Again the Electric Supercharger is geting closer to be a reality.

This seems more or less in Production form. There is a 4-cylinders version e-SC in production (ESC 400) with 5 PSI and there will be one for V6 Application with 5 PSI too ( ESC 550) to be released in Mid Feb 04.

This is ESC e-SC are designed by: Thomas Knight

Site: www.boosthead.com

What do you think?

Nashua

 

if ur really interested in a electric supercharger

here
http://www.alphamaleperformance.com/pages/1/index.htm

it was shown at SEMA

 

frank,

this is applicaiton isout of the usual. Espacially, the Cranck Shaft driven e-motor. It is seems a bit intrusive to the engine internal.

Nashua.

 

"Includes Blower only." of course

"Fits Most engines up to 2.5L " obviously this is the 4 cyl version

"Drive System 6HP x3 Electric Motors" no comment

"Power Source Independent, non-parasitic ultra-lightweight racing batterie" that's good

"Max Recommended PSI Stock engines should be limited to 5-7PSI " yeah that's the safe way to go about it

"Maximum CFM 405 @ 5.5PSI" I doubt this claim. my turbo makes abotu 420 cfm give or take an nowhere near 5.5 psi.

"Maximum HP 425" wouldn't you need about 650 CFM to make this power?

"Maximum Duration 15 seconds" so this is basically a drag racing application? useless to me unless it's going to be usable on the street.

"Installation Time 10+ hours" seems a bit much for an SC. Did my turbo install/unistall in abou tthat much time and we dealt with a lot of problems.

 

only idiots are gonna buy any of these systems until they are proven to produce reliable power and for longer than I could screw carmen electra. ( 10 seconds )

 

It is an interesting alternative to running nitrous since it is only used at WOT and for short periods. Meaning it is worthless for daily driven vehicles or back road driving; yikes, 6 minutes to recharge after a run... :o

One problem I see is that it may be a hindrance when not in use; it might restrict the intake tract lowering normal power. So when not being used, 99.9% of the time, it would be a restriction.

 

ray,

It is a WOT application, in 15s you can accelerate from any speed to over 100 MPH. Unless you keep WOT for like 10 min and drive at 120 MPH to 140 MPH for like 2 hrs... there is no need to anything else. With a good chrager recharging time should be in few minutes and you can use WOT again.

Nashua.

 

how powerful is our CLS alternator, 120 Amps? if so, the recharging time is just 3.5 minutes.

Nashua.

 

That is assuming nothing else is drawing current such as lights, stereo, engine operation, etc. If used often the alternator output would be maxed frequently significantly reducing its life span. But still, not as imediately useable as nitrous but does not empty completely.

As I said, it is an interesting alternative to nitrous.

 

Nashua as I had said in the other thread, garrett already makes and SELLS them in europe on bus/trucks....



So they have been out for a awhile now.


And can be used over and over, however they do not provide the ammount of boost mostg folks would want.

Only 3-4lbs of boost. And it is for lower RPMS. (up to 5k I believe to help get more power and less emmissions)

 

gotcha, but it still doesn't seem worth it to me. And like Scalbert said, it creates a restriction. Would be interesting to see a dyno with it being used and no being used (to see how much a restriction it does create)

 

As for restriction, a bypass valve placed after the SC will be close when The SC is on ( positive presure) and will be open in NA mode, hence no restrictions.

Nashua.

 

Hello Acura guys, this is Geoff Knight--BOOSTHEAD.COM owner and inventor of the ESC series of supercharger. I appreciate your visiting my site and asking questions. I will try to answer any questions you may have.

Someone was concerned about the restriction the ESC would create. We use a 2.5" flap-type valve (a check valve) that is open while naturally aspirated, and is forced closed when boost is applied. This allows for normal driving as if nothing is on the car.

I have been building and designing turbo and superchatrger systenms since the late seventies, and I have been building differen types of electric superchargers since 1978. Five years ago I finally developed how to do this by using multiple motors instead of one single large motor. If you wonder why, go look at an 18hp motor and you will see a 150lb monster the size of a small Honda engine. Three motors at 6hp each is much easier.

Those who ask for dyno runs, you must have not looked at my site. There are numerous dyno runs on there--all performed by an independant well known company--South Florida Performance.

If you look at my FAQ's, you will see I only suggest these for someone with a car that has no production turbo or supercharger kits available for it. Being that only 18% of all 4 & 6cyl cars have kits available for them, this is a GREAT option--and MUCH better than NOX.

The supercharger uses a LOT of current, and produces a LOT of boost and airflow. Someone was sceptical of the hp/vs airflow/vs boost. Go to MagnusonProducts.com and check out the M62 Eaton (the ESC-400 uses those rotating assembly) flowcharts and boost vs hp. You will see I am dead on, and my units rated at a peak 17.8hp @ 10,000 rpm on a small electric motor dyno.

These motors start as 2.5hp diesel starter motors and are reworked for 24V to produce 6hp each. Ask any electrical engineer what determines hp on a DC electrical motor--he will tell you low resistance and HUGE brushes and commutator contact area. We use FOUR brushes that at 1"long, 1/4" thick, and 7/8" tall. We use a specific diameter large wire winding with less turns.

The rules for any fan/compressor are covered under the known 'fan laws'. HP=V X P (HORSEPOWER = VOLUME X PRESSURE). SO IF THE HP IS CONSTANT (18HP) WHEN BOOST PRESSURE GOES UP THE VOLUME WOULD GO DOWN. AS VOLUME GOES UP, THE BOOST PRESSURE GOES DOWN. SIMPLY STATED, AT 5.5 PSI IT FLOWS 405CFM, WHILE AT 0 BOOST IT FLOWS ABOUT 650CFM

Batteries are the shortcoming with the ESC at this time. The awesome Odyssey lightweight racing batteries are 1/3 the weight of a standard battery, yet have the same cranking amps as the better Optimas out there--just for a shorter time. I use two different setups--one for testing and one for track times.

At the track I use four 13lb batteries for the ESC and one 13lb battery replaces my stock battery. That is 5 batteries at 13lb each (total of 65lb), while by removing the stock 42lb battery I only gain 23lb in battery weight.

For testing on the street, I use four Optima red top batteries. I get 10-15 runs from the Optimas, and recharging takes 1-1/4 hrs. The four Odyssey units give 2-3 runs and recharging is 20 minutes.

Some of you have stated you need constant running from your turbo or supercharger. For road racing or a rally car, or SCCA Solo2 or a true racecar I can see it. But for 99% of street drivers having 10 runs of 15 seconds available every day and trickle charging the batteries seems to be all then really need. I an sure some will argue that point, but I build SC and turbo kits, yet all my cars now have an ESC. My Neon ACR racecar will have a drag race only 750CFM @ 30 psi unit on it. When it runs low 10's, some people will still say something about me recharging and changing battery packs between runs.

The future is brighter and brighter if you look ahead. Battery/capacitor hybrids are just now coming out, and the battery packs to run my Neon will consist of a 72V 800 amp battery with a 700 farad cap hybrid. I will have 20 seconds from each 28lb battery pack. Used primarily by Audio competition guys, this is awesome but expensive. Go to BatCap.com and check it out.

 

that just confused me....how are you flowing more air at less boost? Why do we care about volume, we care about air mass.

Also, how do you control boost?

 

I assume the CFM values presented were in SCFM and are more indicative of flow rate and not mass. The ACFM would be close to the 650 value regardless of boost. In any enclosed system, the flow rate reduces as pressure increases.

I also assume that boost is based on the blower drive ratio relative to engine displacement. The boost for a given application would be gear ratio controlled. Just a guess though without knowing the specifics.

 

Hello Geoff and welcome to this site. Thanks for the information and clarifications.

I was the one that mentioned about the restriction. It did appear that an Eaton case was being used and made sense. So I assume that the integral bypass valve was being used and at best they are about 1.5 inch diameter. This would have presented a hindrance to non-boosted flow. But based on your above statement an external bypass is used and for the current application group the 2.5 inch diameter makes sense.

I will partially disagree about the street use though. I installed the Comptech SC on my CL-S6 not just for the WOT ability but for part throttle increases. Not to mention the occasional road course or back road driving which you did address. But in daily driving the added power from a standard SC or turbo enhance the vehicle’s ability at all throttle positions. Honestly, I see this electric SC as competition more for nitrous than a conventional SC or a turbo. To that I would add that I find this great and applaud you for bringing this to market. It is great to see a power adder such as this when the racing type is generally drag related.

Any plans on a larger kit using the MP112 or possibly the MP90??

Correct me if I am wrong here, since this would be a single speed system unrelated to engine RPM, the boost would be greater at the lower revs and dwindle off at the engine speed climbs?? This would only make sense as the blower output would not change but the engine demand would.

What will really be interesting is when system voltages increase to the point to where this could be incorporated in a stock system with a high speed variable drive controller. This way it the boost could be regulated by controlling the actual blower speed. But that is a ways off still.

 

yeah, this is what I was thinking too...but not a bad alternative.

[QUOTE]Correct me if I am wrong here, since this would be a single speed system unrelated to engine RPM, the boost would be greater at the lower revs and dwindle off at the engine speed climbs?? This would only make sense as the blower output would not change but the engine demand would.
[QUOTE]

so would this cause the power curve to drop off steeply in the high end?

 

According to the dyno plots it doesn't appear to drop off quickly. However, the below plots seems to suggest there should be a torque decrease. But that really depends on the motor too.

 

Scalbert, what is SCFM vs ACFM?

 

SCFM = Standard Cubic Feet per Minute
ACFM = Actual Cubic Feet per Minute