Has anyone tried rear mounted turbo?

[^pomen_GTR^]

ever heard the word of: turbo lag?

 

[TitanRev]

For this rear mounted turbo, I think it's not just all about the piping size....as turbo itself you can swap out the exhaust housing and turbine to a smaller one so that it can create boost with lower exhaust velocity. While you have a bigger compressor side to draw in more air and have a higher intake volume. This system is interesting and perhaps it is targeted to improve a specific powerband. Maybe...

 

[^pomen_GTR^]

For this rear mounted turbo, I think it's not just all about the piping size....as turbo itself you can swap out the exhaust housing and turbine to a smaller one so that it can create boost with lower exhaust velocity. While you have a bigger compressor side to draw in more air and have a higher intake volume. This system is interesting and perhaps it is targeted to improve a specific powerband. Maybe...

still need extra oil pump to scavenging the cooling oil from turbo unit back to engine oil sump and a lot of other extra plumbing to run from-to engine

 

[stupidcar]

Well, it depends. Would not say it is good or not, but then everything have it's pros and cons, right?
Well, like first mentioned, it is fitted because engine compartment got no space so this is the pros for this system, but then if you have space in the engine you would not use this system....

This is another one. Not sure what is the reason behind it.
GMC Canyon RWD 350WHP. Rear mounted turbo too.

The Burnout Truck that Burgers Built - /TUNED - YouTube

 

[LittleWhiteWagon]

LOL... I fail to see your argument on hot gases (or maybe it's just us Malaysians), especially with hot air ballon... that one was a classic. Hot air ballon's PRIMARY intention was invented as a means to go upwards, moving forward relies on wind! Propulsion is a totally different subject but even then, moving forward like a jet or rocket (the fastest mechanical thing on earth) still needs super hot air (velocity, remember?) burned by fuel to move them forward, no? Hence the topic of hot gases is VERY relevant when it comes to turbo setup. The hotter the air, the more velocity it carries hence spooling the turbo at much higher speed. How hot do we want the exhaust gas to be? Like you I'm no turbo engineer but I know each turbo design has their own specific optimum gas temperature to operate... too hot, you'll start melting the turbo blades... that is another engineering topic on tuning and metallurgy.

We don't have to be well versed on anything, but at least get the basic right. Internet is a very useful tool nowadays and a quick search on wiki can tell you the basic mechanical works of a twin scroll turbo (I know, my WRX sti uses one):

"Twin-scroll or divided turbochargers have two exhaust gas inlets and two nozzles, a smaller sharper angled one for quick response and a larger less angled one for peak performance.
With high-performance camshaft timing, exhaust valves in different cylinders can open at the same time, overlapping at the end of the power stroke in one cylinder and the end of exhaust stroke in another. In twin-scroll designs, the exhaust manifold physically separates the channels for cylinders that can interfere with each other, so that the pulsating exhaust gasses flow through separate spirals (scrolls). This lets the engine efficiently use exhaust scavenging techniques, which decreases exhaust gas temperatures and NOx emissions, improves turbine efficiency, and reduces turbo lag."

If the setup is for cramped engine bays (V6 and above), how did Nissan R35 cram so much in its bay and still be so powerful and efficient? Again it is about engineering and design... above all, what really works.
al production cars. A lot of car manufacturers uses race cars to carry their second or future techn
No we're not comparing race cars with daily drivers... I'm using race cars as an example of how race technology trickles down to actuology research... hence my argument that if this rear-turbo is such a ground breaking design, it would have at least landed on 1 or 2 models many years ago but why aren't we seeing it? STS engineers are a lot smarter than all the motor industry put together? I think not. No doubt the rear-turbo is nice solution to a lot of turbo problems but it isn't with its flaws... so yeah, from an engineering point of view... a nice novelty idea... realistically, you tell me.

Haha true la, true. I guess STS just caters to people who want to go fast in a straight line and not much else. I've run out of points to debate! Realistically for an overall package, I wouldn't do it either.

 

[Keninshiro]

Haha true la, true. I guess STS just caters to people who want to go fast in a straight line and not much else. I've run out of points to debate! Realistically for an overall package, I wouldn't do it either.

Hehe... no worries lah, I enjoy a healthy debate...no right or wrong so long as we respect each other, everything ok. :)

 

[LittleWhiteWagon]

Hehe... no worries lah, I enjoy a healthy debate...no right or wrong so long as we respect each other, everything ok. :)

Definitely, definitely. Though I did a bit more reading, it seems that the A/R's they choose for the hotsides are different from usual front setups. Tricky stuff la haha.

 

[leonl]

What rear mount turbo??

Actually, rear mount turbo has been around for a while now, the idea did not really pick up just as many has mentioned. I think the advantages of rear mount is the weight transfer towards the rear and heat. Plumbing will be a bxxxx to run, not to mention the oil lines.

 

[KatheyBrannon]

I have no idea how to do that..

 

[stupidcar]

What rear mount turbo??

Actually, rear mount turbo has been around for a while now, the idea did not really pick up just as many has mentioned. I think the advantages of rear mount is the weight transfer towards the rear and heat. Plumbing will be a bxxxx to run, not to mention the oil lines.

But we are talking about front mounted engines, turbo at the back.
Your's both at the back.

 

[^pomen_GTR^]

What rear mount turbo??

Actually, rear mount turbo has been around for a while now, the idea did not really pick up just as many has mentioned. I think the advantages of rear mount is the weight transfer towards the rear and heat. Plumbing will be a bxxxx to run, not to mention the oil lines.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/85/1970_Toyota_7_turbo-charged_rear.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/85/1970_Toyota_7_turbo-charged_rear.jpg

 

[leonl]

But we are talking about front mounted engines, turbo at the back.
Your's both at the back.

That was a joke. Rear mount was very popular a while back on Corvette, mustang & truck. It works well for those car because V8 has enough low end torque to move the car & to spool the turbo. Also, weight of piping & turbo toward the rear of the car help weight distribution of the vehicle.

 

[KatheyBrannon]

That looks just awesome. If you have some more pics of that beast, do post them. We'd all love to see those pics up here.

 

[vr2turbo]

That was a joke. Rear mount was very popular a while back on Corvette, mustang & truck. It works well for those car because V8 has enough low end torque to move the car & to spool the turbo. Also, weight of piping & turbo toward the rear of the car help weight distribution of the vehicle.

But the delay of response should be pretty bad from the front to reach the rears....

 

[esthapo]

I guess the response was pretty bad but I saw this kind of setup mostly on American cars long time ago...their exhaust spooling sound was orgasmic but that's all...sound like a rocket but moves like a snail...i like the sound lol