Saw this on Ebay... makes some dubious claims....

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors...QrdZ1



MimoUSA Electric Supercharger

GET 15-25HP JUST BY CHANGING YOUR AIR INTAKE FILTER

Need boost? Can't afford a turbo or supercharger? Air Intake Blower is an adapter to either your short ram or cold air intake. It will work on absolutely any air intake brand including AEM, Injen, Mimousa, Weapon R etc. Simply remove your current air filter and put the Air Intake Blower as a replacement. It's that simple. The Air Intake Blower is operated on a 12-volt source. This means you can contact it to your battery to get the power. It uses 2.2 amps from your alternator while at work which doesn't create any pressure on it especially while driving at high RPMs. The Air Intake Blower is contacted to a switch inside the car, so whenever you need more power you simply flip the switch and fly away. Air Intake Blower produces 250CFM of forced air into your intake. It is not noisy, it makes a nice sound making it seem like you got something bigger then what you actual have under the hood. A stock turbo from an Audi 1.8T produces 400CFM. Adding an Air Intake Blower will produce more then half of the power than a stock Audi 1.8T turbo would but you don't need to do any modifications to your engine. 250CFM of forced air can also be compared to a 15-25 shot of Nitrous. Produces 15 – 25 horsepower increaseGenerates 250CFM of forced airUniversal Bolt-on, installs on any short ram or cold air intakeK&N Filter includedInstallation instructions and all necessary installation hardware includedPipes are not included, must have either a short ram or cold air intake to install properlyUniversal application – Unit will replace your aftermarket air intake filter please check to see if there is enough room by your air intake filter to install the unit

Look familiar?

Saw those...looks like a converted leaf blower. Which, btw, are not very efficient at moving air with any kind of pressure. I'v been kind of interested in the possibility of electric turbos though and there are some systems out there from a German group that makes carbon fiber ducted fans for remote control jets. These will actually operate in the 12,000 + RPM range and the later models can produce up to 19 lbs of thrust. (would thrust equate to boost? Not sure about the measurement methods) The units come in 90mm tube form. The big questions are the electronics and the reliability. Normally these run on battery packs of up to 24 batteries. I have an email into the motor manufacturer concerning what could be done using a 12 volt car battery and alt. ... if they aren't laughing too much to reply I'll let you know what they say as far as what kind of amps would be pulled etc. Anybody out there done any experimenting with this, or am I the only person here with wayyyy to much time on my hands?

anlasak wrote:Look familiar?

Anlasak ...did that work ? Was it on a Q ?

For forced induction you need more than just cfm. You need pressure.

That's where the electric blowers fall short. A small blower that draws 2.2 amps or even 15 amps is not going to cut it.

Thomas Knight has an electric supercharger setup that uses 3 motors spinning a Roots type blower. It uses crazy amounts of power, such that you need to have a separate batteries to feed it. It works but it is not cheap.

To make real power, you have to go with a belt driven supercharger or a turbocharger.

According to an article in Hot Rod magazine, for every 100 horsepower's worth of airflow a supercharger adds, it will need approx. 30 hp to run it.

Here's an article about the Thomas Knight Electric SuperCharger:

http://www.turbomagazine.com/tech/0406tur_knight/

Hell,if a decent chip adds about 15-25hp,why go to all that expense and unreliability to add a little bit more?

OneOctaveUp wrote:Anlasak ...did that work ? Was it on a Q ?

That is a cooling fan for the injectors from a Datsun 280zx.

(Intake & Exhaust are on the same side on the L28E/ET, so the intake tends to act as a heat sink)

When it comes to forced induction and the Q45, the best way to go would be a supercharger. (Belt driven, not electrically)

No REPOST police around here?

I just noticed the 250 CFM rating of the unit.........that means that on a 4.5 liter engine the max rpm would be 3300 rpm because beyond that the engine needs more CFM. Beyond 3300 rpm it would offer a larger and larger restriction.

Hey if it might work on a 2 liter Honda let's sell it for a Q.......salesmen!

The Q consumes 300 CFM @4000 and 380 CFM @6200 on up.

I can't believe NICO even lets that add scroll over the top of our page.

Q_SHIP wrote:I can't believe NICO even lets that add scroll over the top of our page.

We regularly add it to the list of google ads to be blocked, but the "lister URL" changes all the time .

It is unfortunate ... but interesting that the google ad banner is able to customize the links based on the thread discussion.

can we get back to the BABE with the hot pistol........

I feel we've drifted off topic!!!!

lol

First, this is a tired old thread, but, Will a leaf blower work? Yes, is it cheezy, YES! Won't be as effective on our V8's (or noticably effective at all) but ANY forced induction assitance will make HP. The engine is creating suction through the intake, if you reduce that vacuum with any positive pressure it'll make some, even if minimal, HP. Some of the techies with their complicated formulas will tell you it won't but no matter how many equations they throw at us I am not convinced. Any air the engine doesn't have to "suck" in will help it make more power, period.

Leaf Blower Forced Induction Proof Video

Wow that is amazing!!! Thats a pretty practical setup...

qsiguy wrote:1.) but ANY forced induction assitance will make HP. The engine is creating suction through the intake,

2.) if you reduce that vacuum with any positive pressure it'll make some, even if minimal, HP.

3.) Any air the engine doesn't have to "suck" in will help it make more power, period.

1.) Not if it consumes more engine power than is produces, or if flow is insufficient, as Q45tech noted. Engines don't "create suction." See 3.) below.

2.) There is no vacuum, only a differential in air pressure.

3.) Piston engines don't suck. Rather, the atmophere "blows."

There are very few absolutely true statements in the universe, including this one.
Modified by maxnix at 1:31 PM 3/19/2006

maxnix wrote:1.) Not if it condumes more engine power than is produces, or if flow is insufficient, as Q45tech noted. Engines don't "create suction." See 3.) below.

2.) There is no vacuum, only a differential in air pressure.

3.) Piston engines don't suck. Rather, the atmophere "blows."

There are very few absolutely true statements in the universe, including this one.

Not very often you can get in argument about sucking and blowing in the Q45 forum, and have it be completely appropriate....

maxnix wrote:1.) Not if it condumes more engine power than is produces, or if flow is insufficient, as Q45tech noted. Engines don't "create suction." See 3.) below.

2.) There is no vacuum, only a differential in air pressure.

3.) Piston engines don't suck. Rather, the atmophere "blows."

There are very few absolutely true statements in the universe, including this one.

"Engines don't create suction, there is no vacuum, only a dfference in air pressure?"

Yes and light is the absence of darkness. Hehe... why dont you just stop breathing and let the atmospheric pressure do it for you? What do you think a vacuum is? It's exactly that! Maybe you'd like to do away with the word 'Vacuum'. Hell!.... maybe we should start calling Vacuum hoses "atmospheric pressure shields" instead???

"Piston engines don't suck. Rather, the atmophere blows."... What a load of crap??? You mean to tell me that the Atmospheric pressure is the active catalyst here? Nooo.... it's not the combustion-driven mechanical down-stroke of the piston sucking in Oxygen for the air/fuel mixture. To hell with a super-charger....maybe I should just move to New Orleans and keep the car below sea level! That'll give me the extra power I need!

Sometimes we stray too far from the road of reality and end up stepping in the cow doodoo.

Drew, hes right!!! The downward motion of the piston creates lower pressure in the cylinder, which then the atmospheric pressure forces into the engine...

The basic dynamics of fluids (yes, air is a fluid!!) is that "fluids go from where they are, to where they aint"... thats about as simple as it can be...

Consider this example. When you have a straw in your supersize drink at McDonalds and you "suck" the liquid up, you are not actually sucking in.. you are creating a pressure differential, and the atmospheric pressure is actually pressing DOWN on the surface of the soft drink, and thus FORCING it up the straw...! try sealing the lid of the cup completely to the atmosphere and sucking on the straw!! Yeah, it aint gonna happen..

Those who chose to ignore the basic rules of physics are simply fools in their right.

To counter your other arguments, when you breathe, you are not SUCKING air in. Your diaphram contracts and decreases the pressure (by increasing the volume... inside your lungs, and thus the air is forced in... When you are sitting idle (and not breathing) the pressure is exactly the same outside your lungs as it is inside...

I am sure Mr. boyle (Boyles law, pressure is inversely proportional to volume) was a complete idiot and he has no clue what hes talking about.

Similarly, as the piston moves down you are increasing the volume, you are then decreasing the pressure, and thus the air can move in.

I also agree with you, vacuum is not a good word to use, as its simply a pressure differential. Vacuum is the absense of pressure, and it really does not exist except in the far reaches of space... even near the earth in orbit there is some pressure, albiet very very minimal.....

Quote »Sometimes we stray too far from the road of reality and end up stepping in the cow doodoo.[/quote]I couldnt agree with you more!

elwesso wrote:Drew, hes right!!! The downward motion of the piston creates lower pressure in the cylinder, which then the atmospheric pressure forces into the engine... You just can't ignore the mechanicals.

The basic dynamics of fluids (yes, air is a fluid!!) is that "fluids go from where they are, to where they aint"... thats about as simple as it can be...

Consider this example. When you have a straw in your supersize drink at McDonalds and you "suck" the liquid up, you are not actually sucking in.. you are creating a pressure differential, and the atmospheric pressure is actually pressing DOWN on the surface of the soft drink, and thus FORCING it up the straw...! try sealing the lid of the cup completely to the atmosphere and sucking on the straw!! Yeah, it aint gonna happen..

Those who chose to ignore the basic rules of physics are simply fools in their right.

To counter your other arguments, when you breathe, you are not SUCKING air in. Your diaphram contracts and decreases the pressure (by increasing the volume... inside your lungs, and thus the air is forced in... When you are sitting idle (and not breathing) the pressure is exactly the same outside your lungs as it is inside...

I am sure Mr. boyle (Boyles law, pressure is inversely proportional to volume) was a complete idiot and he has no clue what hes talking about.

Similarly, as the piston moves down you are increasing the volume, you are then decreasing the pressure, and thus the air can move in.

I also agree with you, vacuum is not a good word to use, as its simply a pressure differential. Vacuum is the absense of pressure, and it really does not exist except in the far reaches of space... even near the earth in orbit there is some pressure, albiet very very minimal.....

I couldnt agree with you more!

Wes, I'm am not and cannot argue a basic law of physics... just the perception of it.

Yes air is a liquid... it just contains less of the heavier hydrogen molecules (depending on humidity) and is much lighter than lets say, water. And yes, the lung does maintain a positive air pressure inside the diaphram with relation to the atmoshphere... hence the term "collapsed lung" once a breach is realized. But you must realize the act of breathing involves expansion/contraction of the diapharam fed by the adominal and accessory muscles. Air does not just rush in. That's the active catalyst! BTW, when you are sitting idle not breathing, the lung pressure is not equal to the atmosphere else you'd be dead ...it has to maintain a positive pressure at all times else it collapses.

We all know that we are manipulating the constant (in relation to the big picture) atmospheric pressure on this green-house called earth....I'm not disputing that at all, however, there is such a thing as a catalyst or cause for the change in pressure with relation to the outside atmosphere.

Since the atmosphere remains at pressure, it's a given constant and strives to maintain equilibrium in all spaces it occupies. The downward stroke of the piston after combusting creates a vacuum/void so it becomes the active catalyst in the cause for the change in pressure with relation to the given constant. I have no problem calling this rush to equilibrum of air pressure suction anymore than I have calling the pre-existing pressure difference in the cylinder a vacuum.

I have no problem calling a duck a friggin duck!

Now I have a headache and going to ingest another liquid... BEER

...Drew....
Modified by DrewQ45 at 12:35 PM 3/19/2006

Drew i have a feeling its all coming down to semantics...

"there is such a thing as a catalyst or cause for the change in pressure with relation to the outside atmosphere."

Of course! And im glad you clarified your position, because we are coming from the same place, just calling it different things.. Does not mean one is wrong per se, but rather who is "more accurate".. in the grand scheme of things, which is more accurate?

elwesso wrote:Drew i have a feeling its all coming down to semantics...

"there is such a thing as a catalyst or cause for the change in pressure with relation to the outside atmosphere."

Of course! And im glad you clarified your position, because we are coming from the same place, just calling it different things.. Does not mean one is wrong per se, but rather who is "more accurate".. in the grand scheme of things, which is more accurate?

True true... My argument distilled is that you cannot ignore the engine mechanicals and just give credit solely to atmospheric pressure. I'll shut up now else Mr. Bud is going to interject soon.

...drew...

Mental Focus on the problem is the key as many who might have had a few college courses in Physics even 4.0 students, even PHDs will have not focused on things as simple as how a real engine works............mundane things are not explored due to instructor bias for Grander things.

Other than professional builders, racing teams, and Manufacturers and their suppliers who would graduate as an Automotive engineer and who would specialize in engine design. Pretty restrictive job opportunities.

At least Engine Air Flow Analysis is a mandantory core course in the MSAE program everywhere.

Viewpoint Relative to wholism/reductionism.