Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

if ur talkin about an electronic supercharger all it is is an electric fan that removes any negative pressure in the intake manifold and is apparently not as effective as they say although it will make some difference

they theoretically sound good... but are far far from it

There not even theoretically sound.

These things use a motor that has about 90% efficiency. Charging you battery is ~60% efficient (?). On top of that the alternator is 80-90% efficient and it takes power from the motor to start with. I'm just pulling numbers out of my ass but you get the idea.

ja matt i see your point, but this is when you start looking into practically... and the whole theoretically sound thing too deeply

they are "theoretically sound" as in that they are attempting (and quite badly i might add) to force more air into the intake...

they are theoretically sound otherwise idiots wouldnt be buying them would they?

we all on the same wavelength though.

1000 CFM at 2psi.

fairly restrictive warranty.

I could see it helping - if you have a 1.6L N/A econobox. A little more torque off the mark.

maybe it would help on a 1.8.... how much air does your engine suck at 2krpm? 3? 7?

waste of time on an engine that develops any sort of decent power, and as soon as you are moving, well, there is that extra load. don't forget electrical load is turned into mechanical resistence in the altenator.

Not saying I wouldn't buy one - I just don't happen to have an EFI 1.6 shopping trolley.

EDIT: spelling

Edited by ebola

I was reading an article on the popular science website where they tested a whole bunch of 'fuel saving' devices and they conluded that the best you can hope for is nothing will happen, one device even set the car on fire :happy: most just increased fuel consumption and decreased power.

I was reading an article on the popular science website where they tested a whole bunch of 'fuel saving' devices and they conluded that the best you can hope for is nothing will happen, one device even set the car on fire :/ most just increased fuel consumption and decreased power.

Car catches fire, you stop driving it. You stop driving it, the engine stops burning fuel.

System works as advertised. No refunds.

Car catches fire, you stop driving it. You stop driving it, the engine stops burning fuel.

System works as advertised. No refunds.

haha, i have been meaning to look into these heard a bit about them iv seen 1 in someones engine b4 not much i know about them. apart from what u guys already know. :(

guy at my work has one on a paseo 1.5. He said it definately does give more grunt but the fuel consumtion DID NOT get better, it got allot worse according to him. Apparently theres simlilar systems for motor bikes that iv heard some people rave about.but thats on a very small motor remember

my opinion on them is that they probably would add maybe 4 ish kw's of power at the wheels on a small motor NA car.Youd be able to only just feel the difference i rekn. I guess if your modding a small capacity NA with cheap bolt on uprgades for a little extra get up and go then it would be ok. On there website they do say that they " work best on smaller engines".

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • For once a good news  It needed to be adjusted by that one nut and it is ok  At least something was easy But thank you very much for help. But a small issue is now(gearbox) that when the car is stationary you can hear "clinking" from gearbox so some of the bearing is 100% not that happy... It goes away once you push clutch so it is 100% gearbox. Just if you know...what that bearing could be? It sounding like "spun bearing" but it is louder.
    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
×
×
  • Create New...