If I can get a "custom" turbo manifold from a j32a2.. Would it fit/work on my j30a4
drzchulo147
Quick question about this manifold
... unless he means a "manifold" as in pre-cat delete/turbo pedestal. if youre talkin an adaptor flange that goes from pre-cat flange to turbo flange, possibly but placement of the turbo in the engine bay will be limited. the other option people are talkin is more like remote-mounting the turbo further downstream in the exhaust like the STS kits that can be screwed and glued to just about anything... then you just have to sort out the tuning.what exactly were you meaning when you say "manifold"?
^^ Wow that just made me think ... Could you imagine an STS Rear Mount Twin Turbo Kit for our cars? The turbos would give us that back pressure we need and the rear mounts would solve the Exhaust manifold problem
Kinda Like this
![Image]()
or this is a cobalt
![Image]()
300
![Image]()
or EVEN BETTER BWAHAHAHA:
![Image]()
Kinda Like this
or this is a cobalt
300
or EVEN BETTER BWAHAHAHA:
no room in engine? to have it hiden
deff not for road race set up couse im sure turbo lag is gona be huge issue
http://www.ststurbo.com
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=benefit+of+rear+mount+turbo&aq=&oq=&aqi=&aq=f&oq=&aqi=&fp=KxYPMM6r3XA
check here. its blocked at my work so i cant look what the benefit is.
deff not for road race set up couse im sure turbo lag is gona be huge issue
http://www.ststurbo.com
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&q=benefit+of+rear+mount+turbo&aq=&oq=&aqi=&aq=f&oq=&aqi=&fp=KxYPMM6r3XA
check here. its blocked at my work so i cant look what the benefit is.
this was copied directly from bimmerforums.com
this is a what STS says as for benefits of the rear mount and a members own theories to contrast or concur with STS
(again this was taken from another forum so the arguements are from the guy who had originally posted this (i know none of his credentials))
Lower underhood temperatures. No need to worry about melting wires, hoses, or other engine components, as with a front-mounted turbo.
A properly designed kit or custom build will account for heat management, and remember there are wires and components underneath the car.
Ease of installation. STS turbo systems can be installed in about 8 hours with standard tools and average mechanical ability.
A well designed and documented front mount kit could most likely be installed in a similar time but I dont have hard numbers to support this claim as I've never installed a kit.
Cooler oil to the turbo. Cool oil is better for both the turbo and engine.
They are inferring that because the turbo doesn't absorb as much heat as a front mount due to the loss of thermal energy along the exhaust tract (yes energy) that the oil doesn't have to perform as much of its secondary function of cooling the turbo bearings as it would in a front mount setup where the majority of that thermal energy is mostly maintained except for a small amount that is absorbed into the turbo (housing, shaft, turbine, and bearings).
Well first off a lot of turbos are water cooled which reduces the amount of cooling the oil has to perform to nill, secondly any heat gains to the oil can be offset with a properly sized cooling package, again heat management is key. Last having to route oil lines all the way to the rear of the vehicle is a liability I wouldnt want.
Performance Sound. The turbo acts as a muffler and sounds like an aftermarket performance muffler. Turbo spool and rushing air from the blow-off valve make a unique sound that will turn heads!
Um in a front mount setup the turbo also acts like a muffler and if you want the cool sounds it can also be had, this is a pretty crappy reason!
No need for major modifications to your vehicle. STS systems are designed to "bolt-on" to factory mounts.
Again easily achievable with a front mount kit.
Increased gas mileage. Unlike a belt driven supercharger, the turbo utilizes "wasted" energy leaving your tailpipe. Most of our customers get 1-3 mpg increase in gas mileage compared to their original stock mpg numbers.
Saying that a performance modification that makes more power will consume less fuel than its OEM setup is ludicrous. More power equals more air and fuel!
Converts back to stock in about an hour.
Well this is a plus if its true but I find it hard to believe, but Im sure it does take only a small amount of time compared to a front mount kit.
More room under the hood. Future repair work or modifications will not require the expense of removing the turbo system to allow access to engine components.
This is another benefit to the remote setup.
Lowest Intake Air Temps. Low IAT's equate to more horsepower per pound of boost than any other forced induction option. STS intake piping provides built-in intercooling. Add the optional intercooler, and IAT's drop even further.
Intake temps will not be any better than a properly designed front mount kit or build with a proper intake setup. In fact I would say that a front mount setup would be cooler and more efficient due to the intake point being in a more optimum position thermal and pressure wise.
The idea that the intake piping offers a degree of heat expulsion and acts like an intercooler is true to a small degree but long intercooler piping can lead to large pressure losses which is much more detrimental to performance than a slight temperature reduction (and im going to say very slight)! Another issue with intercooler piping going the length of the car is speed bumps and other road obstacles, the tubing is more prone to damage. Last but not least you have an increased intake volume that will tend to reduce throttle response!
So they are again making pretty bold claims with the, "Low IAT's equate to more horsepower per pound of boost than any other forced induction option" comment.
Approximately 500F lower turbo temperatures. Eliminates the need for a turbo-timer, which allows the engine to run after the car is shut off in order to cool down the turbo and prevent oil and bearing damage.
Again this isnt nescessarily a good thing you have lost a lot of thermal energy that could of been put to good use!
Denser exhaust gasses drive the turbo turbine wheel more efficiently.
Hum Im going to guess they are saying they are denser due to being cooler but at the same time they have lost alot of velocity that could of been used to spin the turbine!
Turbo is exposed to ambient air rather than underhood air. Allows for better cooling of turbo components.
What components need to be air cooled to function more efficiently?
No need for expensive headers, mufflers, or exhaust systems.
Turbo is closer to the tail pipe outlet. Provides a better pressure differential across the turbine wheel which promotes better flow across turbine.
These are some pretty good points especially the last one about pressure differentials which in theory is true with a turbo wanting minimum restriction after the turbine, I believe a megaphone style outlet is the ideal. But again I would want to see some hard numbers comparing a conventional front mount with a rear mount to believe the advantage goes to the remote mount setup.
Better weight transfer. Increases traction because the bulk of system is mounted in rear of vehicle rather than up front.
Sure, this is a good point it does keep weight off the front of the vehicle.
Less noise and heat in the passenger compartment.
Good point about the wasted energy . . . . . err heat. Less noise is a good thing for some builds I will admit.
Just some food for thought
this is a what STS says as for benefits of the rear mount and a members own theories to contrast or concur with STS
(again this was taken from another forum so the arguements are from the guy who had originally posted this (i know none of his credentials))
Lower underhood temperatures. No need to worry about melting wires, hoses, or other engine components, as with a front-mounted turbo.
A properly designed kit or custom build will account for heat management, and remember there are wires and components underneath the car.
Ease of installation. STS turbo systems can be installed in about 8 hours with standard tools and average mechanical ability.
A well designed and documented front mount kit could most likely be installed in a similar time but I dont have hard numbers to support this claim as I've never installed a kit.
Cooler oil to the turbo. Cool oil is better for both the turbo and engine.
They are inferring that because the turbo doesn't absorb as much heat as a front mount due to the loss of thermal energy along the exhaust tract (yes energy) that the oil doesn't have to perform as much of its secondary function of cooling the turbo bearings as it would in a front mount setup where the majority of that thermal energy is mostly maintained except for a small amount that is absorbed into the turbo (housing, shaft, turbine, and bearings).
Well first off a lot of turbos are water cooled which reduces the amount of cooling the oil has to perform to nill, secondly any heat gains to the oil can be offset with a properly sized cooling package, again heat management is key. Last having to route oil lines all the way to the rear of the vehicle is a liability I wouldnt want.
Performance Sound. The turbo acts as a muffler and sounds like an aftermarket performance muffler. Turbo spool and rushing air from the blow-off valve make a unique sound that will turn heads!
Um in a front mount setup the turbo also acts like a muffler and if you want the cool sounds it can also be had, this is a pretty crappy reason!
No need for major modifications to your vehicle. STS systems are designed to "bolt-on" to factory mounts.
Again easily achievable with a front mount kit.
Increased gas mileage. Unlike a belt driven supercharger, the turbo utilizes "wasted" energy leaving your tailpipe. Most of our customers get 1-3 mpg increase in gas mileage compared to their original stock mpg numbers.
Saying that a performance modification that makes more power will consume less fuel than its OEM setup is ludicrous. More power equals more air and fuel!
Converts back to stock in about an hour.
Well this is a plus if its true but I find it hard to believe, but Im sure it does take only a small amount of time compared to a front mount kit.
More room under the hood. Future repair work or modifications will not require the expense of removing the turbo system to allow access to engine components.
This is another benefit to the remote setup.
Lowest Intake Air Temps. Low IAT's equate to more horsepower per pound of boost than any other forced induction option. STS intake piping provides built-in intercooling. Add the optional intercooler, and IAT's drop even further.
Intake temps will not be any better than a properly designed front mount kit or build with a proper intake setup. In fact I would say that a front mount setup would be cooler and more efficient due to the intake point being in a more optimum position thermal and pressure wise.
The idea that the intake piping offers a degree of heat expulsion and acts like an intercooler is true to a small degree but long intercooler piping can lead to large pressure losses which is much more detrimental to performance than a slight temperature reduction (and im going to say very slight)! Another issue with intercooler piping going the length of the car is speed bumps and other road obstacles, the tubing is more prone to damage. Last but not least you have an increased intake volume that will tend to reduce throttle response!
So they are again making pretty bold claims with the, "Low IAT's equate to more horsepower per pound of boost than any other forced induction option" comment.
Approximately 500F lower turbo temperatures. Eliminates the need for a turbo-timer, which allows the engine to run after the car is shut off in order to cool down the turbo and prevent oil and bearing damage.
Again this isnt nescessarily a good thing you have lost a lot of thermal energy that could of been put to good use!
Denser exhaust gasses drive the turbo turbine wheel more efficiently.
Hum Im going to guess they are saying they are denser due to being cooler but at the same time they have lost alot of velocity that could of been used to spin the turbine!
Turbo is exposed to ambient air rather than underhood air. Allows for better cooling of turbo components.
What components need to be air cooled to function more efficiently?
No need for expensive headers, mufflers, or exhaust systems.
Turbo is closer to the tail pipe outlet. Provides a better pressure differential across the turbine wheel which promotes better flow across turbine.
These are some pretty good points especially the last one about pressure differentials which in theory is true with a turbo wanting minimum restriction after the turbine, I believe a megaphone style outlet is the ideal. But again I would want to see some hard numbers comparing a conventional front mount with a rear mount to believe the advantage goes to the remote mount setup.
Better weight transfer. Increases traction because the bulk of system is mounted in rear of vehicle rather than up front.
Sure, this is a good point it does keep weight off the front of the vehicle.
Less noise and heat in the passenger compartment.
Good point about the wasted energy . . . . . err heat. Less noise is a good thing for some builds I will admit.
Just some food for thought
which is why i just posted this up lol. i dont go on the forums nor do i know anyone over there i just did a quick search and came up with this ... so i posted it lol
What a way to romanticize the install of a turbo.
I've heard of cooling a boasted application with water by why? It doesn't work well for 99% of the applications. Maybe if you were going to a drag strip and filled your cooler with ice water then it may run better for that run. As soon as the water is heated up it'll continue to pass hot water through the turbo (limited or no more cooling) while the air cooled set-up will continue to send cooler air dispersing heat. Not to mention all the piping and a second pump; way too complicated.
I've heard of cooling a boasted application with water by why? It doesn't work well for 99% of the applications. Maybe if you were going to a drag strip and filled your cooler with ice water then it may run better for that run. As soon as the water is heated up it'll continue to pass hot water through the turbo (limited or no more cooling) while the air cooled set-up will continue to send cooler air dispersing heat. Not to mention all the piping and a second pump; way too complicated.
i never heard using water for cooling turbo. its way too hot for water and you not gona be able to cool it. usualy N20 is used to cool intake temp but cooling turbo maybe is done by running oil return light from turbo through oil cooler. but never heard about water. its like putting water on metal that heated on glowing iron (you see how hot headers get during high load
for you noobs to turbo charge systems... yes water cooled turbo chargers are very common in good turbos. the cheap chinese turbos mostly dont have them and well thats why they fail! the water is only a small part ot a turbo cooling that goes in play with the oil that both lubricates and cools the turbo. i cannot believe that you dont think there are water cooled turbos that is just amazing to me... and just to let you know the water jacket in in the center shaft that connects the exhaust side and the induction side. silly noobs!!!
The average turbo install is not going to be water cooled. Yes I do know about oil cooling as well but most people who do go turbo do not have the room for the fittings or want the extra complexity.
If I think about the turbos that are in most production cars they are not water cooled at all; air intercooler only.
Maybe a porsche or some other car equal in scope with a 'good' application as you say would have them but not your average affordable import like we're concentrating on.
Water cooling has its limits with how much heat it can disperse then you have to move the heat out of the water.
Turbo heat > water > air
Turbo heat > air
Thanks for calling us names though very productive, I'm sure it makes you feel good about yourself.
Question though, your car is listed as turbo. Is it water cooled?
If I think about the turbos that are in most production cars they are not water cooled at all; air intercooler only.
Maybe a porsche or some other car equal in scope with a 'good' application as you say would have them but not your average affordable import like we're concentrating on.
Water cooling has its limits with how much heat it can disperse then you have to move the heat out of the water.
Turbo heat > water > air
Turbo heat > air
Thanks for calling us names though very productive, I'm sure it makes you feel good about yourself.
Question though, your car is listed as turbo. Is it water cooled?
It sounds like your referring to the intake charge and not the turbo..... shonda is referring to the fact that most decent turbos have both oil and water running through the turbo itself to cool them off. Also an air/water intercooler is pretty superior to just air/air intercooler. Although I do think calling you guys noobs was a little much but he is right.
searched and found. i guess we dont use water cooled turbos for regular cars couse they are bigger from what i found couse extra"housing" has to go over exhaust turbo housing, interesting, never heard of water cooled turbos before. i guess you always learn
![Image]()
id think cooling intake air would have been more beneficial even though its whats IC is for
but looks like its more for marine application couse you have plenty of water there
id think cooling intake air would have been more beneficial even though its whats IC is for
but looks like its more for marine application couse you have plenty of water there
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
-
?
