Full throttle Electric Supercharger Build Thread

[DAEMANO]

Originally Posted by Sojhinn

So back to topic... My car has been running better then ever.

I was thinking we should start with a best tips practice since Rob is about to release the next set here soonish.

So I'll start with one my favorite tips:

Follow the order of electrical connections closely so as not to run the risk of breaking the controller.

Good idea!

TIP: The zip tie is your friend. Use them liberally.

[jflogerzi]

What Fast Freddy fails to realize that Dyno numbers are not what this product is about. This provides low end TQ for DD driving and Auto-X. It also provides a bit more top end power.

[GotBRZ1691]

Originally Posted by jflogerzi

What Fast Freddy fails to realize that Dyno numbers are not what this product is about. This provides low end TQ for DD driving and Auto-X. It also provides a bit more top end power.

Church ( Best Breaking Bad impression voice)

[VR46]

hokai, so - apparently i've touched off some kind of flame war. point was, the dyno operator was talking to me about how he thought it was quite lean in the lower rev ranges. that's what i was looking to discuss. good points were also made about instructions for they dyno operator. let's all just play nice.

Freddy, based on other posts I believe you live near me. Feel free to come on down and take my car for a spin, and you can give me your driving impressions.

[Target70]

Originally Posted by VR46

hokai, so - apparently i've touched off some kind of flame war. point was, the dyno operator was talking to me about how he thought it was quite lean in the lower rev ranges. that's what i was looking to discuss. good points were also made about instructions for they dyno operator. let's all just play nice.

Freddy, based on other posts I believe you live near me. Feel free to come on down and take my car for a spin, and you can give me your driving impressions.

I would agree you are running lean based on your logs. But I don't know if afr of 14 on e85 is the same as 14 on 93. I am running e85 and my last log showed, around 11.25 WOT at low revs, but then again I am not running a phantom.. yet.

[Fast_Freddy]

Originally Posted by fenton

I didnt make 227.

I made 206 on the DynoDynamics(in fall) and 202 on a dynojet(in summer)?

True but 206/185 on a Dyno Dynamics is ~227/204 when corrected to Dynojet equivalency. So either the 206 was in comparison mode (which you say it wasn't) or it is equivalent to ~227 on a Dynojet. Does it make any sense yet?


Not really a big deal but I was simply hoping to clarify why some of the Dyno Dynamics results in this thread match Dynojet numbers while others are ~10% lower. I honestly didn't mean this as an attack on the Phantom and don't even see how it could be viewed that way but...


Sadly I see that once again any attempt by myself to elucidate a factual error or discrepancy is immediately seen as an all out attack on the Phantom ESC. Not you, of course, but several others.


Anyway, maybe the below information will help explain my reasoning. Obviously we still can't expect 100% accuracy when comparing results from different dynos in different shops on different days but often with a little knowledge and the the right correction factor, it can be accurate enough to present a useful comparison.


From the NASA time trials rules:

"Dynamometer tests must be conducted on a Dynojet Model for front and rear wheel drive vehicles, and on a Dynojet, Mustang, Dyno Dynamics, or Dynapack for AWD cars, in a commercial facility that offers dynamometer testing as part of their business and is open to the public. All (AWD) Dyno test results using a Mustang or Dyno Dynamics dynamometer will have 10% added to the maximum horsepower reading to obtain the number that will be used to calculate the “Adjusted Weight/Power Ratio”

[Fast_Freddy]

Originally Posted by GotBRZ1691

Why are you such a ****? What is wrong with you? And what do you have against the ESC? Besides the fact that you have been proven wrong time and time again? I've read the whole thread from start to finish. Yes there have been some exaggerations but who doesn't boast the product they bought(lucky enough to get for free as prototype) and represent.

If by "being proven wrong time and time again" you mean that since the gross exaggerations, lies, fibs, boasts, inaccuracies (whatever) that I've correctly pointed out in this thread were excusable in your opinion because they were made by people simply "boasting" about a product they either bought or were given for free and intending to "represent", I suppose I was. LOL!


Now please let me get the **** out of this thread!

[Fast_Freddy]

Originally Posted by enwave

Well, you are missing something big -- you're comparing max power numbers. We all know boost tapers off towards redline anyway, and we're okay with that.

Everything else you're saying does make sense, and I agree that we don't have tons of perfect before/after comparisons for perfect numeric comparison. But we can always look at line shape, and I'm pretty damn happy with it.

I'd love to do an area under the curve analysis when I have time, but it should be pretty apparent just by looking at charts. We make significant power over stock and even over other boost applications down low, and that's a ton of fun. It just feels like you put a nice strong on-demand V6 into the car without the extra weight.

You don't get the full picture from max power numbers...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I shouldn't even be in this thread at all but I like to stop in every now and then to see if the first ESC car-b-q has happened yet. When I saw VR46's dyno with auto trans, Borla UEL, HFC FP and missing baseline I thought "hey, I have a dyno for my AT with the same exact exhaust setup" and submitted my dyno sheet as a baseline for him. It wasn't until days later that I realized his dyno was probably in Dyno Dynamics (DD) mode and not corrected to Dynojet (DJ) #s. Along the way I also realized that many of the DD sheets posted in this thread as well as the entire forum are in comparison (DJ) mode and I tried to point it out for the benefit of the forum. No hidden agenda.


Anyway, I agree with much of what you've said and honestly wasn't trying to argue anything about peak dyno numbers other than what correction factors are necessary when attempting to compare different dynos. I am now quite frustrated and bored with the exercise and would very much like to exit this thread so that the ESC devotees can get back to topics more relevant to their own needs and wants.


BTW, thanks for being so surprisingly civil. I am not at all accustomed to it in this thread.

[Fast_Freddy]

Originally Posted by VR46

hokai, so - apparently i've touched off some kind of flame war. point was, the dyno operator was talking to me about how he thought it was quite lean in the lower rev ranges. that's what i was looking to discuss. good points were also made about instructions for they dyno operator. let's all just play nice.

Freddy, based on other posts I believe you live near me. Feel free to come on down and take my car for a spin, and you can give me your driving impressions.

You certainly did nothing wrong. Flames follow me in this thread like car-b-q's follow amateur automotive electrical mods.


I wish I could be more help with the lean low-rpm AFR condition. I have seen the same thing on most ESC AFR plots and many turbo apps. It's hard to avoid going lean when the boost suddenly kicks in while the ECU is still in closed loop. IMO a good tuning strategy would be a custom map (Ecutek) that dumps extra fuel based on MAP. Shiv might be able to do something similar using load. I accomplished the same using a MAP-activated AFR enrichment module on my last turbo car. Whenever boost was present the module made the AFR sensor read lean which made the ECU add fuel so that even in closed loop I could get an AFR of 12:1. But I was limited by having a locked Toyota ECU and you are not. I'm sure that a "flash" tuning solution exists for you.


Thank you for your kind offer. I may actually take you up on it.

[Sojhinn]

Originally Posted by Fast_Freddy

You certainly did nothing wrong. Flames follow me in this thread like car-b-q's follow amateur automotive electrical mods.


I wish I could be more help with the lean low-rpm AFR condition. I have seen the same thing on most ESC AFR plots and many turbo apps. It's hard to avoid going lean when the boost suddenly kicks in while the ECU is still in closed loop. IMO a good tuning strategy would be a custom map (Ecutek) that dumps extra fuel based on MAP. Shiv might be able to do something similar using load. I accomplished the same using a MAP-activated AFR enrichment module on my last turbo car. Whenever boost was present the module made the AFR sensor read lean which made the ECU add fuel so that even in closed loop I could get an AFR of 12:1. But I was limited by having a locked Toyota ECU and you are not. I'm sure that a "flash" tuning solution exists for you.


Thank you for your kind offer. I may actually take you up on it.

You see this is nice. This is constructive and appreciative. (Maybe not the first paragraph) but if you try to help instead of being such a negative nancy maybe people would listen more.

I actually think you know a decent amount about cars Freddy but the way you put people down in this thread is not helpful. (Myself included towards you)

Why not try to help others without being a jerk about it and maybe more people would listen.

[s2d4]

Originally Posted by Fast_Freddy

You certainly did nothing wrong. Flames follow me in this thread like car-b-q's follow amateur automotive electrical mods.


I wish I could be more help with the lean low-rpm AFR condition. I have seen the same thing on most ESC AFR plots and many turbo apps. It's hard to avoid going lean when the boost suddenly kicks in while the ECU is still in closed loop. IMO a good tuning strategy would be a custom map (Ecutek) that dumps extra fuel based on MAP. Shiv might be able to do something similar using load. I accomplished the same using a MAP-activated AFR enrichment module on my last turbo car. Whenever boost was present the module made the AFR sensor read lean which made the ECU add fuel so that even in closed loop I could get an AFR of 12:1. But I was limited by having a locked Toyota ECU and you are not. I'm sure that a "flash" tuning solution exists for you.


Thank you for your kind offer. I may actually take you up on it.

It's actually the transition between CL to OL. One way to get around it is targeting richer on both side of the transition.
Run full time close loop will work as well but needs wideband and ecutek atm, and speed density/boost based fueling could work also.

[enwave]

Originally Posted by Fast_Freddy

BTW, thanks for being so surprisingly civil. I am not at all accustomed to it in this thread.

No worries. People sometimes get sensitive to a little sarcasm and overreact. You may not be meaning to, but you do leave some pretty good fuel for the fire in your commentary too

People just need to learn to laugh it off. After all, we're on the internet. Nothing serious happens here.

I'd be interested to hear what you think of a drive with the ESC -- hope you do end up taking him up on the offer!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Gums]

Was showing my battery guy the ESC installation the other day. He was impressed (of course) and now wants a kit for his wife's Veloster.

His comment "The design guys did a great job to get the matching of the brushless motor and drive control/charger to operate so efficiently from the garden variety sealed lead acid battery capabilities. Brilliant marketing"

I remember someone was planning to test the genesis batteries (ages ago) and was wondering how they performed?

Tried search thread with no luck other than @fenton and @DC2R playing with other road users

[stevo585]

Originally Posted by Gums

Was showing my battery guy the ESC installation the other day. He was impressed (of course) and now wants a kit for his wife's Veloster.

His comment "The design guys did a great job to get the matching of the brushless motor and drive control/charger to operate so efficiently from the garden variety sealed lead acid battery capabilities. Brilliant marketing"

I remember someone was planning to test the genesis batteries (ages ago) and was wondering how they performed?

Tried search thread with no luck other than @fenton and @DC2R playing with other road users

I've always wondered this as well. Is there nothing to be gained from using a better (higher amp-capacity) batteries than the basic AGM battery. There seems to be a sizable voltage drop when the system is activated and I've discussed this my electric engineer co-workers and they said they would use ultra-capacitor "batteries". I know it adds cost but it could be very innovative.