Full throttle Electric Supercharger Build Thread

[Target70]

Originally Posted by s2d4

Racing on the streets with no seat belt on, all on camera and boasting a "victim" list just seemed real classy, thank god it looks like I completely missed that stage in life.

that stage in life is not so bad, living isn't much fun without "some" danger. My friend and I had a kill list while driving some pretty slow cars. Though I always used my seat belt when we did it.. not so much for safety, just that my car's seats had no bolsters, and the belt kept me from sliding around in the car, when I was sliding around in the car .

At one time or another we had an eagle talon(na), dodge stealth rt-tt, lexus sc300, 240sx, but my favorite race I ran was a stop light run in my 1985 buick park avenue, against some stranger in a 1st gen Geo tracker riding on the bump stops with the tires sticking half way past the fenders. Light went green, we punched it, and were both running WOT neck and neck for a good 10 seconds before we even hit the speed limit, both of us and passengers all were laughing our asses off at how slow we both were... *sigh*, those were the days.

[shif7i7down]

Originally Posted by s2d4

Yeap, enjoying yourself/having fun and being humble all at the same time.

Racing on the streets with no seat belt on, all on camera and boasting a "victim" list just seemed real classy, thank god it looks like I completely missed that stage in life.

Pssssh , top speed was only 45mph
Its not racing, it's just acceleration testing to 45mph.
Everything Just looks faster on Camera that's all, and the video was playing at 3x the speed.
Last but not lease, that person in the video is someone other then myself.
Plus, the video was taken somewhere in Mexico.
And Santa really does exist!

[shif7i7down]

I know there's been talk about possibly using lithium ion batteries to improve the esc potential, was there any test done? What's stopping people from using lithium ion? Price? If it's just price then let me know, I'm willing to slap on set on lithium ion. As long as it won't screw up the motor or controller. @fenton

[fenton]

Originally Posted by shif7i7down

I know there's been talk about possibly using lithium ion batteries to improve the esc potential, was there any test done? What's stopping people from using lithium ion? Price? If it's just price then let me know, I'm willing to slap on set on lithium ion. As long as it won't screw up the motor or controller. @fenton

Requires a different charging algorithm and they are not stable at engine bay temperatures when loading and unloading as the ESC does.

[silent runner]

Originally Posted by s2d4

Yeap, enjoying yourself/having fun and being humble all at the same time.

Racing on the streets with no seat belt on, all on camera and boasting a "victim" list just seemed real classy, thank god it looks like I completely missed that stage in life.

Hang on now, this is not racing! in my case, I'm well past that stage of my life myself. This was just a couple of responsible car enthusiasts, giving the gas pedal a little poke for fun. All action was kept within 5 mph of the posted speed limit, with no traffic in front of us, and no intention to doing anything stupid. I also always wear my seatbelt.

If your going to buy and drive a sporty car with a bit of pep available, it would just be silly not to have a little fun with it once in awhile, and in a safe manner. -Otherwise you might just as well buy a Toyota Yaris, or one of those tiny little Scion eco-cars, and join the mindless commuting public.

[fenton]

Originally Posted by silent runner

Hey, I have a victim story. I'm flogging and old school Camry (3VZ-FE, auto), as one of Rob's "rest mules", and I decided to see what a beautiful looking old, big block, 1967 Beumont, (obviously built to the...), would run like.I ran real well, like probably an 11 second Muscule Car! I lost obviously... big time. But what a show!

On the general topic, I've tried to PM Fenton, and give him a chance to "beat up" on my ancient family car. So far no answer?

Frankly I'd love to just meet-up and swap some notes. If there was an opportunity to play a little, that would just make for great camera fodder and a few laughs.

Sorry I have been pretty busy with the new baby. Not many opportunities to just go out for a cruise by myself

I'm down for meeting up sometime though.

[Jac]

Audi using "e-boost" electric supercharger

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/06/22/a...harger-report/

[jflogerzi]

Originally Posted by Jac

Audi using "e-boost" electric supercharger

http://www.autoblog.com/2014/06/22/a...harger-report/

basically to eliminate turbo lag.

[Jac]

Originally Posted by jflogerzi

basically to eliminate turbo lag.

Which makes sense considering its low RPM instatorque benefits, and probably better (less complexity/less fuel) than using a belt-driven supercharger for twin charging.

Selfishly, I'm interested in this tech going mainstream so folks don't look at me sideways when i say I've got an electric supercharger and automatically assume I've been duped.

[fenton]

Originally Posted by Jac

Which makes sense considering its low RPM instatorque benefits, and probably better (less complexity/less fuel) than using a belt-driven supercharger for twin charging.

Selfishly, I'm interested in this tech going mainstream so folks don't look at me sideways when i say I've got an electric supercharger and automatically assume I've been duped.

Takes a while to figure out how to deal with those people. I start of by saying it is super charged. The system used the cold side of turbo just like vortech however instead of being driven by a belt it is powered by a electric motor that draws 4.5kw from a discrete 24v battery bank.

when people see it in the engine bay you can tell that it is the real deal.

[jflogerzi]

Originally Posted by Jac

Which makes sense considering its low RPM instatorque benefits, and probably better (less complexity/less fuel) than using a belt-driven supercharger for twin charging.

Selfishly, I'm interested in this tech going mainstream so folks don't look at me sideways when i say I've got an electric supercharger and automatically assume I've been duped.

Who cares what others think. When you bought the ESC, you knew exactly what you were getting

[robwbright]

Originally Posted by shif7i7down

Pssssh , top speed was only 45mph
Its not racing, it's just acceleration testing to 45mph.
Everything Just looks faster on Camera that's all, and the video was playing at 3x the speed.
Last but not lease, that person in the video is someone other then myself.
Plus, the video was taken somewhere in Mexico.
And Santa really does exist!

/rant on/

Just ignore him, shif7i7down. He's a troll who gets mad at and calls out people for telling others about a quality product that they enjoy. I notice that he judged you and your video and was factually wrong on multiple counts. Assuming that you understand everything about something and (incorrectly) judging the person about it - that's certainly "being humble" isn't it?

Christ once said, "Judge not, that you be not judged. For with what judgment you judge, you shall be judged: and with what measure you measure, it shall be measured to you again."

At any rate, I would wear a seat belt 99% of the time without a seat belt law, but if a person wants to go without one, that doesn't directly endanger or affect me. Doesn't bother me in the least. 30 years ago, many/most people didn't wear them.

But here's what's curious to me about his judgment of you: if he thinks you (or the person in the video) is so stupid for "racing" to 45 mph without a seat belt in this "stage of life", you'd wonder why he cares whether or not the driver is wearing a seat belt.

I don't get the "nanny" attitude of so many people in this country (many of which nannies are unfortunately located in our federal government). If I want to do something stupid and/or dangerous, what business is it of anyone's as long as I am not endangering another person and as long as I am forced to bear the consequences of my decision? Seat belt laws and helmet laws are ostensibly to force people to protect themselves, but the real issue behind those laws is the fact that the general public is required by law to pay for the reckless person's injuries if that reckless person is not able to pay themselves. Thus, government thinks that we can't let people do dangerous things because it's a burden on the tax base.

Basically, what I'm saying is this: as long as the choice doesn't directly endanger another person - we should let people make their own choices AND make them live with the consequences. i.e. don't use taxpayer funds to bail them out (if people want to charitably bail them out, that's a personal choice which I fully support). That's how life was for much of this country's history. But we've gone soft. Heck, several years ago, the government passed a law which made the sale of mini dirt bikes illegal (because of lead content in the paint - and we know that 5-10 year old kids are notorious for eating the paint right off of the frames of dirt bikes). The companies had to lobby for months to get exemptions. It was a ridiculous law, but government doesn't care - they just think they have to protect everyone.

I don't need someone in D.C. to protect me from myself. I'll take care of it, thank you. And I'm pretty sure I can keep my own kids from eating frame paint off a dirt bike. I'm willing to bear the risk that I can't, thank you very much - and I don't need a new law to assist me.

/rant off/

[Target70]

Originally Posted by robwbright

/rant on/

Just ignore him, shif7i7down. He's a troll who gets mad at and calls out people for telling others about a quality product that they enjoy. I notice that he judged you and your video and was factually wrong on multiple counts. Assuming that you understand everything about something and (incorrectly) judging the person about it - that's certainly "being humble" isn't it?

Christ once said, "Judge not, that you be not judged. For with what judgment you judge, you shall be judged: and with what measure you measure, it shall be measured to you again."

At any rate, I would wear a seat belt 99% of the time without a seat belt law, but if a person wants to go without one, that doesn't directly endanger or affect me. Doesn't bother me in the least. 30 years ago, many/most people didn't wear them.

But here's what's curious to me about his judgment of you: if he thinks you (or the person in the video) is so stupid for "racing" to 45 mph without a seat belt in this "stage of life", you'd wonder why he cares whether or not the driver is wearing a seat belt.

I don't get the "nanny" attitude of so many people in this country (many of which nannies are unfortunately located in our federal government). If I want to do something stupid and/or dangerous, what business is it of anyone's as long as I am not endangering another person and as long as I am forced to bear the consequences of my decision? Seat belt laws and helmet laws are ostensibly to force people to protect themselves, but the real issue behind those laws is the fact that the general public is required by law to pay for the reckless person's injuries if that reckless person is not able to pay themselves. Thus, government thinks that we can't let people do dangerous things because it's a burden on the tax base.

Basically, what I'm saying is this: as long as the choice doesn't directly endanger another person - we should let people make their own choices AND make them live with the consequences. i.e. don't use taxpayer funds to bail them out (if people want to charitably bail them out, that's a personal choice which I fully support). That's how life was for much of this country's history. But we've gone soft. Heck, several years ago, the government passed a law which made the sale of mini dirt bikes illegal (because of lead content in the paint - and we know that 5-10 year old kids are notorious for eating the paint right off of the frames of dirt bikes). The companies had to lobby for months to get exemptions. It was a ridiculous law, but government doesn't care - they just think they have to protect everyone.

I don't need someone in D.C. to protect me from myself. I'll take care of it, thank you. And I'm pretty sure I can keep my own kids from eating frame paint off a dirt bike. I'm willing to bear the risk that I can't, thank you very much - and I don't need a new law to assist me.

/rant off/

30 years ago, we didn't have airbags standard (which according to stats, are more dangerous when not using the seat belt). I was the one who brought up the seat belt. And his wearing it may not affect me in any way, but I believe that the only proper way to "be my brothers keeper" is by example and instruction, not government force. Sometimes all it takes is to be reminded that someone out there cares about your safety.

I know your rant was not aimed specifically at me, and I couldn't agree with you more about the ridiculous govt intrusion into every facet of our lives. (since bible verses were used)Jesus never used force against anyone. In fact when it came to the stoning of the prostitute, which was the legal punishment for her crime, he effectively went against the law by saying "he who is without sin, cast the first stone". Assuming he knew the outcome of this action, It shows that he believed it was wrong to punish someone for committing a crime against themselves or sinning against God, just because the law wants to legislate morality.

as was said before, judge not lest ye be judged, well govt punishment is only constituents using the govt to judge and punish actions they don't agree with, even when there is no trespass against them. How so many Christians can be ok with throwing people in prison for gambling, prostitution, drug use, etc. is beyond me. The same goes for fines, how can anyone claim to be free if a government official can just take your property(money/car/house) or freedom for not following their legislated dictates.

[DAEMANO]

.... Ermm... back on topic, once again offering rides to anyone who wants to head down to the So Cal Orange County. Haven't rode anyone along that hasn't been impressed (especially for the price).