Quote:
I thought, general case, you wanted the turbo as close as possible to the exhaust port (heating and mounting issues aside). Otherwise, the exhaust gas has time to finish expanding and cooling down, and in doing so it looses energy.
Exactly the reason most conventional turbo people think rear mounts are a waste of time.
Real world examples don't seem to have shown that to be the case, though. They probably aren't as efficient, but the "heat energy" argument doesn't seem to have played out like people think it should. If it had, STS would be out of business.
IMO, the distance the turbo is from the motor is broader than most think. I've seen some Indy car setups that had the turbo(s) pretty far away. The back of the car might be an extreme, but I think next to the transmission is very do-able.
I hadn't even thought about a D100. I could see it being a decent compromise if a guy already had headers and didn't want to get rid of them, on a truck.
I might still mount mine under the floorboards of my Plymouth streetrod (if I ever get back to it). I just don't see that there is much difference in exhaust length between a single turbo in front of the engine on the passenger side (ala Buick GN) or next to the transmission. At the rate I'm going, though, gas will be outlawed before I get to see if it would work.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/ad2ec/ad2ecdb8a8fc5643ecb60907a4c474ea48ec03ee" alt="Laughing :lol:"