I thought I saw this somewhere on the forum but am not sure:

http://www.electricsupercharger.com/

Are there any opinions on this as a power bossitng solution?

I have been told that one can install and remove it rather easily and therefore be able to remove it when going in for warranty service.

Any thoughts?

Thanks,

Claude H.

They absolutely do not work at all in any way shape or form.

The funniest are the ebay auctions selling "turbos" that are in reality a bilge pump (usually several times the original price). At least this one seems to be fairly powerful though, and they don't make totally outrageous claims.

the e-ram is an actual, working electric supercharger.

I know (not personally) a guy that had one installed on his car (ford contour) and he had a dyno proven 10 hp increase.

now, the ebay rip-off "turbos" are far from beneficial.

Theoretically this could work fine. There is no real difference between a mechanically driven SC and and Electrically driven one. As long as the pump can generate enough boost AND volume.
(Not claiming that this one DOES work).

Originally posted by Psylence
They absolutely do not work at all in any way shape or form.

Go ahead and blow your money on the dumbass things then. You can research the specs on the motor. You can see the blades,a nd you can do the calculations to prove how much more air this "thing" is gonna put into your engine.

I remember some people on I-club trying this on a 99 Impreza a couple years ago. It produced no extra power, and was more of a bottleneck in the intake. The purchaser briefly toyed with the idea of using a highpowerd brushless electric motor before realizing the futility of it all.

But seriously, go ahead and buy one. Just please tell us all about it when you do. :p I can always use a laugh here @ work!

The reason I asked is a mechanic friend of mine, whose opinion I respect, brought this particular product to my attention. Having installed several kits, on several diferent make/model cars, he finds he has several happy clients as a result.

I appreciate the feedback and look on for more.

Thanks,

Claude H.

The placebo effect is a wonderful thing!

jds

That eRam doesn't look much different from this: home made kit (http://homemadeturbo.com/tech_projects/el_blower/index.html)

if you want to have fun first hand, that's how you do it :D A good realistic electric supercharger might give you a short burst of boost with the expense of battery drained and probably will cost much more than a real supercharger/turbo.

An honest and knowledgable mechanic would tell you it would take energy to produce horses; you cannot just pull a rabit out of hat :p

No, THIS (http://www.mazdamaniac.com/ebayfake.htm) is the turbo system you want to go with:
Turboboyee Mega Hyper Turbo System (http://www.mazdamaniac.com/ebayfake.htm)

Again,
Not saying this works, but even a normal SC uses engine energy to produce its boost. Basically you are adding HP and using a portion of the added HP to drive the SC, otherwise it would be a net loss.

I think I read that the electric motor only turns on a WOT through some type of throttle switch. So, it only uses juice (battery) on hard acceleration.

The added energy comes from the addition air and fuel consumed to produce the extra HP. A portion of that energy can be used to drive a mechanical SC, or to produce electricity in the alternator that can drive an electric SC.

I do agree that this motor/pump probably does not produce enough volume and boost to be worthwhile.

Originally posted by seikx8

An honest and knowledgable mechanic would tell you it would take energy to produce horses; you cannot just pull a rabit out of hat :p

If people will buy the E-ram... do you think there's a market for long straws that go from cockpit to intake? I mean, those McD's straws are gigantic so I'll bet they can handle some pressure :)

Originally posted by Maniac
No, THIS (http://www.mazdamaniac.com/ebayfake.htm) is the turbo system you want to go with:
Turboboyee Mega Hyper Turbo System (http://www.mazdamaniac.com/ebayfake.htm)

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
hillarious...
http://www.radioshack.com/images/ProductCatalog/ProductImage/64/64-4351.jpg

the saddest part is that there are 10+ bids

hahahaha i want that mega hiper turbo system.
its to cool.:D :D :D :D :D :D :D

Originally posted by SuperRex
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
hillarious...
http://www.radioshack.com/images/ProductCatalog/ProductImage/64/64-4351.jpg

the saddest part is that there are 10+ bids

18+ now and $250 !!

What can I say, if you can't beat them, join them! :D LOL

:D :D :D :D :D

Dyno tested the E-ram on a Miata years ago. We put it on while on the dyno, took it, put it on, took it off, put it on, took it off....and everytime it was on we made LESS HP. In short, does NOT work.

Brian Goodwin
Good-Win Racing (http://www.good-win-racing.com)

HAHAHA ... try the tornado im sure you will get a HUGE increase LOL!

Thanks for the feedback.

Seems like a pass on that one.

I'll wait to see what canzoomer comes out with.

Claude H.

I realize i'm a minority by claiming that the e-ram has noted benifits. But like all car mods, it will depend on the vehicle as to weither it will be benifical or not.

Obviously if the car is allready flowing 600 cfm, and the e-ram pushes 500 cfm there will be no benifit.

Regardless of previous arguments here is a dyno graph of a 99 contour owners car with a 9 hp increase with the e-ram.

There are a lot of ways to make a dyno graph show what you want without resorting to drawing your own. Without knowing where this came from and how it was obtained, it doesn't mean much.

jds

If i had more info i'd post it... unfortunatly i don't

at least the dyno has more weight than some guy claiming... "hey guy, WOOT!!!, i got 30 hp at the wheels with my new carbon fibre steering wheel"..."woot"

If you need more info, you'll have to contact the owner of the car
his e-mail is: bnmotorsports@msn.com

A while back we were discussing electric superchargers.

No, I don't plan on buying one, and find the claims dubious at best. But I also found it interesting from a theoretical point of view, so I asked some questions of one of the vendors who sounded like they might be selling something other than a leaf blower grafted onto an intake. Their website is http://www.boosthead.com/ . Following is what they've said, for everyone's interest only.

-------------------------------

----- Original Message -----

Hi there -

I have a few questions about the ESC-400 Electric Supercharger.

First off, do you have a kit for the new Mazda RX-8, or if you are developing one? Secondly, I get the impression from your website that there is a cockpit actuator for the SC, correct? Third, is the boost variable, and if so, where is the control? Fourth, why can you ony run this SC for 15 seconds? Finally, what would a typical price range be?

I look forward to hearing from you. Thanks!

----- Response -----
From: tkturbo@bellsouth.net
10/20/2003 09:43 PM

The RX8 will draw too much air. The ESC uses a pressure relief valve to control boost. The operator is responsible for keeping runs to 15-20 seconds, but the batteries will also limit the duration as the unit draws 18,000 watts. The ESC-400 will be sold as the main unit only, and accessories can be supplied or sourced by yourself. I will be wholesaling to the public for $2495.


----- Follow up Message -----
To: tkturbo@bellsouth.net
10/22/2003 11:48 AM

Thanks for the reply. So you're telling me that this unit draws 1500 Amperes? (based on Ohm's law, with a 12V system, that's the Amps would be required for 18000 Watts output). What kind of battery are you using? A typical 12V car battery puts out around 750 Amps, so does this system use two 12V car batteries? And if so, where are they mounted?


----- Response -----
From: tkturbo@bellsouth.net
10/23/2003 08:23 PM

Yes, I use four lightweight 13lb Oddysey racing batteries--two sets in series running 24V. This is not a regenerative system, but can be charged if the alternator is upgraded to 200+ amps and a SPDT switch is wired to relays controlling the charging. I will include some schematics as well as dyno runs of the 3.5 V6 Avenger I own so you can see the legitimatecy of this design.

and the "schematic"

Well, I admittedly don't know anything about this particular design of TKT, but this shop (and Geoff Knight himself) does not have a very good reputation as far as their supercharger or turbo kits and upgrades go.
I only heard the stories about applications they are / were offering for the Ford Probe, and the stuff people got was, ahem, less than stellar :p
You can find info on the Ford Probe forum (http://www.probetalk.com/forums/) - search for TKT or Geoff Knight.

Now, this might not apply to their newest creation but it doesn't hurt to be careful ;)

Good info :)

There are some pretty vocal Thomas Knight critics at ProbeTalk, but if you read through there are also a lot of guys who defend him.

I don't think the ESC 400 was designed specifically with the Probe in mind... Geoff is marketing it as a more or less universal kit that "fits most stock engines 3.5L or less"

There are dyno graphs for the ESC400 Electric SC at: http://boosthead.com/dyno.htm

Looks like it really works.

Since it can fit so many models, you are looking at $500-900 in additional components, depending on your system.

Hmmm, $2500 for the raw unit, another $1500 for plumbing and batteries, plus install and fabrication, say another $500. That totals to around $4500, which is comparable or more than to the regular turbo and supercharger kits that will soon be available for the RX-8. And with no guarantee of comparable results. I think I'll let someone else be the guinea pig.

That's what I'm talking about... from what I've gathered, the TKT stuff is grossly overpriced and it seems to be of questionable quality too. "Kits" missing fairly important pieces and welds that look like a hack job were the main complaints I can remember.
I was talking about experiences about their other offerings, not this electric thingy. And these are not MY personal experiences either, just stuff others were posting about. If this "supercharger" is better, then great.

I don't think it would be that expensive ($4500)... According to the website, the price for an ESC raw blower unit is down to $1995, plus $500-$1500 for everything else if you can't install it yourself. So avg $3K total investment.

From what I've read, a lot of the welding issues are from a few years ago. I hear his quality has improved since then.

What they need to do is sponsor a few people, because you're right, nobody wants to pay to be the guinea pig. And with a totally new type of supercharger like the ESC, everyone is going to be very skeptical.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is Geoff Knight, the designer & inventor of the ESC-400 electric supercharger. I am writing to thank you for visiting my website, and to give additional info on my patented supercharger. Many people will be sceptical, as I dont blame them at all. I would be sceptical as well.
I developed a program to determine hp requirements for my ESC and tried like crazy to get enough power for more boost and CFM. But when faced with the limitation of electrical energy in batteries I settled for a smaller desing for 4 & 6 cyl engines. As I state in my FAQ's, it is foolish for someone with a car that has a quality production supercharger kit available to go with my ESC. But lets say you own a car with a small V6 or 4-cyl and no kits available. This supercharger design will allow you to mount it anywhere in any position--even in the trunk if you want!!! The 15 second bursts are just like NOS users are used to, and if the alternator is upgraded to a 200+amp unit the system can be regenerative at a 10:1 ratio. That means if you race two 15 second runs it will recharge in (15 + 15 X 10 X 85% efficiency = 353 seconds) or six minutes. That is much better than NOS as you MUST get the tank filled and the cost is $45 per bottle. My customers with NOS go through 3-4 bottles/week. Do the math--that is a LOT of $$$. Just so you know my credentials, I am on Vortech's referral list for custom supercharger design, I do R&D for Paxton, Ford Motorsports, as well as many custom desigs you see every day but dont know I designed them. I have been involved with turbos since 1976.
As for the criticism of my welding, people wanted tig welded manifolds for a mig welded price. While mig is strong, it is obviously not as visually appealing. Another problem with the Probe guys were countless copies of my kits sold as my kits on ebay and through the Probetalk discussion boards. They used junkyard turbos and intercoolers with compression bent pipes from a muffler shop. All of mine were mandrel-bent. Bad news travels much faster than good. I still hold the record at 787 flywheel hp from a Probe GT V6 bored and stroked to 3.2 with twin T3T04E hybrids. Noone ever mentions that, though.
Please feel free to contact me with your questions. I am truly open to any questions, advice, criticism, etc.
Geoff Knight--TKTurbos--atsturbo@aol.com
BOOSTHEAD.COM--786-243-2000

Nice to see you on here posting, Geoff.

May I suggest that the best way to prove the validity of your design is to actually put one of these units into an RX-8, dynoing the car before and after, then post the results?

I don't know where you're located, but if you were to offer up a free kit, in exchange for the use of a forum member's car to prototype the unit, I'll bet you'll find a volunteer or two.

I believe he's in Florida.

I have not looked into the displacement of the RX8, as rotary engines are 300% the airflow of a similar displacement piston engine. The 13B flowed the air of a 3.9 liter engine, and revved to 9000 rpm all day. I used to build a lot of race turbos for rotary engines, and my calculations were always based in a 4.0 engine at 8000 rpm for the airflow. My ESC design is limited to a 3.5 liter at 6000 rpm producing 5 psi. BTW, I just did some additional dyno runs today at South Florida Performance at the request of Turbo Magazine. Yesterday I ported & polished the supercharger housing and installed rewound motors. With the standard ESC-400 boost dropped off from 5.5 psi @ 3500 down to 3 psi at 6700 rpm on the 3.5 V6 engine. With the ported housing I sustained 5.5 psi all the way to 6700 rpm, which means more airflow than 405 CFM @ 5.5 psi. Should be well over 500 CFM. The HP peak went up from 212 wheel hp to 234 wheel hp, and at 6700 rpm the power was at least 50 hp more. I will have ther dyno results posted in the next day or two. I also did a run with the ESC off until 5000 rpm and then switched the ESC on. HP immediately jumped over 100 hp. That dyno run will also be posted.

Originally posted by Omicron

May I suggest that the best way to prove the validity of your design is to actually put one of these units into an RX-8, dynoing the car before and after, then post the results?

I don't know where you're located, but if you were to offer up a free kit, in exchange for the use of a forum member's car to prototype the unit, I'll bet you'll find a volunteer or two.


Geoff, did you see my questions, above?

I saw your questions. I already have about a dozen units being tested on various cars out there by other performance shops. The market I have targeted is 2.5 liter and smaller. I just found the 13B six port rated at 250hp @ 8000 rpm. That engine will flow more air than this supercharger can flow while producing boost. I also have a centrifugal race version in the works with special motors and 700CFM capabilities at 5-6 psi. That is still at least 6 months away.

At least you are realistic and honest about its performance. :)

I have expected the industry to be sceptical due to the uniqueness of my invention. If I make false claims or am anything but truthful and honest it will kill my reputation. I have invested close to a half mil into this in the last five years, and dont want to shoot myself in the foot. The 'computer fan' with an air filter sold as a 'supercharger' or 'electric turbo' has always pissed me off. I built my first ESC in 1978 using a T11 cartridge and a 4hp 6V Ford starter motor running on 12V. I threw v-belts every 10-30 seconds on the compound pulley setup I used, but on my VW Beetle it made 6 psi boost at launch. I was not able to do better until I developed the idea of multiple motors. That only took 20 years :-( Just keep your eyes on the ESC progress. I am only a single person, so once several hundred of these are out there someone will play with the motor windings, use some type of mosfet controller, and the power gains will start to inch higher and higher. I fully expect an ESC supercharged import car to run 9's within two years. The ESC at 10 psi will be equivalent to a turbo at 13-14 psi, and a belt driven SC at 15-16 psi. A turbo always developes more exhaust backpressure than boost (called the E/I pressure-ratio), so power is NOT free like some people think. A crank driven SC at 15 psi takes 75-100 hp to turn it. The dyno run from yesterday shows an instant 100 hp gain at only 5 psi when the ESC was switched on at 5000 rpm. That would be at least 7-9 psi with either a turbo or belt driven SC.

I would like to disagree with just one comment but don't take it personally. A turbo does not always develop more exhaust backpressure than boost pressure. Most do but they don't have to. Marcus Williams' twin T-04 ethanol fed RX-7 race car developed 22 intake psi while only having 18 exhaust psi before the turbo. This was something that he could not get with only one turbo not even a large one. It is possible. It all has to do with the mass/mol relationship within the intake and exhaust gasses that makes this possible. So while it is unusual for there to be more pressure on the intake side than the exhaust side, it isn't impossible. Not trying to discredit you here. Just wanted to correct one statement.

I agree that my statement is mostly a blanket statement--but I am referring to street driven cars--not an alcohol car. The only occasions I know of where the E/I PR is less than 1:1 is in Indy, Cart, F1, and occasionally drag racing trailered cars. I worked on March open wheel turbos while at Turbo Tech in 1977. We found that if the turbine wheel was large enough the leverage would compress air in a smaller compressor wheel/housing with a less than 1:1 ratio. But 99% of all street driven cars have an average 1.7:1 up to 3:1 ratios. The example you give is an extremely rare race-only car, not a street driven car. But regardless of that ratio, if there is anything over -0- psi in the exhaust manifold it is not 'free' power. But I do appreciate your point--it is well taken.

Its looks like an eaton/roots type SC hiding in that ESC400.
What size is it?

For engines up to 2.5 liter I use the 62 CID Eaton--fully ported housing--extremely important for higher boost and efficiency. I used the 90 Eaton fully ported with rewound motors on my last 3.5 V6 dyno run and saw lower boost when compared to the 62 but there was no boost drop as the rpm went up. I maintained 5-6 psi to 7000 rpm. The 90 is the ESC-550 model. It requires six Oddysey 680 batteries (15 lb each and 7" X 6" X 3.5") and draws 20,000 watts. I dont push that larger model as only someone with good electrical understanding should get one because the extra current draw between 15KW and 20+KW is quite noticable in the relays--I use six relays for the ESC-550 and only three for the ESC-400. The larger unit is $500 more. I am only building them as special order versions. Still all CNC gears & adapters, but the motor rewinding is where the cost is incurred. I also have a centrifugal model capable of higher CFM numbers (500 CFM) and 15 psi. I am testing that model on my race car, and it wont be available to the public for close to a year. I want to run in the 10's with that one before I release it. I have spent almost a half mil in R&D and patents for this as well as magazine ads which started already in Power Pages Mag, and will be in Turbo and Sport Compact next issue. The ESC-400 is incredibly durable and will make any 4-cyl owner quite happy.

What about additional fuel requirements? With more air, you need more fuel. What kind of aftermarket fuel system was on the Avenger that you have on your website? What are the intake charge temps after the blower? There really isn't any need in cooling the charge of 10psi or less, but above that, the compressed air begins to get too hot to make usefull horsepower. Any thoughts?

I ran a safe 5-6 psi, and used a simple FMU and inline fuel pump for fuel. The delta rise at 6 psi is 80 degrees, and at 15 psi is 240 degrees. A water-to-air intercooler will be used on my Neon Race car running 20+ psi.

I know im a skeptic to,but for straight line running this thing seems pretty cool.If i read the article at www.boosthead.com correctly with a cap setup instead of battery you could boost about every 30 secs or so.I looked around a little bit and i could rap it all up for about 3400 bucks.I think thats cheap for a nice 5 to 7 psi setup with 1/4 the install time and problems.I also read that cars are going to 48 volt systems after 06 can anyone confrm this??

2006 will intruduce 42V electrical systems to a limited number of factory cars. My ESC simply cant work well on 12V so we run 24V which does power it nicely right now. We are releasing a larger unit in Feb called the ESC-550 which will fit a larger engine like the RX8 13B (flows 300% the air of a 4-stroke similar size motor, so it is a 3.9 for measurement purposes when comparing rotary to piston engines).

Feb 15th is the scheduled release date, and it will be great on engines up to 4.5 liter.

Same 2k price point?

Yes, same $2K price. If you want to get even more power you can fan-cool the motors and run 48V. We are building a 72V 36hp setup right now for my Neon ACR which will launch at 25-30psi and taper boost down to 12-15 psi at 7K rpm (boost always tapers downward on any permanent hp supercharger (like an electric one) because the higher the engine rpm the more air it uses and fan/compressor laws state that if HP is constant, then higher pressure = lower airflow, and higher airflow = lower pressure. Soon, in a year or so, we will have electronic controllers that can be programmed to make whatever boost you want at a specific rpm.

This is an interesting idea. However, I'd need to "see" it on someone's RX-8 first, to find out how much it cost in total to get it installed and how effective it is. I'd also want to see dyno charts. But it is intriguing.

"because the higher the engine rpm the more air it uses and fan/compressor laws state that if HP is constant, then higher pressure = lower airflow, and higher airflow = lower pressure"

....Confused!!

I hope the quality of knight changed... last I checked a few years ago to supercharger kit for a Probe GT either didn't fit, didn't work, or blew up the engine... :o

Originally posted by pr0ber
I hope the quality of knight changed... last I checked a few years ago to supercharger kit for a Probe GT either didn't fit, didn't work, or blew up the engine... :o

I was sure I had straightened all of this BS out on Probetalk, but I guess the stories are still floating around. All my PGT supercharger kits DID fit, DID work, and NONE--EVER--blew up an engine IF kept at a safe 7 psi like I recommended.

Now consider this: I built and sold over seven hundred V6 2.5 KL Probe/MX6 kits in total. How many people probably changed a pulley to raise the boost ABOVE what I shipped it with? If they did and toasted their engine, who would they blame? Themselves? Hardly--they blame anyone and everyone else.

As I have stated over and over again in my replies to other boards, the internet is great for many things. But is is also home to MANY false/untrue urban legends. I will bet a truckload this guy--pr0ber--has probably never SEEN, DRIVEN, or OWNED one of my kits. I will not respond to the part of this thread that questions my products quality--especially based on legends instead of first hand knowledge, etc. I simply dont have the time.
Suffice it to say--check out my name on Vortech Engineering's & Paxton Automotive's referral sites. Do you really believe that I would be on there if my designs were of such poor quality?

For the confused response--the ESC has a certain amount of hp the electric motors make. That is the constant in the fan laws. That means the 18hp will remain at 18hp, and if you try to run a larger engine then you will need more airflow--more airflow means less boost. Now if you have a smaller engine--say, 1.5 liter, you could run a LOT of boost provided the engine could handle the higher boost. This is because at 18hp, the airflow (CFM) will be little, so the boost can be high. I hope this clears that up for you.

Nice response, atsturbo.

Now please tell us what we all want to hear (:D): that you have a complete kit ready to go for the RX-8 that costs under $2500. At that price, and in this market void, it WILL sell... and then you'll have all sorts of testimonials here about it.

Originally posted by Omicron
Nice response, atsturbo.

Now please tell us what we all want to hear (:D): that you have a complete kit ready to go for the RX-8 that costs under $2500. At that price, and in this market void, it WILL sell... and then you'll have all sorts of testimonials here about it.

I wont lie or make untrue promises. The ESC-550 is due to be released in 45 days. It is the proper size for a stock RX8, but I would be misleading anyone to say that I will have a KIT for the RX8 at that time--(I might tell my wife I NEED an RX8 for testing purposes, you see. She will then say she NEEDS a new KITCHEN to the tune of $25K) Time will tell.
We are now purchasing about four vehicles for kits, as the demand is already here for the F-150 4.2 V6, the Eclipse 4-cyl & V6, and some other imports like the Celica 2000+. After we build kits and make the Jigs & fixtures we can duplicate them as orders come in, and we sell the cars to buy the next highest demand vehicle.
As for pricing, we are looking at $2500 being the price for most of the bolt-in kits. The accessories will be done as group purchases for each type of car, so cost will be low enough to do so.
Also, just got a call from a MAJOR centrifugal supercharger manufacturer who wants to do a JV (joint venture) I will receive several units to adapt to my drive and we will have answers sooner than I planned for the centrifugal units. This will allow for better tuning for a wider field of vehicles, as by simply changing internal gear ratios and compressor wheel diameters we can make one style fit many more vehicles. They will receive several drive systems minus the supercharger itself to adapt for testing. I wont be able to divulge whom it is till we have it in writing, but it WILL happen. I had already built several similar units before they contacted me. By using an existing design it eliminates a TON of work for me.

I agree with Omicron, although this sounds like a boon for H.P. at a decent price, I think a lengthy testing procedure would be best. I want to see how durable the RX8s apex seals are. I take it the the exhaust, cat and plugs will have to be upgraded since the heat generated from Canzoomers stage 2 N/A setup will produce enough heat to kill these. I also think we need to see the computer codes cracked, to be sure of the correct air/fuel ratios. I live( Pemb Pines) About 45 min from the Redlands so if this works out, I'm there. believe me I want to see this work!

Originally posted by JimW
I agree with Omicron, although this sounds like a boon for H.P. at a decent price, I think a lengthy testing procedure would be best. I want to see how durable the RX8s apex seals are. I take it the the exhaust, cat and plugs will have to be upgraded since the heat generated from Canzoomers stage 2 N/A setup will produce enough heat to kill these. I also think we need to see the computer codes cracked, to be sure of the correct air/fuel ratios. I live( Pemb Pines) About 45 min from the Redlands so if this works out, I'm there. believe me I want to see this work!

I make this offer to anyone who is qualified as a tech or good with electricity. I mean someone who has installed high end audio systems in their ride, or is a serious backyard tech or shop tech, or an electrician who understands how important quality installations are with a high current system like this one. If you are within a reasonable drive of Miami (California residents dont bother--he-he) and wish to come here I will make that owner of an RX8 this offer:

Take a ride with me in my car, so you KNOW it is for real. I will GIVE you a ESC-550 unit when they are available. Then, sign an agreement--it will be a promisary note for pictures, dyno runs, installation procedures, etc. This will allow me to show others how to do one and also open more doors for sales. Your cost will be less than $1000 even if you have to purchase a 200 amp alternator, get an Apex S-AFC, etc. I wont have to buy my wife a $25K kitchen, and YOU can have the exclusive on making the brackets and selling them to RX8 owners (for a reasonable markup of course) as well as installation diagrams.

As for the durability of apex seals, the ductile iron used is only harmed when shockwaves from detonation is incurred. At 5 psi that is almost impossible to do on 93+ octane fuel. You are only raising the dynamic compression ratio 1.67 points (3 psi boost = 1 dynamic CR point). The FMU will allow for simple WOT operation, and the S-AFC could be used to fatten up the fuel curve at the standard lien areas (tip-in, and lower rpm).

The rest of the system would not be affected at all. The ESC is only running for a short time, and the EGT's dont go up at all. Neither will the engine's durability be affected as long as 5 psi is maintained.

I believe one of you will be interested in doing this, and I hope it shows this board that I truly am interested in promoting my product.

1-1-04 will begin the new partial sponsorship program for those with any car model--specific year and engine--that has never had an ESC on it. A $475 discount will be allowed, and a $200 rebate for detailed pics and dyno runs will also be offered. I may limit this and exclude some cars (Yugo, Vega, etc :-)

Very interesting, and a good offer. I'm glad I'm not close to Florida, or I'd be apt to take you up on it and blow my factory warranty. :D

Sooooo, any takers?

So, I live in Miami and would be interested in talking to you a bit.

PM me when ya see this and we'll talk.

O.K. it sounds like a good offer, can I call your cell# listed on your web site to discuss this further ?

call me at 786-243-2000--I will be open all fri and sat

OK. I'll be stopping by tomorrow afternoon. 4pm good?

yes, thats fine.

Tom/atsturbo, have you seen this thread (http://www.rx8club.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17777)? You wouldn't happen to have a hand in this development, would you? ;)

Good luck Genom, I have decided to wait after running from my wife. I am to worried about warranty issues as of now and I think I would be just as happy having Canzoomers Stage2 when it comes out. The only problem I need to know is if you can go back to the stock exhaust and cat if you have any aftermarket one installed, any of you guys know, Because 55 whp is enough to make me happy!

I looked at that site, and the electric turbo is Turbodyne's technology of a dc motor/generator in the bearing housing allowing for faster spoolup from a brushless 2000 watt motor. The 2.7hp motor will yield 1-2 psi instant boost al low rpm, raising the output a few hp and lowering boost transition. As soon as the turbo reaches speeds where the turbine takes over, the electric regeneration acts like a wastegate allowing the exhaust heat to generate electricity instead of going out the tailpipe through the wastegate. Great idea, but not mine.
Had Genom stop by today--I am psyched about the RX8. It is so perfectly set up for the ESC that I could not have designed a car better to receive one. I know other systems will come along, but this one will be done within two weeks of the ESC-550 being given to Genom (end of Feb).

Indeed. We both agreed that this car is almsot tailor made for this thing. It will be quite easy to install overall, even if we do all the mods we spoke about. Depending on the mounting of the unit it might be even easier to install/remove. We shall see!

Congrats Genom, and let us know how you like it and when you get it installed and Thanks Geoff for developing a part that will gives us more performance for a reasonable price. After talking to my wife she felt uncomfortable with the warranty issues and I dont think it would be easy to return the car back to stock form in case a warranty issue arises, I however will be interested when my warranty expires.

The ESC/filter swap to get it back to warranty (a battery relocation should not alter warranty in any way) and removing the ESC battery cell and cables would be a 2-3 hr simple swap in the worst case scenario. I have only seen one as simple installatiuon--the 2001 Ranger 4-cyl we did which was a 3 hour installation for the ESC and 4 hrs for the cables. The RX8 will be simpler.

So what does this mean? If I bring my car you will give me one as well in turn for testing, pictures,advertisement and dyno runs!

No--sorry. First come first serve. I will be offering some kind of special once I have the ESC-550 ready.

atsturbo,

I have a 2001 CLS and I it would beinteresting if you can sponsor my CLS to do a ESC-400 or ESC-550!

Let me know what you think.


Nashua.

I am assuming an Acura ? If so I can offer you a partial sponsorship. I believe someone already makes a turbo kit for those--I am not sure.

Tom,

Yes, It is an Acura 2001 CL Type-S.

There is only a SC kit from Comptech, MSRP is $4999 and you can get the SC Kit discunted as low as $3750. You still need a small battery and installation cost.

I think there is interested in your product. Maybe the ESC-400 is too small for the 260 3.2L V6 engine. With headers the CLS can be easily over 300 HP at the crank. For example my CLS 5-Auto dyno at 226-235 SAE WHP Stock is around 195-200 WHP.6-speed CLS can dyno at 240 WHP.


There is no Turbo Kit for the CLS. There was only one of a kind Custom Turbo. Application. Dyno was arond 325 WHP.

Nashua.

Originally posted by NashuaCLS
Tom,

Yes, It is an Acura 2001 CL Type-S.

There is only a SC kit from Comptech, MSRP is $4999 and you can get the SC Kit discunted as low as $3750. You still need a small battery and installation cost.

I think there is interested in your product. Maybe the ESC-400 is too small for the 260 3.2L V6 engine. With headers the CLS can be easily over 300 HP at the crank. For example my CLS 5-Auto dyno at 226-235 SAE WHP Stock is around 195-200 WHP.6-specc CLS can dyno at 240 WHP.


There is no Turbo Kit for the CLS. There was only one of a kind Custom Turbo. Application. Dyno was arond 325 WHP.

Nashua.

The ESC-550 would be a better fit. An auto trans 3.2 would be OK, but the 5-speed would see a boost drop at higher rpm while the auto trans would benefit from the low rpm power. The 550 will flow more air, so boost drop at redline will not occur. Send me your email so I can place you in my ESC-550 file to notify you whaen one is available. I will do a partial sponsorship with you so you can get one and install it for very little.

We are READY!!! I installed an ESC-550 on the Altima 4-cyl and ran 8 psi boost on the dyno. The baseline run was 105 wheel hp a month ago, and the addition of a header and exhaust raised that to 115 yesterday. Running 8 psi we jumped to 208.3hp on this bone stock Altima KA24DE, doubling the stock engines hp.

Genom's unit will be ready tomorrow, so stay tuned. There will be an RX8 with the ESC-550 in a VERY short time.

Originally posted by atsturbo
The baseline run was 115 wheel hp a month ago, and the addition of a header and exhaust raised that to 115 yesterday.

That makes no sense. That is no gain at all with a header and exhaust. Typo???

Yes, typo--supposed to be 105. I changed it.

Originally posted by atsturbo
We are READY!!! I installed an ESC-550 on the Altima 4-cyl and ran 8 psi boost on the dyno. The baseline run was 105 wheel hp a month ago, and the addition of a header and exhaust raised that to 115 yesterday. Running 8 psi we jumped to 208.3hp on this bone stock Altima KA24DE, doubling the stock engines hp.

Genom's unit will be ready tomorrow, so stay tuned. There will be an RX8 with the ESC-550 in a VERY short time.

Any updates on this? atsturbo?? Genom???

I have the ESC, and am working on it. But like ats mentioned before, late feb at the earliest before anything happens. Mounting is only part of it, then there is all the tuning involved. There'll be more as it progresses. THis weekend I am going down to the Keys and am gonna be fishing all day long and partying all night long, so wont be much work done :D

Fishing in the key's and a supercharger, lucky dog! Very interested, let us know how it works out Genom.

Hey, gotta do SOMETHING non-productive on my b-day :D

I figure looking for sailfish at the hump is a good way to do so :D

Have we gotten an update on this? Is it in another thread? Or did you run into some serious problems, Genom?

--Landon

.....still waiting.......

I'll bet ECU tuning is the hold up... just as it has been for EVERY other FI vendor that's working on things. Genom's just smart enough to not air out the problems with development process, then wind up having to spend more time answering questions and stupid "boom" comments on the forums than working on the finished result. :D

Geoff Knight here. Actually, Genom had an unforseen personal situation come up and the installation was set back a few months. We have installed about a dozen ESC-550's on other vehicles with engines as large as 4.0 with good success. The beauly of the ESC is that there is no need for part throttle tuning which is where the majority of turbo and belt driven supercharger tuning issues reside. WOT is a simple mixture related situation, and a simple additional injector would solve that issue (we suggest that on 99% of the installations). The timing issue, if it is a problem, could be handled easily by a piggyback and I believe one is available (E-Manage, etc). Running a safe 5 psi will only result in a 55 degree delta rise, so a simple water-alcohol injection has been added to several detonation prone high compression vehicles with the ESC that had no ignition controls available.
Turbo Magazine did a three page article in the June, 04 issue, and
you will see a complete multiple page article done by Street Concepts Magazine in the Aug, 04 issue. They give an in depth step-by-step installation in their project Ranger, and that vehicle saw a jump from 122 wheel hp to 228 wheel hp @ 6 psi.

Sweet. I'm next.

any updates?

I am really liking this solution the more I read about it. I wonder if how much quicker will the recharge be if I use 4-6 batcaps instead of drycell batteries.

BTW ebay is selling the ESC550 for $1395

The Batcap 800 battery is great. I sponsored a truck in a mag named Street Concepts Mag a few months back, and we used four Batcap 800's and two Megacap 150's. 10-12 runs at 24V worked great, with a 6-minute recharge per 15 second dyno run. BTW, the Ranger 2.5 jumped from 122 to 228 wheel hp @ 6 psi on Street Concepts in-house dyno.
I am trying to reach 100 units sold in one year, so the Ebay items are sold by me at a loss to generate sales and reach our goal. We have sold or sponsored 62 units since Sept/03. I shipped two ESC-550's to a company that does RX8s a few weeks back. We should have some results soon.

Any of the members that getting it?

I am an electrical dummy, so bare with me.

The max voltage you can get by connecting batteries in series is 24V? Can you connect 8 batterys in series to get 96V then the current draw will be less? Will that translate to longer play time?

Also is the install clean? I assume you remove the stock airbox, place the ESC there and run a cone intake in front of the radiator right?

Also, is there future plans for a smaller unit? I mean is there something more compact than the eaton m46 (I think thats right?!) As it is it's a pretty nice product.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is Geoff Knight, the designer & inventor of the ESC-400 electric supercharger. I am writing to thank you for visiting my website, and to give additional info on my patented supercharger. Many people will be sceptical, as I dont blame them at all. I would be sceptical as well.
I developed a program to determine hp requirements for my ESC and tried like crazy to get enough power for more boost and CFM. But when faced with the limitation of electrical energy in batteries I settled for a smaller desing for 4 & 6 cyl engines. As I state in my FAQ's, it is foolish for someone with a car that has a quality production supercharger kit available to go with my ESC. But lets say you own a car with a small V6 or 4-cyl and no kits available. This supercharger design will allow you to mount it anywhere in any position--even in the trunk if you want!!! The 15 second bursts are just like NOS users are used to, and if the alternator is upgraded to a 200+amp unit the system can be regenerative at a 10:1 ratio. That means if you race two 15 second runs it will recharge in (15 + 15 X 10 X 85% efficiency = 353 seconds) or six minutes. That is much better than NOS as you MUST get the tank filled and the cost is $45 per bottle. My customers with NOS go through 3-4 bottles/week. Do the math--that is a LOT of $$$. Just so you know my credentials, I am on Vortech's referral list for custom supercharger design, I do R&D for Paxton, Ford Motorsports, as well as many custom desigs you see every day but dont know I designed them. I have been involved with turbos since 1976.
As for the criticism of my welding, people wanted tig welded manifolds for a mig welded price. While mig is strong, it is obviously not as visually appealing. Another problem with the Probe guys were countless copies of my kits sold as my kits on ebay and through the Probetalk discussion boards. They used junkyard turbos and intercoolers with compression bent pipes from a muffler shop. All of mine were mandrel-bent. Bad news travels much faster than good. I still hold the record at 787 flywheel hp from a Probe GT V6 bored and stroked to 3.2 with twin T3T04E hybrids. Noone ever mentions that, though.
Please feel free to contact me with your questions. I am truly open to any questions, advice, criticism, etc.
Geoff Knight--TKTurbos--atsturbo@aol.com
BOOSTHEAD.COM--786-243-2000

After a big dispapointment with Turbodyne (I won't even mention all the cooling fan-based bollocks), I'm quite glad to see that someone out there has done it : a true e-charger that you can actually buy.
However, I'm very surprised by the power (15 kW) that is needed to drive the 400 S/C. I'm comparing it to some calculations I've made and to centrifugal compressor based e-chargers that have been evaluated by Visteon. They all come with electric motors of about 2 to 3 kW for engines displacing up to 2.0l.

Therefore my questions. On which grounds did you opt for the Eaton way i.l.o. a centrifugal compressor? And why such a large power requirement?



By the way, the segregation between the vehicle electric system and your e-charger power source is definitely the right option : Visteon found out that you must havea 42 Volts vehicle electrical system otherwise the e-charger would drain too much power and put the whole 12V system at risk.

Also, is there future plans for a smaller unit? I mean is there something more compact than the eaton m46 (I think thats right?!) As it is it's a pretty nice product.
Yes, we have just released the 2nd generation of our ESC line. The ESC-200 is for engines up to 1500cc. Our newest designs are a 5-6 psi max centrifugal electric turbo. Designed specifically for the Hybrid cars out there, we will be releasing larger centrifugal models--all with 5-6 psi max output.

After a big dispapointment with Turbodyne (I won't even mention all the cooling fan-based bollocks), I'm quite glad to see that someone out there has done it : a true e-charger that you can actually buy.
However, I'm very surprised by the power (15 kW) that is needed to drive the 400 S/C. I'm comparing it to some calculations I've made and to centrifugal compressor based e-chargers that have been evaluated by Visteon. They all come with electric motors of about 2 to 3 kW for engines displacing up to 2.0l.

Therefore my questions. On which grounds did you opt for the Eaton way i.l.o. a centrifugal compressor? And why such a large power requirement?



By the way, the segregation between the vehicle electric system and your e-charger power source is definitely the right option : Visteon found out that you must havea 42 Volts vehicle electrical system otherwise the e-charger would drain too much power and put the whole 12V system at risk.

We have added a 2nd generation design using a centrifugal unit that has a maximum 5-6 psi and more compact size. To make things simple I will share with you my formula for power requirements to turn a supercharger. This will allow those who wish to know to calculate the power loss from their engine powered units as well.
Visteon's 'Torque Enhancement System' used a 2KW 50,000 rpm brushless design with a turbo comp wheel for a max 4-5 psi. If you follow the formula you will see that unit would not support a 2 liter engine, and Visteon admitted the unit would produce no boost at all at 5000 rpm on a 2.0 liter. It only supported a 1.1 liter engine to 6K rpm.
To determine boost, CFM, and the electrical power needed, we developed*several formulas:
1--1HP = 746 watts at 100% efficiency. Electric motors are on average 70% efficient, so 1000 watts = 1 hp is a great starting point.
2--CFM X PSI divided by 175* = hp required to make boost.
3--CID X RPM X .5 divided by 1780= CFM
4--boost pressure + 14.7 divided by 14.7 = pressure ratio X .85*= density ratio
5--density ratio X CFM = boosted CFM
*note: centrifugal units have a higher efficiency resulting in a 200-210 divisor. Standard roots units have a 150 value. Seriously ported units are 175. Screw-type are 190-200.

*
First lets look at a 2.5 V6--150 CID X 7000 RPM X .5 divided by 1780 = 294 CFM
*
(7 psi + 14.7*/ 14.7) X .85 = 1.25 X 294 CFM = 368.9 CFM
*
(368 X 7 psi)/ 175= 14.72 hp Roots
(368 X 7 psi)/ 200= 12.88 hp Centrifugal
*
14.72 HP X 1000 watts = 14,720 watts (@ 24V = 613 AMPS)
12.88 HP X 1000 watts = 12,880 watts (@ 24V = 536 AMPS)

Just for kicks lets reverse that for the Visteon unit:

2000 watts= 2.5hp (this is being generous, but brushless/slotless motors are 90% efficient)
2.5hp X 210 (efficiency number) = 525
525 = 5 psi X 105 CFM. 105 cfm divided by 1.2 density ratio is 87.5 CFM
(87.5 X 3560)/6000 rpm = 52 CID engine (850cc)

We have added a 2nd generation design using a centrifugal unit that has a maximum 5-6 psi and more compact size. To make things simple I will share with you my formula for power requirements to turn a supercharger. This will allow those who wish to know to calculate the power loss from their engine powered units as well.
Visteon's 'Torque Enhancement System' used a 2KW 50,000 rpm brushless design with a turbo comp wheel for a max 4-5 psi. If you follow the formula you will see that unit would not support a 2 liter engine, and Visteon admitted the unit would produce no boost at all at 5000 rpm on a 2.0 liter. It only supported a )

You're right, the VTES can only on very small engines (a vast majority over here though) or as a low-end torque enhancer (hence the name) on a 2-liter unit.

I'm interested in your ESC-200. I'll PM you...

I have two of the ESC-500's and I just purchased a new car so I can play with them on my RX-8.

No promises. No time table.
I fits inside the front bumper so I will probably plumb it through the air box with 2.5 to 3" aluminum tubing with a bypass for normal driving. In this config - the ESC will not be visible at all.

I fits inside the front bumper so I will probably plumb it through the air box with 2.5 to 3" aluminum tubing with a bypass for normal driving. In this config - the ESC will not be visible at all.

That's cool.

I'm also interested in ESC-200, keep us updated.

A crank driven SC at 15 psi takes 75-100 hp to turn it.
Also not true. Various superchargers require various amounts of power to drive them. I'm running 14psi, does that mean I have a 600 crank hp motor instead of 530 cank hp? The answer is no.

Idea- Electrical Axial Flow supercharger! Now everybody's happy. :p

Drewstein,

What he is saying is that you would have 75-100hp addl' if you were stuffing the engine with 15psi and miraculously had no drag from turning a huge air pump. The only measurment that means anything is the crank hp after all the accessories including the SC are turning. So, If your engine dyno's at 530hp, then yes it could be making 600hp total or more. But you can only brag about the available hp at the crank.

It takes power to make power, no free lunch today.

Drewstein,

What he is saying is that you would have 75-100hp addl' if you were stuffing the engine with 15psi and miraculously had no drag from turning a huge air pump. The only measurment that means anything is the crank hp after all the accessories including the SC are turning.
I happen to know my blower takes 58hp to drive at 14.5psi. Therefore the 75-100hp claim is close to double what the truth may be. It's going to vary per application as I stated above. :rolleyes:

I happen to know my blower takes 58hp to drive at 14.5psi. Therefore the 75-100hp claim is close to double what the truth may be. It's going to vary per application as I stated above. :rolleyes:

I am not sure why you are debating my math numbers. IF your blower uses 58hp we can assume it is:
58 X 175 or 200=10150 to 11600 divided by 14.5 psi = 700-800CFM. Using a density ratio of 1.5 (assuming a 75% efficient blower) you have a 467CFM to 533 CFM NA motor. With a redline of 7000 RPM, we then know you have an engine:
467 to 533 x 3560/7000rpm =237 to 271 CID. If that same blower is on a 350 SBC, it would be 350 X 7000/3560=688 cfm. 688 X 1.5 density ratio is 1032 X 14.5 psi divided by a 200 factor would be 75hp. If we used the 175 factor it would be even more hp lost.
The SBC and 5.0 are the two most popular blown motors, so people want to know how much crank power they are losing. If you have an engine that makes 550 flywheel hp on a dyno with a crank driven blower, and the blower is taking 75 hp tp turn it, then you are actually making 625 hp but the crank losses are 75. The 550CID engines running the Procharger @ 25 psi are using 200 +crank hp to turn them.

What ever happened to the Genom project 8?

Drewstein wrote: Electrical Axial Flow supercharger
Good point. I wonder why Geoff Knight and Richard Paul don't consider a joint venture?

I wonder whether someone came up with a hydraulic or an air driven supercharger?

How?
Instead of a flywheel generator you'd have an air pump. Since the engine is an airpump already, you'd install a compression retarder and a valve and you pump air into a tank everytime you hit the brake and therefore store braking energy. At WOT the pressurized air in the air tank would drive an airmotor which in turn drives the supercharger.

Why?
* Because you could still use regenerative braking.
* There's no parasitic loss nor is there any increased back pressure which means power will higher with less boost.
* The supercharger would only be used at WOT and therefore not increase fuel consumption at normal driving conditions.
* The supercharger can generate more pressure at low rpm since its drive is independent from the crank rpm. Therfore a more efficient and lighter compressor (centrifugal or axial) can be installed and still generate a drive shaft terrifying low end torque.
* An intercooler can be installed since the supercharger can be placed before the throttle plate. With an intercooler the efficiency or power would even further go up since the cooler air will require less compression work.
* Storing pressurized air would probably use less weight than storing electric energy in batteries.
* An air tank can be charged million times.
* Hardly anyone drives at WOT for longer than maybe 20 seconds therefore no giant airtank is required.

The air tank required to store that kind of energy would be quite large. Think what kind of tank you need to drive an air tool for 20 seconds, and then think about how much more air would be required to drive a supercharger. Of course, you could go with a high-pressure tank, but then you'd have to figure out how to generate those pressures during regenerative braking. Then you have the whole bomb thing.

If you could figure out a way to store the air, why not bypass the supercharger altogether? If you have a source of pressurized air, why not just blow it straight into the intake manifold at WOT (along with the required extra fuel, of course)?

Thinking of this, I'm sure it's been thought of before. If it worked we'd all have little pressure tanks in our trunk we would charge up before we leave for the day, and then "spray" the air when that STI rolls up. I'm sure the reason people do this with NOS as opposed to air is the energy density - you just couldn't get enough air in your trunk to last very long.

Liquid oxygen, anyone? ;)

GeorgeH wrote: If you could figure out a way to store the air, why not bypass the supercharger altogether? If you have a source of pressurized air, why not just blow it straight into the intake manifold at WOT (along with the required extra fuel, of course)?
Actually I thought about this too. This would basically be a jet pump, but jet pumps for some reasons have a very low efficiency (Something like 20%). And I'm actually not even sure to what level you can even generate pressure with a jet pump.

Ok let's do the math: You'd maybe need 5kW for 20 seconds which would mean 100kWs. According to the compression ratio it should be able to generate around 10 atm. Work is pressure times volume (simplified). So in order to generate 100kWs you'd require a 100 l tank. Oh well, it's bigger than I thought.

But if you had a turbocharged car, you could simply use the pressurized air to bring the exhaust wheel up to speed and you sort of end up with the same concept, but you'd need less energy.

Or if you had a hydraulic pump connected to the flywheel you could generate much higher pressures and have a much smaller tank. But I don't say that an electric supercharger might ultimately still be the superior solution.

I think the reason why we don't have it, is because regenerative braking is something fairly new and no matter how you do it, it simply makes the car more expensive. Now ordinary Hybrids have the benefit of making a car far more efficient and a hybrid supercharger wouldn't really make it much more efficient but more powerful. It'd be something inbetween and so far there wasn't a market for it, since buyers of sportscar don't really care much about fuel efficiency.

Well with liquid oxygen you wouldn't just burn fuel, but I guess you're aware of it.

Dont let my reply stop you from imagining additional ways to make an AP supercharger (auxiliary powered). As the previous post states, the tank would be enourmous for a 10-20 second run. This is because of the need for more pressure and airflow coming out of the tank than what is going into the engine. The formulas for determining power to drive any supercharger is the same:
(PSI X CFM / 229) /EFFICIENCY OF THE BLOWER/FRICTION LOSSES
So a 13B engine uses the airflow of a 3.9 liter engine. That translates to:
3900/16.6 = CID X 7000 (RPM)/3456 = CFM @ 100% EFFICIENCY. THE ENGINE IS ABOUT 90% EFFICIENT, SO CFM/90 = 430CFM.
Lets do the math for 10 psi with a 75% efficient compressor. The density ratio at 10 psi with 75% AE = 1.5, so 430 x 1.5 = 645 cfm @ 7K @ 10 psi
10 x 645 = 6450/229 = 28hp. No compressor is 100% efficient, so 28/.75% = 35hp/.05% friction losses = 37hp.
The typical air tool is 1-3hp max, so you would need a serious air motor as well as a tank (even with air compressed to 4000 psi)
There have been several good designs in the past. Turbonique used rocket fuel monopropellant to run their turbine/superchargers with unbelievable results. Other than the several dozen deaths associated with explosions and little problems like that, the design was good for the late 60's (You know I am being sarcastic in this sue-anyone age) I owned about two dozen of their units before nearly killing myself trying to power one with steam. A tank ruptured at 600psi. Fortunately, it exploded in the opposite direction of me or I would have been deep fried. I sold all the units immediately before I could kill myself :-)

atsturbo, I have never heard of Turbonique but it certainly sounds exciting.
Actually I think 4 psi boost would be enough to generate an extra 50HP (since there's no parasitic loss). I still don't see why you need to anticipate an airflow of a 3.9 liter engine, since the engine would displace 1.3 liter per revolution if it had a volumetric efficiency of 100% (which is the same as a 2.6 liter otto engine). So the air consumption would then be 151.6 l per second at 7000 rpm (1.3l*7000rpm/60). 4psi is about 27400Pa an volume times pressure is power(27400*0.151=4.2kW) (assuming isochor compression which it's not, but it's not too far from adiabatic compression). If you had an efficiency of 70% you'd end up with a power requirement of 6kW which is roughly 10HP. I wouldn't take the power needed to generate the air pressure into account, since it's supposed to be generated when you brake anyway. It just saves your brakepads. :)
(I'm not very familiar with English units so I use SI-units.)
But as I acknowledged before you need a larger tank than I originally expected and I agree electrically powered might ultimately the better way to go. Well actually a flywheel can still store more energy per weight than a battery. And a flywheel might also give one some interesting stories to tell, granted he or she ever gets old enough.

Not that this has anything to do with a rotary engine, but this might be an excellent application for an electric supercharger:
http://popularmechanics.com/automotive/auto_technology/2000/5/saab_compression_engine/

So, has anyone ever ended up installing one of those ESCs, I wonder?

I was surprised that the RX-8 used electric power steering.
I guess practical electric boost is just a matter of engineering.

The air tank required to store that kind of energy would be quite large. Think what kind of tank you need to drive an air tool for 20 seconds, and then think about how much more air would be required to drive a supercharger. Of course, you could go with a high-pressure tank, but then you'd have to figure out how to generate those pressures during regenerative braking. Then you have the whole bomb thing.

If you could figure out a way to store the air, why not bypass the supercharger altogether? If you have a source of pressurized air, why not just blow it straight into the intake manifold at WOT (along with the required extra fuel, of course)?

Thinking of this, I'm sure it's been thought of before. If it worked we'd all have little pressure tanks in our trunk we would charge up before we leave for the day, and then "spray" the air when that STI rolls up. I'm sure the reason people do this with NOS as opposed to air is the energy density - you just couldn't get enough air in your trunk to last very long.

Liquid oxygen, anyone? ;)

The reason the Nitrous is used is because because essentially you deliver Oxygen to the engine, but in a safe "capsule". At around 400F (or is it C)? Nitrous Molecules Break down releasing all that Oxygen.
Oxygen on it's own is going to blow up along with your car and you in it. :eek:

http://www.boosthead.com/ seems legit. Anybody try this on an RX-8?

Based on the theory, it should work. I don't see any reason why you can't use electric power for short bursts.

The real issue would be the type of supercharger, boost level, HP gain, and cost. Since he using a centrifugal supercharger, I wonder how fast the boost would come on. If belt driven, there should be a little delay, like turbo. But for an electric driven centrifugal supercharger, would it boost faster?

Yes it would boost faster (than a turbocharged engine). Actually Borg Warner is working on a turbocharged system in combination with an electric supercharger in order to reduce turbolag - such that a downsized turbocharged engine develops the same torque curve as an engine with a large displacement.
http://www.turbos.bwauto.com/de/products/ebooster.asp
(Sorry I couldn't an English link).

I see atsturbo has not posted since 2004. Did he ever get an electric SC working on the RX-8?

The reason the Nitrous is used is because because essentially you deliver Oxygen to the engine, but in a safe "capsule". At around 400F (or is it C)? Nitrous Molecules Break down releasing all that Oxygen.
Oxygen on it's own is going to blow up along with your car and you in it. :eek:

we need another planet with different air compositions for the RX-8 to develop more power with its 1.3 liters..... 50%nitrogen/50% oxygen? :hahano:

Yes it would boost faster (than a turbocharged engine). Actually Borg Warner is working on a turbocharged system in combination with an electric supercharger in order to reduce turbolag - such that a downsized turbocharged engine develops the same torque curve as an engine with a large displacement.
http://www.turbos.bwauto.com/de/products/ebooster.asp
(Sorry I couldn't an English link).

I read an article about the proposed RX8 mazdaspeed a while ago, and it was supposed to have an eletrically assisted turbo, to remove lag.

in english
http://www.turbos.bwauto.com/en/products/ebooster.asp

So, is someone running one of these suckers yet or not?