Full throttle Electric Supercharger Build Thread

[ft_sjo]

Originally Posted by Fast_Freddy

You may have missed it but a Vortech SC BRZ recently ran the 1/4 mile in 13.1s @ 111mph

Don't you mean a 13.981?

[Gixxersixxerman]

Originally Posted by Fast_Freddy

Exaggerate much? Instead of letting your emotions control your keyboard you should pay heed to those first two lines at the beginning of the thread. This little e-charger appears very promising for those who can't afford real FI but is no where close to competing with traditional super and turbo chargers. Neither will a stage 1 GTI "rape" or even keep up with a SC BRZ. You may have missed it but a Vortech SC BRZ recently ran the 1/4 mile in 13.1s @ 111mph.


.

Idk about the numbers now, but I was at the evasive dyno meet and two well known SC FRS's ran 203hp and 205hp.. And the bottom end was not even close to this.. Of course they make a bit more now.. But this is still in the tuning phase like those were

[Fast_Freddy]

Originally Posted by ft_sjo

Don't you mean a 13.981?

No, I mean 13.1 @111mph with a Vortech kit on pump gas.

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showp...&postcount=174

BTW, the innovate SC is already up to 255whp on pump gas.

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showp...&postcount=515

[Fast_Freddy]

Originally Posted by Gixxersixxerman

Idk about the numbers now, but I was at the evasive dyno meet and two well known SC FRS's ran 203hp and 205hp.. And the bottom end was not even close to this.. Of course they make a bit more now.. But this is still in the tuning phase like those were

I don't mean to knock this e-charger down below it's true value but IMO the marketing and fanboy BS is getting out of hand. I don't recall just how much dyno correction has been applied to compensate for the testing altitude but it must be significant to allow 1.6psi boost to equal 7.5-9.0psi boost.

If this little e-charger is equal to "over-priced $5000 fans with a pulley", let's see those 255-275whp dyno sheets and 13.1 @ 111mph time slips. Until then perhaps it would be best to speak about what this relatively economical e-charger is actually capable of.

[Gixxersixxerman]

Originally Posted by Fast_Freddy

I don't mean to knock this e-charger down below it's true value but IMO the marketing and fanboy BS is getting out of hand. I don't recall just how much dyno correction has been applied to compensate for the testing altitude but it must be significant to allow 1.6psi boost to equal 7.5-9.0psi boost.

If this little e-charger is equal to "over-priced $5000 fans with a pulley", let's see those 255-275whp dyno sheets and 13.1 @ 111mph time slips. Until then perhaps it would be best to speak about what this relatively economical e-charger is actually capable of.

I personally think 230 will be about the most this will do, at sea level.. One dyno sheet was posted and it shows the power sap the SC takes on a engine as this was making the same power as the SC was at 5psi I believe.. I don't think anyone here is saying or suggesting this is as good or better then a proper SC TC kit.. Just an alternative to them for roughly half the cost.. Again, for what a good exhaust, header, and intake cost you can get something that makes decent power.. I'd love to do some testing here in Vegas and at the track.. To see how long it takes to deplete the batteries.. I'm thinking a lot longer then some people are guessing.. Even at the track I'm not full throttle that much.. Granted I'm wide open more the coasting.. But it's not like I'm wide open 1:20 seconds on a 1:30 second track.. I don't think this will run all 20 minute session.. But after about 5 laps my tires are roasted anyway.. So if this could give me three good laps, that's all I need for my time attack..

[unijabnx2000]

Originally Posted by Fast_Freddy

No, I mean 13.1 @111mph with a Vortech kit on pump gas.

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showp...&postcount=174

BTW, the innovate SC is already up to 255whp on pump gas.

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showp...&postcount=515

Thats an E85 run. What did it do on pump 93?

[akuhei]

Originally Posted by unijabnx2000

Thats an E85 run. What did it do on pump 93?

http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=40850

latest run is 255 on 93. he just posted it up tonight

[neutron256]

Wow such negativity on this thread at times. I'm sure this is why Innovate was keeping quite in the long build up to releasing their supercharger.

Step back, take a deep breath, and try to relax before posting.

[Gary in NJ]

Originally Posted by Fast_Freddy

I don't recall just how much dyno correction has been applied to compensate for the testing altitude but it must be significant to allow 1.6psi boost to equal 7.5-9.0psi boost.

I don't know where the 1.6 psi figure comes from. Can you provide a citation? I believe 4.0 psi has been referenced by Fenton and it is thought that 5.0 psi would be achievable at SL.

Also keep in mind that the eCharger does not have any parasitic loss at the crank nor any significant pumping loss through an intercooler. Depending on the SC design, the parasitic loss on a SC is somewhere in the 1.0 to 2.0 equivalent psi range. So yes, the eCharger can have an equivalent effect of a SC in the 7.0 psi range. Where a SC is superior is at during increasing RPM, a SC makes more boost as rpm's increase where the eCharger makes the same boot over the entire range.

We are all looking for installation updates from the 4 new beta testers, some of which are at or close to sea level.

[Guff]

Wow, lots of strong opinions in this thread....

[Calum]

Originally Posted by Gary in NJ

I don't know where the 1.6 psi figure comes from. Can you provide a citation? I believe 4.0 psi has been referenced by Fenton and it is thought that 5.0 psi would be achievable at SL.

Also keep in mind that the eCharger does not have any parasitic loss at the crank nor any significant pumping loss through an intercooler. Depending on the SC design, the parasitic loss on a SC is somewhere in the 1.0 to 2.0 equivalent psi range. So yes, the eCharger can have an equivalent effect of a SC in the 7.0 psi range. Where a SC is superior is at during increasing RPM, a SC makes more boost as rpm's increase where the eCharger makes the same boot over the entire range.

We are all looking for installation updates from the 4 new beta testers, some of which are at or close to sea level.

Check the boost plot in this graph.

[Wonderbar]

Haha, continue to defend with insults. Good way to be the "spokesperson" for a product.

I'm even complimenting this kit for what it is and where it works. It has a bottom end power and like a good turbo, but putters out up top, just like the avo kit with its baby snail. But this doesn't have big potential in the turbine itself to compete. That's all I'm saying. My opinion on it hasn't changed since my first post like 30 pages ago stands, it's an interesting build but I've found out its being done by people with a chip on their shoulder trying to prove something.

I was able to afford my toys because I've been deployed 10 months a year for the last 8 years. I also sold off several personal items to include very rare and personally built rifles. I work for my toys, I'm willing to sacrifice to get there. I also bought my BRZ used.

[Wonderbar]

Originally Posted by Guff

Wow, lots of strong opinions in this thread....

Lots of hate and violent defenses.

[utekineir]

Originally Posted by Wonderbar

I agree, again, I'm just providing a different perspective on it. I don't see why it shouldn't be a viable option once it is sorted out entirely. The limitations need to be very well known as well as what it is comparable to.

Who has nos on an eclipse? It's 2013. Nos is a shitty energy drink now, is it even still a shitty nitrous kit?

Fact of the matter is, a header and a tune will put a car not too far behind this kit, albeit this kit has a much better bottom end torque but not nearly the top end.

The appeal to this for me over a header/tune is the dealer apsect. Yank in a half hour and appear stock in the case of issues. This is only a year old platform, nobody has seen yet what issues may crop up over a longer period of time, fi or na.

If i wanted to dump in 30+ (mssrp brz/frs + mods) grand on a rwd sports car with no warranty a c5/6 or cayman would fit that bill far better than this car. For most people this isn't a race car. Its a sporty car, with some dd usability and good economy at a suitable price point.

I have one moneypit, don't need 2 (even though its starting to look like that will be the end result).

does anyone even drive eclipses in 2013?