leccycharger -am starting to wonder (maybe with standalone)

[liam012]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/Supercha ... enameZWDVW

once you have visited the link and finished laughing just consider for a second -

it has a 10year squillion mile warranty so maybe they are built better these days.
it can generate 2.1 psi?
it costs (in terms of Forced Induction) Nothing

Now say (and providing) you are running megasquirt or some other standalone, you have ditched the afm and using only MAP. So you have a nice big intake pipe from throttle body going down to the front area behind lights,

my question is this:

Can it hurt to add the leccy charger? sure 2.1 psi is nothing compared to what real turbo creates but for so little money maybe its not that bad???

your'e still laughing aren't you?....

[Jhonno]

[liam012]

it was worth a try!

[Jon_Bmw]

+ 1

[liam012]

i think what i was asking is could you say there would be zero benifit?
i mean surely if proper turbo costs 3500
does the price ratio of performance to the pound relate in anyway to the price performance ratio of the leccy charger
and (deep breath) could the leccy charger actually give you more (yes more ) performance per pund than the big boy turbo!!!!!!!

i appreciate this is hillarious- and may be even slightly embarassed to have started the topic -
but we all slate them including myself and i have never actually looked at the numbers (if there are any to look at!) so i am just real curious is all.....

[Jhonno]

dude - its a glorified hairdryer - more of a restriction than a help, will not rotate @a high enough rpm to do shit

[Jon_Bmw]

If you really feel the need to do something that involves "leafblowers"

look here

http://videos.streetfire.net/toprated/1 ... CA9564.htm



Link edited

[liam012]

funny allright
bot
I just find it hard to believe that they can market something that generates 2.3 psi and its totaly usless? -
because i would imagine if it did generate 2.3 psi throughout ther rev range it wouldnt be totally useless?
i gues it must be what they call false advertising
its dissapointing to think that in the modern era we havent got more electronically advanced chargers as lets be honest turbos and superchargers have beeen around a long time and one would imagie the royal "they" would hae invented something by now.
oh well i shant hold my breath....

now let me see mmm m90 or leafblower........?

[Morat]

I'm guessing that generating 2.3 PSI is entirely possible if you're pointing the hairdryer at a jamjar. BUT if that jamjar is being constantly emptied by.. .well... lets say a 2.5 litre displacement pump 1000 times a minute (2.5 litres displacement, revving at 4000rpm, intake every 4 revs) then your hairdryer would be doing well not to just get sucked into the cylinders and spat out of the exhaust

As for electric vs mechanical 'chargers: Looking at the big scheme of it, any form of 'charger is using mechanical energy to shove air into the engine. There doesn't seem much point in turning some of the mechanical energy generated by the engine into electrical energy and back again when you could just hook up a pulley or use the kinetic energy in the exhaust gases that is going to be disapated in the silencer.

[Widge]

I think you'll find that the fan is just anothr restriction in the intake system. Even if it can produce 2 psi it woun't flow the volume needed at high rpms. Also on standard fuelling I doubt it would make any differance. Having said that I'd like to see why these guys are obviously convinced it will help, they must have rolling roaded it.... so I'm like you very dubious particularly of the ones which are just small PC cooling fans, but at the same time not dismissing it off hand.

[Turbo-Brown]

I'm guessing that generating 2.3 PSI is entirely possible if you're pointing the hairdryer at a jamjar. BUT if that jamjar is being constantly emptied by.. .well... lets say a 2.5 litre displacement pump 1000 times a minute (2.5 litres displacement, revving at 4000rpm, intake every 4 revs) then your hairdryer would be doing well not to just get sucked into the cylinders and spat out of the exhaust

I agree with all of that, except that 4 stroke engines induct ever other revolution of the crank, not every fourth.

[Morat]

I'm guessing that generating 2.3 PSI is entirely possible if you're pointing the hairdryer at a jamjar. BUT if that jamjar is being constantly emptied by.. .well... lets say a 2.5 litre displacement pump 1000 times a minute (2.5 litres displacement, revving at 4000rpm, intake every 4 revs) then your hairdryer would be doing well not to just get sucked into the cylinders and spat out of the exhaust

I agree with all of that, except that 4 stroke engines induct ever other revolution of the crank, not every fourth.

HAH, yes correct
4 strokes, 2 revs! Got that a bit wrong then!

So, lets test my maths - I reckon that a 2.5l engine revving at 4k sucks in 83.3 Litres/second and 125 litres per second at 6k revs. Thats an incredible volume! Can it be right?

[Turbo-Brown]

If we say it's 2.5 litres per two revs so:

1.25litres per revolution
Say volumetric efficiency of 75% so:
1.25*0.75=0.9375/rev

6000rpm*0.9375=5625litres/minute

5625/60=93.75litres / second so yeah that's about right

[Motorhole]

http://www.homemadeturbo.com/tech_projects/el_blower/

I've posted this link before, but it is a "road test" of a leccy charger.