seems like a BETA version of something that can be great...in the future.

 

my thoughts exactly... a kind of stepping stone for something great...

 

I think the most important issue everyone is missing is the fuel... there are no fuel upgrades with this setup and no way to increase fuel to accomodate the boost. That means more cash, more time, and more research.

 

I have heard of smaller versions of these that dont produse that kind of flow, but supposedly flow up to 5 psi. Less $$$ to purchase also. I was thinking of doing a little research there when I had the cash. With that low amount of increased pressure, a fuel upgrade shouldnt be needed either...imo.

 

okay... boost 5 psi without fuel mods and I'm sure a vendor that sells pistons will love you.

 

Hello everyone, this is Geoff Knight from Boosthead.com, and I heard you were discussing my ESC. I would like to take this time to thank you for looking at my product, and also to answer some questions you have.
The ESC does indeed need fuel upgrades--additional air--no matter how little--will affect air/fuel mix. That is why the 'other' electric superchargers you may have seen dont work--period. They dont do diddly-squat, so then dont need additional fuel. I run an additional 550cc injector on my Altima to add the extra fuel at 8 psi. We have doubled the front wheel hp from 105 to 208 @ 8 psi. No turbo or other supercharger can even come close to that. Why?? Because all turbos are parasitic, as are all belt driven superchargers. The ESC is NOT!!!
We ran at Moroso last fri and ran 14.57 on a bone stock auto trans 2.4 engine running 8 psi. This grandma-mobile runs an 18.023 bone stock.
I understand your questions, but dont think for a second I have spend over a half mil on something that does not work, and work better than the turbos and superchargers I built for 30 years.
You question 15 seconds? Why only a short burst? When was the last time your car ran 15 seconds at WOT? Unless it is a Yugo you should have been over the speed limit. With my ESC and 15 seconds you would be at 95+ MPH in almost any car. I know speed limits are a nuisance, but we get lots off little pieces of paper if we dont obey them.
I will make one last point--I am building a 10 second ESC powered Neon right now--475hp @ 20 psi. What will the sceptics complain about when I run 10.' and then 9's? I can dial in boost at any level (over 40 psi has been tested), and there is no lag, no exhaust heat, no parasitic loss, no oil supply, etc. My drag racer uses a Kenne-Bell screw unit. My ESC weighs 38lb, and my battery-capacitor experimental cells weigh 28lb and produce 55KW for 12 seconds @ 72V. They recharge in five minutes.

 

Wanna sponsor a Ralliart???

 

OZ, LS, and ES models need 14 seconds (even at 20 psi) maybe you should make a battery upgrade

 

I second that - wanna sponsor my Lancer ES - i am looking to go boost, so if u sponsor me, we can work out a deal

 

ps - what upgrades would u need to run the 20psi?

 

US lancer puts out about 100whp stock... at 9psi i put out 230+whp... don't make claims that are false or you'll get caught in a lie... just like now!

Keep up the work as it is interesting and totally believable. Drawbacks of recharging are a downer but to some it may not matter. What would really suck is in a street race, evne though illegal, you'd find yourself behind since you can't keep the boost up past 15 seconds.

 

for 2 grand i would rather save up a little while longer get the rrm non-ic with all the parts you need and have boost all the time. And you can upgrade to IC later for not that much. As far as saying that no other supercharger or turbo can come close is not true so i am not too sure about this electric supercharger until i see some dynos from our cars.

 

''US lancer puts out about 100whp stock... at 9psi i put out 230+whp... don't make claims that are false or you'll get caught in a lie... just like now!

Keep up the work as it is interesting and totally believable. Drawbacks of recharging are a downer but to some it may not matter. What would really suck is in a street race, evne though illegal, you'd find yourself behind since you can't keep the boost up past 15 seconds.''

First of all, you must compare apples to apples. The KA24 in the Altima cant make 208 hp in an automatic vehicle. So dont confuse others by calling me a liar--I dont lie or exxagerete--ever!!! I assure you that many of you dont nunderstand turbos or supercharging, so for the others who might be mislead by your answer here are the thermodynamic equations and physics to back my well known truth about the ESC making more power than ANY turbo or SC--PERIOD!!!

1--Superchargers take power to turn them. The complete equation is too long, so for simplicity I will give you one that is within 1.2% of the longer formula. CFM X PSI divided by 175 = crank hp to turn a supercharger including friction losses at 65% Adiabatic Efficiency.
2--boost pressure heats air--about 12 degrees for each psi.
3--airflow is determined by NA airflow X pressure ratio divided by density ratio. So at 70% AE we get:
2.0 liter engine turning 8000 rpm @ 90% VE = 285 CFM
9 psi +14.7 divided by 14.7 = 1.61:1 Pressure ratio
1.61 PR @ 70% AE = 1.35. So a 2.0 @ 9 psi flows 285 X 1.35, or
384 CFM. 384 CFM X 9 PSI = 3462 divided by 175 = 19.75 hp to turn the belt driven supercharger.
4--a supercharger has boost pressure push down on the piston during the intake stroke, so a PV thermodynamics book has a formula to compensate for it-- 1/2 RPM X CID X psi / 396,000
So 4000 (RPM) X 120 (CID) X 9 =4320000 Divided by 396,000 = 10.2 extra hp.
5--A turbo creates boost at the cost of pressure in the exhaust manifold--in the turbo business it is known as the intake/exhaust pressure ratio. On factory turbo cars the PR is around 2:1, meaning at 9 psi there is 18 psi in the exhaust manifold. That is a restriction--no matter what anyone says. So for calculating the additional hp of a supercharger with no backpressure the PV intake stroke power formula is added, and then the power to turn the blower is subtracted.
6--using the numbers quoted for your turbocharged Lancer we can conclude that a supercharger would make 230WHP + 10.2 - 19.75, or 220.45 hp if everything was equal. My ESC would not have any losses at all, so it would make 230 + 10.2 for a total of 240.1 wheel hp. That is facts--not speculation. Also consider that the a/f mix can run leaner because the EGT is lower, and ignition timing can be more advanced because the lower EGT (about 300 degrees cooler) wont require retarding the timing to avoid detonation. So add another 3-5hp from the better a/f mix and ignition timing, and we make 245 hp, with NO spoolup time, NO lag, and NO variable tuning issues that a turbo kit runs into.

We do offer a partial sponsorship--for anyone interested.

The ESC can run for two minutes and drain the batteries completely. I get 3 runs from four 10lb batteries at the track, and I run two 58lb batteries on the street and get twenty 10 second runs which recharge in 40 minutes of driving with my 200 amp severe duty alternator. After a 1/4 mile run I can drive for 6-7 minutes and be fully recharged. The only race I would lose is the 2F2F guys who run on I-75 at 2AM for a few minutes reaching 150+ MPH. I am 48 years old and not stupid. I will save my races for the track.

 

Ahhhh where the hell do all these number come from. And as far as the equation i say **** it and lets see some dynos to prove it. You can prove anything with the equations that doesnt make any sense because everything is abbreviated and you use symbols like @. All im saying is on the track not the paper.

 

ya i kind of understand that equation - but would much rather see some dyno's.

dont take it personal, haha b/c we are being like 100X nicer to you than the RIPP guys, its just that, well, we love Dyno sheets