powerful machine all on its own and barely has three yrs on the market...Y do you think its so easy for a honda civc to FI?? theyve been at it for years now! 4. So let em test & develop and you'll see in the end after a couple years(2-3) which system is ideal.

My 50 cents... I can wait on the 5k investment..besides I dont know about the rest of you, but im still paying the bank off, so technically its not 100% mine yet[I]!

 

Turbonetics

386 RWHP 8 PSI 11:1 AFR 91 octane gas.

 

APS! All the way.

 

aps

 

ok lets put it like this,

APS--$5700-$6000
Turbonetics--$4500-$5000.

how about now. and dont say APS cause youre foolin yourself.

 

why would I be fooling myself? I still would have to buy a return fuel system with the Turbonetics, which costs $1K+.. so the price is really about the same.

I'm not convinced just a fuel pump will do the trick. But then, that's just me and a few others. Plus, with the APS, I can get the car tuned to my existing mods since it comes with a piggyback. For the Turbonetics, I need to find someone that can flash the ecu or buy a piggyback, which would again be extra dollars.

 

Sure IF you can find an authorized tuner near you. If not have fun shipping your car to wherever. And BTW the flash that Turbonetics does can incorporate any mods you currenty have. Other then adding cams to your motor its doubtful you will ever need to reflash the ECU again.

 

It's more likely that I will find a closeby Unichip tuner than a tuner with reflashing capability. There are only 2 of those in the whole country.

I personally don't believe in running a stock map without having it retuned to your mods to get the most of out a kit within safety margins. That's also why I don't believe in mail-in reflashes either. There is way too many factors. Sure, you can make one safe map for everyone but I don't think you'll get the most out of your investment unless your car is otherwise bone stock.