Here's an idea I've been toying with. I was thinking of making my own
home made supercharger type thing. Not knowing much about forced
induction, I've got the following basics: turbos are run off the
exhaust, superchargers are run off the engine/belt itself. Both are too
much mucking around for my liking - I'm looking at doing this just out
of shit I have laying around, or can pick up cheaply. I was thinking of
doing it with an electric motor, and probably have a second battery
(possibly with a switch so it can be turned on when wanted thus saving
power the rest of the time) Put simply I'm looking at strapping a worked
hairdryer to my intake ! :-)
What do you reckon ? Does it sound worthwhile or am I not going to get
any sort of benefit out of it.
If nothing else I'd probably have the worlds flashest cold air intake
:-)
Eddie
Hyena <hye...@start.com.au.spam-me-and-die> wrote in message
news:3ACBBFA7...@start.com.au.spam-me-and-die...
Hyena <hye...@start.com.au.spam-me-and-die> wrote in message
news:3ACBBFA7...@start.com.au.spam-me-and-die...
100 amps (not unrealistic I assume) at 12 volts would be 1.2kw
Geared up enough a starter motor might provide enough pressure with
enough volume to make a difference.
That said I think an electric setup would be just as much hassle
as a supercharger running off the fanbelt (but less hassle than a
turbo).
Pete
You're still cut about the wheels post ! :-)
It happens from time to time :-)
> Do you have a few kilowatts or so electric motor that runs off 12 volts?
> That's
> how much power you would need - enough to melt down your wiring.
>
Shit hey. Oh well, I thought it sounded like a good idea but I guess thats
why no one has done it. Although it wouldn't be the first time some one
patented an idea that I'd had a year earlier.
Someone already has :)
www.turbozet.com
-- The Red Krawler
Sometimes I think I'd be better off dead.
No, wait.. Not me....
You.
You're a hopeless mofo.
Speaking of hopeless mofos... www.turbozet.com
1.2kw would only be enough to deliver a small amount of boost on a small
engine. And a starter motor isn't designed for continuous operation - it
would die quickly if used for something like that.
On top of that, all this electricity has to come from somewhere - can you
imagine how big your alternator would have to be to deliver 1.2kw on top of
its existing load? It would have to be as big as your average supercharger!
> That said I think an electric setup would be just as much hassle
> as a supercharger running off the fanbelt
Much more hassle actually.
> (but less hassle than a turbo).
I don't understand why people think turbos are complex - in many cases it's
*easier* to fit a turbo than a supercharger. No need to fabricate a big
solid bracket, line it up perfectly at the front of the engine, modify your
crank pulley, etc. All you need is a manifold to mount the turbo somewhere
near the exhaust side of the engine, a few hoses for the coolant and oil,
and you're away. Of course you also need to worry about intercoolers and
inlet plumbing, but you have the same issues with superchargers.
Norbie.
F*CK ME !! Snaked again !
I'm sure I could corner the Australian market with the Hyena-Charger :-)
Screw you Krawley, sitting all high and mighty behind the wheel of your
twin turbozetted laser !
There's a good reason why turbo's and superchargers work they way they do.
There's a significant amount of energy required to drive these items and
compress large volumes of air. Ever hold your hand partly over the top of a
carby while the engine is idling? There's a very strong suction and a decent
volume of air being consumed, now multiply that by 6000rpm and then multiple
that by the increased boost that your trying to add and you'll soon realise
why turbo impellers spin at around 100,000rpm. Try make your hairdryer pump
that much air;-) Even consider an air compressor with a 1 or 2 hp engine,
the volume of air is still nowhere near what an engine would require. As the
person in the other post said your require something like 14kw to drive a
device to produce that much air.
Nevo
"Hyena" <hye...@start.com.au.spam-me-and-die> wrote in message
news:3ACBBFA7...@start.com.au.spam-me-and-die...
In any case you can actually buy one to fit a BriggsStratton small engine
cost is US$799 (AUS$1600) so you might get a few ideas from this one
http://www.hscsupercharger.com/
Ciao HL
Don't suppose anyone is interested in my other idea, the old pipe your
airconditioner into your intake trick ? The worlds first intercooled N/A engine
:-)
You could, with appropriate marketing to the brainless ricer demographic.
Just look at the success of the Turbozet thing - it's utterly useless, but
people continue to buy them!
Norbie.
> Don't suppose anyone is interested in my other idea, the old pipe your
> airconditioner into your intake trick ? The worlds first intercooled N/A engine
> :-)
how about my idea of putting a new engine in the back to power the air
conditioner, so you don't suffer any power loss when you turn it on?
Pete
Shaddow
there was a WRX with one in a mag a while ago. he claimed it improved
throttle response.
Trent
> Someone already has :)
> www.turbozet.com
Autospeed loved it :-)
http://www.autospeed.com/A_0237/page1.html
Yeah turning the aircon off is almost like a "turbo boost" button you see in
old car movies / cartoons etc.
> What do you reckon ? Does it sound worthwhile or am I not going to get
> any sort of benefit out of it.
> If nothing else I'd probably have the worlds flashest cold air intake
> :-)
I don't think you would.
You'd probably need an electric motor the size of a Fiat 500 to make enough
power to drive a blower on your average engine. This doesn't mean that it's
an impossible task, but the car is sure to have a *very* limited range
unless you can come up with some extremely long 3 phase power leads to run
the blower drive.
Either that, or you can come up with some sort of "tail hook" like the
DeLorean in "Back to the Future" had on it and run it off the overhead tram
wiring, as it would take you more than a bootload of car batteries to get
you half a kilometre :)
Regards,
Noddy.
When connected to power:
Tiny electric fans rotate at speed similar to PC-cooling fans, creating
a faint breeze
Reaction of all technical experts who examined the Twin Turbo Zet:
Extreme mirth
Yep, they sure do :)
hahahahhh
Dont go too far, or I'll suggest you're a closet Camira owner.
I'd love to hear everyone thoughts on this one... there's even a
downloadable mpg with an example on it.
--
Dale Walker < da...@icr.com.au >
Hey I don't own no poor mans Commodore !
Speaking of Camiras, I must take a picture of this riced up one that I
always see parked up the train station. It's got like a full Walkinshaw kit
on it. The funniest part is all the paint is flaking off the stick on bits.
Read the Autospeed article and draw your own conclusions...
http://www.autospeed.com/A_0237/P_1/article.html
Worse than useless. The thing would actually RESTRICT the intake, and you'd
probable lose power!
> Read the Autospeed article and draw your own conclusions...
> http://www.autospeed.com/A_0237/P_1/article.html
Thats about the TurboZet you mofo (www.turbozet.com), not the eRam
supercharger.
Geez. Some people.
Well atleast its a bit bigger than the wankzet
Eddie Goblok <gob...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3acbcfb7....@news.onthenet.com.au...
> I am sorry to say but you are pulling your dick big time. Do you have
> a few kilowatts or so electric motor that runs off 12 volts? That's
> how much power you would need - enough to melt down your wiring.
>
>
> Eddie
Could be a neat way to electrocute car theives though :)
Eddie
I've often thought of having an electrocution type car alarm. Have metal
contacts or spikes in the seat that deliver an electric charge into the bum of
the potential theif. There'd be nothing better that coming back to your car an
hour later to find a tasered unconcious would-be car their laying in your seat
:-)
> He could have an inverter straight from a battory and run 240v.. cheaper to
> get a turbo though!
That would be even worse. There is no free energy, so a motor that
consumes 4kW at 12VDC will still consume similar at 240VAC, assuming no
conversions losses.
In fact, we are living in the real world and therefore using an inverter
is very silly, because of 2 things:
1) No inverter is 100% efficient. If it's 80% efficient (and that's being
generous) you now need 5kW worth of battery input power to get 4kW worth
of 240VAC output power. That extra 1kW is dissipated as waste heat mainly
in the output drivers and transformer.
2) The more efficient inverters produce a "dirty" square wave output. A
true sine wave inverter produces something much closer to a mains output,
but at the cost of efficiency. A motor will NOT run well on a dirty square
wave output, so when you hang it off a true sine wave inverter your
efficiency from battery to motor terminals will be something shocking like
50%. 8kW in, 4kW out.
Then there is the motor (in)efficiency to contend with. Inefficiences are
cumulative, so the amount of output power at the motor spindle versus the
power taken from the batteries may be significiantly smaller.
I've heard it said that heat is the only near 100% efficient conversion
from electrical energy.
BTW, where are you going to find an alternator, charging system, and
battery that can handle continuous current charge/draw of 300+ amps
(assuming 4kW at the battery)?
Cheers.
--
"rowan-ns" is used exclusively for newsgroup postings, to clearly show when
spammers have indiscriminately harvested my email address from a newsgroup.
Please remove the "-ns" to reach me directly.
Rowan Crowe http://www.rowan.sensation.net.au/
Personal webcam index and archiving http://www.camrecord.com/
Sensation Bot (AI chat) http://www.sensationbot.com/
ever connected a vacuum cleaner to a lawn mower ??
Brendon wrote:
> "The Red Krawler" <kra...@hoontown.com> wrote in message
> news:3ACBF401...@hoontown.com...
>
> > Someone already has :)
> > www.turbozet.com
>
> Autospeed loved it :-)
>
They Get payed to...
>Here is my idea....A super/turbo exhaust Extractor.This was used on the
>bombers during WW2 I cant remember who ( I think it was Allison or
>Packard)
>Run a shaft off the flywheel like the starter motor, connected up the a
>Turbo through an overrun clutch ( the starter motor has one) . This would
>create a vacuum in the manifold and in turn the cylinder drawing the fuel
>into the cylinder. A supercharger in reverse!
>Feedback??? Anyone???
>
Nope, it just ensures that no exhaust is left in the chamber, doesn't
boost.
Although a small boost could be achieved by using long inlet tracts
and the inertia of the inlet charge. Really only suitable for constant
speed engines like aircraft (funny that).
Oz
A system like this is already used on large diesels (eg Caterpillar), but
the turbine doesn't draw exhaust out of the cylinders - it works the other
way, ie the turbine drives the crank. In other words, the waste energy in
the exhaust is being put to good use.
Those who claim that turbochargers create parasitic drag on the engine, take
note of this. If that were the case, this system would not work!
Norbie.
Ian
How?
Shaddow
They got paid to say how useless it was ? get with it.
I would have thought it was pretty self explanatory - there is a turbine in
the exhaust which is connected directly to the crank, presumably via
drop-down gears since the turbine would be spinning much faster than the
crank.
Norbie.
I was thinking and couldn't be bothered so thanks.
Shaddow
> They Get payed to...
Why don't you follow the link, and read... THEN learn what an :-) means.