Drift-Office : Phantom Supercharger - Tuned!

[Drift-Office]

Originally Posted by NoFear99

If I add this electric supercharger mod on top of that setup do you think I could be looking forward another 20-30 extra WHP like it did to a stock car ?

Originally Posted by raven1231

There is no reason it shouldn't. However anything would just be speculating.

Speculation is correct - it should be reminded that we know from experience that typical performance from I/H/E mods when stacked together, do not equate to the total performance as if they were used independently of each other added together.

If I had to make an educated guess though, I would have to say that you should be able to get the same numbers as you would otherwise, but with better bottom to mid range performance. In other words, the ESC would help (dramatically) on the bottom end but at the top, the dyno chart would look similar to your typical NA set up with a bolt ons, @ WOT. The slight restriction with the minimal boost pressure would probably negate getting much more. This is all conjecture of course.

The exception to that is using E85, and that's going to be more of the same but with the increased ignition timing, you should be able to break into the 200s.

Originally Posted by Element Tuning

Was the drop in HP gains at high rpm a result of voltage drop and therefore less compressor flow?

Heya Phil ~ that would be my guess, but we've apparently been told otherwise within these threads. I guess we'll have to wait and check out the new revisions!

Cheers!


Bob @ Drift-Office, LLC

[regal]

Originally Posted by fenton

Trust me Rob is the man when it comes to this. The sad fact is the energy to create 5 psi at redline is 15 to 20 kW if I remember correctly.

Most people think well just turn that motor a couple 10,000 rpm more and your there. Unfortunately all that increases the motor required, controller required, batteries required and so on. Once you get into those wattages you are talking about cooling every component and the list goes on and on.

Can you imagine the batteries required for even a 30 second shot, times what we have now by 5 and your trunk is half full.

Short answer is yes absolutely its possible but you are talking about more money than most of the turbo kits and at that point the costs outweigh the benefits of non parasitic boost.

As tech evolves the price to performance will continue to improve.

I see you said IF you had better technology, which is good, whereas a lot if people just say crank it up. Lol

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4

IMHO this would be a more attractive kit with modern Lithium batteries. Why not LiFePO4 batteries I think they are non-explosive?

[fenton]

Originally Posted by Drift-Office

.



Heya Phil ~ that would be my guess, but we've apparently been told otherwise within these threads. I guess we'll have to wait and check out the new revisions!

Cheers!


Bob @ Drift-Office, LLC

Hey Bob,

The fact that proves this is if you wait until 5000 or even 6000 with a full charge and go wot you get the same boost pressure. The voltage drop that you see on the readout doesn't effect boost pressure unless it goes down to the shut off level (18v)

I thought the same initially as well, but after many tests it was plain to see that boost pressure created is directly proportional to the engines efficiency at a given rpm.

Sent from my Nexus 10 using Tapatalk 4

[mid_life_crisis]

Originally Posted by Fast_Freddy

: lol:


You guys aren't exactly in agreement here

That funny, really? Have you ever talked to someone who designs headers? They take into account all sorts of variables to do with both what they have to work with and what their goals are. An FI engine is moving more air than a NA one. Pretty much the whole point of the supercharger, isn't it? So it should require changes in the design to account for that, shouldn't it?
I'm not a design expert so my estimation that the factory exhaust with high flow cats would be sufficient with a small blower like the electric may be off, but I don't think it's that far off.
And you took two quotes on different topics and said they disagree. Nice job genius.

[bakerr6]

Originally Posted by mid_life_crisis

That funny, really? Have you ever talked to someone who designs headers? They take into account all sorts of variables to do with both what they have to work with and what their goals are. An FI engine is moving more air than a NA one. Pretty much the whole point of the supercharger, isn't it? So it should require changes in the design to account for that, shouldn't it?
I'm not a design expert so my estimation that the factory exhaust with high flow cats would be sufficient with a small blower like the electric may be off, but I don't think it's that far off.
And you took two quotes on different topics and said they disagree. Nice job genius.

There are a lot more variables that go into designing a set of headers, that I would worry about vs. the volumetric flow rate on these cars. There are other restrictions much further down the line that would be more detrimental.

Most headers would not break through their volumetric efficiencies, as they are usually not designed to just hit an efficiency point equal to the flow rate of the current engine.

[Robftss]

Originally Posted by Fast_Freddy

It sounds like this little ESC is more for short 0-60 bursts than 1/4 mile and that is very weak sauce indeed. How long can this ESC maintain max boost at WOT? 0-60? 0-100? Burnout and 1/4 mile pass?

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xA_Sf4IdrAo"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xA_Sf4IdrAo[/ame]

Going up a steep mountain pass to demonstrate sustained boost.

Pressure vs. rpm is primarily a function a centrifugal compressors fluid map (PR drops with flow @ constant rpm, look up any compressor map).

Voltage drop is a function of load. Sustained voltage during boost is a function of energy source discharge curve. The SLA's discharge curve is nearly flat for the 1st 30 seconds after the initial load is applied.

One gear boost... not very meaningful.

Rob

[forzajuve]

I don't see the price for the Phantom SC anywhere. What is the price exactly? Also, when will this be available to purchase? I am in California, and this seems like a nice alternative and something I would strongly consider in the near future

[Mr.]

SPAM. JK. Looks interesting. This was a good read. Hope the people develop and finish this.

[Gary in NJ]

Originally Posted by retrosmiths

I wonder how much this would cost...

Should be around $1,500 plus the cost of batteries. The batteries cost me $135 from AtBat.

[regal]

Originally Posted by fenton

Trust me Rob is the man when it comes to this. The sad fact is the energy to create 5 psi at redline is 15 to 20 kW if I remember correctly.

Most people think well just turn that motor a couple 10,000 rpm more and your there. Unfortunately all that increases the motor required, controller required, batteries required and so on. Once you get into those wattages you are talking about cooling every component and the list goes on and on.

Can you imagine the batteries required for even a 30 second shot, times what we have now by 5 and your trunk is half full.

Short answer is yes absolutely its possible but you are talking about more money than most of the turbo kits and at that point the costs outweigh the benefits of non parasitic boost.

As tech evolves the price to performance will continue to improve.

I see you said IF you had better technology, which is good, whereas a lot if people just say crank it up. Lol

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk 4

This car excels at driving extended high rpm twisties. I'm talking >5k for for miles and miles. This seems more likes something for city/highway drivers who need to pass someone or blast up an on ramp.

I think an option where it only turns on at WOT would be a great benefit for those who drive in the power band around rural roads. Just turning on when you need torque to get over a hill ?

Also just curious why not use LiFePO4 batteries I think they have all the benefits of Li-Ion without the safety concerns?

[Gary in NJ]

Originally Posted by regal

This car excels at driving extended high rpm twisties. I'm talking >5k for for miles and miles. This seems more likes something for city/highway drivers who need to pass someone or blast up an on ramp.

It's for anyone that is looking for part-time boost. I typically don't drive at 5000 rpm for extended periods. It's a range I pass through, not sustain. I much prefer the 3-4000 range, relying on boosted power when needed. Still, on-boost at 5000 rpm I still have a 40-50 lb-ft advantage over a NA FA20.

Originally Posted by regal

Also just curious why not use LiFePO4 batteries I think they have all the benefits of Li-Ion without the safety concerns?

I can think of two reasons. One is cost. All three SLA batteries cost me $135 shipped. Just one LiFePO4 could cost double that. Tell someone that they have to add $135 of batteries to their car and they don't think twice about it. Tell someone that they have to add $750 of batteries to their car and you'll have to pick them up off the floor. The other reason is the way the SLA's provide current under high load. SLA's don't require any complicated charging solutions and can withstand deep and rapid charge/discharge cycles. LiFePO4 batteries do have a greater charge density, but the SLA's are a VERY cost effective solution.

[regal]

Originally Posted by Gary in NJ

It's for anyone that is looking for part-time boost. I typically don't drive at 5000 rpm for extended periods. It's a range I pass through, not sustain. I much prefer the 3-4000 range, relying on boosted power when needed. Still, on-boost at 5000 rpm I still have a 40-50 lb-ft advantage over a NA FA20..

We probably drive a completely different type of terrain, I drive the engine in the power band for miles.

Originally Posted by Gary in NJ

I can think of two reasons. One is cost. All three SLA batteries cost me $135 shipped. Just one LiFePO4 could cost double that. Tell someone that they have to add $135 of batteries to their car and they don't think twice about it. Tell someone that they have to add $750 of batteries to their car and you'll have to pick them up off the floor. The other reason is the way the SLA's provide current under high load. SLA's don't require any complicated charging solutions and can withstand deep and rapid charge/discharge cycles. LiFePO4 batteries do have a greater charge density, but the SLA's are a VERY cost effective solution.

I have only used LiFePO4 batteries in high end audio applications and they were quite inexpensive, I guess the cost scales exponentially with size. Thanks.