Full throttle Electric Supercharger Build Thread

[Toma]

Fenton. If that filter on the inlet is one of those ractive or vibrant shielded cones

.. ive seem a 20hp LOSS on a na B18 honda. Garbage. Just use an open element I kn and I assume you guys are just gonna ditch the airbox and poke the inlet out the front.

Limit boost to 5 or 6 psi max and let them both scream wide open at redline. My guess is 3.5 psi and the 230 rwhp.

[Robftss]

Originally Posted by bfrank1972

I believe you are right about the sequential vs parallel:

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/pu...ial-d_636.html

Wouldn't parallel make more sense as we're looking to keep boost low but maintain that boost at high rpm? i.e. double your CFM by using parallel units, and not worry about limiting boost by switching the motors?

Series as shown.

Parallel:
- Remove 'spider' intake manifold.
- Supercharge each 2 cyl (100hp) bank separately with its own ESC, 'Y' the inlets to a single MAF. I think this would look cool! and make room with the manifold removed.
- Run both units off a larger 24V, 35-40 AHR SLA, this will keep the PR's balanced.

Since the VW is 115hp stock, using two TQ18024V smaller units per side on the FA20 would yield ~ 3.5 psi to redline

Similarly, 370Z and early BMW 850i use two separate MAF/intake/manifold/cylinder runs, effectively 2 banks on a common crankshaft.

[Toma]

Originally Posted by bfrank1972

Hmm can you explain further? My intuition tells me we'd need a parallel system - tractor pull guys are not flow limited and they're looking for max boost pressure. This ESC system for the 86 needs more flow, not max boost right? A single unit produces enough boost pressure at low RPM, but boost drops as the motor requires more CFM. I would think the parallel rig, compared to the sequential rig, would produce less boost at low rpm, but more at higher rpm (where we need it)? I'm not a mechanical engineer so please feel free to correct me

The set up is not flow limited. Its easy to flow a ton of air with no restriction. Put a restrictor at the outlet... say an engine lol.... and then moving the same air starts to take exponentially more power as restriction... ie boost.... rises. So if you feed a compressor already compressed air... it has to do less work to move the higher volume of air.

In parallel... both turbos are fighting the same boost restriction but need to flow less cfm. But cfm is the easy part. Its the pressure that is hard.

I have a shop dyno fan that will flow 15, 000 cfm free flow with only a 1hp motor. Yet it takes 5 hp to move 300 cfm at only 2psi. 6 psi at say 800 cfm can take 35 hp

[bfrank1972]

Originally Posted by Robftss

Series as shown.

Parallel:
- Remove 'spider' intake manifold.
- Supercharge each 2 cyl (100hp) bank separately with its own ESC, 'Y' the inlets to a single MAF. I think this would look cool! and make room with the manifold removed.
- Run both units off a larger 24V, 35-40 AHR SLA, this will keep the PR's balanced.

Since the VW is 115hp stock, using two TQ18024V smaller units per side on the FA20 would yield ~ 3.5 psi to redline

Similarly, 370Z and early BMW 850i use two separate MAF/intake/manifold/cylinder runs, effectively 2 banks on a common crankshaft.

Cool! What's the benefit of plumbing to individual banks? Could it be simplified with parallel chargers just feeding into the stock intake manifold?

[meadowz06]

I have been thinking about selling my Lingenfelter built supercharged Corvette to buy a FR-S. And this electric unit has really got me excited. I can go back and try to find the information, but how much is the TOTAL cost for this kit? I am a manager at a Toyota\Scion dealership, so I could buy the FR-S for a good price.

[bfrank1972]

Originally Posted by Toma

The set up is not flow limited. Its easy to flow a ton of air with no restriction. Put a restrictor at the outlet... say an engine lol.... and then moving the same air starts to take exponentially more power as restriction... ie boost.... rises. So if you feed a compressor already compressed air... it has to do less work to move the higher volume of air.

In parallel... both turbos are fighting the same boost restriction but need to flow less cfm. But cfm is the easy part. Its the pressure that is hard.

I have a shop dyno fan that will flow 15, 000 cfm free flow with only a 1hp motor. Yet it takes 5 hp to move 300 cfm at only 2psi. 6 psi at say 800 cfm can take 35 hp

Ok, I think I get you - I was thinking the compressor was limiting flow, so it's the motor (or power to the motor) that is essential limiting factor? if that's the case and you assume equal amounts of power are going to two motors in either setup (series vs parallel), the 'in series' setup is actually more efficient? Bear with me, I'm trying to wrap my brain around this! Thanks

[Robftss]

Originally Posted by bfrank1972

Cool! What's the benefit of plumbing to individual banks? Could it be simplified with parallel chargers just feeding into the stock intake manifold?

Balancing the pressure from the two outlets is difficult, path of least resistance, will cause pressure from one unit to flow into the other if there is even a small delta P. Once this happens the 'backfeed' centrifugal wheel may surge (low flow). I believe this is resolved on the turbine side on parallel turbo systems, balancing the wastegates via pressure.
Isolation works best.

[fenton]

Originally Posted by Toma

Fenton. If that filter on the inlet is one of those ractive or vibrant shielded cones

.. ive seem a 20hp LOSS on a na B18 honda. Garbage. Just use an open element I kn and I assume you guys are just gonna ditch the airbox and poke the inlet out the front.

Limit boost to 5 or 6 psi max and let them both scream wide open at redline. My guess is 3.5 psi and the 230 rwhp.

Yes that is the idea, i think that intake is just one that Rob had sitting around.

The airbox would be ditched and the airfilter would sit in the area that the perrin intake or some turbo kits place their filter.

Removing the stock intake will require a significant amount of tuning to get it running right i think. This is really just for fun, it isnt all that practical.

[Toma]

Originally Posted by fenton

Yes that is the idea, i think that intake is just one that Rob had sitting around.

The airbox would be ditched and the airfilter would sit in the area that the perrin intake or some turbo kits place their filter.

Removing the stock intake will require a significant amount of tuning to get it running right i think. This is really just for fun, it isnt all that practical.

Tuning wouldn't be any harder. It's just the MAF flow curve. Easy breezy.

I think if the battery power is there, it would be very practical

[Gary in NJ]

While fun to discuss, the twin charger is a distraction. I'm more interested in development updates, and ultimately PRODUCTION RELEASE.

[NickFRS]

I knew that would piss all you guys off

[NickFRS]

Originally Posted by Gary in NJ

Nick, you are comparing apples to alligators.

The driver of a turbo or SC car with exhaust mads and the like is *generally* looking for big HP gains.

The ESC is for the driver that is looking to improve the torque curve (on demand) on a much smaller scale.

I was very interested in the Innovative SC until the Phantom came along. The ESC meets all of my performance and reliability needs. I had concerns with 100% boost over a long ownership period. Being able to choose when I apply boost means a lot to me.

Only time I hit boost is at WOT. I usually drive in -boost. Bypass valve ftw. Only lost 15 miles to a tank.

@fenton is this charger only when you flip it on? After your done with drift office you should bring it down to PIR and see what it traps in the 1/4 mile.

[bfrank1972]

Originally Posted by NickFRS

I knew that would piss all you guys off

Definitely kept the thread near the top of the FI section

[Pug]

Originally Posted by Fast_Freddy

Just to throw a few facts into the recent BS spew... The Innovate SC costs $3195 with free shipping vs the pre-production estimate of $1500 for the ESC. Shipping costs and inclusion of batteries is unknown. Tuning for either charger will cost the same depending on the tuning method and tuner you choose. The results are far from equal but for many the ESC will be good enough. I'm even considering it now.

I bought batteries here in the states from AtBatt. I got 2 of the correct batteries for the system (they are specific 12V/18AH, sold as a two pack PS-12180-NBx2) and one bigger battery for the starter. (12V/21AH) 1x PSH-12180FR.

I did free shipping and the batteries arrived in 3 days for a total of $139.03.


Power-Sonic 2 x 12V/18AH Sealed Lead Acid Battery w/ NB Terminal
SKU: PS-12180-NBx2 (8429) $99.49 $99.49

Power-Sonic PSH-12180NB FR Sealed Lead Acid Battery
SKU: PSH-12180FR (21861) $54.99 $54.99

SUBTOTAL $154.48
SHIPPING -
Thursday Special (M024PTL - 10% OFF) - $15.45
TOTAL $139.03