http://www.fastcar.co.uk/New_supercharger_really_shifts.YTW4rnJoa2rmWw.html

Quote :

"Imagine a forced-induction car with high boost all the way across the rev range. How'd they do that? By being damn clever, that's what: They bolted a tiny gearbox to a supercharger, with tremendous results!"

Haven't read the whole thing yet, don't shoot the messenger.

5/8/2006 1:50:33 PM

I'm pretty sure they use gearboxes with turbos in aviation applications all the time. This isn't revolutionary.

[Edited on May 8, 2006 at 1:52 PM. Reason : .]

5/8/2006 1:51:54 PM

You're an idiot.

5/8/2006 2:03:47 PM

pretty damn interesting

5/8/2006 2:09:57 PM

Quote :

"I'm pretty sure they use gearboxes with turbos in aviation applications all the time. This isn't revolutionary."

Ray's pretty much right. Except they used to do it. With the advent of gas turbines, they don't really need to do it anymore.

Quite a few WWII airplanes had 2-speed and even 3-speed superchargers to boost power and efficiency over a broad altitude range.

The differences here are that in aircraft, their primary goal was power normalization (creating sea-level power) while at high altitude...but changing speeds wasn't done automatically (at least I don't think).

So this isn't a new concept at all.

5/8/2006 2:27:04 PM

Fucking hell, way to miss the point you morons. Even if it isn't a new concept, why is it just now that someone is making a car application of it?

It's like you guys think the iPod probably wasn't anything revolutionary because all it does is play music in a portable way, something that had definitely been done before.

5/8/2006 2:30:05 PM

Quote :

"why is it just now that someone is making a car application of it?"

Possibly because the gain really wasn't worth the effort or the extra complexity.

Is it now? That's a good question.

5/8/2006 2:42:43 PM

Its pretty dumb actually

you're going to have a gear train loss equivalent or greater than the difference between the efficiency of this and a roots type or twin screw

5/8/2006 4:08:52 PM

Ha, the way you make that claim without having a fucking clue yet trying to sound like you have a clue is just...just retarded.

5/8/2006 4:37:13 PM

how about a CVT supercharger.. that'd be hot

5/8/2006 4:45:34 PM

^Paxton did it originally.

5/8/2006 4:49:53 PM

someone made a hydrolic one too.

if it does work well I'd be very surprised.
what is the point... gear up the supercharger so it makes a more constant boost pressure?
if that is the point its a neat idea but will never be as efficient as a turbo (properly sized) or a twin screw blower.

5/8/2006 5:19:25 PM

^^^ My brother, who's about to start a new job developing a new plane for Gulf Stream, used to work on experimental turboprop planes for this company down in Daytona Beach about 6 or 7 years ago (he went to Embry Riddle). He explained to me maybe a year ago all the gearing involved with the turbos they had setup. It ran a Chevy smallblock derived from NASCAR technology (owner of this company used to work in NASCAR). I don't remember much of the details anymore, but he's coming to visit in a couple days and maybe I can get him to remind me how it all worked. I do remember him telling me how fast this turboprop was... the air traffic controllers used to ask them if whether or not they were a jet.

My knowledge of aviation stuff is pretty limited though.

5/8/2006 5:20:19 PM