Notices
Forced Induction Turbochargers and Superchargers..Got Boost?

Owner's Feedback for STS Rear-Mount Turbo

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-14-2007, 09:16 AM
  #1  
goosegoose
Registered User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
goosegoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: New York City
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Smile Owner's Feedback for STS Rear-Mount Turbo

Here are my initial impressions of the STS turbo:


Hydro Performance
I took the vehicle home on Saturday night and had the great fortune of driving in heavy rain and getting stuck in horrendous traffic on the Staten Island Expressway and the Brooklyn Queens Expressway. Even in the heavy rain, the intake seems to have no problem with water ingestion. This is even without a metal intake shield, as STS forgot to ship that over to us in time for me to take the car home. With the metal intake shield in place, I don’t think I will have any worries about hydrolocking. I believe Julian is right: the only way to hydro damage the motor is to submerge the lower portion of your vehicle in water.


Gas Mileage
Sunday brought better weather and a lot of miles were driven in the car. I drove 200 miles since I picked up the car 1.5 days ago. Before the STS, the vehicle reported around 15-18MPG and got around 280-300 miles out of a full tank of gas before the low-gas light lit up. With the STS, the OEM mileage meter read values as high as 34MPG, and stabilized Sunday night at 25MPG. I’m very skeptical of these figures, especially after the injectors were changed. However, between Saturday night and Sunday, I’ve driven 200 miles, and I am only down to half a tank of gas. Mileage seems to have significantly increased.


Road Clearance
Julian was right about the clearance of the turbo, but I’ll take it a step further. On Sunday, I drove everywhere between Manhattan, Brooklyn and Queens, where some of the worst roads in the country are. I didn’t hit anything. To me, it seems like the rear turbo sits higher than the factory muffler. If you weren’t about to hit anything that would have ripped off your OEM muffler, you don’t need to worry about bottoming out and ripping out the turbo.

The intake tubing running along the passenger side of the vehicle is a completely different concern. While it hasn’t hit anything yet, the pipe bothers me. It is now without a doubt, the lowest part of the vehicle. What frustrates me the most is that it blocks the passenger side lift areas of the undercarriage, and you have to lift the vehicle from the pumpkin in the rear before you can even think about propping up the vehicle from the passenger side. I change my wheels myself two times a year, and this seriously annoys me. After seeing the amount of room down the center of the vehicle’s undercarriage, I fail to see why STS cannot design an insulated intake pipe that runs parallel with the exhaust track. If they did this, the vehicle’s lifting points would no longer be blocked, and the intake pipe would no longer be the lowest point of the vehicle. This is my biggest gripe about the setup.


Noise
For an FI setup without a muffler, it surprised me how quiet this thing was at idle. Even when cruising normally, this setup is really not as intrusive as it should be. The only concern is that there is a significant amount of noise and rasp inside the cabin when you are accelerating normally, below boost, between 1500-2000 rpm. It is actually pretty damn annoying inside the cabin during that time, and it seems to be louder inside the car than it is outside. I feel like I have to do something about this soon before I get too many headaches in that range. This has got to be my second biggest grievance about the setup.

Cruising normally about 2000 rpm at around 50-60 mph below boost seems quieter than stock.

During boost, all hell breaks loose. The exhaust note is great, the spool-up is satisfying, and the wastegate noise is insane. Can you say AIRPLANE? I don’t think I’ve ever heard any system quite like it. Very satisfying. I can see myself getting addicted.


Boost Performance
This is what you guys will probably be most interested in. With Julian’s expert tuning, the STS is very responsive. Boost comes on linearly, stabilizes quickly, and does not spike at all in any of the boost maps. At WOT from a stop, the car does not turbo lag to hell like many previously had assumed. The car spools into full boost very quickly. At WOT from cruising speed, the response is fast as well. The power produced is responsive enough to make passing 90% of road vehicles, and whipping out your rear during a turn insanely easy. If you guys want numbers, I wouldn’t mind taking this thing to a track. But those things are a bit hard to find around Manhattan, so maybe Julian will take care of that during another visit.


Automatic Transmission Performance
Most of you won’t be doing this to an automatic. Out of boost, while driving normally, the auto manages decently. Shifts are significantly later than when the car was NA, but the ride is still civil and very manageable. On the other hand, the auto is not happy at WOT. Shifts are late, sometimes very late, and the engine rams into the rev-limiter almost every time. In manual mode, you need to command an upshift almost 1500-2000 rpm early for the transmission to shift at redline. Upgraded valve body is an absolute necessity. I will be installing a Fluidyne transmission cooler to go along with it.


Overall Initial Impressions
In summary, this kit offers a solid single-turbo solution. I feel that here are still some refinements that need to be made, but there is so far nothing that makes me regret choosing MRC and STS.

Last edited by goosegoose; 05-14-2007 at 10:52 AM.
Old 05-14-2007, 09:25 AM
  #2  
Julian@MRC
Banned
iTrader: (28)
 
Julian@MRC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Spotswood NJ
Posts: 5,510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Glad you liked it, I have been discussing changes to the charge pipe with Rick..
As far as the gas milage, that makes no sence... lol
Old 05-14-2007, 09:25 AM
  #4  
tropicalypso
New Member
iTrader: (6)
 
tropicalypso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: www.BooostedImports.com
Posts: 4,561
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by 98MODMTR
Great write up, thanks.
+1
Old 05-14-2007, 09:35 AM
  #5  
goosegoose
Registered User
Thread Starter
iTrader: (8)
 
goosegoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: New York City
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by MRC Motorsports
Glad you liked it, I have been discussing changes to the charge pipe with Rick..
As far as the gas milage, that makes no sence... lol
Yeah.
I don't get it either.
Maybe I'm not boosting enough.
Old 05-14-2007, 09:57 AM
  #6  
Lakelandkev
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
 
Lakelandkev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Apul Madeek-out...TPA/LKLD
Posts: 853
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

2nd that on posting, good info...I'm starting to like this kit..
Old 05-14-2007, 10:03 AM
  #7  
athenG
Registered User
iTrader: (2)
 
athenG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NYC
Posts: 2,252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I was also a skeptic until I saw the car last Saturday. The Lag is just a myth and this thing does scream when WOT. I hope STS do find a way to relocate the pipe coz my side skirt does scrape every now and then (depend on the driveway) and the pipe is about 1/4 of an inch lower than my side skirt.

Julian,
I can't wait to have this system now.

Last edited by athenG; 05-14-2007 at 10:24 AM.
Old 05-14-2007, 10:41 AM
  #8  
aorbeta
Registered User
 
aorbeta's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: virginia
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Great review. I'll be the first in line when they redo the charge piping. I have a lowered G35 too and I scrape on certain bumps.
Old 05-14-2007, 11:15 AM
  #9  
Julian@MRC
Banned
iTrader: (28)
 
Julian@MRC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Spotswood NJ
Posts: 5,510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by aorbeta
Great review. I'll be the first in line when they redo the charge piping. I have a lowered G35 too and I scrape on certain bumps.
Working on the redesign with them..
Old 05-14-2007, 01:53 PM
  #10  
diwun67
Registered User
iTrader: (13)
 
diwun67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: In the wrong lane
Posts: 6,433
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

sweet review
Old 05-14-2007, 01:55 PM
  #11  
Ghost 350z
Registered User
iTrader: (15)
 
Ghost 350z's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Get out my way pimpin', FL
Posts: 8,269
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

great review, it has been very helpful
Old 05-14-2007, 02:50 PM
  #12  
Wired 24/7
Dr. Wired
iTrader: (2)
 
Wired 24/7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: San Mateo, CA
Posts: 17,582
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes on 7 Posts
Default

Cool kit, and nice review. Although I do not agree with the assessment of the gas mileage. You should calculate mileage after filling up your tank, not using the gauge on the dash.

There is no way to get better gas mileage when you use more fuel
Old 05-14-2007, 03:22 PM
  #13  
diwun67
Registered User
iTrader: (13)
 
diwun67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: In the wrong lane
Posts: 6,433
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Wired 24/7
Cool kit, and nice review. Although I do not agree with the assessment of the gas mileage. You should calculate mileage after filling up your tank, not using the gauge on the dash.

There is no way to get better gas mileage when you use more fuel
I understand your logic, but at the same time the computer is seeing that you're not having to press the gas down as much to go the same speed therefore the inflated numbers, at least that's my assumption
Old 05-14-2007, 03:24 PM
  #14  
Wired 24/7
Dr. Wired
iTrader: (2)
 
Wired 24/7's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: San Mateo, CA
Posts: 17,582
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes on 7 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by diwun67
I understand your logic, but at the same time the computer is seeing that you're not having to press the gas down as much to go the same speed therefore the inflated numbers, at least that's my assumption
Yeah, the dash computer uses the MAF or throttle position or something to calculate MPG, it's bullsh1t... I get like 12MPG usually but it shows 16+
Old 05-14-2007, 03:30 PM
  #15  
hndumafia
New Member
iTrader: (10)
 
hndumafia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Miami
Posts: 3,965
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
Default

if i'm not mistaken the gas mileage gauge will now read incorrectly since you are using different size injectors. the car thinks the injectors are now spitting out less fuel with the stock injectors, but you're actually using more from the larger injectors. something like that.. best way to calculate would be to reset your mileage when filling up gas and then dividing mileage by how much gas you fill up next time.
Old 05-14-2007, 03:33 PM
  #16  
diwun67
Registered User
iTrader: (13)
 
diwun67's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: In the wrong lane
Posts: 6,433
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Wired 24/7
Yeah, the dash computer uses the MAF or throttle position or something to calculate MPG, it's bullsh1t... I get like 12MPG usually but it shows 16+
It probably uses the throttle position as it's main input. BTW I average anywhere between 15-19mpg since going FI, I used to get anywhere from 19-21mpg NA, both mixed city/highway.
Old 05-14-2007, 03:47 PM
  #17  
350Z_LEE
Registered User
iTrader: (9)
 
350Z_LEE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: New Orleans, Louisiana
Posts: 2,169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I think the gas mileage display is just skewed. Mine is reporting 33mpg since I got it tuned from FP and I know it's not getting that. I have noticed better gas mileage though due to the tune. I was running very Rich though.
Old 05-14-2007, 03:49 PM
  #18  
350Z_LEE
Registered User
iTrader: (9)
 
350Z_LEE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: New Orleans, Louisiana
Posts: 2,169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I think I am getting around 17-20 mpg.
Old 05-14-2007, 04:06 PM
  #19  
FairladyZ06
Registered User
iTrader: (5)
 
FairladyZ06's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: .88 Mach at FL 410
Posts: 521
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Most honest review I have read on the forum yet. Thanks for pointing out the pros and cons with clarity. Keep us updated with the performance of the car after the valve body upgrade and trans cooler.
Old 05-14-2007, 05:10 PM
  #20  
xxgreatwarsxx
Registered User
iTrader: (6)
 
xxgreatwarsxx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Indiana
Posts: 1,408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

good review


Quick Reply: Owner's Feedback for STS Rear-Mount Turbo



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:56 AM.