| Author | Message | ||
     Shot_Gun |
So, hmmm let me see here, you have vaccum at the intake manifold. Ok, now you have a device that makes the vaccum not as strong therefore increasing the volumetric effecientcy making the engine more effecient. Ok now it $300. Is there anything for less than $300 that adds pressure to the intake manifold? I'm not saying I'd buy it but turbo-chargers are expensive. Blake's math is as simple as it gets. Black and white. Just my 2 cents. SG | ||
| Reepicheep |
Thanks for the math Blake. The only part of my thoughts I was not sure of is if a fan is a "boost" and can simply bump up the existing airstream regardless of velocity and volume, or if it was an absolute. I assumed the RPM of the fan was fixed, and once the velocity of the air flow exceeds the terminal speed of the fan, it stops providing any boost at all and is simply an obstruction. They probably work around that in the more credible unit you refer too by only running it WOT, in which case they can design the fan pitch and RPMs such that it IS still boosting at that volume. The math makes a lot more sense as well... 50 amps to get a 5% gain. Sounds FAR more credible. Scale that down from their stated 3 litre to our 1.2 litres, and it is probably barely possible. It would be about a 25 amp current on a 300 watt or so motor. I would think the size of the motor would be an issue due to mounting location, but I bet we could sustain a 25 amp draw. Wonder if you could get that same 5% completely passively with a dual intake setup (or a "zero restriction airbox" in place of the gas tank  ) Annony.... relax and enjoy the board. This is a fantastic place for "gentle rebuke". Blake, Aaron, Big Hairy Ralph, and others have been most patient, gracious, and polite with me when I make some idiot assumption or comment. Both will not hesitate a second to call BS when they see it, but they are nice about it and take the time to educate and are gracefull in correction. This is rare. People with enough knowledge rarely give the time, and people with enough time rarely have the knowledge. Relax, come out into the open, and participate in polite discussion. You will either contribute or learn, nothing to loose. | ||
| Hans |
Excellent information, thanks gladiators ! The Zet thingy is worthless, but the E-Ram thing will do its job, as I am convinced. Let`s assume: 3 HP at WOT. That is 100 $$/ HP, only with WOT, and only for a few minutes. That is roughly the price you have to pay for a M2: 100$/HP, but then you can ride hours and hours and hours and hours, and you need not even WOT. Hans (160 HP? Take two M2`s) | ||
| Fasteddieb |
I have a friend who builds 3-wheelers who once mentioned he was looking at an electric blower arrangement for one of his projects. At the time, it sounded intriguing. I recently referred him to this discusssion. What got my attention is this: if it were that simple, why wouldn't ALL motor vehicles use them. Don't you think Honda would love to throw an electric fan onto a Civic and get "free" hp? If forced induction can be accomplished mechanically (via supercharging) or exhaust-driven (via turbo-charging) why NOT electro-charging? There must be good reasons (which I'll leave to the engineers). Not to say that "the masses" can't come up with unique ideas, that manufacturers later "borrow". I just don't think this is one of them. Sounded good at the time, though... | ||
| Snotrocket |
Blake, Really Really good info! Im always impressed by the level of knowledge this board offers. Is it possible that a more efficient electic motor/fan could be developed in the near future? Seems like it would be possible, however, I know nothing about electric motors... For all I know we could be squeezing every last bit of energy from them. It just seems like the whole electro-charger idea would work, especially after reading your response above. Call me whatever, but if I can easily add HP by bolting on the amazing "electro-charger" then I am all for it! However, it sounds like I need to wait awhile until someone comes out with a little better design. | ||
| Hootowl |
I was thinking the same thing. They are using a fan that spins up nearly instantly. Maybe if the fan had less starting torque i.e. not series wound, it would take less power to operate. Maybe it could be run at part throttle opening? Tied to a vacuum sensor maybe? The advantage of a series wound motor is its starting torque and high RPM potential. (If you start a series motor without a load attached it hs a tendency to overspin and damage itself.) | ||
| Blake |
I think that at anything less than near WOT, boosting the intake pressure doesn't make much sense. If you are cruising at constant speed the boost would simply cause you to open the throttle a bit less than in normally aspirated mode. I'd maybe set it to come on at 1/2 to 2/3 throttle though to give it time to spin up. Reep, I was wondering the same thing, which is one reason I calculated inlet air velocity. I agree that as long as the fan's motor has a terminal speed significantly greater than that required for the fan to match the inlet velocity, the concept should work fine. The one thing I'm skeptical about is how they package such a powerful little motor in their eRAM device. Though 22,000 rpm significantly diminishes the torque required to get 1 HP. The torque (T)needed to make 1 HP at 22,000 RPM would be...  They claim the 3.5" dia eRAM flows the same as an open 3" dia intake. From that we can estimate the diameter of the motor... Less a little for the added drag of a toroidal section, so maybe the motor is 1.5" diameter. That's larger than my Dremel's motor, so it seems feasible to me. At lower engine speeds (lower flow rates) the motor would load up and the eRAM's speed would be reduced, effectively lowering its power output, thus boost stays at a relatively constant level. Power in a pumping system is equal to flow times pressure differential (boost). The fan/motor should then be able to easily maintain 1 psi pressure differentail for all WOT engine speeds. The eRAM is supposed to work even for a car pulling 350 CFM. They claim the fan will flow up to 750 CFM; if their claims are true, they probably have enough margin for most automobile engines running short of 200 HP. Even if you can get 5 HP out of a free flowing intake, add the eRAM and get another 5 HP. Fast Eddie, I think the gains are small enough (4-5% only at WOT) that the eRAM's added complexity and electrical considerations probably discourage manufacturers from persuing such a system. Likewise for serious racers and HP junkies; it won't work on high 200+ HP engines and it's far short of what their friends and competitors are getting from a turbo, mechanical blower, or nitrous. I can definitely see problems with battery if the system were used in excess. Something a percentage of the mass market would likely do. SRocket, Unfortunately it's unlikey that any electric motor will ever put out more power than is put in. If you want 1 HP of output from an electric motor, you have to put a bit more than that into it in the form of voltage (V) times current (I) in amps (A) which equals power (P) in watts (W). Like Bill already pointed out, 1 HP = 745 W. Motor efficiencies due to mechanical bearings, resistive windings, and aerodynamic drag run significantly lower than 100%. I'm not sure but they are probably better for smaller, slower motors. Possibly approaching the 90% level? The nice thing about the eRAM is that the motor's raison d'être also performs perfectly as its cooling fan. Hoot, Interesting comments. I must be "series wound." ![:]](http://www.badweatherbikers.com/buell/clipart/proud.gif) Anony, Still waiting for your rebuttal.  | ||
| Snotrocket |
Blake, Where can I find some info. in regards to the calculations and what not that you have supplied. I trust your math! I just want to understand it a little better. Any good websites out there? Or, do I need to go to the library and check out some ME books? | ||
| Blake |
SRocket, There is a great site on the web somewhere that covered a bunch of physics and engineering fundamentals without getting into the derivations differential equations and calculus of the business, but I lost my favorites/bookmarks when my HDD crashed a month ago. You might check here for some good links. That topic will get expanded in time. Hopefully. | ||
| Rippen |
I was really distrurbed by one comment (actually many, but one in particular) that was made by Blake. "Though I agree that the Twin Turbo Zet device is ineffectual and a scam for the unwary, the writer of the article made one very elementary mistake in his technical discussion. He assumed that the electric blower must by itself generate the entire intake flow and at a boosted pressure level. It doesn't. An inline fan type of electric blower would add to the engine's nominal intake flow such that if a normally aspirated engine flowed 100 CFM and an electric blower fan could flow 20 CFM the total flow would be increased to somewhere between 100 and 120 CFM. " If the fan is installed in the intake, the worst following device within the system determines the systems overall flow characteristics. If I have a carb that flows 250 cfm, intake that flows 300 cfm and an air filter that can 200 cfm, I don't have a 750 cfm intake. I am restricted by the air filter in that case. The same is true when you install the fan; it is the restriction since it is a series airflow path. If you were to place the normal intake and the fan in parallel you still wouldn't generate any boost at any usable rpms. The only gain possible from this type of system would be at a near idle situation when the throttle body (now the largest restriction) is flowing less than the maximum of the electro-charger. | ||
| Blake |
Rippen, You are confusing airflow production (fan) with airflow resistance (intake tract=intake/filter/carb/manifold/heads), two similar but oppositely acting parameters, both having ratings in CFM for STD atmospheric conditions. Rather than a restriction to flow, the fan is acting as an air pump, an amplifier of air flow. If the fan is properly designed/chosen for the intake conditions in which it must function, it takes air from its intake side at low pressure (P1) and pumps it out at a higher pressure (P2) thus boosting the density (pressure) of the air flowing through the intake tract compared to a normally aspirated engine. Turn the fan off and measure it's flow resistance in reference to some standard reference pressure (10 inches of mercury), then yes, your point would apply. If it only flowed 20 CFM it would be a terrible restriction to the intake tract. However the resistance of the 3-1/2" diameter eRAM is advertised to be equal to that of a 3" diameter duct. That's how we calculated the approximate size of the motor, remember? Such resistance to flow is negligible as far as we are concerned. Did that make sense? What do you think the flow resistance of a turbocharger or blower might be if it were not under power? Doesn't matter does it? When under power, both will pump significantly more air thant the engine could pump on its own. Together they exceed the capability of either one alone. The eRAM concept is no different, just a lot less effective due to its relatively weak pumping power. | ||
| Se7enth_Sign |
Dirt cheap super charger... http://www.richmondlabs.com/Automotive/DCSP.html From what would you drive a belt supercharger on a motorcycle? | ||
| Rippen |
Blake, I am still not buying it. That fan is going to spin without power being applied at all due to the velocity of the air that the engine is trying to pull. This energy lost due to fan motion will a resistance to airflow. A fan on the front of a car pulls air through the radiator and robs horsepower. At speeds over 40ish mph, it is just along for the ride and doesn't add to airflow since the airstream it is working in is moving faster than the fan is pushing air. That is the condition I am seeing happening when the engine is requiring more air than the fan can provide. The only difference on the intake is that the fan is covering the entire flow area so it becomes a restriction. If it didn't cover the whole area it wouldn't build any pressure. It would be similar to trying to blow up a balloon with a hole in it. If it can bleed off air faster than it can take it in, you don't have a pressure increase. The believe the difference lies in our perspectives that you think the fan is adding to air no matter what speed is moves relive to the surrounding airstream. If you can't add air FASTER than the engine draws it in, I see it as a restriction. If you are seeing something differently, I would be interested in being enlightened. | ||
| Blake |
"That fan is going to spin without power being applied at all due to the velocity of the air that the engine is trying to pull." Agreed. The fan would most likely freewheel when left unpowered. "This energy lost due to fan motion will (be) a resistance to airflow." True, but if the fan requires very little torque to get it to freewheel, that energy loss in the form of a pressure drop can be negligible. If the fan blades were held in place the pressure drop would be worse,but if allowed to freewheel, the fan is akin to a poorly designed flowmeter and would pose very little, harldy any resistance. "A fan on the front of a car pulls air through the radiator and robs horsepower. At speeds over 40ish mph, it is just along for the ride and doesn't add to airflow since the airstream it is working in is moving faster than the fan is pushing air. That is the condition I am seeing happening when the engine is requiring more air than the fan can provide." That is a valid point, however you are neglecting the fact that the eRAM fan can indeed flow significantly more air than the engine requires, the eRAM fan however can only pump that amount of air at a pressure differential (pressure in minus pressure out) of only 1 psi. "The only difference on the intake is that the fan is covering the entire flow area so it becomes a restriction. If it didn't cover the whole area it wouldn't build any pressure. It would be similar to trying to blow up a balloon with a hole in it." Though not germane to our point of discussion, that is not an accurate statement. Even unducted airflow aimed at an intake orifice can significantly enhance the flow of an air pumping system. Pull the airbox off your bike and with the engine running at idle, point a high pressure compressor-fed air hose with nozzle directly into the carb orifice from about a foot away and pull the trigger. Your engine will speed up due to the ram-like boost it receives. This is the same exact effect as the UJM repliracers strategically incorporating their intake orifices into the front fairing. How do you understand that ram air works? You seem to be avoiding that point. The motorized fan is nothing more than artificial ram air. Of course, the fan's pitch/blades and motor must be designed to spin fast enough for the fan's flow to significantly exceed the velocity of the normally aspirated airflow. So if the fan freewheels at 10,000 rpm when left unpowered (motor power removed) at WOT, then speeds up to 22,000 rpm when the motor kicks in, what do you think is happening? The engine is its own air pump similar in many ways to a water pump. Say you have a large unrestrictive water line with a 14 HP pump that pumps the water up to the top of a steep, tall hill and in doing so pumps 350 gallons per minute. You also have a 1 HP pump that is unable on its own to provide enough pressure to pump water up the hill; it simply cannot develop enough pressure to overcome the height of the water column on it's route up the hill. You therefore use it instead to pump water from one holding tank to another that is only slightly above the first tank. The 1 HP pump can pump water form tank 1 to tank 2 at a rate of 500 gallons per minute flat out. How can the smaller pump provide such a high flow rate? It is not having to overcome the large pressure differential required to pump water up to the top of a tall hill. Rather it is only battling a very small difference in inlet and outlet pressure. If the 2nd tank were below the 1st, you wouldn't even need a pump would you? (siphon action) Now, for some reason, you need to increase the flow of water being pumped to the top of the hill. You have no larger pumps that you can use. But you can take 1 HP tank transfer pump offline if needed. You do so and place the 1 HP pump in series with the 14 HP pump. The flow of water to the top of the hill increases from 350 CFM to ~375 CFM. The eRAM is analogous to the 2nd pump; the engine is the first. Now water, an incompressible fluid, behaves much differently than air, a highly compressible fluid, but the analogy holds true. Are you convinced? I sure hope so. If not, post your counterpoints and I'll try again later. Where's X1Glider when I need him??!!  | ||
| Rippen |
The only problem I have with what you said was part of my original statement. "You need to increase the flow of water being pumped to the top of the hill. You have no larger pumps that you can use. But you can take 1 HP tank transfer pump offline if needed. You do so and place the 1 HP pump in series with the 14 HP pump. The flow of water to the top of the hill increases from 350 CFM to ~375 CFM." The problem with this scenario is that if you put these pumps in series, you must flow the entire volume through both pumps. You also are looking at it slightly different in the fact that you are considering the engine a contributing pump. You are trying to feel the engine as much as possible so it doesn't act like a pump. I think you want to look at the intake pressures and not the exhaust, which is what the two-pump scenario does. My bottom line is this: you need to apply much more power to move that much air. A typical supercharger (belt-driven) consumes as much as 25-40 percent of crank horsepower to turn it as fast as needed. I don't think you have a motor large enough to move that much air. Yes, the air hose increases idle speed of that engine. What does it do at half to full throttle? How much stored energy do you have in the air tank? Could you output that much power through a 1/4-horse motor if you have an "unlimited" amount of current? | ||
| Hootowl |
Car blowers provide a lot more boost than 1 PSI. They are also larger with a lot or rotating mass and friction. Also, in the tests, these things were used on cars and were making 1PSI. Our bikes don't flow as much air as a 350 small block. Maybe the boost would be greater. Lets all pitch in and buy one, somebody with a dyno can fit it to a bike, and yea or nay, we can clear all this up for everybody. | ||
| Aaron |
Send me one, I'll test it. | ||
| Blake |
Rippen, "The problem with this scenario is that if you put these pumps in series, you must flow the entire volume through both pumps." As long as the pumps are rated for that rate of flow, what exactly is the problem with that? Obviously the 1 HP pump will work, we know that it can flow up to 500 GPM. You now have 15 total HP pumping where you previously had 14 HP, thus the slight increase in flow rate. The eRAM concept acts the same way. Add a small pump to help a big one, give a small yet significant increase in total flow rate. You seem to be glossing over my discussions without really digesting the information. Everything I've stated is perfectly valid and applicable to the eRAM concept. "You also are looking at it slightly different in the fact that you are considering the engine a contributing pump. You are trying to (feed) the engine as much as possible so it doesn't act like a pump. I think you want to look at the intake pressures and not the exhaust, which is what the two-pump scenario does." But the engine most certainly IS acting as a pump. The engine is pumping air into its own cylinders. It's just doing it via a vacuum (sucking) rather than blowing. Maybe that's what has you confused. Consider that every pump sucks and every pump blows (no jokes please  ; it just depends at which port you look (inlet or outlet). We all know that for efficiency's sake the intake valve in each cylinder opens as soon as and actually before TDC of the exhaust stroke. But imagine now for illustration's sake that the intake valves stay completely closed until BDC of the intake stroke whereupon they then instantaneously open fully. The piston would pull a significant vacuum on it's way to BDC with both valves closed during what would normally be the intake stroke right? If we could measure the pressure in the cylinder just prior to the intake valve opening at BDC, we would find a very low pressure; it would be a small percentage of atmoshperic pressure (Patm=~14 psi) and so we would call it a vacuum. Let's estimate that at BDC the cylinder is at 10% Patm or ~1.4 psi (10% of 14 psi). Then at the instant the intake valve finally opens at BDC just before the air in the intake tract starts to violently rush into the cylinder, we would have a total pressure differential of 14-1.4=12.6 psi between the intake orifice and the valve seat. The resulting flow rate for the two cylinder four stroke engine turning at 6000 rpm is around 127 cubic feet of STD atmospheric air per minute. Now, consider the same scenario, but the intake has a fan capable of flowing 750 CFM that provides a 1 psi boost to the pressure at the intake orifice. The total pressure differential is then (14+1)-1.4=13.6 psi. Which case will fill the cylinder with more air? Here's another analogy... You are pushing a car up a slight incline. You can manage to keep it moving at 1 mph. A small boy joins your efforts. Now by himself the small boy would have no chance to even budge the car, if he tried it would roll right over him and accelerate downhill. But he can certainly walk at a speed of 1 mph, and when he ads his meager effort to the cause, the car accelerates a bit. You are the engine, the boy is the eRAM helping you out. I don't know how else to get the concept across to you, but I'll ask once again... If the eRAM cannot boost intake pressure and thus flow rate, how do ram air intakes work? "Yes, the air hose increases idle speed of that engine. What does it do at half to full throttle? How much stored energy do you have in the air tank? Could you output that much power through a 1/4-horse motor if you have an "unlimited" amount of current?" Put a bike on the dyno and blast the high pressure compressed air hose/nozzle straight into the exposed carb inlet while the engine is accelerating at WOT. Yes, even at WOT the result will be significant. Higher pressure at the inlet allows more air to flow to the engine. I'm assuming the float bowl vent sees the same pressure. I guess a better illustration would be to blast the nozzle into a filterless Force type intake so that the float bowl vent is far enough downstream to avoid localized turbulence. "My bottom line is this: you need to apply much more power to move that much air. A typical supercharger (belt-driven) consumes as much as 25-40 percent of crank horsepower to turn it as fast as needed. I don't think you have a motor large enough to move that much air." Yes, and a 1 ATM supercharger is moving all that massive amount of air from its intake orifice pressure of ~14 psi and boosting it another 14 psi less ~ 1/2 psi of intake restriction losses to a achieve a total intake tract boosted pressure of ~27.5 psi. The eRAM however, is moving much less air from an intake orifice pressure of ~14 psi since it is boosting it a mere 1 psi to achieve a total boosted intake feed pressure of 15 psi less 1/2 psi intake restriction loss equals 14.5 psi. Aaron, you have a good sized compressor right? | ||
| Se7enth_Sign |
Found on ebay when searching for "electric supercharger" Be Warned! These Fans are Total Scams and a Big Big Rip Off! These Items Not Only Do Not Work and Will Hinder Your Cars Performance, but they Can Also Cause Major Engine Damage If Placed In Your Car! These inline fans are only 130-230cfm 3-5 amp $15-$30 marine bilge Blowers using plastic fan blades. They ARE NOT The 750cfm 50 amp E-RAM Electric Superchargers. E-RAMs uses a high-power electric motor and an axial flow fan to spool up to 22,000 rpm in less than 1/10 of a second! They are able to slightly pressurize the intake air up to 1 psi with 4% - 6% GUARANTEED horsepower gains for $299.00 (Just Look it up and see for yourself) If these E-RAM Monsters can only give you up to 1 lb of Boost and 4-6% HP gain which is only 12 hp on a 200 hp engine. How Can These Scammers Claim 20-60 hp gains? Do you know why? Because they can say whatever they want! They are scammers and ebay can care less! They will not give you any boost! These Items on ebay are almost all Boat Bilge Blowers that put out at most 250 cfm and unable to provide boost! This might keep up with your engine at idle and that's it! Your engine intake will actually be restricted due to this type of fan being in your intake! Causing a loss of Power! The Engine Damage will be (and has been) caused with the in line models when your engine is running at high RPM's and these fans then spin (due to your engines intake) at over 2x their intended RPM's. These fans were not intended for high speeds they will encounter causing the plastic fan blades to break off and go into your engine! If you check out the e-ram electric blower they will tell you that they provide a screen that goes between the fan and your intake to keep pieces from getting sucked up into your engine! This is if you have a 4 cyl engine! Imagine if you own a 6 cyl or V8 and place one of these fans on them? Ebay Says I cannot give out URL's or any Web pages in my ads and I have To Be Selling Something! Ebay has already pulled several of my ads! Imagine that? Pulling my ads and leaving all of these bogus Fraudulent ads on ebay? So, This bid is for the URL (for $1.00) to an assortment of bilge Blowers like the Attwood TURBO 4000 BLOWER (like the one pictured) for $20.10 and many others for a fraction of the price you will find on ebay. If you are going to place this item in your car Please Do Not Bid on this Items URL! But, If this ad has saved you a lot of time, aggrivation, and Money and has enlightened you to these Fraudulent scams please donate $1.00 to my cause by bidding for the URL to these fans! The Big Blowers you now see on ebay are an even BIGGER SCAM than those small inline Blowers on ebay! They may not break apart and cause engine damage because they use a metal rotor, But Even if it did work (which they don't!)where would you fit the thing? These Blowers are made for Boats to exhaust fuel fumes! Not Cars! They are made of Plastic and if placed too close to your exhaust will cause a fire! These scammers are really becoming laughable! Please Read On! If Ebay continues to allow people to sell these items as TURBOS and SUPERCHARGERS that will give you 50-60 horsepower gains then there will be many unhappy Ebayers out there with a bad taste of ebay in their mouths! And I'd hate to see that happen! If any bidders are out there wondering why almost all their bids for this so called Turbo Supercharger are being done as a private auction it is because the sellers do not want you to know about this scam! They do not want anyone giving them info about this scam! If you check their feedbacks you will not see any good feedbacks for these so called Turbos! Why don't you see these blowers in car magazines? Better off going with an inline air induction system like Injen or AEM cold intake systems They are for real giving up to 7 hp increase! and usually under $200 and will not Damage your engine! These system increase airflow by reducing restriction from filter to intake and some even supply your engine with cooler air using a duct to the outside of engine compartment which increases power due to the higher density of colder air. It Makes The Engine Sound Nice Too! Below I have some of the many feedback letters from ebayers who have not been suckered into this scam! hey, thanks for the good information about the "superchargers". i just stumbled upon them today and was actually considering one for my 2000 civic si. but after your information i will definately not be putting an exahust fan in my car, and if i was i would go to a marine store and get it for much cheeper. once again thanks for the great and valuable info. thanks HAHAH! I kept asking them how a 220 cfm fan would increase my power on an engine which flows more to begin with and they refused to answer. I love the tact shown here in your auction/notice. Thanks for the laugh! --Curt-- I already knew it was a scam, but great job in posting this!!! Hopefully at least a few people will look and listen. nathan hey just wanted to thank you for the information i was getting abit skepitcal about this whole thing i mean build a turbo for 20 bucks lol but im glad someone actually put something up for people who dont no any better. A rip off it surely is. More power to you. Phil Thank you so much for putting this out there. I knew it was a scam but I know too many people who have been drug in by it. thanks. BT Hey, you're doing a good thing. I was wondering about those in-line blowers myself. I found the in-line one's at www.....com for $20.39. Even if I wanted one, I darn sure wouldn't pay $79.95 for it!!!!! Thanks, Richard YOU DA MAN!!!! ALTHOUGH, IT IS KINDA FUNNY HOW MANY TARDS' OUT THERE THINK THIS IS A VIABLE POWER ADDER!!!! lmfao!!!!! later keep up the good work. these jerks must be making a fortune...keep fighting the good fight So you may ask, What are these blowers good for? BILGE BLOWERS exhaust warm air from galleys and engine rooms, ventilating steam or odors from heads and general marine air circulation. Flangemount blowers are generally mounted with discharge port fastened directly to flat external surface minimizing required ducting. With mounting flange on discharge port. Inlet port can be connected with duct hose to area requiring ventilation. REMEMBER! This is an air bilge pump to exhaust fumes from a boat. NOT A TURBO or SUPERCHARGER for any internal cumbustion engine! I would be very happy if just 1 person out there saves time and money by reading this ad and not giving into these scamers. | ||
| Rippen |
The problem is that the eRAM is not rated for the flow of the engine. Se7enth_Sign, thanks for posting that ad. Blake, are you still a believer? Does anyone have a JCWhitney "tornado" making tons of horsepower too? | ||
| Blake |
Rippen, You need to reread the first paragraph of the ad that Se7enth_Sign posted. It supports my position 100%. It basically says that the eRAM is a reputable system, but that others claiming high HP gains with little underpowered fans are scams, just like I said in my original post on this topic. And yes, I still believe the claims advertised by the eRAM folks. | ||
| Hootowl |
Hey! Quit picking on my Tornado! It was the deciding factor in my successful 300MPH LSR attempt on my Honda Spree. (You ever see a Spree get hit by a tornado?) | ||
| Rippen |
Sorry Hoot, I didn't realize that you were sensitive about that. Blake, I can see we are not going to see eye to eye here, so I am not going to spend anymore time contributing to this conversation. I know I won't be buying any type of hair-dryer intake, but I may be in the market for a shop-vac exhaust system. Anyone know where there might be one available? | ||
| Blake |
Rippen, Our seeing "eye to eye" has nothing to do with it. This is not a clash of opinions; this is elementary physics and fluid mechanics; you see, when simple basic science supports everything the eRAM folks claim, we must accept it as fact. Sorry your obstinateness will not let you see the simple truth. My M2 has received an almost 40% increase in power output by simple porting along with cams, 10.5 CR pistons and a 4% increase in displacement. But you cannot accept that a 1 HP electric blower cannot add another 5%? I can't help but imagine that it was people like you who stood around laughing and telling Wilbur and Orville Wright that they were fools. I haven't seen any 1hp hairdryer motors. Most of their wattage goes directly to the heating element. A small vacuum cleaner is closer to what the eRAM motor should be producing in the way of power. | ||
| Featheredfiend |
Blake wrote:when simple basic science supports everything the eRAM folks claim, we must accept it as fact. I've spent the past thirty years working with engineers of one stripe or another. Not one of them would make a statement similar to that. They do outstanding working modifing existing systems or processes. Some of the work involves new, untried ideas. Some of the work is adapting existing equipment to new technology. After the math comes bench testing, pilot studies, and finally, testing in the field. I don't ever recall anything that was successful Not having to be modified to meet performance standards. It's tough work when everyone's livelyhood is on the line. It's also a real source of enjoyment when the work moves from paper to a full scale cost effective product. Nothing's been proven here. The real work has yet to be done. It won't get interesting (at least to me) until it's been proven on the bench(dyno). The game has been prematurely called. Not even the Wright brothers knew it would fly until it was tested. Have some fun. But learn something while you're having it. | ||
| Blake |
FF, I was referring to the general concept, not the actual eRAM system. Nonetheless, I'm not here to argue semantics or what you think your engineer coworkers might say. Show me the facts that contradict that an electric blower can provide a meager 5% boost to engine performance. Show . . . . . me . . . . . the . . . . . facts. I'm not interested in rhetoric or hearsay. Show me one fact, just one that refutes the concept of a powerful (~1 HP) electric blower providing a 4-5% boost to engine performance. I'll be waiting. And FYI: The Wright brothers certainly did know that their concept would fly. Getting the full-sized hardware airborne was simply a matter of will and a powerful/light enough engine. I am having fun, and I've learned enough to know when I'm right which certainly isn't every time. This time however, I KNOW I'm right.  | ||
| Aaron |
I've taken the dyno's fan duct and pointed it into the carb inlet before, while doing a pull, does that count? | ||
| Hootowl |
It's really this simple. Can the fan blow air faster than the motor can breathe it in? If so, it will create boost. The eRam is rated at 750cfm right? Buells don't flow that much air so it SHOULD create boost. | ||
| Rippen |
All right, I just couldn't stay away. Do we know what pressure differential the eRam was flowed at? That will make a HUGE difference in performance numbers. Most parts are flowed in through a pressure differential much different that what you are trying to create inside of the intake. When the conditions change, so does the performance and power requirements. I have agreed with featheredfiend's statement and thank him for making it. I am not ready to accept any "claim" of performance without some creditable source standing behind it. Case in point, I don't believe I can get new piston rings in a can, nor can I run a engine without oil because I added some magical goo to the crankcase. What would you be telling potential customers about your product? Of course they will say it works. I also don't think we can put the Wright brothers and the folks at eRAM on the same level of contributors to society. No offense, but I think that is a very unfair comparison. | ||
| Blake |
Yawn... more semantics and rhetoric. Show me the facts. Aaron, As with a ram air intake, if the air velocity impinging on the carburetor were less than 100 mph, you probably saw little to no effect. Remember, stagnation pressure (Q) at STD conditions is approximately V2/391. At 100 mph that gives... Let's solve for the ram air velocity equivalent to a 1/2 PSI (144/2 = 72 PSF) ram boost... |
