KRAFTWERKS SUPERCHARGER aka (Jackson Racing)
#701
01-21-2008, 03:11 PM
Oscar:
Question from those of us at altitude (I know you did high altitude testing).
When does the Rotrex make its peak boost of 5 psi in the RPM band at both sea level and at 5000+ ft? I know I will have to rev it a bit more to see the true 5 psi here in Denver, thats why I am asking. I understand FI very well, and I am sure you have engineered the bypass valve very well, and I just want to understand where in the RPM band the Rotrex is hitting that peak at both sea level and high altitude (assume a full throttle run).
Thanks, looking forward to hearing a response, and maybe next time you are in Colorado we can meet up
-Eric
Question from those of us at altitude (I know you did high altitude testing).
When does the Rotrex make its peak boost of 5 psi in the RPM band at both sea level and at 5000+ ft? I know I will have to rev it a bit more to see the true 5 psi here in Denver, thats why I am asking. I understand FI very well, and I am sure you have engineered the bypass valve very well, and I just want to understand where in the RPM band the Rotrex is hitting that peak at both sea level and high altitude (assume a full throttle run).
Thanks, looking forward to hearing a response, and maybe next time you are in Colorado we can meet up
-Eric
No matter what, you will not be seeing the same amount of boost as your sea level friends. Its the laws of physics, there is just less air.
But your percentage increase in power will be the same as sea level. So no problems.
-Oscar Jackson Jr.
Last edited by OJRKraftWerks; 01-21-2008 at 05:27 PM.
#703
01-21-2008, 09:11 PM
Another point people should realize. Let's take an 80 WHP automatic. Add 5# kit for 120WHP (but the actual numbers have not been released). You say, only 50% increase. Well, only from a dig.
If you are rolling down the road at 75mph, using 40HP to maintain cruising speed, then actually you will have double the power if you stomp your foot down, ie, 80HP available for acceleration instead of just 40HP.
If you are rolling down the road at 75mph, using 40HP to maintain cruising speed, then actually you will have double the power if you stomp your foot down, ie, 80HP available for acceleration instead of just 40HP.
#704
01-21-2008, 10:19 PM
It doesn't take 40 hp to cruise at 75 mph in anything as light and aerodynamic as the fit.
#705
01-21-2008, 10:54 PM
so.... any word as to teh release date?? possibly a group buy? is this thing carb legal? what is teh final price?? i have the funds, and the money is burning a hole in my pocket :P
#706
01-21-2008, 11:00 PM
you can visit the kraftwerks site and sign the interest list for notification.
click on products, click on honda fit, click on the kraftwerks logo, then you will see sign interest list to click on.
e.b.
kraftwerksusa
click on products, click on honda fit, click on the kraftwerks logo, then you will see sign interest list to click on.
e.b.
kraftwerksusa
Last edited by ebcspace; 01-21-2008 at 11:10 PM.
#707
01-21-2008, 11:02 PM
you can visit the kraftwerks site and sign the interest list for notification.
Default PLESK Page
e.b.
Default PLESK Page
e.b.
#708
01-22-2008, 01:34 AM
But my point stands, reserve WHP is lesser at speed. The same reason that a Lotus Elise with a great power to weight ratio loses at higher speeds (ie, no corners), it's using more percentage of its available power just to fight the drag vs some overpowered boat anchor.If you have some sort of drag coef + velocity -> req'd hp conversion, that'd be awesome.
Last edited by xorbe; 01-22-2008 at 01:40 AM.
#709
01-22-2008, 06:11 PM
hi oscar, you seem to think that i insinuated that you guys didn't road race. i did no such thing. i'm just saying that AJR also has a road-raced, boosted Fit application with a track record and that they too could shed some light on how tough (or not) the L15 is.
i was aware of your organization's road racing successes prior to your above post. but to be fair, you guys have been a little mum about your testing data, whereas AJR has spoken openly about theirs and has a track record to boot (on the Fit in particular, which is why i'd even mention them). no offense, but this is the car industry, and in the age of nearly instantaneous and free information, no company, OEM or otherwise, gets a free pass regardless of its history of success. it's like the stock market - past performance is no guarantee of future success. unless you prove it.
and for the record, my wife and i were talking about choosing between a fit hybrid vs. supercharging our current fit. since it is likely to be cheaper to supercharge the fit than to eat depreciation, fees, mark-up on the new car, she offered to split the cost of the SC with me.
when you get a chance, these are my specific questions:
1. do you test your AT application with the same regimen as your MT application? i'm specifically concerned with road racing, and i don't go any longer than 30 minutes at a time. it would be nice to know that all i have to do is switch to amsoil AT fluid and call it good, or not. what did you guys do?
2. would you still recommend the base kit (without IC) knowing it will encounter road race conditions? will basically adding a few gallons of 100 octane be sufficient?
3. what type of dyno are you using, and what were the results of your base run and after run? were all those runs on 91 octane?
thanks in advance.
i was aware of your organization's road racing successes prior to your above post. but to be fair, you guys have been a little mum about your testing data, whereas AJR has spoken openly about theirs and has a track record to boot (on the Fit in particular, which is why i'd even mention them). no offense, but this is the car industry, and in the age of nearly instantaneous and free information, no company, OEM or otherwise, gets a free pass regardless of its history of success. it's like the stock market - past performance is no guarantee of future success. unless you prove it.
and for the record, my wife and i were talking about choosing between a fit hybrid vs. supercharging our current fit. since it is likely to be cheaper to supercharge the fit than to eat depreciation, fees, mark-up on the new car, she offered to split the cost of the SC with me.
when you get a chance, these are my specific questions:
1. do you test your AT application with the same regimen as your MT application? i'm specifically concerned with road racing, and i don't go any longer than 30 minutes at a time. it would be nice to know that all i have to do is switch to amsoil AT fluid and call it good, or not. what did you guys do?
2. would you still recommend the base kit (without IC) knowing it will encounter road race conditions? will basically adding a few gallons of 100 octane be sufficient?
3. what type of dyno are you using, and what were the results of your base run and after run? were all those runs on 91 octane?
thanks in advance.
I was just informing you (and others) that we have a track record of abusive testing with all different types of engines and power-adders. We don't tell everyone about our testing because there is too much to talk about! We never stop testing; we are testing everyday, because you drive your cars everyday. We may not share all our private testing data, but we share important figures and ensure a quality product.
1. We have not tested the AT at the racetrack. I would HIGHLY recommend a Trans Oil Cooler for AT track abuse. Honda Automatics have done fairly well with boost in spirited STREET driving, but track abuse is different. I would always use Honda Automatic Transmission Fluid. Honda Trans Oil is usually the ONLY oil that works properly in Honda transmissions.
2. We have ran our 10 PSI kit Non-Intercooled through many track days, with no issues. Intercoolers are not as necessary as you might think. Ask Chris... He saw us working his car on the dyno run after run, without a break between runs. Then he noticed we would hold onto the discharge pipe DURING and AFTER runs, as a kind of quick temperature check. This is only possible with the Rotrex!
If you would like to throw some 100 in on a track day, that's nice, but not required. Boosted engines on hot, abusive track days always like 100.
3. We use a SuperFlow AutoDyn currently (similar to a DynoJet). It produces its numbers as accurate to a DynoJet, and has been tested against other DynoJet dynos. We use standard 91 octane pump gas. If we used any other fuel, that would not reflect a real-world scenario. Final dyno numbers will be announced on our website in the coming week.
-Oscar Jackson Jr.
#710
01-22-2008, 11:28 PM
I finally found the trigger to the Load debate!
I apologize for the delay gloryhound!
You will not be in boost at steady-state, cruise throttle. Your engine would be seeing a common vacuum situation, and adjust as it did before the supercharger.
When you go to climb the Baker Grade, you will not have to down-shift twice, try to catch a draft off a SUV, and spin the engine at high RPMs. You will be able to roll into the throttle, and climb the hill faster, with the help of boost. You will spend less time on the hill revving the engine, with the help of a little boost.
Your engine will not see boost for the duration of the trip. Unless you were at full throttle the whole time and never lifted.
So... At highway cruise speeds- You will NOT be in boost. This goes for both superchargers and turbochargers. But when you hit the throttle to pass someone on a supercharged engine, you will see boost immediately, and be able to accelerate. There is no lag between your foot and boosted acceleration.
We have Mazda Miata supercharger kits with over 17 years of abuse and hundreds of thousands of miles. The only maintenance by our customers is changing their engine oil.
-Oscar Jackson Jr.
I apologize for the delay gloryhound!
You will not be in boost at steady-state, cruise throttle. Your engine would be seeing a common vacuum situation, and adjust as it did before the supercharger.
When you go to climb the Baker Grade, you will not have to down-shift twice, try to catch a draft off a SUV
, and spin the engine at high RPMs. You will be able to roll into the throttle, and climb the hill faster, with the help of boost. You will spend less time on the hill revving the engine, with the help of a little boost.Your engine will not see boost for the duration of the trip. Unless you were at full throttle the whole time and never lifted.
So... At highway cruise speeds- You will NOT be in boost. This goes for both superchargers and turbochargers. But when you hit the throttle to pass someone on a supercharged engine, you will see boost immediately, and be able to accelerate. There is no lag between your foot and boosted acceleration.
We have Mazda Miata supercharger kits with over 17 years of abuse and hundreds of thousands of miles. The only maintenance by our customers is changing their engine oil.
-Oscar Jackson Jr.
short shift kit installed, anti-sway bar installed... stalking the sound deadening thread. all set.
#711
01-23-2008, 04:29 AM
its like talking to a wall. i already said i didn't have proof. i also already said the kit would increase wear. i said there was no way to obtain the evidence your looking for. the evidence to disprove significant wear (significant is a subjective term, but lets not even get into that) is in chris's engine, and we're not opening that up.
then you are gonna come back and call me an "internet kid" for making a (lame) joke
? you are harping on a point that im saying is irrelevant. i am also agreeing with you that the rotrex will cause additional wear. the additional wear will also be insignificant
. you are just arguing for the sake of arguing now.
to sum it all up.
yes, there will be probably be a slight (read:INSIGNIFICANT) increase in wear on internals while cruising down the highway. can't say with 100% accuracy though.
no, there is no way to prove or disprove that to claymore's satisfaction.
btw, i think a couple thousand na miata drivers with less efficient jackson chargers would prolly agree with me anyways, but w/e. i'm done.
then you are gonna come back and call me an "internet kid" for making a (lame) joke
? you are harping on a point that im saying is irrelevant. i am also agreeing with you that the rotrex will cause additional wear. the additional wear will also be insignificant. you are just arguing for the sake of arguing now.to sum it all up.
yes, there will be probably be a slight (read:INSIGNIFICANT) increase in wear on internals while cruising down the highway. can't say with 100% accuracy though.
no, there is no way to prove or disprove that to claymore's satisfaction.
btw, i think a couple thousand na miata drivers with less efficient jackson chargers would prolly agree with me anyways, but w/e. i'm done.
you know what? its hilarious he even posted what he did, because in another thread, mr. clay decided it was his job to harp on me for the same EXACT thing. what a hipocrite. i've decided he's virtually useless.
Lyshk0, i feel your pain!
#712
01-23-2008, 04:32 AM
No worries. I was just informing you (and others) that we have a track record of abusive testing with all different types of engines and power-adders.
We don't tell everyone about our testing because there is too much to talk about! We never stop testing; we are testing everyday, because you drive your cars everyday. We may not share all our private testing data, but we share important figures and ensure a quality product.
1. We have not tested the AT at the racetrack. I would HIGHLY recommend a Trans Oil Cooler for AT track abuse. Honda Automatics have done fairly well with boost in spirited STREET driving, but track abuse is different. I would always use Honda Automatic Transmission Fluid. Honda Trans Oil is usually the ONLY oil that works properly in Honda transmissions.
2. We have ran our 10 PSI kit Non-Intercooled through many track days, with no issues. Intercoolers are not as necessary as you might think. Ask Chris... He saw us working his car on the dyno run after run, without a break between runs. Then he noticed we would hold onto the discharge pipe DURING and AFTER runs, as a kind of quick temperature check. This is only possible with the Rotrex!
If you would like to throw some 100 in on a track day, that's nice, but not required. Boosted engines on hot, abusive track days always like 100.
3. We use a SuperFlow AutoDyn currently (similar to a DynoJet). It produces its numbers as accurate to a DynoJet, and has been tested against other DynoJet dynos. We use standard 91 octane pump gas. If we used any other fuel, that would not reflect a real-world scenario. Final dyno numbers will be announced on our website in the coming week.
-Oscar Jackson Jr.
I was just informing you (and others) that we have a track record of abusive testing with all different types of engines and power-adders. We don't tell everyone about our testing because there is too much to talk about! We never stop testing; we are testing everyday, because you drive your cars everyday. We may not share all our private testing data, but we share important figures and ensure a quality product.
1. We have not tested the AT at the racetrack. I would HIGHLY recommend a Trans Oil Cooler for AT track abuse. Honda Automatics have done fairly well with boost in spirited STREET driving, but track abuse is different. I would always use Honda Automatic Transmission Fluid. Honda Trans Oil is usually the ONLY oil that works properly in Honda transmissions.
2. We have ran our 10 PSI kit Non-Intercooled through many track days, with no issues. Intercoolers are not as necessary as you might think. Ask Chris... He saw us working his car on the dyno run after run, without a break between runs. Then he noticed we would hold onto the discharge pipe DURING and AFTER runs, as a kind of quick temperature check. This is only possible with the Rotrex!
If you would like to throw some 100 in on a track day, that's nice, but not required. Boosted engines on hot, abusive track days always like 100.
3. We use a SuperFlow AutoDyn currently (similar to a DynoJet). It produces its numbers as accurate to a DynoJet, and has been tested against other DynoJet dynos. We use standard 91 octane pump gas. If we used any other fuel, that would not reflect a real-world scenario. Final dyno numbers will be announced on our website in the coming week.
-Oscar Jackson Jr.
i agree, there would be so many questions if we found out the parameters of testing...and the fact of the matter is, on most consumer products that you can buy, even the level of question answering that we have already gotten is unheard of, so thanks kraftwerks!
i finally picked up the lastest siphon, and the article was great, the gas mileage issue was wonderful too!!!!
its good to hear that its meant to be a perfect boost medium....not to little but not to much either.
someone (kraftwerks, jdmchris) remind me....that kit was the OLD one right?
and another question for the jacksons....if you are not planning on seeing track time...will the a/t fluid cooler really be necessary? and will the add on intercooler compromise our fog's?
o
#713
01-23-2008, 11:24 AM
i agree, there would be so many questions if we found out the parameters of testing...and the fact of the matter is, on most consumer products that you can buy, even the level of question answering that we have already gotten is unheard of, so thanks kraftwerks!
i finally picked up the lastest siphon, and the article was great, the gas mileage issue was wonderful too!!!!
its good to hear that its meant to be a perfect boost medium....not to little but not to much either.
someone (kraftwerks, jdmchris) remind me....that kit was the OLD one right?
and another question for the jacksons....if you are not planning on seeing track time...will the a/t fluid cooler really be necessary? and will the add on intercooler compromise our fog's?
o
i finally picked up the lastest siphon, and the article was great, the gas mileage issue was wonderful too!!!!
its good to hear that its meant to be a perfect boost medium....not to little but not to much either.
someone (kraftwerks, jdmchris) remind me....that kit was the OLD one right?
and another question for the jacksons....if you are not planning on seeing track time...will the a/t fluid cooler really be necessary? and will the add on intercooler compromise our fog's?
o
Putting a transmission cooler may not be necessary for the AT, but it would be an added bonus.
The intercooler option features have not been announced yet. We will try our best, but it is a really tight area to work in.
-Oscar Jackson Jr.
#714
01-23-2008, 12:22 PM
The current Siphon has our Current kit on the car.
Putting a transmission cooler may not be necessary for the AT, but it would be an added bonus.
The intercooler option features have not been announced yet. We will try our best, but it is a really tight area to work in.
-Oscar Jackson Jr.
Putting a transmission cooler may not be necessary for the AT, but it would be an added bonus.
The intercooler option features have not been announced yet. We will try our best, but it is a really tight area to work in.
-Oscar Jackson Jr.
much appreciated!
#715
01-23-2008, 04:29 PM
I haven't been able to find a Siphon to be able to read the article so perhaps you could shed a little light on it for me. Fuel economy is very important to me (environmental and foreign dependence not as much economical) so I was wondering what the results were, you mentioned a slight increase seen by someone but I wonder if this would be typical given similar driving habits. (would depend on the ecu tune I guess)
Also, given that I am in a high altitude (CO), and not knowing specifically how the Honda ecu and the map with the SC work, would running at a higher altitude make the car run slightly richer in comparison with the same car at sea level. I am wondering because a MAF sensor just measures the speed of the air if I recall correctly and I am not sure how or if the ecu corrects for density with the fuel mixture or something.
I am not sure if it is planned or not, but comparisons showing pre and post SC fuel mileage in similar driving conditions (temp, route, etc..) might go a long way convincing others like me it would be a fun purchase (that this won't hurt our wallet/environment etc. daily).
Also, given that I am in a high altitude (CO), and not knowing specifically how the Honda ecu and the map with the SC work, would running at a higher altitude make the car run slightly richer in comparison with the same car at sea level. I am wondering because a MAF sensor just measures the speed of the air if I recall correctly and I am not sure how or if the ecu corrects for density with the fuel mixture or something.
I am not sure if it is planned or not, but comparisons showing pre and post SC fuel mileage in similar driving conditions (temp, route, etc..) might go a long way convincing others like me it would be a fun purchase (that this won't hurt our wallet/environment etc. daily).
#716
01-23-2008, 05:10 PM
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Riverside
Posts: 12,411
I have posted about the gas mileage time and time again. My best tank of gas was 41mpg, but usually avg about a good 36mpg. The Fit tested was mine along with a stock one. Keep in mind I have no cat, so my MPG suffers a little. The difference was not even 1 1/2 mpg difference, however the testers were driving my car a little more spirited than the stock one
#717
01-23-2008, 06:16 PM
What did you average before the SC? 34.5? And I saw the previous posts, I was just wondering if you had more data...
#718
01-23-2008, 08:25 PM
I haven't been able to find a Siphon to be able to read the article so perhaps you could shed a little light on it for me. Fuel economy is very important to me (environmental and foreign dependence not as much economical) so I was wondering what the results were, you mentioned a slight increase seen by someone but I wonder if this would be typical given similar driving habits. (would depend on the ecu tune I guess)
Also, given that I am in a high altitude (CO), and not knowing specifically how the Honda ecu and the map with the SC work, would running at a higher altitude make the car run slightly richer in comparison with the same car at sea level. I am wondering because a MAF sensor just measures the speed of the air if I recall correctly and I am not sure how or if the ecu corrects for density with the fuel mixture or something.
I am not sure if it is planned or not, but comparisons showing pre and post SC fuel mileage in similar driving conditions (temp, route, etc..) might go a long way convincing others like me it would be a fun purchase (that this won't hurt our wallet/environment etc. daily).
Also, given that I am in a high altitude (CO), and not knowing specifically how the Honda ecu and the map with the SC work, would running at a higher altitude make the car run slightly richer in comparison with the same car at sea level. I am wondering because a MAF sensor just measures the speed of the air if I recall correctly and I am not sure how or if the ecu corrects for density with the fuel mixture or something.
I am not sure if it is planned or not, but comparisons showing pre and post SC fuel mileage in similar driving conditions (temp, route, etc..) might go a long way convincing others like me it would be a fun purchase (that this won't hurt our wallet/environment etc. daily).
Directly from siphon:
" Pulling into the gas station to fill up, the two odometer readings were almost spot on: 142.2 miles for the Kraftwerks fit, 142.1 for the stock Fit. As for fuel, the KW took in 5.153 gallons of premium and ours 4.873. The results: 27.596 mpg for the KWSC fit and 29.161 mpg for the stock. A paltry difference of 1.565 mpg between the two or a 5.4 percent loss of efficiency from N/A to supercharged.
While the prototype Fit is missing a catalytic converter due to testing, the results were damn near unbeliveable. From the 96.2 hp and 93.1 lb-ft of torque the KW fit made when stock, to 144.1hp and 123.3lb-ft of torque after the modifications, that's almost a 50 percent increase in power (47.9bhp and 30.2lb-ft torque gain) with marginal fuel loss."
#719
01-23-2008, 08:44 PM
#720
01-23-2008, 09:04 PM