Rear mounted turbo kit

Crash · 06-29-2009, 01:06 PM

Snakebite202, What they're rated at and what they actually get are two different things. The AUTOs got about that MPG, but the manuals get WAY better... You can take my word or you can ask anyone with a manual C5.

2fast4theLaw likely had an auto. Those sound like Auto numbers to me... In fact, I had an auto as well and that's what I got until I put 3.73's in the rear end where I lost about 1-2 MPG. All my friends and I get/got beyond 30 on the freeway with the m6. The BIG difference between the 4L60E (auto) and the T56 (manual) is that the auto had a crappy overdrive after 3rd whereas the T56 has 2 overdrive gears (one for street, one for freeway) and at any time, the car can cruise at 1500RPM. 70MPH in 6th gear on the freeway is 1700RPM.

The LS1 is already a very efficient motor... Giving it better gearing like that is only going to help its case. The auto, however was a 3 speed + over drive. And that trans was terrible for fuel economy.

LS1 Gas Mileage - LS1TECH <-- Totally unbiased MPG results. Some really low (from VERY modded cars) and some exceeding my expectations.

What shows up on paper isn't always true. GM under rated the LS1 F-Bodies to sell more Corvettes. So are you saying that just because it's on paper, the F-Bodies were 325HP instead of 350? Because a dyno would say otherwise.

And yes, that saying is old. But I don't feel it's outdated. Technology only gets better, but the truth behind the saying is still what it is. A current day Big block is still FAR better than a current day small liter motor. ANYTHING you do to the smaller motor, you can do to the bigger motor and the results are only escalated, but not changed.

Snakebite202 · 06-29-2009, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crash

Snakebite202, What they're rated at and what they actually get are two different things. The AUTOs got about that MPG, but the manuals get WAY better... You can take my word or you can ask anyone with a manual C5.

2fast4theLaw likely had an auto. Those sound like Auto numbers to me... In fact, I had an auto as well and that's what I got until I put 3.73's in the rear end where I lost about 1-2 MPG. All my friends and I get/got beyond 30 on the freeway with the m6. The BIG difference between the 4L60E (auto) and the T56 (manual) is that the auto had a crappy overdrive after 3rd whereas the T56 has 2 overdrive gears (one for street, one for freeway) and at any time, the car can cruise at 1500RPM. 70MPH in 6th gear on the freeway is 1700RPM.

The LS1 is already a very efficient motor... Giving it better gearing like that is only going to help its case. The auto, however was a 3 speed + over drive. And that trans was terrible for fuel economy.

LS1 Gas Mileage - LS1TECH <-- Totally unbiased MPG results. Some really low (from VERY modded cars) and some exceeding my expectations.

What shows up on paper isn't always true. GM under rated the LS1 F-Bodies to sell more Corvettes. So are you saying that just because it's on paper, the F-Bodies were 325HP instead of 350? Because a dyno would say otherwise.

And yes, that saying is old. But I don't feel it's outdated. Technology only gets better, but the truth behind the saying is still what it is. A current day Big block is still FAR better than a current day small liter motor. ANYTHING you do to the smaller motor, you can do to the bigger motor and the results are only escalated, but not changed.

Crash, I wasn't saying that paper is truth set in stone, I was merely getting some numbers to show that the Z and the LS1 have similar specs as far as fuel consumption. And all the higher numbers for the LS1 seem to have come from modded cars and not stock cars. Anyway, this disscussion about fuel is moot too me as I said before - it's a sports car.

Speaking of moot, this thread has gotten completely off topic...

LiquidZ · 06-29-2009, 01:52 PM

My dad's C6 Z06 is a beast!

jmlenz · 06-29-2009, 05:30 PM

this thread is about a rear-mounted turbo setup in the 370z fellas...not GM/corvettes versus blah blah. Take this discussion elsewhere on the forum.

Crash · 06-29-2009, 06:39 PM

LOL! Sorry, didn't mean to hijack the thread...

Back on point, the STS kit is kind of expensive for what you're getting, but the biggest benefit to it is that you don't have to modify the crap out of your car to make it work. Most turbo systems require cutting and shaving and bending. They're really just not easy to install and if you remove them at any point, you have a lot of under-body work that needs to be done to seal up what's been modified.

With the STS kit, it's pretty straight forward. Since they've realized they do need an intercooler, it seems they're including it with the kit now. But the good news is that the intercooler doesn't have to be big leaving a LOT of room for expansion later (or getting a bigger intercooler and upping the boost).

I've thought about doing a staged STS kit so that there's no boost lag.

Any thoughts?

06-29-2009, 01:06 PM	#1 (permalink)
Crash A True Z Fanatic Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 1,853 Drives: 02 Corvette Z06 Rep Power: 590	Snakebite202, What they're rated at and what they actually get are two different things. The AUTOs got about that MPG, but the manuals get WAY better... You can take my word or you can ask anyone with a manual C5. 2fast4theLaw likely had an auto. Those sound like Auto numbers to me... In fact, I had an auto as well and that's what I got until I put 3.73's in the rear end where I lost about 1-2 MPG. All my friends and I get/got beyond 30 on the freeway with the m6. The BIG difference between the 4L60E (auto) and the T56 (manual) is that the auto had a crappy overdrive after 3rd whereas the T56 has 2 overdrive gears (one for street, one for freeway) and at any time, the car can cruise at 1500RPM. 70MPH in 6th gear on the freeway is 1700RPM. The LS1 is already a very efficient motor... Giving it better gearing like that is only going to help its case. The auto, however was a 3 speed + over drive. And that trans was terrible for fuel economy. LS1 Gas Mileage - LS1TECH <-- Totally unbiased MPG results. Some really low (from VERY modded cars) and some exceeding my expectations. What shows up on paper isn't always true. GM under rated the LS1 F-Bodies to sell more Corvettes. So are you saying that just because it's on paper, the F-Bodies were 325HP instead of 350? Because a dyno would say otherwise. And yes, that saying is old. But I don't feel it's outdated. Technology only gets better, but the truth behind the saying is still what it is. A current day Big block is still FAR better than a current day small liter motor. ANYTHING you do to the smaller motor, you can do to the bigger motor and the results are only escalated, but not changed. __________________ 2002 Corvette Z06 - Totaled 2003 Corvette Z06 50th Anniversary

06-29-2009, 01:52 PM	#3 (permalink)
LiquidZ A True Z Fanatic Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Columbus, OH Posts: 1,940 Drives: Mag. Black 2009 370Z Rep Power: 705	My dad's C6 Z06 is a beast! __________________

06-29-2009, 06:39 PM	#5 (permalink)
Crash A True Z Fanatic Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 1,853 Drives: 02 Corvette Z06 Rep Power: 590	LOL! Sorry, didn't mean to hijack the thread... Back on point, the STS kit is kind of expensive for what you're getting, but the biggest benefit to it is that you don't have to modify the crap out of your car to make it work. Most turbo systems require cutting and shaving and bending. They're really just not easy to install and if you remove them at any point, you have a lot of under-body work that needs to be done to seal up what's been modified. With the STS kit, it's pretty straight forward. Since they've realized they do need an intercooler, it seems they're including it with the kit now. But the good news is that the intercooler doesn't have to be big leaving a LOT of room for expansion later (or getting a bigger intercooler and upping the boost). I've thought about doing a staged STS kit so that there's no boost lag. Any thoughts? __________________ 2002 Corvette Z06 - Totaled 2003 Corvette Z06 50th Anniversary

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Can you get to 400 without turbo or super-charger	Q_USAF	Engine & Drivetrain	193	03-15-2023 02:18 PM
AAM VQ37 Twin Turbo Kit!	Clint@Altered	Forced Induction	114	12-01-2009 08:58 PM
Will we see a SINGLE turbo kit?	Brazilbro	Forced Induction	17	07-03-2009 04:03 PM
APS Twin turbo release???	Dcwatson7	Forced Induction	8	03-06-2009 12:13 AM
BMW M3 E46 Turbo vs Lamborghini Gallardo	AK370Z	Other Vehicles	7	12-27-2008 01:22 PM

06-29-2009, 05:30 PM	#4 (permalink)
jmlenz Track Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: San Diego Posts: 645 Drives: a car Rep Power: 643	this thread is about a rear-mounted turbo setup in the 370z fellas...not GM/corvettes versus blah blah. Take this discussion elsewhere on the forum.