What do u think of electric turbo that works
cargodzcc
12-06-2003, 12:36 PM
What if I said that I found an Electric Turbo that actually worked after testing almost all of them out there? What if it actually showed a 25 horsepower increase on a car with over 244,000 miles on it? What if it created 800cfm? What if you had the ability to save on miles per gallon, because unlike the exhaust driven turbos you could shut it off? Keep in mind this is in no means a replacement for an actual exhaust driven turbo, but an economical alternative for those that don't have or don't want to spend the extra money and has an easy install. What If?
KC Ron Carter
12-06-2003, 02:26 PM
I would xitch slap you and tell you to wake up.
100% NFW.
More snake oil than this forum deserves.
That pretty much shows my answer.
Later,
100% NFW.
More snake oil than this forum deserves.
That pretty much shows my answer.
Later,
SaabJohan
12-06-2003, 07:46 PM
Currently I have seen no electric compressors (a turbo is turbine driven) which have a motor which are powerful enough to do what they claim. Actually, the ones I have seen are not even compressors they are fans, and fans are not supposed to be used as a density increaser.
Turbochargers "shut off" themself when they aren't needed, and they will not cause the restriction than an electric driven compressor will.
Currently there are no needs for an electric driven compressor, use the power from the crank instead and a magneto clutch or a set of valves and it will do the job without having a 30% powerloss from the crank to the compressor. Or why not do like Garrett; use an electric motor to help speed up the turbocharger.
Turbochargers "shut off" themself when they aren't needed, and they will not cause the restriction than an electric driven compressor will.
Currently there are no needs for an electric driven compressor, use the power from the crank instead and a magneto clutch or a set of valves and it will do the job without having a 30% powerloss from the crank to the compressor. Or why not do like Garrett; use an electric motor to help speed up the turbocharger.
454Casull
12-06-2003, 11:42 PM
800cfm? You know how little that is, right?
cargodzcc
12-07-2003, 12:33 PM
Any doubts although 800cfm may not seem like much this unit did actually produce 25.9 more horsepower. Now please keep in mind before you claim that this is BS brought up by some manufacturer that I don't make these things and this test was done on a Mustang Dyno.
http://files.automotiveforums.com/gallery/watermark.php?file=/503/84778cargodz_Dyno_Test_sm.jpg
Everyone always asks for proof and I have yet to see any other electric turbo/ supercharger make this kind of improvement.
http://files.automotiveforums.com/gallery/watermark.php?file=/503/84778cargodz_Dyno_Test_sm.jpg
Everyone always asks for proof and I have yet to see any other electric turbo/ supercharger make this kind of improvement.
SaabJohan
12-07-2003, 01:52 PM
To do this you will need a boost pressure of at least 0.15 bar while giving 0.17 kg of air per second.
0.15 bar means at least a pressure ratio of 1.15. With an adiabatic efficiency of 70% (in reality probably lower) and an inlet temperature of 293 K the outlet temperature will be 310 K. This will require ((1*310)-(1*273))*0,17 = 6.29 kW, a 8,5 hp motor that is, and this is low calculated. The required power from the alternator would be 6.29/0.85 = 7.4 kW, at 14 Volts that is 528 Amps. A normal car alternator wouldn't be enough to power it and a fully charged "normal" car battery wouldn't last longer than approx 7 minutes.
0.17 kg/s is also only equal to about 400 cfm.
Unless the electric driven compressor had a motor with at least 8.5 hp this can all be desribed in one word; bullshit.
0.15 bar means at least a pressure ratio of 1.15. With an adiabatic efficiency of 70% (in reality probably lower) and an inlet temperature of 293 K the outlet temperature will be 310 K. This will require ((1*310)-(1*273))*0,17 = 6.29 kW, a 8,5 hp motor that is, and this is low calculated. The required power from the alternator would be 6.29/0.85 = 7.4 kW, at 14 Volts that is 528 Amps. A normal car alternator wouldn't be enough to power it and a fully charged "normal" car battery wouldn't last longer than approx 7 minutes.
0.17 kg/s is also only equal to about 400 cfm.
Unless the electric driven compressor had a motor with at least 8.5 hp this can all be desribed in one word; bullshit.
KC Ron Carter
12-07-2003, 02:30 PM
I also know a little about Dynos.
Here is a dyno run with FI.
http://www.kcrealtime.com/images/John_Dyno.bmp
That is a Dynomite Dyno in KC.
Yep, I own it.
http://kcrealtime.com
Never BS a BSer.
Oh, and this is the xitch slap I promised.
Later,
Here is a dyno run with FI.
http://www.kcrealtime.com/images/John_Dyno.bmp
That is a Dynomite Dyno in KC.
Yep, I own it.
http://kcrealtime.com
Never BS a BSer.
Oh, and this is the xitch slap I promised.
Later,
cargodzcc
12-07-2003, 04:34 PM
Say what you will about any theories or physics, but the proof is in the post. Everybodies always saying that they want to see it in black and white, that these things can't do what they claim. This is not some hyped up bilge pump you see on ebay people, somebody developed the real thing, we tested it to make sure that the claims actually stood up and now we are happy to sell them because this thing actually works. People always have doubts and we did too, we tryed those bilge pump things and yes they're junk, same with the -ram device also junk, but when I found out that the company that makes this electric turbo spent 4 years in developing it, it peaked my interest and it works. So take your head out of the books and step into the real world. Dyno Proven Results!!!
454Casull
12-08-2003, 03:19 PM
Say what you will about any theories or physics, but the proof is in the post. Everybodies always saying that they want to see it in black and white, that these things can't do what they claim. This is not some hyped up bilge pump you see on ebay people, somebody developed the real thing, we tested it to make sure that the claims actually stood up and now we are happy to sell them because this thing actually works. People always have doubts and we did too, we tryed those bilge pump things and yes they're junk, same with the -ram device also junk, but when I found out that the company that makes this electric turbo spent 4 years in developing it, it peaked my interest and it works. So take your head out of the books and step into the real world. Dyno Proven Results!!!
Hey bitch, lick my choda.
Hey bitch, lick my choda.
cargodzcc
12-08-2003, 06:08 PM
Open forum or not you don't have to be rude, I'm just trying to shed some light on a touchy subject. Now if you want to talk like that, please go do it at your local bar unless your afraid that someone might kick your A*s in, that case go kiss your mother with that mouth.
Hey bitch, lick my choda.
Hey bitch, lick my choda.
street freakz
12-08-2003, 11:35 PM
:banghead: its amazing that when you show the proof in a dyno, that people try to come up with this physics stuff. i have the formullas to prove this device. its amazing the defense that people will put up when their proven wrong. the dyno doesn't lie, so you can rattle off all the b.s. you want too, it doesn't matter. the proof is there, deal with it. weve recieved better results with the 4cyl. engines, because they take in less amounts of cfm at wide open throttle. so once again, you wanted the dyno results and you got them. by the way; what was that crayon dyno all about anyways? the one with all the pretty colors.
Sluttypatton
12-09-2003, 02:24 AM
How is the compressor output proportioned to the engines RPM? Turbo's are run by exhaust gasses, superchargers are run by belts, both create boost as a function of engine speed. The result is, higher RPM; more boost. Unless this "fan" is somehow controlled, it will be delivering the same amount of air at idle, as at high RPM. You would think this would create a wierd dyno reading. One would also need to get around the problem of the wierd fuel correction the motor would need.
Anyways, maybe I'm wrong and it does work. If it does...cool, I'm open to any new aftermarket addons.
Anyways, maybe I'm wrong and it does work. If it does...cool, I'm open to any new aftermarket addons.
street freakz
12-09-2003, 11:40 AM
the boost is not the priority with these units, they work like a ram air system would but in larger amounts of air. we still can use a bov with these & some people are. the wind speed on a single unit is 185mph. the twin is 370.4mph, and the lpm with the twin is over 44,000. as far as the fuel goes, the gm computers will automatically compensate for the air increases, just ask pro charger about their 4psi supercharger, there are no engine mods required for their system but the foreign applications require a reboot. we give the step by step instructions to do this with the e-turbo. unfortunately with the ford, mazda, & audi systems, their computers will not compensate for these.
SaabJohan
12-09-2003, 02:18 PM
The increase in static pressure, hence air density is what gives the extra power (15% power increase require usually around 15% density increase). Ram-air, centrifugal compressors, roots compressors and so on, they all works by increase the air density. Ram-air, centrifugal- as well as axial flow compressors works by increasing the kinetic energy of the air (by moving of high speed against the air or increase the speed of the air), when the speed of the flow is reduced the kinectic energy translates into a static pressure increase. This will increase the temperature of the air and with a given mass flow it will define the power consumption of a compressor.
Furthermore I haven't seen any proof, I have seen two power graphs without any information about MAP, airflow, intake temperatures or about the dyno itself. "Proof" don't goes against well known physics, and if they do they should have a damn good reason of why.
Furthermore I haven't seen any proof, I have seen two power graphs without any information about MAP, airflow, intake temperatures or about the dyno itself. "Proof" don't goes against well known physics, and if they do they should have a damn good reason of why.
street freakz
12-09-2003, 03:12 PM
:banghead: what part of the cargodz dyno don't you understand???? you can read, right? the info about the time tested, the car milage,type of car, everything is there. i don't care what your numbers say, the dyno doesn't lie. deal with it, you have been proven wrong.
street freakz
12-09-2003, 03:20 PM
:disappoin oh, i see whats going on now. since weve been proven wrong by the dyno, now were buckin at the credability of the dyno used. wow, your at the bottom of the excuses now. i won't argue physics with you people, the dyno doesn't lie.
street freakz
12-09-2003, 03:25 PM
:lol: if we went to hot rod with this and they dynoed the same car with the same dyno and got the same results. you would probobly accuse us of paying them off or some lame excuse like that.
cargodzcc
12-09-2003, 05:11 PM
It would seem that we have gathered the attention of the manufacturer of our famous electric turbo and this is wonderful for all of you that have all of these wonderful questions as he is the best to answer them. Yep, this is the man with the plan, and 4 years worth of development. This is the man that challenged us to prove him wrong. You nay sayer's know as well as we do that most of the stuff on the market is junk, but when we got what we did from the airflow meter and then the dyno, we were amazed and happy to eat our own words that it couldn't be done.
So if any of you have any more doubts, questions, or comments, please feel free to give them to "Street Freakz" as he has all of the answers, then when you've decided that this little blower is worth all the Hype come see us!
(we've said it before, "WE DON'T MAKE'EM, WE JUST SELL'EM & WE DON'T SELL IT IF IT DOESN'T WORK!")
P.S. what up Lee
So if any of you have any more doubts, questions, or comments, please feel free to give them to "Street Freakz" as he has all of the answers, then when you've decided that this little blower is worth all the Hype come see us!
(we've said it before, "WE DON'T MAKE'EM, WE JUST SELL'EM & WE DON'T SELL IT IF IT DOESN'T WORK!")
P.S. what up Lee
Sluttypatton
12-09-2003, 05:42 PM
So the compressor output isn't proportioned to engine speed? You failed to explain how the output is controlled. What would 44,000 lpm do to an engine at idle? Do you realize how much extra fuel would be needed to compensate for that much extra air at idle?
SaabJohan, correct me if I'm wrong here. A 2.0L engine would theoretically use 1490.56L of air @ 800RPM, with a stoich mixture. And @7000 RPM it would use 13042.56L, still not even half of the claimed output of the twin unit. The bottom line is that it would deliver far too much air at low RPM. Unless the output is proportioned, please better explain how this is done.
Also, street freakz, you said earlier "i have the formullas to prove this device"...please provide them. If you are the developer of this device that should be simple.
What are your credentials? Are you an engineer? Have you gone to post secondary school of any kind? Have you even finished secondary school? Your spelling and lack of proper punctuation seems to indicate that you haven't.
SaabJohan, correct me if I'm wrong here. A 2.0L engine would theoretically use 1490.56L of air @ 800RPM, with a stoich mixture. And @7000 RPM it would use 13042.56L, still not even half of the claimed output of the twin unit. The bottom line is that it would deliver far too much air at low RPM. Unless the output is proportioned, please better explain how this is done.
Also, street freakz, you said earlier "i have the formullas to prove this device"...please provide them. If you are the developer of this device that should be simple.
What are your credentials? Are you an engineer? Have you gone to post secondary school of any kind? Have you even finished secondary school? Your spelling and lack of proper punctuation seems to indicate that you haven't.
454Casull
12-09-2003, 06:03 PM
Do you have any pictures or the turbocharging unit itself? How about pictures of it taken apart? Installed in a car? During a run? During a run on a dyno? (I can fake a dyno pic showing 2000kW for my family minivan, so that doesn't suffice)
Furthermore,
Furthermore,
street freakz
12-09-2003, 08:34 PM
:screwy: well mike, it would seem that we now have a fake dyno. amazing isn't it. you give them proof and they question that. i wonder if i could ask vortec for a video dyno with god himself present , just to prove it correct. think that will work? as far as a dismantled pic? were not that stupid, we had the measurements at the website, but we had a problem of people trying to copycat. no, i'm not an engineer nor do i want to be one, we have jacobs engineering at wright patterson air force base doing that for us. we could give a video dyno & the formulla for these so-called boat blowers, but what would that do? leave the door open for another formulla to counter attack that one. were not stupid people. theres always a formulla to counter attack the one you have. it never ends. but hey, for a stupid hillbilly that can't spell correctly, i seem to have a device that nobody wants to admit works. hell when we told paxton what we had & offered a free one for them to test. they said no. we said , why not? if it doesn't work then it doesn't work. right? they said no. and i quot in their own fricken words. " IT"S A DIRECT THREAT" end quote. it would seem that we are wasting our time here. when you invent one thats better than ours , or thomas knights. let us know.
Sluttypatton
12-09-2003, 10:02 PM
First off, let me apologize for attacking your intelligence...this is a forum, and by definition is a place where differing opinions are shared.
But you still haven't explained the very first question I asked. It may very well be that your claims are true, but you haven't offered much concrete evidence, and have been evasive in answering our questions. Also, if your formulae are correct then no one will be able to offer another that attacks it, as that would be impossible. Just as if I were to say 2+2=4, you would be hard pressed to disprove it.
But you still haven't explained the very first question I asked. It may very well be that your claims are true, but you haven't offered much concrete evidence, and have been evasive in answering our questions. Also, if your formulae are correct then no one will be able to offer another that attacks it, as that would be impossible. Just as if I were to say 2+2=4, you would be hard pressed to disprove it.
KC Ron Carter
12-09-2003, 11:26 PM
http://www.express-cleaning-supplies.co.uk/shopbask/it010009.jpg
Numatic Edward Turbo Electric
1100 watt motor Capacity 9 litres surge chamber
Airflow 40 litres/sec Rugged construction
High efficiency filtration Turbo Electric + CAI
Lightweight and portable 4 wheel drive capable.
Please note the variable location RAM air inlet.
I can provide Dyno charts on request,
wideband 02 tuning charts are also available.
£150.19 is the expected renumeration
Limited range in this version, 2 meter cord.
Double you money back guarantied 200% range increase
in the next version.
Shipping and payment details http://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/x.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/x.gifShipping and handling: US $3.00 (within United States)
Buyer pays for all shipping costs Shipping insurance: Not offered Will ship to United States only. Seller's payment instructions & return policy:
I accept all major credit cards payment through PayPal. Please use my registered PayPal and e-mail address. My PayPal ID is "kcroncarter@kc.rr.com" Shipping within 2 days. On checks shipping within 5 days of check receipt.
http://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/x.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/x.gifPayment methods accepted http://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/x.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/x.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/bullet_blk.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/paypal/1_paypal_71x20.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/paypal/1_parenLeft_7x20.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/paypal/1_visaUS_28x20.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/paypal/1_discover_22x20.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/paypal/1_mstrcrdUS_23x20.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/paypal/1_amex_23x20.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/paypal/1_echeck_23x20.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/paypal/1_ebayAny_27x20.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/paypal/1_parenRight_7x20.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/bullet_blk.gifPersonal checkhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/bullet_blk.gifMoney order/Cashiers checkhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/bullet_blk.gifSee item description for payment methods accepted
Numatic Edward Turbo Electric
1100 watt motor Capacity 9 litres surge chamber
Airflow 40 litres/sec Rugged construction
High efficiency filtration Turbo Electric + CAI
Lightweight and portable 4 wheel drive capable.
Please note the variable location RAM air inlet.
I can provide Dyno charts on request,
wideband 02 tuning charts are also available.
£150.19 is the expected renumeration
Limited range in this version, 2 meter cord.
Double you money back guarantied 200% range increase
in the next version.
Shipping and payment details http://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/x.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/x.gifShipping and handling: US $3.00 (within United States)
Buyer pays for all shipping costs Shipping insurance: Not offered Will ship to United States only. Seller's payment instructions & return policy:
I accept all major credit cards payment through PayPal. Please use my registered PayPal and e-mail address. My PayPal ID is "kcroncarter@kc.rr.com" Shipping within 2 days. On checks shipping within 5 days of check receipt.
http://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/x.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/x.gifPayment methods accepted http://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/x.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/x.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/bullet_blk.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/paypal/1_paypal_71x20.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/paypal/1_parenLeft_7x20.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/paypal/1_visaUS_28x20.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/paypal/1_discover_22x20.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/paypal/1_mstrcrdUS_23x20.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/paypal/1_amex_23x20.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/paypal/1_echeck_23x20.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/paypal/1_ebayAny_27x20.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/paypal/1_parenRight_7x20.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/bullet_blk.gifPersonal checkhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/bullet_blk.gifMoney order/Cashiers checkhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/bullet_blk.gifSee item description for payment methods accepted
street freakz
12-09-2003, 11:41 PM
:icon16: the effect at idle speed has yet to be harmfull. since the throttle is more than 3/4 the way closed. we recomend at the site to use a 3,000 rpm activation switch, but have found that most people want them on at idle, we don't know why. so thats the reason why we do alot of testing at idle speed. the dyno that was done on the regal, was done while the blower was on at idle, but the hp gains were not very effective until the 3,000 rpm & up range. i have a twin setup on my cavalier & i run them at idle on occasion, but mostly i will activate them at around 35mph. the injectors will not compensate for the advanced air flow until the throttle is opened up, so at the idle speed when the throttle is 3/4 the way closed all that is actually happening is the air tube is being pressurized. nothing more.
street freakz
12-09-2003, 11:48 PM
:rofl: cute vacuum ron. that will go great with your bmw.
street freakz
12-10-2003, 11:31 AM
:sly: turbo flow calculations; n=pv/(rt) n=psi level of turbo, p=atmospheric pressure of the engine, v= cfm of turbo, r=constant, t= rankine temp/absolute temp.(460+outside temp) /=divided by. (14.7x803)/(10.73x510) (11804.1/5472.3)= 2.15 n=2.15psi we used 50 degrees for the outside temp. e-turbo hp formulla--e-turbo cfm x engine litres divided by 1/2 the wheel hp. ''example'' 96 cavalier--803x2.2/45=39.2hp gain. this car g-teched a 40hp gain.
Polygon
12-10-2003, 12:17 PM
The big problem with the dyno slip is that you could have had other mods done to the car and we wouldn't know. How are we to know that the power increase was solely from your electric turbo? I would have to see it for myself in person to believe it.
street freakz
12-10-2003, 12:55 PM
:banghead: once again i ask you unbelievers to fully read the dyno!! there was a 23min time frame between the 2 runs, what devise is available for a 3.8litre V-6 that can be installed in less than 25min???? there are very very few performance items available for any V-6. especially a buick regal. give me a fricken break people.
Polygon
12-10-2003, 02:47 PM
I'm sorry, but I am just a very skeptical person, besides a lot of devices have come before yours that will make it very hard for you to convince people.
street freakz
12-10-2003, 03:05 PM
:iceslolan yes, we understand that fully. weve been fighting this for years now. hell, we went through 4 designs before we actually got something that worked. the e-bay scams have put a major toll on us. i think it should be illegal to sell a bildge pump as an e-charger. and the warnings of a patent violation have grown old too, theres always someone trying this bildge pump thing. were not trying to rip anybody off here. the motor has a 1year warranty & the turbo housing and our new intake tubes have a lifetime warranty.
cargodzcc
12-10-2003, 03:59 PM
For all of you that said that it was a fake, let me say "Please get real!".
If we were going to go to all of the trouble to try and make a fake dyno why would we claim only 25.9 horsepower. I mean come on people think about it, we would have said 50 on up to 75 horsepower if we were trying to swindle everyone. Also if it didn't work why would Street Freakz offer a warranty with it, yes I did say you get a WARRANTY!
And now on to the topic of what was done to the car, almost nothing! I should know, it's my car. The 1st test shows the car on the dyno with nothing more than a K&N air filter and a high flow exhaust. The 2nd test shows it with the Electric Turbo installed. Both tests were done in 2nd gear which you can also see on the dyno sheet and both done with the car semi-cool so as to have nothing different (for all of you that are about to ask what semi-cool is, it means that the engine only had enough time to cool so as to work on it). :smile:
P.S. you want to see them installed on cars go to the link below and go to the punch it catagory. You will see the unit itself and on the cars along with the airflow test that we did, you can see the twin setup too.
If we were going to go to all of the trouble to try and make a fake dyno why would we claim only 25.9 horsepower. I mean come on people think about it, we would have said 50 on up to 75 horsepower if we were trying to swindle everyone. Also if it didn't work why would Street Freakz offer a warranty with it, yes I did say you get a WARRANTY!
And now on to the topic of what was done to the car, almost nothing! I should know, it's my car. The 1st test shows the car on the dyno with nothing more than a K&N air filter and a high flow exhaust. The 2nd test shows it with the Electric Turbo installed. Both tests were done in 2nd gear which you can also see on the dyno sheet and both done with the car semi-cool so as to have nothing different (for all of you that are about to ask what semi-cool is, it means that the engine only had enough time to cool so as to work on it). :smile:
P.S. you want to see them installed on cars go to the link below and go to the punch it catagory. You will see the unit itself and on the cars along with the airflow test that we did, you can see the twin setup too.
454Casull
12-10-2003, 08:00 PM
:banghead: once again i ask you unbelievers to fully read the dyno!! there was a 23min time frame between the 2 runs, what devise is available for a 3.8litre V-6 that can be installed in less than 25min???? there are very very few performance items available for any V-6. especially a buick regal. give me a fricken break people.
Any aspect of a dyno chart can be modified. I could draw in the power/torque curves if I really wanted to.
Sorry, but no dyno chart will convince me that your electric "turbo" (turbo comes from turbine, so unless you have a turbine hooked up somewhere it's not a turbo, it's a supercharger) exists and/or works and/or works effectively.
Any aspect of a dyno chart can be modified. I could draw in the power/torque curves if I really wanted to.
Sorry, but no dyno chart will convince me that your electric "turbo" (turbo comes from turbine, so unless you have a turbine hooked up somewhere it's not a turbo, it's a supercharger) exists and/or works and/or works effectively.
street freakz
12-10-2003, 09:29 PM
:lol: well, if thats what you want to believe then thats fine too. we gave you what you asked for, and you still deny this. no problem. and by the way, according to webster. turbo/supercharger; any devise that forces air into an internal combustion engine to create hp.
supratt6s
12-10-2003, 10:15 PM
I read through this and started to laugh my ass off, not at the turbos, but you other guys! I know all of you THINK you know what and how turbos works. Yes, a turbo contains a turbine inside of shell that is spun by exhaust fumes that spins an axil attached to an axil flow compressor wheel. I personally contacted Greddy Turbos and asked them the stats of one of their high hp turbo. It created 12 psi and 600 cfm. There are two different types of psi. A-psi and G-psi. A-psi is atmospheric pressure and G-psi is gauge psi meaning the gauge's 0 is really 14.7 (atmospheric pressure). It is proven that 7 psi increases hp by 50%. If you passed math you will figure out that 2 psi with create a little over 14% hp increase. I believe someone already put down the equation for psi at a cfm rate. n=pv/(rt). Which equalled a little over 2 psi. There is also an equation for hp gain from cfm alone. hp=[cfm(engine lt.)]/half hp. Now you combine the cfm hp gain and psi gain for a total hp gain. Then you take away 10% of that from the flywheel. And if you have an auto, another 10% from the trans. I would love and actually pay someone to show me an equation proving these wrong. None of you understand ot know fluid dynamics. A 22 blade fan with a 45 degree pitch spinning at 22,000 rpms will create what it claims. Do the damn math. If your all so smart (LMAO), GIVE ME PROOF, EQUATIONS, ETC.... That little equation from SaabJohan only proved one thing, that he's a dumbass. And someone also said that exhaust driven turbos progressivley increase their airflow, well no shit, it feeds off of the engine. These e-turbos feed off of their own motor, not the car's. Use your little heads and think of this, 2 pounds of air per square inch traveling at 803 cubic feet per minute, how can that not create hp when it DYNO PROVEN AND FROM PHYSICS? and Sluttypatton, hahahahahaha. You're funny. There's something called a constant rate, heard of that? A car sitting at idel with these going will have to give the same amount of gas-to-air ratio as if it would at 6,000 rpms. No compensation there. This is is funny i can hardly breathe. If anyone wants to challenge me on knowledge of a turbo, email me (nickgiggey@comcast.net) or just reply. And like they said, this isn't a modified version of a turbo. I don't know why you are comparing the aspects of them together. Well no shit these will pregressively create a highe level of airflow compared to the engine combustion. These create a constant airflow. A standard car requires 250 cfm of air. This turbo gives 803 cfm, that's a 553 cfm increase. But noooooooo.... that wont give any hp gains, not at all. LMAO. And someone braught up something about it not having a turbine or a compressor wheel. Do i need to explain this slowly to u? The turbo isn't a turbine, it containes a turbine. A turbine is what catches the exhaust air and spins the compressor wheel. Yes i bet you knew that. But i can bet you don't know how a compressor wheel works or what it actually is. A compressor wheel IS A FAN. There are two kinds of fan used for a turbo. An axil fan and a compressor fan. Axil fans were stopped being used in turbos a long time ago because of the little psi given and the air restriction. So the compressor fan was used a lot more. A compressor fan comtains blades that has something called a pitch or a curve, that's where 75% of the psi comes from. A compressor fan has pitche blades that spin parallel to the object directed towards. An axil flow fan spins perpindicular and also has a pitch in it's blades. There have been over 15 different types of compressor fans used in turbos. Some you probably have never even seen. Some are to create cfm and some are to create psi. This compressor fan is made to create cfm over psi. Two totally different aspects of what your all talking about. And no, neither the exhaust driven turbos or the e-turbo will restrict the intake air flow when either aren't spinning. I've seen both. I'll post again later if more dumbasses decide they THINK they know more than me and can prove me wrong.
supratt6s
12-10-2003, 10:29 PM
one more thing, if i'm not mistaken, this would create little to no strain on the engine. Every second the car wastes 18 amps that's converted to heat. These were designed to take the wasted energy and use it. Also, i still don't get where you don't understand that the motor only uses 16-17 amps of engery. Really i don't, it confuses me. Let me relate this to something else that maybe will help out a little, it's not the best example, but it may help. lets say you have a portable cd palyer. You pop in a few batteries and turn it on. lets say it uses 3. It constantly just uses three. So now when you turn up the volume do u have to add mroe batteries NO! It does not add strain or use more energy to turn up the volume. That was actually proven with studies. So when they have a graph (which i've seen) tha shows a FlowMeter testing it at 803 cfm with a 17 amp draw, you can't deny it. Also with this fake dyno thing. These people came on here to show u the new light, not to scam you. They didn't come in here giving prices and deals, they gave staight info and asked what you all would think if you found one that worked, that's all. I personally in that situation wouldn't make a fake dyno when i'm not promoting anything but the first actual working e-turbo. And by the way all, I HAVE ONE IN MY CAR AND GOT A 33 HP INCREASE. Have a happy holiday all
SaabJohan
12-10-2003, 10:37 PM
First, since some people don't seems to know this; dynos cannot lie but their results can be incorrect. That paper isn't prooving anything, add information about inlet temperature (before and after the compressor), oil temperature, water temperature, currant of the power that drives the compressor and probably most important MAP since this will tell if the compressor can increase the density of the air at all, and then we will have something to start with. The standard used for the dyno test must be specified.
The power consumption of a compressor depends basicly on compressor ratio and massflow, power need increase when any of them increase. Furthermore, a compressor can't run with a high pressure ratio at low massflow, then it will go into surge. That's what makes the chirping sound of a turboengine when releasing the throttle after boost. So running an electric driven compressor at idle will require about the same electric power that peak power does, the difference is that the flow will be low so the pressure ratio will increase (since the electic motor will deliver the same power at all time unless the current or voltage to it is changed) - not good (remember the surge).
A typical 170 hp engine consumes 0.13 kg of air per second at 20 degrees C. The "electric driven compressors" I've seen have not have a power exceeding 1 kW, possibly 1.5 kW for two. With this power the maximum pressure ratio would be 1.09 giving an outlet temperature of 30.3 degrees C. This can increase the maximum power from around 170 to 180 hp.
street freakz: your use of the gas law is incorrect, an explaination:
By using your formula you can calculate the mass of a certain volume, V of air (or any gas if you like) at a certain pressure, p and temperature, T:
m = pV / ( RT )
m (or n if you like that better) isn't the pressure a compressor will give, it's the massflow. For your fan, in S.I. units and at atmospheric pressure it will give 0.44 kg/s at "no load".
If the flow of the compressor is 800 cfm "unloaded" it won't be that high when it's "loaded". The flow of the compressor will at all times be equal to the flow of the engine and the flow of the engine can be estimated with pressure ratio*original flow of the engine.
Your hp formula I will not even get into, but you can get a rough esimation of the power by muliplying the power with the pressure ratio. But the temperature increase over the compressor will cause the density to drop, and therefore also the pressure.
When we increase the pressure of a gas its temperature will rise. If we for example wants to increase the pressure from one to two atmospheres (pressure ratio of 2) at 273 K the temperature will rise to at least 332 K, but since the efficiency isn't 100% it will rise even more, for an adiabatic efficiency of 75% (typical turbocharger compressor) it will rise to 352 K or it has risen 79 K (or degrees C if wanted).
To rise the temperature we will need to add energy. Air requires about 1 kJ/(kg*K), the exact number (well, in theory as an ideal gas) depends if the process is done at constant volume or constant pressure. So to rise the temperature by 79 K it will require the specific work 79 kJ/kg. If we now add a massflow to that, let's say 0.13 kg/s (enough for about 170 hp); 79 kJ/kg*0.13 kg/s = 10.27 kJ/s = 10.27 kW or about 14 hp.
For some compressors the power consumption is huge. Lets take a Top Fuel dragster as an example. A Top Fuel requires 2.5 kg air per second, they have a roots blower running with approx. 50% efficiency and 4 in pressure ratio. The temperature will rise about 262 K so the head will be 262 kJ/kg. The power needed to run the supercharger will be 650 kW or 900 hp.
With "load" I mean a pressure ratio that is greater than 1. It's like pumping the tires in a bike, the higher the pressure gets, the harder you will need to work.
The power consumption of a compressor depends basicly on compressor ratio and massflow, power need increase when any of them increase. Furthermore, a compressor can't run with a high pressure ratio at low massflow, then it will go into surge. That's what makes the chirping sound of a turboengine when releasing the throttle after boost. So running an electric driven compressor at idle will require about the same electric power that peak power does, the difference is that the flow will be low so the pressure ratio will increase (since the electic motor will deliver the same power at all time unless the current or voltage to it is changed) - not good (remember the surge).
A typical 170 hp engine consumes 0.13 kg of air per second at 20 degrees C. The "electric driven compressors" I've seen have not have a power exceeding 1 kW, possibly 1.5 kW for two. With this power the maximum pressure ratio would be 1.09 giving an outlet temperature of 30.3 degrees C. This can increase the maximum power from around 170 to 180 hp.
street freakz: your use of the gas law is incorrect, an explaination:
By using your formula you can calculate the mass of a certain volume, V of air (or any gas if you like) at a certain pressure, p and temperature, T:
m = pV / ( RT )
m (or n if you like that better) isn't the pressure a compressor will give, it's the massflow. For your fan, in S.I. units and at atmospheric pressure it will give 0.44 kg/s at "no load".
If the flow of the compressor is 800 cfm "unloaded" it won't be that high when it's "loaded". The flow of the compressor will at all times be equal to the flow of the engine and the flow of the engine can be estimated with pressure ratio*original flow of the engine.
Your hp formula I will not even get into, but you can get a rough esimation of the power by muliplying the power with the pressure ratio. But the temperature increase over the compressor will cause the density to drop, and therefore also the pressure.
When we increase the pressure of a gas its temperature will rise. If we for example wants to increase the pressure from one to two atmospheres (pressure ratio of 2) at 273 K the temperature will rise to at least 332 K, but since the efficiency isn't 100% it will rise even more, for an adiabatic efficiency of 75% (typical turbocharger compressor) it will rise to 352 K or it has risen 79 K (or degrees C if wanted).
To rise the temperature we will need to add energy. Air requires about 1 kJ/(kg*K), the exact number (well, in theory as an ideal gas) depends if the process is done at constant volume or constant pressure. So to rise the temperature by 79 K it will require the specific work 79 kJ/kg. If we now add a massflow to that, let's say 0.13 kg/s (enough for about 170 hp); 79 kJ/kg*0.13 kg/s = 10.27 kJ/s = 10.27 kW or about 14 hp.
For some compressors the power consumption is huge. Lets take a Top Fuel dragster as an example. A Top Fuel requires 2.5 kg air per second, they have a roots blower running with approx. 50% efficiency and 4 in pressure ratio. The temperature will rise about 262 K so the head will be 262 kJ/kg. The power needed to run the supercharger will be 650 kW or 900 hp.
With "load" I mean a pressure ratio that is greater than 1. It's like pumping the tires in a bike, the higher the pressure gets, the harder you will need to work.
SaabJohan
12-10-2003, 10:49 PM
That little equation from SaabJohan only proved one thing, that he's a dumbass.
Well, I guess it's just me and the other dumbasses that works with compressor development that uses them...
By the way, a compressor isn't a fan, or the other way around.
Well, I guess it's just me and the other dumbasses that works with compressor development that uses them...
By the way, a compressor isn't a fan, or the other way around.
street freakz
12-10-2003, 11:13 PM
:disappoin like i said before, there is always a formulla to counter attack the one you have. every auto performance mod made has a dyno sheet. thats what everybody goes by. they have theirs & we have ours. the bottom line is this people, you will believe what you want to believe no matter whats put in front of you. i don't give a damn about your physics. the proof is there. and lots of positive feeback from customers with their own dyno's too. i suppose i should tell them that their dynos are wrong & that they have been tampered with. "idiots"
street freakz
12-10-2003, 11:19 PM
:p oh, i just wanted to say , thanks for your time. contact us when you wake up. there will be an article in max power magazine in the uk about our " E- TURBO" in 2 weeks. thats right, global attention.
Sluttypatton
12-11-2003, 01:52 AM
You say that these turbo's feed off thier own motor...no one disputed that, the fact remains that a turbocharged motor works because boost increases and decreases proportionately to the motors RPM. We have already been told that this compressor is running at full output as long as it is switched on...that means that the same amount of air is being delivered all of the time. Lets walk through the problem I have with this.
A 2 liter motor can theoretically use 2 liters of air fuel mixture per cycle (a cycle is all four strokes). Hence the name, 2 liter. So to find out how much air, in liters, a 2 liter motor would use at various RPM's we multiply the engine displacement by the engine RPM. So 2 liters multiplied by 800 RPM equals 1600 liters. This means that a two liter would theoretically intake 2 liters of air in one minute at a constant 800 RPM. Now we see that at 6000 RPM the motor would intake 12000 liters of air. It has been claimed that this device can move 44000 liters of air per minute, 72% more air than this motor would use even at 6000 RPM. We have also been told that this unit constantly runs at full output, meaning that regardless of engine RPM the compressor is always moving 44000 liters of air per minute. So when the motors speed decreases to 800 RPM (idle) and the engine only needs 1600 liters of air, the compressor will still be trying to force 44000 liters of air down it's throat. So let's ignore the possibility that some of this may get by the throttle plate, and assume that it all backs up against the throttle plate. Think about how this compressor will handle all of that air being forced, counter flow, back out. Okay, now imagine at 1000 RPM, WOT. How much of that 44000 liters do you think will be forced into the motor? What effect will that have when the motor will only need 2000 liters of air? The motor would go so lean, I don't even think it would run. This is why I don't see how a constant output compressor could ever work. Of course I left out the matter of fuel taking up space in an atmospheric engine, and volumetric efficiency, but the math is close enough for our purposes.
But you are right about one thing, a car sitting at idle will have the same Air/Fuel ratio as one at 6000 RPM, that is why it is called a ratio. The more air in the motor, the more fuel is needed to keep that ratio static. But when you're force feeding an idling motor 44000 Lpm, it's gonna be hard for the fuel system to keep up with that.
By the way, good luck street freakz (honestly), and I will keep my mind open. Perhaps when this product becomes big, I'll believe it.
Also, a turbocharger is a type of supercharger. The difference is that a turbocharger uses a turbine to power the compressor. No turbine=no turbocharger. It's just a supercharger.
A 2 liter motor can theoretically use 2 liters of air fuel mixture per cycle (a cycle is all four strokes). Hence the name, 2 liter. So to find out how much air, in liters, a 2 liter motor would use at various RPM's we multiply the engine displacement by the engine RPM. So 2 liters multiplied by 800 RPM equals 1600 liters. This means that a two liter would theoretically intake 2 liters of air in one minute at a constant 800 RPM. Now we see that at 6000 RPM the motor would intake 12000 liters of air. It has been claimed that this device can move 44000 liters of air per minute, 72% more air than this motor would use even at 6000 RPM. We have also been told that this unit constantly runs at full output, meaning that regardless of engine RPM the compressor is always moving 44000 liters of air per minute. So when the motors speed decreases to 800 RPM (idle) and the engine only needs 1600 liters of air, the compressor will still be trying to force 44000 liters of air down it's throat. So let's ignore the possibility that some of this may get by the throttle plate, and assume that it all backs up against the throttle plate. Think about how this compressor will handle all of that air being forced, counter flow, back out. Okay, now imagine at 1000 RPM, WOT. How much of that 44000 liters do you think will be forced into the motor? What effect will that have when the motor will only need 2000 liters of air? The motor would go so lean, I don't even think it would run. This is why I don't see how a constant output compressor could ever work. Of course I left out the matter of fuel taking up space in an atmospheric engine, and volumetric efficiency, but the math is close enough for our purposes.
But you are right about one thing, a car sitting at idle will have the same Air/Fuel ratio as one at 6000 RPM, that is why it is called a ratio. The more air in the motor, the more fuel is needed to keep that ratio static. But when you're force feeding an idling motor 44000 Lpm, it's gonna be hard for the fuel system to keep up with that.
By the way, good luck street freakz (honestly), and I will keep my mind open. Perhaps when this product becomes big, I'll believe it.
Also, a turbocharger is a type of supercharger. The difference is that a turbocharger uses a turbine to power the compressor. No turbine=no turbocharger. It's just a supercharger.
Sluttypatton
12-11-2003, 04:48 AM
By the way, Supratt6s, how are you affiliated with Cargodz custom concepts?
Neutrino
12-11-2003, 09:52 AM
Ok i'll jump on the bandwagon too...
and i fully agree with patton...how the heck can that engine run with so much air forced into it...there is no way the ecu will be able to compensate stock...
show me one good aftermaket turbo kit (even a low psi one) that will not require a reflash, chip, pigiback or some sort of fuel compesation...there is nothing more dangerous for an engine that running lean
second how do you plan to handle the presure build up against a closed plate...are you going to use a blow off valve?
third all those problems would be easily solved with a rpm sensitive electrical engine...its not that hard to determine the engine speed and modify your fan's speed acordingly....or change the blade pitch accordingly...
and i fully agree with patton...how the heck can that engine run with so much air forced into it...there is no way the ecu will be able to compensate stock...
show me one good aftermaket turbo kit (even a low psi one) that will not require a reflash, chip, pigiback or some sort of fuel compesation...there is nothing more dangerous for an engine that running lean
second how do you plan to handle the presure build up against a closed plate...are you going to use a blow off valve?
third all those problems would be easily solved with a rpm sensitive electrical engine...its not that hard to determine the engine speed and modify your fan's speed acordingly....or change the blade pitch accordingly...
street freakz
12-11-2003, 11:35 AM
weve never tested a twin setup on the dyno before, only at the local race track. when the results came up at the end of the track, nobody believed that neither & the proof in front of their damn faces. they accused the track of having a faulty system. its amazing what levels that people will go to , to ignore this devise.the twins put out the 44,000lpm. you can use a bov with the twins, & we have a special one for the single unit. for you f&f people that want that pretty sound. the motor was designed to dead head at a closed throttle position, in other words the motor will hold the pressure in the tube but will no longer draw any air in. you can block the inlet and outlet openings on these units while their activated and they will not burn up. they have a thermo switch in them to prevent this. we also give you an instruction sheet to reboot or reflash your computer, however you want to refer to it. the fords, mazdas, and audis have to go to the dealer ship to have this done, their computers are hack proof. i'm sure there will be someone to question this also, but i called to verify just in case, "a ram-air hood will give approx. 20hp while the vehicle is traveling at speeds of 150mph or better". but for some reason, you think that a devise pushing air in at 185mph (single unit) will do nothing at all????????? but what the hell, right? we are only telling people of this devise, we have 3 people out of 5,000 that cry no way. so we will no longer waste your time. weve proven ourselves and thats all that matters. by the way, i can't call it an electric supercharger. ever heard of patent claim violations before???
Neutrino
12-11-2003, 11:58 AM
weve never tested a twin setup on the dyno before, only at the local race track. when the results came up at the end of the track, nobody believed that neither & the proof in front of their damn faces. they accused the track of having a faulty system. its amazing what levels that people will go to , to ignore this devise.the twins put out the 44,000lpm. you can use a bov with the twins, & we have a special one for the single unit. for you f&f people that want that pretty sound. the motor was designed to dead head at a closed throttle position, in other words the motor will hold the pressure in the tube but will no longer draw any air in. you can block the inlet and outlet openings on these units while their activated and they will not burn up. they have a thermo switch in them to prevent this. we also give you an instruction sheet to reboot or reflash your computer, however you want to refer to it. the fords, mazdas, and audis have to go to the dealer ship to have this done, their computers are hack proof. i'm sure there will be someone to question this also, but i called to verify just in case, "a ram-air hood will give approx. 20hp while the vehicle is traveling at speeds of 150mph or better". but for some reason, you think that a devise pushing air in at 185mph (single unit) will do nothing at all????????? but what the hell, right? we are only telling people of this devise, we have 3 people out of 5,000 that cry no way. so we will no longer waste your time. weve proven ourselves and thats all that matters. by the way, i can't call it an electric supercharger. ever heard of patent claim violations before???
ok first of all...we are not one of them f&f furious people...the reason i asked about a blow off valve is because the only way i could see your compressor putting out boost against a close throtle body would be with a blow off valve/ diverter valve.....otherwise the presure woud mount to insane levels
ok and i don't understand....how you get around this....from what i could understand from your explanation you divert the air around your turbine or what?
oh and you say you are going to give instructions for ecu reflash....does that include new ignition maps, injector pulses etc.....
and you still did not explain why you guys did not just made the turbine spool or change the blade pitch...dependant on engine rpm and throtle position?
ok first of all...we are not one of them f&f furious people...the reason i asked about a blow off valve is because the only way i could see your compressor putting out boost against a close throtle body would be with a blow off valve/ diverter valve.....otherwise the presure woud mount to insane levels
ok and i don't understand....how you get around this....from what i could understand from your explanation you divert the air around your turbine or what?
oh and you say you are going to give instructions for ecu reflash....does that include new ignition maps, injector pulses etc.....
and you still did not explain why you guys did not just made the turbine spool or change the blade pitch...dependant on engine rpm and throtle position?
cargodzcc
12-11-2003, 02:13 PM
I could have sworn that I stated this before, and it was pointed out, but since you didn't catch it I'll repeat myself. There was only a 23 minute difference between dyno runs and the 1st run and 2nd run were done with the car semi-cool in other words the motor was just cooled down enough to work on it. I'm sure if we had popped the radiator cap either time we would have been covered in coolant. Both test were done in 2nd gear, so I dont see any difference between the 2 runs, no temperature change, nothing!
And for all of you wondering about supratt, we have no affiliation, have never met, and he didn't buy it from us. Chances are that he got it from one of the older dealers that used to be allowed to carry this line.
First, since some people don't seems to know this; dynos cannot lie but their results can be incorrect. That paper isn't prooving anything, add information about inlet temperature (before and after the compressor), oil temperature, water temperature, currant of the power that drives the compressor and probably most important MAP since this will tell if the compressor can increase the density of the air at all, and then we will have something to start with. The standard used for the dyno test must be specified.
The power consumption of a compressor depends basicly on compressor ratio and massflow, power need increase when any of them increase. Furthermore, a compressor can't run with a high pressure ratio at low massflow, then it will go into surge. That's what makes the chirping sound of a turboengine when releasing the throttle after boost. So running an electric driven compressor at idle will require about the same electric power that peak power does, the difference is that the flow will be low so the pressure ratio will increase (since the electic motor will deliver the same power at all time unless the current or voltage to it is changed) - not good (remember the surge).
A typical 170 hp engine consumes 0.13 kg of air per second at 20 degrees C. The "electric driven compressors" I've seen have not have a power exceeding 1 kW, possibly 1.5 kW for two. With this power the maximum pressure ratio would be 1.09 giving an outlet temperature of 30.3 degrees C. This can increase the maximum power from around 170 to 180 hp.
street freakz: your use of the gas law is incorrect, an explaination:
By using your formula you can calculate the mass of a certain volume, V of air (or any gas if you like) at a certain pressure, p and temperature, T:
m = pV / ( RT )
m (or n if you like that better) isn't the pressure a compressor will give, it's the massflow. For your fan, in S.I. units and at atmospheric pressure it will give 0.44 kg/s at "no load".
If the flow of the compressor is 800 cfm "unloaded" it won't be that high when it's "loaded". The flow of the compressor will at all times be equal to the flow of the engine and the flow of the engine can be estimated with pressure ratio*original flow of the engine.
Your hp formula I will not even get into, but you can get a rough esimation of the power by muliplying the power with the pressure ratio. But the temperature increase over the compressor will cause the density to drop, and therefore also the pressure.
When we increase the pressure of a gas its temperature will rise. If we for example wants to increase the pressure from one to two atmospheres (pressure ratio of 2) at 273 K the temperature will rise to at least 332 K, but since the efficiency isn't 100% it will rise even more, for an adiabatic efficiency of 75% (typical turbocharger compressor) it will rise to 352 K or it has risen 79 K (or degrees C if wanted).
To rise the temperature we will need to add energy. Air requires about 1 kJ/(kg*K), the exact number (well, in theory as an ideal gas) depends if the process is done at constant volume or constant pressure. So to rise the temperature by 79 K it will require the specific work 79 kJ/kg. If we now add a massflow to that, let's say 0.13 kg/s (enough for about 170 hp); 79 kJ/kg*0.13 kg/s = 10.27 kJ/s = 10.27 kW or about 14 hp.
For some compressors the power consumption is huge. Lets take a Top Fuel dragster as an example. A Top Fuel requires 2.5 kg air per second, they have a roots blower running with approx. 50% efficiency and 4 in pressure ratio. The temperature will rise about 262 K so the head will be 262 kJ/kg. The power needed to run the supercharger will be 650 kW or 900 hp.
With "load" I mean a pressure ratio that is greater than 1. It's like pumping the tires in a bike, the higher the pressure gets, the harder you will need to work.
And for all of you wondering about supratt, we have no affiliation, have never met, and he didn't buy it from us. Chances are that he got it from one of the older dealers that used to be allowed to carry this line.
First, since some people don't seems to know this; dynos cannot lie but their results can be incorrect. That paper isn't prooving anything, add information about inlet temperature (before and after the compressor), oil temperature, water temperature, currant of the power that drives the compressor and probably most important MAP since this will tell if the compressor can increase the density of the air at all, and then we will have something to start with. The standard used for the dyno test must be specified.
The power consumption of a compressor depends basicly on compressor ratio and massflow, power need increase when any of them increase. Furthermore, a compressor can't run with a high pressure ratio at low massflow, then it will go into surge. That's what makes the chirping sound of a turboengine when releasing the throttle after boost. So running an electric driven compressor at idle will require about the same electric power that peak power does, the difference is that the flow will be low so the pressure ratio will increase (since the electic motor will deliver the same power at all time unless the current or voltage to it is changed) - not good (remember the surge).
A typical 170 hp engine consumes 0.13 kg of air per second at 20 degrees C. The "electric driven compressors" I've seen have not have a power exceeding 1 kW, possibly 1.5 kW for two. With this power the maximum pressure ratio would be 1.09 giving an outlet temperature of 30.3 degrees C. This can increase the maximum power from around 170 to 180 hp.
street freakz: your use of the gas law is incorrect, an explaination:
By using your formula you can calculate the mass of a certain volume, V of air (or any gas if you like) at a certain pressure, p and temperature, T:
m = pV / ( RT )
m (or n if you like that better) isn't the pressure a compressor will give, it's the massflow. For your fan, in S.I. units and at atmospheric pressure it will give 0.44 kg/s at "no load".
If the flow of the compressor is 800 cfm "unloaded" it won't be that high when it's "loaded". The flow of the compressor will at all times be equal to the flow of the engine and the flow of the engine can be estimated with pressure ratio*original flow of the engine.
Your hp formula I will not even get into, but you can get a rough esimation of the power by muliplying the power with the pressure ratio. But the temperature increase over the compressor will cause the density to drop, and therefore also the pressure.
When we increase the pressure of a gas its temperature will rise. If we for example wants to increase the pressure from one to two atmospheres (pressure ratio of 2) at 273 K the temperature will rise to at least 332 K, but since the efficiency isn't 100% it will rise even more, for an adiabatic efficiency of 75% (typical turbocharger compressor) it will rise to 352 K or it has risen 79 K (or degrees C if wanted).
To rise the temperature we will need to add energy. Air requires about 1 kJ/(kg*K), the exact number (well, in theory as an ideal gas) depends if the process is done at constant volume or constant pressure. So to rise the temperature by 79 K it will require the specific work 79 kJ/kg. If we now add a massflow to that, let's say 0.13 kg/s (enough for about 170 hp); 79 kJ/kg*0.13 kg/s = 10.27 kJ/s = 10.27 kW or about 14 hp.
For some compressors the power consumption is huge. Lets take a Top Fuel dragster as an example. A Top Fuel requires 2.5 kg air per second, they have a roots blower running with approx. 50% efficiency and 4 in pressure ratio. The temperature will rise about 262 K so the head will be 262 kJ/kg. The power needed to run the supercharger will be 650 kW or 900 hp.
With "load" I mean a pressure ratio that is greater than 1. It's like pumping the tires in a bike, the higher the pressure gets, the harder you will need to work.
cargodzcc
12-11-2003, 02:16 PM
Another thing I'd like to say is that even though we have no affiliation with supratt6s is that I would like to thank him for the physics lesson. :smokin:
cargodzcc
12-11-2003, 02:35 PM
Actually we have found that the GM car's ECU will compensate quite easy on it's own, alot of the others do need the reboot though. Now as far as the compensation itself you have to look at it in weather related terms. Think about how your car is able to adjust one day to the next, one day it's cold (denser air) the next warm (thinner air). I should know as I live in northwest Ohio and just last week we had one day that was 65 degrees and the next 22 degrees, yet my car started both days just fine. Your car's brain is smarter than you think it is. :naughty:
Ok i'll jump on the bandwagon too...
and i fully agree with patton...how the heck can that engine run with so much air forced into it...there is no way the ecu will be able to compensate stock...
show me one good aftermaket turbo kit (even a low psi one) that will not require a reflash, chip, pigiback or some sort of fuel compesation...there is nothing more dangerous for an engine that running lean
second how do you plan to handle the presure build up against a closed plate...are you going to use a blow off valve?
third all those problems would be easily solved with a rpm sensitive electrical engine...its not that hard to determine the engine speed and modify your fan's speed acordingly....or change the blade pitch accordingly...
Ok i'll jump on the bandwagon too...
and i fully agree with patton...how the heck can that engine run with so much air forced into it...there is no way the ecu will be able to compensate stock...
show me one good aftermaket turbo kit (even a low psi one) that will not require a reflash, chip, pigiback or some sort of fuel compesation...there is nothing more dangerous for an engine that running lean
second how do you plan to handle the presure build up against a closed plate...are you going to use a blow off valve?
third all those problems would be easily solved with a rpm sensitive electrical engine...its not that hard to determine the engine speed and modify your fan's speed acordingly....or change the blade pitch accordingly...
street freakz
12-11-2003, 02:37 PM
:uhoh: we don't need to change the blade pitch on these. and were not allowed to use the turbo style fans neither, another patent claim violation there. the air doesn't flow around the turbo while at idle speeds. the fan holds the pressure and no, it doesn't escape neither. the motor dead heads & the amperage drops by 2 amps. you can use an rpm switch or a throttle style switch, so the turbo will speedup as the throttle opens up. in other words the faster you go, the faster the turbo spins. it can be done, but as i said before. people choose not to go with this, they want to run at idle speeds at full throttle from the e-turbo's. as far as the reboot goes, there is a way to reset the whole damn thing without your fancy add-ons people. we have 16 years experience with the mechanics of auto's. but as i expected, you people are both physics and mechanics experts here. were not fricken idiots here people, it took a long time to develop this devise. if you go to a place called turbo flow calculations, guess what you will find there. a calculation formulla that matches the same one that we gave you on this forum, HOLY S@#T!! someone else uses that same formulla for other turbos also.
cargodzcc
12-11-2003, 02:43 PM
Hey Street,
Although poop may have holes I don't believe it's actually "Holy" come on man get with the holiday spirit , FA La La La, La, La La La, La! :lol2:
:uhoh: we don't need to change the blade pitch on these. and were not allowed to use the turbo style fans neither, another patent claim violation there. the air doesn't flow around the turbo while at idle speeds. the fan holds the pressure and no, it doesn't escape neither. the motor dead heads & the amperage drops by 2 amps. you can use an rpm switch or a throttle style switch, so the turbo will speedup as the throttle opens up. in other words the faster you go, the faster the turbo spins. it can be done, but as i said before. people choose not to go with this, they want to run at idle speeds at full throttle from the e-turbo's. as far as the reboot goes, there is a way to reset the whole damn thing without your fancy add-ons people. we have 16 years experience with the mechanics of auto's. but as i expected, you people are both physics and mechanics experts here. were not fricken idiots here people, it took a long time to develop this devise. if you go to a place called turbo flow calculations, guess what you will find there. a calculation formulla that matches the same one that we gave you on this forum, HOLY S@#T!! someone else uses that same formulla for other turbos also.
Although poop may have holes I don't believe it's actually "Holy" come on man get with the holiday spirit , FA La La La, La, La La La, La! :lol2:
:uhoh: we don't need to change the blade pitch on these. and were not allowed to use the turbo style fans neither, another patent claim violation there. the air doesn't flow around the turbo while at idle speeds. the fan holds the pressure and no, it doesn't escape neither. the motor dead heads & the amperage drops by 2 amps. you can use an rpm switch or a throttle style switch, so the turbo will speedup as the throttle opens up. in other words the faster you go, the faster the turbo spins. it can be done, but as i said before. people choose not to go with this, they want to run at idle speeds at full throttle from the e-turbo's. as far as the reboot goes, there is a way to reset the whole damn thing without your fancy add-ons people. we have 16 years experience with the mechanics of auto's. but as i expected, you people are both physics and mechanics experts here. were not fricken idiots here people, it took a long time to develop this devise. if you go to a place called turbo flow calculations, guess what you will find there. a calculation formulla that matches the same one that we gave you on this forum, HOLY S@#T!! someone else uses that same formulla for other turbos also.
SaabJohan
12-11-2003, 02:46 PM
Sluttypatton: A turbocharger delivers boost when the load is high (how much the throttle is opened), this is because of the exhaust mass and temperature is mainly dependant on that factor. The second factor is how much air the engine can flow (rpm, displacement and all that stuff).
When we open the throttle on a turbocharged engine it will consume more air and fuel, this will increase exhaust gas massflow and enthalpy. The turbine will now convert the enthalpy (the energy in the gas, mainly heat) into mechnical work by expaning the gases which cause them to cool down. This will increase the power from the turbine and the boost and massflow from the compressor will increase.
If we are using an electric motor which run on constant power instead of a turbine we will always use the maximum power the motor can deliver.
If we take the 2 liter engine as an example it will if the volumetric efficiency is 100% consume 800 liters per minute at 800 rpm (multiply engine displacement with half the engine rpm, remember 4 strokes do 2 rpm for a cycle) and 6000 liters per minute at 6000 rpm. So if we now increase the pressure the volume flow of the engine will stay constant, but the mass flow, or volume flow before the compressor have increased. The flow of the compressor will not be constant, it will be the natural flow of the engine multiplied with (MAP/MAP without compressor). So at constant power the massflow will increase with rpm and throttle position and when the massflow increases the boostpressure will drop.
One of the problems that I see it is that none of the "e-turbos" I've seen haven't used compressors they have used axial flow fans. Some people in here seems to believe that fans and compressors are the same thing, well they aren't. An axial flow fan and compressor looks very similar but the difference is that fans aren't used to increase the static pressure more than 3% (I'm not 100% sure of 3% but it's in that area). That is equal to about a half psi. The axial flow compressor is on the other hand suitable for increasing the static pressure, even if they can't increase it as much as a centrifugal compressor. If you look at a picture on a axial flow compressor you will find that after each step of compressorwheels it has a set of vanes which reduce the speed of the air and increase the static pressure.
When we open the throttle on a turbocharged engine it will consume more air and fuel, this will increase exhaust gas massflow and enthalpy. The turbine will now convert the enthalpy (the energy in the gas, mainly heat) into mechnical work by expaning the gases which cause them to cool down. This will increase the power from the turbine and the boost and massflow from the compressor will increase.
If we are using an electric motor which run on constant power instead of a turbine we will always use the maximum power the motor can deliver.
If we take the 2 liter engine as an example it will if the volumetric efficiency is 100% consume 800 liters per minute at 800 rpm (multiply engine displacement with half the engine rpm, remember 4 strokes do 2 rpm for a cycle) and 6000 liters per minute at 6000 rpm. So if we now increase the pressure the volume flow of the engine will stay constant, but the mass flow, or volume flow before the compressor have increased. The flow of the compressor will not be constant, it will be the natural flow of the engine multiplied with (MAP/MAP without compressor). So at constant power the massflow will increase with rpm and throttle position and when the massflow increases the boostpressure will drop.
One of the problems that I see it is that none of the "e-turbos" I've seen haven't used compressors they have used axial flow fans. Some people in here seems to believe that fans and compressors are the same thing, well they aren't. An axial flow fan and compressor looks very similar but the difference is that fans aren't used to increase the static pressure more than 3% (I'm not 100% sure of 3% but it's in that area). That is equal to about a half psi. The axial flow compressor is on the other hand suitable for increasing the static pressure, even if they can't increase it as much as a centrifugal compressor. If you look at a picture on a axial flow compressor you will find that after each step of compressorwheels it has a set of vanes which reduce the speed of the air and increase the static pressure.
Neutrino
12-11-2003, 04:18 PM
well i know that in the long term a turbo will be damaged by backpresure without a BOV/DV so i don't see why your own e-turbo won't have the same prob....at least this is how i see it
i know that the ecus have quite a good capacity to relearn but i doubt most of them will be able to compesate for that much...i don't know about the GM ecus but IMO they are more the exception to the rule
why i am so nazi about the ecu programing is because if the ECU is not able to adapt you'll get a lean condition and i don't have to tell you guys how bad that can be
btw can we get at least some general info on the materials used, general type of compressor, electrical engine specs...btw do you guys have a pattent yet?
and you have to understand our skepticism...there are so many snake oils out there and many of them claim to have proof....heck they were showing that pos tornado make 20hp at the wheels....this is why we ussually need some very rock solid evidence....
plus not to mention that during those arguments a lot of good info can surface
i know that the ecus have quite a good capacity to relearn but i doubt most of them will be able to compesate for that much...i don't know about the GM ecus but IMO they are more the exception to the rule
why i am so nazi about the ecu programing is because if the ECU is not able to adapt you'll get a lean condition and i don't have to tell you guys how bad that can be
btw can we get at least some general info on the materials used, general type of compressor, electrical engine specs...btw do you guys have a pattent yet?
and you have to understand our skepticism...there are so many snake oils out there and many of them claim to have proof....heck they were showing that pos tornado make 20hp at the wheels....this is why we ussually need some very rock solid evidence....
plus not to mention that during those arguments a lot of good info can surface
cargodzcc
12-11-2003, 05:37 PM
Neutrino I understand your concern especially about running lean. I know a kid that bought a second hand exhaust turbo T3/T4 and bolted it to a stock civic and blew it up. I don't have all of the specifics on the electric turbos themselves, but I can tell you that we have tryed it on 4 cars and haven't had any problems with any of them (The cars: 1994 Buick Regal, 1991 Saturn SC, 1989 Honda Prelude Si, 1988 Honda CRX)
I can also tell you that all of them that have gone out have brought NO negative feedback. The developer "StreetFreakz" has the claim that this is for a stock application and not the "big boost" offered by so many others. From our experience it is not for the person that's looking for "MORE POWER!", just that extra little umph. As we stated in a previous post, we were skeptical too, I know there is a bunch of junk out there and I've tested almost all of them, but you don't see me selling the *-ram or any of those others. We even had them contact us and ask why we don't sell theirs right next to this one, Because it's junk. I've said it before "We don't make'em and we don't sell what doesn't work.". If you look at the sight you'll see we sell exhaust driven turbos, intakes, exhaust, even nitrous....You will not see the t*rnado even though one of our wholesales carries it, why because it doesn't work.
I can also tell you that all of them that have gone out have brought NO negative feedback. The developer "StreetFreakz" has the claim that this is for a stock application and not the "big boost" offered by so many others. From our experience it is not for the person that's looking for "MORE POWER!", just that extra little umph. As we stated in a previous post, we were skeptical too, I know there is a bunch of junk out there and I've tested almost all of them, but you don't see me selling the *-ram or any of those others. We even had them contact us and ask why we don't sell theirs right next to this one, Because it's junk. I've said it before "We don't make'em and we don't sell what doesn't work.". If you look at the sight you'll see we sell exhaust driven turbos, intakes, exhaust, even nitrous....You will not see the t*rnado even though one of our wholesales carries it, why because it doesn't work.
Creepyjon
12-11-2003, 06:00 PM
Ok I think everyone is missing the point. Don't superchargers and turbochargers increase the pressure of the air and the density. This thing is nothing more than a fan the will give the engine more air flow, but wouldn't be any better than just putting a ram air intake in your car. I would say it might give it say 5 hp topps, but we all know you really can't feel that small of an increase.
cargodzcc
12-11-2003, 06:11 PM
Obviously you have not read through the whole forum as you can see on page 1 of the forum I posted the dyno proving 25.9 more horsepower. Now as for your comment on the ram air, you've kinda got it right. These units are designed to work like ram air, but if you talk with GM they might let you in on the little secret that to get 20 more horsepower out of the firebird you have to be doing 150mph. These units are designed so as to force feed the motor in ram air style.
Ok I think everyone is missing the point. Don't superchargers and turbochargers increase the pressure of the air and the density. This thing is nothing more than a fan the will give the engine more air flow, but wouldn't be any better than just putting a ram air intake in your car. I would say it might give it say 5 hp topps, but we all know you really can't feel that small of an increase.
Ok I think everyone is missing the point. Don't superchargers and turbochargers increase the pressure of the air and the density. This thing is nothing more than a fan the will give the engine more air flow, but wouldn't be any better than just putting a ram air intake in your car. I would say it might give it say 5 hp topps, but we all know you really can't feel that small of an increase.
cargodzcc
12-11-2003, 06:17 PM
Another thing you're right about is that you can't feel a difference in small horsepower increases, but keep in mind that people pay $500 or more for a new high flow exhaust to get 5-15 more horsepower and a buttload of iridium plugs are sold every day at 15bucks a piece to get that extra 1 horsepower, not to mention intake tubes, pulleys, etc. You get my point......Right. :iceslolan
cargodzcc
12-11-2003, 06:27 PM
You people really need to realize that not everything on the market gives you the power of nitrous oxide.
SaabJohan
12-11-2003, 07:50 PM
Ok I think everyone is missing the point. Don't superchargers and turbochargers increase the pressure of the air and the density. This thing is nothing more than a fan the will give the engine more air flow, but wouldn't be any better than just putting a ram air intake in your car. I would say it might give it say 5 hp topps, but we all know you really can't feel that small of an increase.
I tried to explain this earlier; Ram-air does also work by increasing the static pressure (and therefore density). Ram-air is basicly a divergent nozzle which convert kinetic energy into pressure energy.
In a normal axial flow compressor the air is slowed down with the vanes behind the compressor-wheel.
I tried to explain this earlier; Ram-air does also work by increasing the static pressure (and therefore density). Ram-air is basicly a divergent nozzle which convert kinetic energy into pressure energy.
In a normal axial flow compressor the air is slowed down with the vanes behind the compressor-wheel.
street freakz
12-11-2003, 08:03 PM
:nono: i can give a little info but not alot, weve been keeping the motor quiet for a while now. too many people ask for very detailed info about the motor just to try to duplicate. the motors length is 41/2'' long, the casing is made of #1018 cold rolled steel, the fan is made from steel not aluminum 31/2'' dia. 3'' wide , turbo housing is from polypropolyne plastic good for temps up to 650degrees. 3'' inlet, 3'' outlet. motor rpm's 22,000, 270 degree internall thermo switch for overheating protection, externall brushes for easy rebuilds from the outside of the motor, can be rebuilt 3 times. brush life-2500 hrs. total unit-3.6lbs. thats all the info we will give.
street freakz
12-11-2003, 08:07 PM
:banghead: I DO NOT HAVE A DAMN AXIAL FLOW BLOWER. ITS CENTRIFIQUAL. get it right.
Sluttypatton
12-11-2003, 08:27 PM
It is obvious you are not going to convince us, and I am tired of hearing the same arguments over and over. However, no new points have been brought up by either side, and some people are showing up and regurgitating old ones mixed with insults (supratt). I'll respond when someone brings up a new, valid point, but until then I quit.
By the way, in the mean time I will be contacting "Max power" magazine's editor to confirm your recognition in the magazine. Also, how can I get in contact with the engineers at Wright Patterson air force base? I would like them to confirm your story with them as well.
By the way, in the mean time I will be contacting "Max power" magazine's editor to confirm your recognition in the magazine. Also, how can I get in contact with the engineers at Wright Patterson air force base? I would like them to confirm your story with them as well.
Automotive Network, Inc., Copyright ©2025