sosonic

Ok, where to begin?

1st off globi I did not create this thread if your comments are being directed at me. Why not attack the orginal creator of this thread?

2nd, the other thread is mostly 2004 comments and this is 2006 going on 2007. Since 2004, the "serious" electric superchargers have undergone changes.

3rd, there are 2 "major" electric superchargers. The other thread mostly talks about the Thomas Knight electric supercharger, and this one was talking about the e-RAM electric supercharger.

4th, the electric supercharger option should be explored. The is because of its "Return On Investement". A Blitz supercharger costs near $5,000 dollars (and the others are around the same or MORE) to give you like a 50 HP boost (and the others are 60 to 80 HP). The Super e-RAM is claiming that for $600 dollars it can give you 27 HP. This includes them posting dyno results and videos verifying the e-RAM's performance and the guy owns a patent for it.

Despite having potential, the Geoff Knight electric supercharger does not appear cost effective. You are talking extra batteries, limited boost time, extra weight, extra space requirements, etc.... for about the same cost or almost as expensive as a Blitz, Axial Flow, Pettit, Hymee, etc... supercharger.

On the otherhand, the e-RAM is cost effective (IF it works), therefore could be an option. So, I was thinking about some serious debate. Calling the e-RAM a piece of sh*t, without proof, may be unjustified.

The e-RAM website has actually made point for point arguments defending their product from comments similar to one in this and other threads. If the guy is a fraud, than it would be interesting to prove it. If not, and the guy is legit, than his electric supercharger should be a viable option because of its price to HP ratio.

Fearsomefatman

I am just gonna say this to you, buy an e-ram... install it and then see for yourself, if it does not work you can sell it on ebay, heck I bought the magnaflow exhaust for my 8 and then sold it once I figured out how horrid it is, (I hate it, not the tone for me)

I however will simply save enough money for a turbo or a pettit unit, (I like the pettit set up) but that will be once I have the car paid off february 2008

globi

Who cares whether they have changed or not?
The calculations are based on 200 year old thermodynamic laws and the were valid back in 1853 as well as 2004 and my guess it they are still valid in 2006 as well as the year 3006.

The proof is in the calculations and therefore justified.

There is a very justified reason that you need all these extra batteries - without serious power in there is no serious power out.

sosonic

globi, I've seen numerous threads and posts which attack the e-RAM. The calculations go back and forth too, on both sides. and both sides make numerous assumptions.

Its much better to see practical results like dyno runs, G-timer results, and actual experience.

Geoff Knight, the inventor of the other viable electric supercharger, has somewhat vouched for the e-RAM as he had access to a customer that bought and used it on his car.

There is nothing about the e-RAM concept that will indicate that it can not work. The concept is viable. Actually, regardless if it works or not in this form, I think its a good idea. So I'm curious about it and want one.

Its a matter of whether or not the device delivers the performance that it promises. Even some of its most negative critics argue about the level of performance and HP results and not that it does not completely work.

I consider this like an exhaust, CAI, Pulleys, etc... that make HP or performance claims. You can find people on both sides of the debate that will say a product does or does not work. When it comes to saying something does NOT work, I rather they actually put their money where their mouth is, bought it and then say it was a piece of crap. Debating formulas, is very, very problematic.

In the case of the e-RAM many of the people that have negative comments have never owned one, tried one, or were comparing it to some other device that has nothing to do with the e-RAM.

Instead of debating formulas, I'm contemplating buying one (still waiting on their response to some of my e-mails to them) and seeing if it will really work. I have a G-Timer and would see some performance gain, if there is any to have. If it does NOT work, than trust me, I will be quick to let other RX-8 owners know. If it works somewhat or does fully deliver, than I will let people know what I learned.

Also, the e-Racing/e-RAM offers a refund if you can prove no performance increase via dyno or G-Tech. That's at least fair and better than what you get from many other products that claim performance gains. I'm checking if they will accept G-Timer results too.

Spin9k

Here's a thought or two for you to think about sosonic. I too was quite interested in this idea a year ago and finally came up with the following problems with the marketing/scientific arguements for things of this type (that I've never tested out, but still believe to hold true). See if they make sense too you too. It took the air (lol) out of them for me.

These little fans can produce lots of CFM, perhaps as much as they say. That's great. But we do need boost pressure too at that rated CFM, otherwise we're not really doing anything NA "sucking" of air to the cyclinder or rotor doesn't get done with simple atmospheric pressure differential.

This is where these tales of cheap HP start fall apart. They can produce some small static pressure with little to no flow (like .5 or 1 PSI) OR they can produce some air flow volume with little to no static pressure. But doing both at the same time ... I don't see how they can.

What the "real deals" like super/turbo chargers produce (and why they are expensive) is sufficent air volume (CFM) AND at a pressure of several PSI above atmosphere at the same time. You can see this looking at their pressure/flow curves. At high flow volumes they show high boost pressures. These cheaper imitators don't do that - they can do some of one or some of the other, but not enough of both at the same time. Result - little to no on the road improvement - just what you'd expect for the price.

Example - There is no PSI pressure in air going fast (stick your hand out the window at 100mph - neat huh? But no air under pressure is to be found there - only volume flow past your hand. Put a tube out the window with the back end blocked and a pressure sensor there. Some (very small) pressure is there, but no volume.

The electrical issue is another problem. Short run times may not be important on the street, but for other track use, it's a problem as the performance envelope is pushed whenever possible, and usually 100s of times in the course of an hour.

What do you think?

RX8PDX

I dont know why people get fooled into these things.

Look at the size of that thing, its barely big enough to cool my CPU. (im exaggerating).

The DC available from the cars batteries is just not enough to create sufficient boost (for the price).

You are talking about the energy from the exhaust forcing a 'fan' or the mechanical force of the engine itself through the crank pulley to spin a 'fan'. These create much more work than a few batteries will. And with a TC/SC you dont have to add anything to get that power, its already created by the engine.

You would need a massive power source to be able to create enough force to get enough boost to matter. The machine I work on runs on 208V 3 phase AC from large about 50lb amps, to power linear motors, and I can still make them overload if I push on the device hard. And thats some serious power.

You may see a SLIGHT increase in power on a dino, but a dino doesnt factor in weight. How much do all those extra batteries weigh that you need to power that thing, for what 15 seconds? And you get what, 5HP? For $2500!!!!

This guy Knight, has got to be LOL at the people who buy these things. Hes just lucky, that there are enough stupid people to actually pay for these things. Heck, people bought pet rocks.......

I bet you could stop the fan with a pencil.

sosonic

But see my issue is its better to have somebody actually try it than just to claim its a scam. I can be up in here saying RB ram ducts are big scams and other people can say they work, so who is right? I can say all the "proof" that RB offers is total crap. I rather people told me they bought it, did a test, and then make a claim.

e-Racing is even offering refunds if their product fails to provide a performance increase, so why not take them up on it?

Its no big deal for me to check if its real or not. I will "slap it on", check performance gains with a g-timer (as its pretty cheap and easy for me to do) and go from there. I'm not afraid and will put my money where my mouth is. If it does not work, than I will know for SURE that it does not work and will let everyone know about it. If it does, than I will pass that info. along to.

Of all the things you can do in life or with an RX-8, this is not so big to do.

BoosTED

iTrader: (2)

Keep in mind that the blades for the fan are in the intake pipe. They can cause resistance if they are not flowing enough. If it is only used for short bursts then the time it is resting will cause resistance.

Spin9k

Cool dude, go for it. One word of caution I got from those folks... they told me there was not enough room for one of these under the RX-8 hood wo/removing the stock intake, and certainly not enough for the dual fan one. Other than that... slap her in there and have a go Let us know what happens on a G-Tech and on the track if you can.

globi

Don't bash Knight. He is the only one that produces an electric supercharger which provides serious power.
If you take 3 12V batteries and each providing 600 A you end up with 22kW or roughly 30 hp, which easily results in over 100 extra hp's.
Yes maybe you only have boost for 20 seconds. But if the car takes 6s from 0 to 70 what are you gonna make with the remaining 14 seconds? Knight compares electric superchargers with nitrous and this is a valid comparison. Charging your batteries is done automatically and is less expensive than buying nitrous bottles.
If you want to bash something, bash that e-RAM which according to the website draws 0.8 kW, with most probably less efficient electric motors than Knight uses. The e-RAM is not a purposely designed compressor and draws 30 times less power, so there's your answer.

But again you guys should read the other thread instead of re-discussing what has already been discussed.

BaronVonBigmeat

Well, the thing is...if we start with the assumption that someone is selling a bilge pump, without admitting that it is a bilge pump--and selling it for inflated prices--then it's not a big jump to assume that they are not going to honor their warranty either. Or give honest dyno numbers.

Having said that, if you want to give it a shot, go for it. I do wish there were more options for real HP increases in the sub-$3k price range and wish you the best.

edit2: well I'll be damned, they did actually win several SEMA awards.

http://www.sema.org/main/semaorghome.aspx?id=56281 (ctrl + F and type in "e-ram")

Although it also says that the awards were selected by journalists from 37 different publications, so I'm considerably less impressed than if it had been voted on by a panel of experienced racers or engineers.

Cody Red

So is anyone gonna do it?

BaronVonBigmeat

Another thought: If we're talking about something which is not much more than an air-moving device with a motor attached, why not use a turbo as a starting point? An actual turbo by itself (without boost controller, BOV, ECU, headers, etc) can be had cheaply, right? At least from what I have read here. So take the compressor side of a cheap turbo, and drive it with a motor. I doubt that would do anything either, but at least that would seem somewhat more plausible, at lower RPM's perhaps. Frankly even if this thing did make 7% more power or whatever, I would be leery of using it, simply because the fan looks like a flimsy little piece of stamped sheetmetal that could fly apart and get sucked into the engine.

The Ace

OK, some simple -and a bit simplistic- math: your 6port renesis produces 170kW of power (230HP). The eRAM is a 0,8kW device, that if it was 100% efficient could possibly mean 0,8kW of energy transfered to the motor.
So, AT BEST, this device could provide an additional 0,8kW or roughly 1HP to the engine....any way you look at it, this is not very probable.....

Brettus

iTrader: (2)

ace - on that logic a belt driven supercharger will only add the amount of power it takes to drive it

The Ace

Not quite the same. You also have to take into account the multiplication that happens with the gears of the supercharger, or the a.r ratio for a turbo, so mechanics (leverage/axle) come into play...not to mention turbine design, flow dynamics etc,...

In any case, the energy used by a turbo (heat/velocity of exhaust gases) or the HP sapped off the shaft by a supercharger is near or in the double digits of percentage of the total power output, which is adequate power to actually provide the necessary pressure in order to produce any real tangible results in the intake charge.

In this case, the power used by the e-turbo actually spins directly the compressor side, so nothing of the above apply here. Hence the 0,8kW are simply not nearly enough to provide any serious amount of boost (notice how the site mentions 1psi, or 1,7psi for the 1,7kW version). 1,5psi would roughly equal to about 4-5% increase, but hey, 2-4% is the margin for mechanical and instrument error, or engine power output fluctuation.....not to mention that a properly working ramair will produce almost 2psi of pressure above 200kph....

Even if this does work (which I'm sure is debatable even you had the unit in your hands and very accurate instruments to measure its performance), it is simply another stupid way to waste 400$...invest the same amount in a decent piggyback and some dyno time, and you'll see way better results

globi

wtf?
You could get 5 times as much power with a supercharger than without one - especially if it is one without parasitic loss such as an electric supercharger.
So with 0.8kW in you might get 4kW out, but since this fast spinning electric motor (0.8kW is the electric power consumed and not the mechanical power produced) and since the sheet metal blades are not quite as efficient you might get 2kW, so roughly 3hp. Which is not far from what a CAI would bring and therefore not that bad after all.

The Ace

And I'm saying something different ? The turbo uses the wasted energy of the exhaust gases, while the supercharger saps energy off the shaft in order to do the same thing. The additional energy equivalent introduced into the system is the extra o2 forced into the air/fuel mixture, causing it to contain more chemical energy, thus producing higher resulting kinetic energy.

However, both turbo and s/c multiply the force of the impeller by altering the ratio of rotation for the compressor, while this is not the same as the e-turbo. The fact remains: the energy used by the e-turbo is simply not enough.

The TKT might be a valid effort, but look at what it entails....

sosonic

e-Racing will accept G-Timer computerized results. GT-2 G-Timer data can be uploaded to a computer. So they will accept Dyno test, G-Tech, or G-Timer test results. If there is no performance increase than you can request a refund. You have to admit, they appear to be standing behind their product.

On the RX-8 it appears that an AEM or Mazdaspeed CAI in combination with the inline super e-RAM (about 27 HP increase claim / 1.7 PSI) would be the most likely setup. But would add more cost to the setup and bring it around or above $1,000 dollars (though there should be some slight additional HP increases from the CAI too). With going with the stock box, instead of AEM and Mazdaspeed CAI, the issue is getting the inline super e-RAM after the MAF and having enough intake tube.

Example setups-

http://www.electricsupercharger.com/...ionguide.shtml

Marx8nka

so .. are you going for it?

Nemesis8

iTrader: (3)

I'm going to mount one in the rear bumper, and hook it up to a bubble bath sump! Thanks for the find