Full throttle Electric Supercharger Build Thread

[Gary in NJ]

Originally Posted by Target70

Kind of a change in topic, but could a normally closed flapper valve in a bypass hose running parallel to the ESC remove the drag reduction?

with a 1 pound spring or so the natural vacuum of the engine should hold it open so air could pass around the ESC. and with the WOT switch, as soon as pressure equalizes to no vac or positive pressure from the ESC, the valve closes holding in boost.

a buddy and I were looking into this many years ago for a twin charger setup on an sc300

I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish here. The ESU is a part-time boost solution. If you want to eliminate drag reduction, simply do not connect the vacuum hose from the manifold to the controller.

[Target70]

Originally Posted by SloS14

1lb would still negate anything under 1lb of boost...which would be bad especially at WOT.

A vacuum operated door on a solenoid is a different story.

Then again, both are unnecessary with the ESC.

gary: I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish here. The ESU is a part-time boost solution. If you want to eliminate drag reduction, simply do not connect the vacuum hose from the manifold to the controller.

Let me try to explain what I am talking about. OP in the first post talks about this Quote:

DRAG REDUCTION

Next lets talk about DR. My car has the most aggressive version of DR. DR's intention is to look for a loss in power due to high vacuum and equalize that with a pulse of the compressor. The fact of the matter is DR is not used in the way we used it today, you would never go with DR only all the way to redline. DR give you a nice shot of boost to get you going down low.

With that said here are the DR results with both stock and charger disabled on the same graph. Its plain to see from the graph that it does work, and works well especially at the top end. Yes there is some oscillation however Rob is now working on turning up the frequency/sample rate.
solenoid on an old throttle body could be used as well
/quote

from my understanding, this is about the engine having a loss of power due to engine having to suck through the ESC when it is not powered, creating a restriction. I would assume this would mainly be at partial throttle and at higher rpm, the dyno shows the power loss is about 5 hp at mid range, and 20hp at top end.
This of course has been remedied electronically, by having the ESC kick on in spurts under heavy vacuum. I don't know how often this would occur, or what kind of drain on the batteries. But this solution would also mean that the batteries are almost constantly charging/discharging even when you are not hitting the WOT switch under the pedal. I do not know the particulars but it seems like the ESC would be partially working all the time and not "just" when you hit the WOT switch. So If for any reason you didn't want it working all the time, or only want it working when you floor it. I suppose you could do as Gary suggested, and unhook the vacuum line to the controller, this however still leaves you with the intake restriction, and a loss of power over stock.

Please don't take this as anything more than a curiosity on my part, The above solution may work wonderfully and never cause any issues, and from the look of it, give more power all the time which would probably make everyone happy. But, on the rare occasion someone might want want another option...

My thought was to have an alternate way for the engine to get air, so it didn't have to suck through the ESC when not in use. With two Y connectors, one at the throttle body, and one at the filter box, you could hook up the ESC on one, and a strait pipe with a one way valve on the other.

Now as the ESC is a restriction when not powered, the natural vacuum of the engine would pull through the path of least resistance, which should be the valve side. However when the WOT switch is tripped and the ESC starts to kick on, it will equalize the pressure in the intake. Now that the ESC is spinning it will be the main intake for the engine, so with no vacuum on the valve side, to hold the flapper open, the spring or gravity would close it so no boost would be lost. It is possible that without the intake air constant spooling up the turbine, there might be some extra spool up time. It's all just a thought experiment so I don't know.

this is only an example, just the first thing that popped up on google: I have seen pvc ones for $10, or any number of other workable valves, I'm not saying it's a good idea, but for what it's worth.


In the picture above, the air would be moving from the intake box on the right, through the valve and out the left side to the throttle body. the spring would only need to be strong enough to hold the valve closed at no vacuum, gravity might be enough for the above example.

As the ESC is extremely close to both the throttle body, and the Air Box, It would have to be moved a few inches back from the TB, and to the left, or a different Intake filter arrangement made.

[Gary in NJ]

Drag reduction works very well. The pulse lasts about a second and after it' has pulsed it reviews the MP and if necessary, pulses again. I find it will engage when starting up a hill or when accelerating in high gear at low rpm. If you don't see the voltage drop on the indicator, you would never know that it engaged. It's that seamless.

In practice/reality, the compressor is NEVER a restriction. When you have part-time boost like the ESC the tendency is to engage the ESC/boost when you want power. For example, if I'm climbing up a hill and the car feels lethargic, I just engage the ESC until I'm at the speed that I was trying to achieve and then I back off the throttle. It's not something I give a lot of thought to, but when I need power I'll go to 75% throttle.

The valve that you presented seems like a solution for a problem that doesn't exist.

[bfrank1972]

Originally Posted by Gary in NJ

Drag reduction works very well. The pulse lasts about a second and after it' has pulsed it reviews the MP and if necessary, pulses again. I find it will engage when starting up a hill or when accelerating in high gear at low rpm. If you don't see the voltage drop on the indicator, you would never know that it engaged. It's that seamless.

In practice/reality, the compressor is NEVER a restriction. When you have part-time boost like the ESC the tendency is to engage the ESC/boost when you want power. For example, if I'm climbing up a hill and the car feels lethargic, I just engage the ESC until I'm at the speed that I was trying to achieve and then I back off the throttle. It's not something I give a lot of thought to, but when I need power I'll go to 75% throttle.

The valve that you presented seems like a solution for a problem that doesn't exist.

I'm not sure about that - I think some dyno runs were done a while back that show the compressor is a pretty big restriction. DR is one solution that seems to work by having the motor spin the compressor, but it's drawing power. Probably negligible in the grand scheme, so it's an effective solution that doesn't seem to drain battery reserves to any degree. But without DR, I'd imagine your throttle response and fuel economy would be significantly impacted. Would be interesting to hear Rob's views on this (I'm sure he's probably considered it at one point or another).

[fenton]

Originally Posted by bfrank1972

I'm not sure about that - I think some dyno runs were done a while back that show the compressor is a pretty big restriction. DR is one solution that seems to work by having the motor spin the compressor, but it's drawing power. Probably negligible in the grand scheme, so it's an effective solution that doesn't seem to drain battery reserves to any degree. But without DR, I'd imagine your throttle response and fuel economy would be significantly impacted. Would be interesting to hear Rob's views on this (I'm sure he's probably considered it at one point or another).

Excellent topic for discussion. A bypass system does have it's benefits but it is very hard to integrate properly and increases complexity a lot. Adding y's and solenoids to bypass the compressor will more than likely create problems with daily driveability in terms of idle and bogging. I know in theory it sounds great but the solution that Rob has created fixes a very small problem that exists mostly above 5000 rpm.

In reality DR is not used that much so to try and incorporate all the extra stuff is more work for little gain.

Fuel economy is not affected with or without DR. Power above 5000 rpm is affected....the compressor does not create a measurable restriction below 4000 rpm.

From experience the power drawn from DR is very negligible as it pulses short burst.



Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

[sw20kosh]

Originally Posted by CBR600RR

they both seem to accellerate at the same rate

How is that possible? Doesn't the JR kit give 250 whp with most of its gains in the upper rpms which would make a 0-127 test totally in its favor.

Must be Magic...

[Gary in NJ]

Originally Posted by bfrank1972

I'm not sure about that - I think some dyno runs were done a while back that show the compressor is a pretty big restriction. DR is one solution that seems to work by having the motor spin the compressor, but it's drawing power. Probably negligible in the grand scheme, so it's an effective solution that doesn't seem to drain battery reserves to any degree. But without DR, I'd imagine your throttle response and fuel economy would be significantly impacted. Would be interesting to hear Rob's views on this (I'm sure he's probably considered it at one point or another).

Maybe I didn't make my point clear enough. The compressor is never a restriction because you will engage the ESC as soon as you feel you want/require more power. Drag reduction is a nice feature and works well for the way engages, but when you want power you will simply ask the ESC to make more power.

In the real world a bypass is just something you will "pass through" on your way to boost. An unnecessary step and complication.

[Gary in NJ]

Originally Posted by sw20kosh

How is that possible? Doesn't the JR kit give 250 whp with most of its gains in the upper rpms which would make a 0-127 test totally in its favor.

Must be Magic...

Cars don't accelerate in a linear fashion. A car that makes gobs of top-end power can easily have the same ET and trap speed as a car that makes gobs of low-end torque and not as much peak HP.

It's not magic, just physics.

[fenton]

Originally Posted by sw20kosh

How is that possible? Doesn't the JR kit give 250 whp with most of its gains in the upper rpms which would make a 0-127 test totally in its favor.

Must be Magic...

The JR is also shifting a little slower than I was but the point remains...similar acceleration.

You have to remember the JR does make 240(@7300) on the carb legal tune but ever time he shifts it drops to 150 to 175hp(@5000rpm) or so and has to build back up. This 240hp isn't fully utilized until 4th gear when he is above 7000 rpm for longer periods of time.

This was not meant to knock anyone or say something is better than something else just as a simple comparison.

Thanks.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

[Robftss]

Originally Posted by bfrank1972

I'm not sure about that - I think some dyno runs were done a while back that show the compressor is a pretty big restriction. DR is one solution that seems to work by having the motor spin the compressor, but it's drawing power. Probably negligible in the grand scheme, so it's an effective solution that doesn't seem to drain battery reserves to any degree. But without DR, I'd imagine your throttle response and fuel economy would be significantly impacted. Would be interesting to hear Rob's views on this (I'm sure he's probably considered it at one point or another).

Ahhhh restriction, power loss, fuel economy...my nemesis's !
To a degree all can be sorted using scientific fact, not my opinion.

Restriction: Requires flow and constriction, it is exponential and only occurs when enough airflow is present to effect velocity thru the constriction. Ex. Water flowing through a 1" dia hose that is 1/2 filled flows the same as a 2", 3", 4" dia hose, only when the 1" dia hose is completely full does it become a restriction. The TQ250 flows ~60-70 HP worth of air with little restriction.

Fuel economy: Fuel is injected as per metered air not pedal postiion.

Power loss: This is what the DR does @ ~ +50% throttle, or you could just push the pedal to 55% and have the same result. DR restores pedal expectations and tip in responds.

By-pass: no spring required on flapper valve delta P's take care of that.

Now...back to my CNC.

[bfrank1972]

Originally Posted by Robftss

Ahhhh restriction, power loss, fuel economy...my nemesis's !
To a degree all can be sorted using scientific fact, not my opinion.

Restriction: Requires flow and constriction, it is exponential and only occurs when enough airflow is present to effect velocity thru the constriction. Ex. Water flowing through a 1" dia hose that is 1/2 filled flows the same as a 2", 3", 4" dia hose, only when the 1" dia hose is completely full does it become a restriction. The TQ250 flows ~60-70 HP worth of air with little restriction.

Fuel economy: Fuel is injected as per metered air not pedal postiion.

Power loss: This is what the DR does @ ~ +50% throttle, or you could just push the pedal to 55% and have the same result. DR restores pedal expectations and tip in responds.

By-pass: no spring required on flapper valve delta P's take care of that.

Now...back to my CNC.

Interesting. Do we even need DR, or could a tuner just re-scale throttle position so "100% throttle" is reached just as the pedal touches the ESC switch? I imagine in that situation the only benefit of DR is to slightly reduce the 'jump' between ESC off vs ESC on.

[mid_life_crisis]

Originally Posted by fenton

Excellent topic for discussion. A bypass system does have it's benefits but it is very hard to integrate properly and increases complexity a lot. Adding y's and solenoids to bypass the compressor will more than likely create problems with daily driveability in terms of idle and bogging. I know in theory it sounds great but the solution that Rob has created fixes a very small problem that exists mostly above 5000 rpm.

In reality DR is not used that much so to try and incorporate all the extra stuff is more work for little gain.

Fuel economy is not affected with or without DR. Power above 5000 rpm is affected....the compressor does not create a measurable restriction below 4000 rpm.

From experience the power drawn from DR is very negligible as it pulses short burst.



Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

If my engine is over 5000 rpm, my foot is to the floor passing someone. I guess DR is a real non-issue for me after all.

[silent runner]

Originally Posted by MidnightRunner

Uhh.. let's not get too carried away. This is a nice affordable piece of equipment, but not at the level of a full time supercharger.

But from a returns standpoint, this is definitely the best bang for your buck under the impression of honesty regarding the $2k ish price.


Sent from my LG-P769 using Tapatalk

Your absolutely right of course about, doing the same stuff as a full time supercharger. The real fun is definetly in the gains to be found for the investment (which I believe is a pretty honest number so far), and the fact that you can probably do this without having a finicky, breaky car. Had a talk with the TRD, and enthusiast Sales guys at my local Toyota dealer today.... right now the are "fixing" a local guys FRS. He figured he could adapt a Suby turbo system to the car (with 16lbs of boost). Now he is nursing the car through a $12,000, engine replacement. I walked out and looked, and it was messy!

Makes this option look quite reasonable for the fun quotient.


-Country Hills Toyota, Calgary Alberta, was where I talked to the guys fixing this poor little busted FRS, by the way.

[bfrank1972]

Originally Posted by silent runner

Your absolutely right of course about, doing the same stuff as a full time supercharger. The real fun is definetly in the gains to be found for the investment (which I believe is a pretty honest number so far), and the fact that you can probably do this without having a finicky, breaky car. Had a talk with the TRD, and enthusiast Sales guys at my local Toyota dealer today.... right now the are "fixing" a local guys FRS. He figured he could adapt a Suby turbo system to the car (with 16lbs of boost). Now he is nursing the car through a $12,000, engine replacement. I walked out and looked, and it was messy!

Makes this option look quite reasonable for the fun quotient.


-Country Hills Toyota, Calgary Alberta, was where I talked to the guys fixing this poor little busted FRS, by the way.

Just to re-iterate one other aspect of this system: installation and uninstallation are extremely simple and quick. This is particularly attractive to people who'd like to be able to add and remove the system quickly (i.e. service/warranty work, competition in restricted classes like AutoX, etc.)