Full throttle Electric Supercharger Build Thread

[Thatruth2001]

Fenton, sent Rob an email regarding the relocation of the MAF sensor. Speak with Rob about the design of Injen's short ram intake design, specifically where the tubing steps down. Maybe modeling those dimension will address the situation you described.

If required, I have an Injen intake in my garage. . .

Even better, could we create a custom phantom intake by modifying the injen intake?

[Sojhinn]

Originally Posted by Thatruth2001

Fenton, sent Rob an email regarding the relocation of the MAF sensor. Speak with Rob about the design of Injen's short ram intake design, specifically where the tubing steps down. Maybe modeling those dimension will address the situation you described.

If required, I have an Injen intake in my garage. . .

I noticed on the injen intake they use a smaller tube on the inside to either guide air or take away air from the maf sensor. I think that's one of the reasons the injen intake had issues with some cars like mine. After I switched to the takeda intake I had no issues at all. May be different though once you add the supercharger.

[fenton]

Rob sent me a photo of a nice piece of aluminum today. It should do the trick for testing looks like the dimension s are right on.

Like the idea of ingen or tekada.... anything that isn't exactly the diameter of stock will need to be rescaled via a tune.... Hence why the ingen doesn't work for all.

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk

[NoFear99]

+1 for Takeda.

[s2d4]

-1 for everything but stock box.

[Fast_Freddy]

I don't know what you hope to accomplish by converting to a blow-thru MAF but it seems to me like a lot of work for very little return. By placing the MAS so close after the compressor you're sure to have turbulence issues. Worse than that, the relatively sharp transition from small to large diameter MAF tubing immediately before the MAS will significantly alter the MAS signal slope. Both of these changes will necessitate major re-mapping of the MAS signal slope to compensate for the new MAS placement. After all this work you will have slightly more accurate IAT readings.

This is JMO but I think the focus should be more on making the Phantom ESC ready for sale rather than incremental improvements in it's implementation. Now that the major issue of ignition key arming/dis-arming has been (or is being) incorporated, this thing should finally be ready for prime time. My last remaining concern is the lack of a reliable year-round starting battery recommendation and supporting tray/hold-down hardware

[Hanni_0176]

Originally Posted by Fast_Freddy

I don't know what you hope to accomplish by converting to a blow-thru MAF but it seems to me like a lot of work for very little return. By placing the MAS so close after the compressor you're sure to have turbulence issues. Worse than that, the relatively sharp transition from small to large diameter MAF tubing immediately before the MAS will significantly alter the MAS signal slope. Both of these changes will necessitate major re-mapping of the MAS signal slope to compensate for the new MAS placement. After all this work you will have slightly more accurate IAT readings.

This is JMO but I think the focus should be more on making the Phantom ESC ready for sale rather than incremental improvements in it's implementation. Now that the major issue of ignition key arming/dis-arming has been (or is being) incorporated, this thing should finally be ready for prime time. My last remaining concern is the lack of a reliable year-round starting battery recommendation and supporting tray/hold-down hardware

I agree with this. Finish polishing up the current version, and market it as a Stage 1 kit. That way, people can get their hands on something now, and the Developer(s) can earn some immediate capital to fund further R&D for improvements, i.e Stage 2, 3, etc kits.

[bfrank1972]

Originally Posted by Fast_Freddy

I don't know what you hope to accomplish by converting to a blow-thru MAF but it seems to me like a lot of work for very little return. By placing the MAS so close after the compressor you're sure to have turbulence issues. Worse than that, the relatively sharp transition from small to large diameter MAF tubing immediately before the MAS will significantly alter the MAS signal slope. Both of these changes will necessitate major re-mapping of the MAS signal slope to compensate for the new MAS placement. After all this work you will have slightly more accurate IAT readings.

This is JMO but I think the focus should be more on making the Phantom ESC ready for sale rather than incremental improvements in it's implementation. Now that the major issue of ignition key arming/dis-arming has been (or is being) incorporated, this thing should finally be ready for prime time. My last remaining concern is the lack of a reliable year-round starting battery recommendation and supporting tray/hold-down hardware

The man makes some solid points.

[Gary in NJ]

Some info for the beta testers...

For the past few weeks I've been playing with the OBD Fusion app on my iPhone, getting data logs and reviewing the information. From my data, maximum boost is generated right around 3000 rpm. This is true whether I engage at 2000 rpm or 2800 rpm. I also noticed that I was only producing about 3.6 psi of boost around 3000 rpm @ around 400' msl. This seemed low to me as I was expecting a value closer to 4.0 psi. This is also the same value that Moto-Mike showed the day I was tuned.

I have to admit, since the day I installed the ESC I never looked at it again to inspect my work, but I always thought a few of the couplers could look a little better. So a few days ago I removed the ESC from my car and carefully reinstalled it, making sure that I got a perfect fitment. I just reviewed my last 10 engagements and my boost is now showing 3.8 psi @ 3000 rpm.

As I reinstalled it I made sure everything looked straight and was well aligned. I tightened of the clamps like you would a tire, going back and forth until they were all torqued about the same. During this process I constantly realigned the intake tract.

I can't feel the 0.2 psi difference, but it's nice to know I'm getting all that I can out of my ESC.

[Robftss]

Originally Posted by Fast_Freddy

I don't know what you hope to accomplish by converting to a blow-thru MAF but it seems to me like a lot of work for very little return. By placing the MAS so close after the compressor you're sure to have turbulence issues. Worse than that, the relatively sharp transition from small to large diameter MAF tubing immediately before the MAS will significantly alter the MAS signal slope. Both of these changes will necessitate major re-mapping of the MAS signal slope to compensate for the new MAS placement. After all this work you will have slightly more accurate IAT readings.

This is JMO but I think the focus should be more on making the Phantom ESC ready for sale rather than incremental improvements in it's implementation. Now that the major issue of ignition key arming/dis-arming has been (or is being) incorporated, this thing should finally be ready for prime time. My last remaining concern is the lack of a reliable year-round starting battery recommendation and supporting tray/hold-down hardware

I agree, placement and transitions are less than ideal....it is a long shot...but easy to try since the sensor can be easily moved. At least we will know for sure, similar changes to MAF ID and placement to the VW allowed for manipulation of AFR's in open loop.

Sunday night will be -12C (10F) overnight, Fenton/Bu-Tang park outside

Rob

[jpit]

My last remaining concern is the lack of a reliable year-round starting battery recommendation and supporting tray/hold-down hardware.

I have attached a photo of my battery set-up. I chose the Odyssey PC925, a battery equal to or probably better than the OEM Panasonic battery. Needed to get a longer battery tray ($8.00 on ebay) and Rob made some adjustments for the wiring to fit. Taped and zip tied the batteries together and the fitment is perfect. I mounted the arming switch on top of the trunk
opening button. The green led display is somewhat bright and distracting and I wanted the steering wheel to hide it. With the switch now being controlled by the ignition there isn't a real need to view it all the time.

Gary, I am seeing a maximum of a 4.1 psi boost at 3000 but usually sits at 3.8. I'm using the Torque App. and I assume it is reading correctly.

[Gary in NJ]

Originally Posted by jpit

Gary, I am seeing a maximum of a 4.1 psi boost at 3000 but usually sits at 3.8. I'm using the Torque App. and I assume it is reading correctly.

Thanks for the confirmation. I think I'm in the right range now. I'll do some dedicated 3rd & 4th gear pulls from 2000 to redline and see what I get.

I've been playing with a few formulas to determine HP & Torque. One is a basic SPC calculation (gph*fuel weight/loss). At 7000 rpm I'm showing 10.57 gph. Using 6.2 pounds per gallon and assuming 33% loss (due to heat and friction) I'm showing 200 HP. 33% is the efficient end of the loss spectrum, but inline with WOT use. I'd use 38-40% at partial throttle.

The other formula I'm using as a comparison/validation is 43*((MAF g/s)/14.7)*loss)*1.34. This is something I found online and oddly enough the result is within a few percentage points of the SFC calculation.

[Hanni_0176]

While browsing for some totally unrelated information earlier (trying to figure out the pros/cons to running a lighweight crankshaft on a boosted motor), I came across this...

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hybrid_turbocharger"]Hybrid turbocharger - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

I know it's wikipedia, but this basically sounds like an improved version of the ESC. Basically, it's an ETC (electric turbocharger).

The design appears to be capable of recharging the battery at high engine speeds (while still engaged), allowing the car to have access to continuous boost (which would be relevant at the track). It also appears to be able to deliver power output at various throttle pressures (not just WOT), and is capable of delivering more precise timing than a typical turbocharger (which would improve mpg's significantly).

Unfortunately, it appears to be patented by a single company at the moment.

I'm curious how similar this thing is to the ESC though, and how much of the tech could be also be utilized with the ESC.

Anyway, just figured I'd share that with you guys.

Like I said before, I'm still very interested in this thread and the ESC, and would like to purchase one sometime next year.

[Gary in NJ]

The HTT is an exhaust turbine that spins a generator. The power developed is stored in a battery or capacitor. When demanded, the stored energy can run a motor/compressor to develop boost. So in this system waste gas is used to create stored energy.

The ESC uses waste/unused current (edit: I made a mistake here, see post #2499) from the alternator and stores that energy in batteries. When commanded (~70% throttle travel) the stored energy is used to run a motor/compressor to develop boost. The ESC is a simpler design. I would think lighter too as there isn't a turbine/turbo in the exhaust.