There is actually a Grand Prix that has a turbo setup like that too. I've see a few trucks with a twin turbo steup like that also.

Big problem with the rear mounted turbo setup is the length of it.

It'* MUCH heavier, It'* many more points to fail, it'* costlier, it'* more susceptable to damage, it'* a larger pipe to fill, and will be less responsive, and such. Mounting air filters under the rear bumper too.

Some cars it'* almost necessary on (vettes), and on trucks it'* got no real big issues, but on larger cars there'* no reason you can't fab/modify to get the turbo under the hood, or on the Down pipe. One member on another board was adament about this setup, and wouldn't accept the issues it can have.

The idea of puilling exhaust out does have some merrit, but If you're digging that deep, just run open headers.

how did we get onto the topic of turbos?

1993 SLE Started it...hahaha.....What kinda electric motor do they have driving that M62?

u posted that in the wrong thread.... i think the one ur looking for is this one

Holy ****! Mass Confusion up in here. Is there any dyno numbers on a "normal" car with a setup like this?

Back to the origional topic;
I think you would see a loss, not from lack of back pressure but, it will take more to spin the blower than you gain from the exhaust flow.

Many large diesls use an exhaust scavenging blower. By large I mean spinning a 1000+ KW generator.

Hmm...this is kind of a neat idea. I think if you could get it to work and minimize parasitic losses it could actually be worth something. The deal with exhaust (beating the same drum) is velocity not back pressure. You want the most amount of velocity as possible, generally that means using a 'smaller' exhaust pipe which results in backpressure. WIth something actually sucking the exhaust out at a high velocity with minimal losses I don't see why it wouldn't work.

Thinking of it in terms of using a supercharger it takes something around 34hp to spin the m62 at redline. But thats pushing around 9psi, we would only really need ~1psi worth of flow or maybe 4-500cfm. If the hp requirement is linear (which it probably isn't) it would need about 3.7hp to spin. I don't see why it wouldn't achieve more than that. The issue then becomes cost which would probably be prohibitive and senseless.

Another idea would be to use one of those old smog pumps. Just reverse the flow. I've read before some shade tree mechanics actually use them as superchargers on motorcycles so obviously they can push some air. Meh, gives me something to bounce around my head today, thanks!

No prob, Doc. We thought it through for a while and came to the same kind of conclusion. You could run a bigger exhaust diameter and still retain the scavenging effects due to the high velocity of air being sucked out of the cylinders. Again, it'd probably want to be some kind of electric deal, and you wouldn't have the space limitations of an engine bay. Heck, you could mount a fairly large electric motor in the trunk and cut through the floor to run a drive belt to your turbine in the exhaust pipe. You would even be able to have a separate battery for the motor. I don't see why this would have to be an expensive setup.... you could probably rig something up for $500 or less. I guess it would all depend on the gains you received from it.

DIfferent cam specs might be necessary for a vacuum in the exhaust...

Electric motors wouldn't be a great thing, but may be necessary.