Turbo mounted Rear of car?

[92TealSupra]

Well, I have been doing some research about a rear exhaust turbo. It's a turbo on the back of a car that still runs off the exhaust. Now I am not sure fi anyone has done this on here, but I am curious to see what you all think.

Now in many of your minds the first thing you would say is * turbo lag * but the truth is there is constant pressure in the piping just like a garden hose, you have water coming through, if you want more water you turn it up and you have more pressure.

Same thing about the rear mounted turbo.

I am thinking about doing this..

 

[suprahero]

I know a guy locally that has this on his GMC and he made about 606rwhp and 798torque, but he doesn't have a supra. Why would you want to do this on a supra when you have all the necessary items needed to do it in the engine bay? A lot of cars, don't have the room or have access to a manifold for a turbo, but we do. I say go the easier way, the proven way. Good luck either way.
http://www.alabamaracingscene.net/forum/showthread.php?p=658918#post658918

 

[subjug4tor]

I know a guy locally that has this on his GMC and he made about 606rwhp and 798torque, but he doesn't have a supra. Why would you want to do this on a supra when you have all the necessary items needed to do it in the engine bay? A lot of cars, don't have the room or have access to a manifold for a turbo, but we do. I say go the easier way, the proven way. Good luck either way.
http://www.alabamaracingscene.net/forum/showthread.php?p=658918#post658918

+1- the setup is mainly for cars that simply don't have room in the engine bay for a turbo. Think about all that's involved, lots of intake piping, and you have to run oil and coolant lines all the way to the back of the car and back. That's a lot of connections to leak or fail, and a larger volume of oil the pump has to move.

Granted, it's been done plenty, I've seen a couple guys with pickups that have their turbos in the bed, right behind the cab. Its getting popular on domestic V8's.

 

[GrimJack]

No point doing this in a Supra, we have more than enough room up front. Less exhaust piping between the engine and the turbo is a good thing. Smaller volume in your intercooler piping is likewise better.

 

[Rennat]

uhh... and not to mention their engines are twice the displacement of a supra engine. most trucks have at least a 5.7L or larger... so you have to take that into account.

a kid at my school had a turbo truck, but blew the engine shortly after cause he would just boost it like a crack head and his engine couldnt take the power.

and that truck was on a GT67..... HOLY SHIT thats big.

 

[shaeff]

Not to mention it's inefficient because exhaust loses velocity (heat) the closer it gets to the rear of the car...

 

[adampecush]

Not to mention it's inefficient because exhaust loses velocity (heat) the closer it gets to the rear of the car...

thats exactly what I was thinking

 

[Mo87NA]

Didn't you part your supra?

 

[shaeff]

He's been talking about getting another...

 

[Mo87NA]

Ohhh.....

 

[Poodles]

Lag because of the loss of velocity from the exhaust and long intercooler piping. No room under the car for said intercooler piping. Hot turbo next to gas tank. Easier to steal. Oil supply issues.

Should I keep going?

 

[RazoE]

or just do a twin turbo, one in the engine bay, one in the rear, either way it's not worth it on a Supra..

other cars may be another story..

 

[Rennat]

Lag because of the loss of velocity from the exhaust and long intercooler piping. No room under the car for said intercooler piping. Hot turbo next to gas tank. Easier to steal. Oil supply issues.

Should I keep going?

screw the lines, the oil return has to have a pump because your plumbing it alllll the way to the back of the car, and theres no way you can gravity drain that. haha.

i think its a waste of time... and we dont have the engine for a rear mounted turbo either. k.i.s.s. - keep it simple stupid

 

[Bluechulappa]

Turbochargers.com here in Houston, Texas did this sort of thing on their FJ cruiser. Here are some pics...
http://turbochargers.com/gallery/v/our_cars/fj/?g2_page=5

 

[GrimJack]

Turbochargers.com here in Houston, Texas did this sort of thing on their FJ cruiser. Here are some pics...
http://turbochargers.com/gallery/v/our_cars/fj/?g2_page=5

Yes, and in this case it makes sense. It's still going to make more power than the stock engine without the turbo, and there just isn't room to put a turbo and all the related piping in an FJ's engine bay that I can see.

 

[92TealSupra]

I know a guy locally that has this on his GMC and he made about 606rwhp and 798torque, but he doesn't have a supra. Why would you want to do this on a supra when you have all the necessary items needed to do it in the engine bay? A lot of cars, don't have the room or have access to a manifold for a turbo, but we do. I say go the easier way, the proven way. Good luck either way.
http://www.alabamaracingscene.net/forum/showthread.php?p=658918#post658918

Hey there Jay, i have a Audi 2.8 V6 I traded for my rusty Integra I was thinking about doing it to that..

 

[92TealSupra]

He's been talking about getting another...

Yah I thought about getting another, the parents right now would shit a brick though, I just got a Audi for MY GSR, so... :|

 

[arizzle]

Yah I thought about getting another, the parents right now would shit a brick though, I just got a Audi for MY GSR, so... :|

you traded your GSR for a 2.8audi? dang man, thats a deal but is it the 28valve motor?

 

[Doward]

Rear mount turbo = inefficient. You might make 100 additional hp, but a proper setup would have yielded MUCH more.

 

[Supracentral]

So if this isn't about a Supra, why is it in the General MKIII section?

Moved to other cars...