Over six feet to the back of the truck to the turbo, and six feet back (more if you have an intercooler) - you don't think that's going to introduce lag? Ugh....

Apparently the reviewers who tested the product had the same concerns about lag, but were surprised to find that lag wasn't as bad as they had expected. (Or perhaps the reviewers were bribed...?)

The challenge for us is to find a suitable location for the intake, because I think we're all in agreement that an intake has no place on the underbelly of a 4x4.

as long as we arn't doing this for drag racing, who cares about the lag..
As we all know, these arn't fast trucks.. I would want one for those times I am towing my boat.. Just think, by the time you have to turn off the OD.. the turbo would be spun up..with a terbo, you might be able to do the hill in od..
And the really steep ones (like the grapevine north of la) with a trailer, in 3rd locked, not 2nd locked..I would love to be able to tow uphill at 55mph.. (the speed limit in CA with a trailer,
there are a few sections at 60, but 90% are 55)..
The turbo would do this, off road i doubt many of the SC trucks even use their SC's.. WOT in 4low.. that would be funny.. In the sand & mud, you would be into the throttle enough to keep the turbo spun up, so it would be helpful there.. just not in the rocks.. at 5psi that fat from the intake, you might get away with mid grade.. put in an intercooler, and maybe the cheap stuff..
BTW, at 5 psi boost, you should be well over 30% increase in power.. an NA moter will never see atmospheric(sp) pressure at the injectors die to the filter, plumming, and relying on engine suction to move air.. with a wastegate tweek, we should be able to raise or lower the boost far better then the SC..
Here is a page on Motorcycle Turbos, just to give you an idea what is out there..

turbo motors typically run lower compression than most stock normally aspirated engines to keep the bottom end together. Not sure of the compression ratio on a VG33, but I'm sure adding a turbo would at least require premium gas to run well and not detonate.

Compression raises the temp of the air charge.
High compression raises it higher (duh)
Higher temp air at the valves = higher temp at TDC.
The SC needs premium due to high air temps at the valves caused by compression (the SC) and no way to cool the charge (intercooler)
lower the compression in the motor(like 5:1), and run forced induction (mild) on regular..
A different SC (due to plumming issues) and an intercooler would be fine on mid grade.. maybe the cheap stuff with low enough boost ~3-5psi@ the valves..
High temp air charge + "normal" compression surpasses the thermal lel (lower explosive limit) or ignition point.. diesels use high compression to exceed the thermal lel for diesel, then inject directly into the cylinder to cause detonation.
the injection is timed pretty much the same as our spark timing. Fuel pressure & pulse width work the same as out injectors.. if we could get direct injection on our trucks, then fuel grade wouldn't matter.. high boost would make high temps which would eat rings, and cook the exhausts & turbos is equipped..
I want Forced Induction,with Propane direct injection.
Propane is ~120 Octane, and as it decompresses, it would tend to cool the air charge, meaning lower egt's.. so i could run higher boost..
Now that would Rock.. But not on my X...
Where could I mount a propane tank on a Ninja...

If properly tuned, you could run regular unleaded with stock internals and have no problems. The key to longevity with a turbo is engine management. I have run 16 PSI on a honda D series@9.75-1 static compression on pump gas with no problem. The key was programable engine management(Hondata S-200)

Could the X handle the boost?

For the question of the X handling the boost, as far as I could see, the n/a 3.3L has the same C/R as the SC version, so why not...the SC version seems to be built well enough, I doubt they really spent the dough to change the internals of the SC version without lowering the c/r.

This is funny because I brought this exact scenario up on www.vaxc.com a few weeks ago. Can't get away from turbos after building a MKIV Supra.

A while back there was a post on the S/c had a lower C/R then the non s/c.

In theory, turbos produce their best impeller pressure forces when located "AT THE SOURCE OF THE EXHAUST OUTPUT" by the time it makes it down stream, you lose and the engine loses out. Not to mention, who the (*& puts their air filter element under their truck near the road? Save yourself from butchering a good truck and DON"T DO IT!

that really doesn't look like a good idea. i'm trying to remember, is it every 2 feet of tubing doubles the pressure needed to pull a fluid through it (air is a fluid too). and each 90 degree bend is like adding 2 (or 4?) feet of tubing i think. gosh, i can't remember!!! i need to go look up the properties of a fluid in a tube and come back and edit my post...

EDIT: ok, i'm back. the rate of flow of air in a tube is inversely proportional to the length of a tube. so if you double the tube length, you double the amount of energy required to pull air through it. as for the bends, i can't find anything specific on how much loss in rate of flow they cause, but it looks like it's about 50% for a smooth bend, more for a bend like the ones in the pic that aren't done on a mandrel with an inside ball form.

so, in short, mechanically/physically/scientifically this turbo system is a REALLY BAD IDEA!!!

looks bad ass-what would it cost to buy one?
i didnt want to give my number out to the sales people.

in case you didn't notice, everybody seems to think this system isn't such a good idea!