STS vs PRO Charger

DFWGTO · 06-13-2005, 01:58 PM

Ok guys I need some kinda techie info... If you were to compare the two systems, what would you rate there installability and longevity.
-This will be the 8lb Intercooled STS with M6 PopOff VS Intercooled ProCharger
-In the end them seem to cost the same... roughly 7000 installed w/custom tune vs 6500 installed with there tune ( I think I would go get custom NeWays so theres 7000 vs 7000
-Things I would like to know oiling problems for each MAF AIR Temp for each... oviously the lower of the two would let you run more boost

The effects of Headers and underdrive pully.
-Stuff like that,
-Not trying to start a war here just need some facts so I can make a good choice.

ftlfirefighter · 06-13-2005, 02:36 PM

Which engine? the 5.7 or 6.0? Turbos make huge power but the sts sys suffers from alot of lag, the procharger takes a second to spool up as well. ones engine driven vs exhaust powered. Depends what you're looking for?

DFWGTO · 06-13-2005, 05:55 PM

Looking for 2004 5.7 M6 stuff

GTODEALER · 06-13-2005, 06:36 PM

STS............but then we've already discussed this during lunch now didn't we.......lol How close are you Loyd? ......I'm starring at the STS kit, she's soooo pretty...... sorry.

06-14-2005, 09:48 AM

Get the procharger, even with the belt it's still more efficient than the STS
issuez

GTODEALER · 06-14-2005, 10:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Traction issuez

Get the procharger, even with the belt it's still more efficient than the STS
issuez

I'd argue all day with that..........what are you basing this off of?

06-14-2005, 12:57 PM

The T67 that often comes with the STS kits is a rather large turbo that produces "unfulfilling" results in the STS configuration. The Procharger does just as it should, belts up and blows air. In a traditional engine compartment turbo layout the T67 would school the procharger in area under the curve and overall performance. However with the choked down turbine A/R that typically would be used to compensate for a lower displacement engine or a twin turbo applications combined with the heat loss and travel distance of the hot pipes in the STS configuration makes it still produce admirable numbers, but not par with what the compressor is capable of from a power and response perspective.
Second, these cars a low to the ground, they are designed that way for cruising and "elevated" speeds. Having the lower stance tends to cut the air from out from underneath the car to improve stability. The "pipe" that is used to transport the compressed air from the turbo up to the intake doesn't take on the same airflow that the procharger intercooler would (which is a poor choice to compare an intercooler with that "pipe" anyway) and doesn't have the same heat transfer, ie efficiency capability, that the procharger would have in mounting the intercooler in the nose.
Finally, take a look at available air at speed. When you're driving down a dusty road, does dirt settle on the nose or on the tail? It settles on the tail because there is less airflow at that point to blow the dust away, that's right where STS put the air filter, the procharger filter is located in the engine bay near the fenderwell, which is right where GM designed the air inlet to be.
In this application, the Procharger, despite the fact of being belt driven, wins out. When the T67 is mounted in the engine compartment and given a proper front mount intercooler, the procharger will be left wanting, but for the time being it takes the cake.
issuez

Clevite 77 · 06-14-2005, 01:00 PM

I like Turbo's better myself, but the sts has a lot of tubing and such ran under the car.

I would go with the pro charger kit.

plus with turbo's you have to let them idle for a good minute to keep the oil from coking (SP?) up.

just my opinion

Braman'sGTO · 06-14-2005, 02:26 PM

I personaly would go with the STS, I have seen and heard of several more Prochargers go back for several rebuilds because they keep blowing there seals, an issue that procharger was sapose to have fixed and has yet to do so succesfully

ftlfirefighter · 06-14-2005, 02:33 PM

Go for the Harrop Stealth roots type blower from Australia. Makes gobs of power, has built in liquid to air intercooler and fits right in the V of the engine. No plumbers nightmare of plumbing. http://www.harrop.com.au/root_folder..._ls112-75.html

Now isn't that SWEET?