Small type air induction?

[UpNSmke]

I was researching turbos and how to rig them up. I went onto ebay for parts and came across this. http://cgi.ebay.com/TURBO-FOR-SMALL-...QQcmdZViewItem

Now I used the search and found a post about it draws so much electricity that it doesnt make up for engine power? But if I get another answer here that says otherwise I was thinking of putting this directly on the airbox opening on the circle inlet. If its too big, than its too big but if it works it would be a good spot since the battery is also right there so I wont really have to run wires other than the switch. I know it wont give me barely any boost if any. But I would like to know your thoughts. Please dont burn me I just want some opinions. Thanks

[mad max]

Personally I wouldnt waste my money on it. You probably wouldnt even notice a difference. Just put some K&N pods on it. Its much cheaper and a bit lighter that way. jus my 2 cents

[The CyberPoet]

Well, first of all, the seller says it's for mini-bikes and scooters (50 to 125cc). At no point does he say what the electrical draw is either AND his diagram shows it hooking up the CDI, which would be a big no-no on the Kat (or just about any other streetable motorcycle I can think of).

The concept of electrical air compression systems is valid in general, if you have three things:
(A) Enough electrical power;
(B) The need for more low-end boost (where cramming a set amount of air in really shines); AND
(C) The space to put a large enough electrically-driven impeller on the bike (right at the airbox opening would be ideal on the Kat, although you could duct to it as well).

The first problem to consider is how much air the Kat consumes.
Some simple math:
If each Kat 600 cylinder is 149cc & the engine is a four-stroke engine, then the engine consumes 149cc per cylinder per every 2nd revolution of the engine.

Simple formula is:
Cylinder_volume x (RPM / 2) = volume_of_air_per_minute

Thus at 1k RPM, the Kat uses:
149 x (1000 / 2) = 149cc x 500 = 74,500cc's per cylinder per minute @1k RPM.
74,500 x 4 cylinders = 298,000cc's per minute for the whole engine @1k
Convert that to liters (divide cc by 1000 to get liters):
298,000 / 1000 = 298 liters per minute per 1,000 RPM on a 600 Kat

But, hold it, you don't ride around at 1k. Hell, most Kats' idle is supposed to be higher than that. So let's say you want the volume at 11k RPM... that's eleven times more than it would be at 1k RPM, so we can say:

298 liters x 11 = 3278 liters of air per minute

But induction fans (at least in the USA) are usually measured in cubic feet, so let's convert that into cubic feet: about 116 cubic feet per minute.

OK, so now go look for a 12 volt induction fan that will fit under your seat AND deliver more than 116 cubic feet per minute... Is it feasible? Oddly enough, it is, if you can keep the space confinement from choking the fan's (or fans') intake system(s) AND not lose too much pressure in the ducting from where-ever you mount them. It wouldn't give the type of boost a true turbo would give because of pressure irregularities within the airbox, but you should see some boost. And you shouldn't even have to rejet to compensate for it, since it's happened at the airbox opening (i.e. - before the air filter).

Cheers,
=-= The CyberPoet

[UpNSmke]

^^ That is some of the best info I have read. Seriously and really helpful for what I needed. Thank you again cyberpoet.

[UpNSmke]

I have a few more questions......Would a .26 amp fan be too much draw? And also should something like this be ran on a switch so you start blowing when you want it. Or could you run it constantly, or would this harm anything? Thanks because I found a computer fan that blows what you said it needs oddly enough for 17 dollars.

[The CyberPoet]

I have a few more questions......Would a .26 amp fan be too much draw? And also should something like this be ran on a switch so you start blowing when you want it. Or could you run it constantly, or would this harm anything? Thanks because I found a computer fan that blows what you said it needs oddly enough for 17 dollars.

You Kat could handle an additional draw of up to 5 amps with no problem, if you're not running any upgraded electrical equipment.

Now before you go bolting a standard computer (flat) fan on there rated at 116 cu. ft per minute, stop and think about the fact that the computer fan's volume is measured right at the output of the fan with no resistance. You still need to pump through the air filter and carbs before it gets to the cylinder, so you're probably going to need at least three to four times that volume being delivered to see an appreciable difference. And you need a fan that either slams the air 90 degrees (why I kept talking about impeller fans), or some sort of other method to ensure the pressure actually builds up in the airbox rather than just leaking back around the fan blades when it encounters resistance (the primary reason that turbo's use 90 degree air paths normally).

To put it another way -- if you can't feel the entire 116 cubic feet slamming against your hand when you hold your hand as far away from the fan as your cylinder is from your air filter intake port (or at least a positive breeze when a filter membrane is in the way), it probably won't gain you diddley-squat.

Good Luck!
=-= The CyberPoet

[UpNSmke]

If you double up fans stacked on top of eachother. Would they work against themselves or would it double the amount of CFM? Sorry Im asking so much questions.

[The CyberPoet]

If you double up fans stacked on top of eachother. Would they work against themselves or would it double the amount of CFM? Sorry Im asking so much questions.

Neither. They will still turn about the same amount of volume as a single fan, maybe 15% more.

Cheers,
=-= The CyberPoet