Electic motorized supercharger

69shocktower · Oct 10, 2008

Is this a common idea? Im wondering how it would fit over the water
pump.

These guys have been growing thier operation over the years and looks
like their doing ok, they custom make all the parts needed for mad max
replicas even functional switch operated supercharger! To bad the cars
are dissapearing.

BLACK PURSUIT SPECIAL PARTS

wild70stang · Oct 10, 2008

No, Absolutely NO. This subject has been mentioned before. Just another snake oil scheme.
http://forums.stangnet.com/720315-electric-superchargers.html

fast_back_gta · Oct 10, 2008

I don't think it's even supposed to work, the electric motor is meant to just turn the belt so it looks like it's working, just a replica.

Hack · Oct 10, 2008

When a real supercharger is pumping air into the motor it takes 50 or more HP to turn it. That's why they use a big belt to run it. There's no way your alternator can pump out 50 HP. Power (watts) is current (amps) X voltage. 50 horsepower is 37.3 kW. At 12 volts, that is 31,000 amps! You know how big a wire you need to carry that?

Just imagine that 5 HP air compressor in your shop - Yeah the electrical motor on it is a BIG unit, isn't it? Now make it 10 times bigger and find a way to power it in your car!

gtss · Oct 10, 2008

Fast back is right, it just a replica so you can recreate the movie car.
but you would have to really want to LOOK fast to spend $4000.00 on an empty blower shell
gtss

and "if it don't go.............chrome it"

ForceFed70 · Oct 13, 2008

Hack said:
When a real supercharger is pumping air into the motor it takes 50 or more HP to turn it. That's why they use a big belt to run it. There's no way your alternator can pump out 50 HP. Power (watts) is current (amps) X voltage. 50 horsepower is 37.3 kW. At 12 volts, that is 31,000 amps! You know how big a wire you need to carry that?

Just imagine that 5 HP air compressor in your shop - Yeah the electrical motor on it is a BIG unit, isn't it? Now make it 10 times bigger and find a way to power it in your car!

Actually,

37285 watts = 3,107 Amps (at 12volts)

Still outrageous tho.

Hack · Oct 13, 2008

ForceFed70 said:
Actually,

37285 watts = 3,107 Amps (at 12volts)

Still outrageous tho.

I was worried I might have that wrong. Thanks for the hand!

Yeah there's a reason why even 5+ hp motors want to be 240 volts or more.

65ShelbyClone · Oct 16, 2008

The electric supercharger idea has really been beaten to death and ultimately buried quite a few times.

It takes a LOT of power to compress air, especially at the flow volumes needed by an engine. Simply put, it is more efficient to use the engine's mechanical output to drive a blower than to use the engine's mechanical output to produce electricity(which incurs losses from inefficiency) in order to drive a motor to convert the electrical energy back into mechanical energy, which incurs even further losses.

ForceFed70 · Oct 16, 2008

65ShelbyClone said:
The electric supercharger idea has really been beaten to death and ultimately buried quite a few times.

It takes a LOT of power to compress air, especially at the flow volumes needed by an engine. Simply put, it is more efficient to use the engine's mechanical output to drive a blower than to use the engine's mechanical output to produce electricity(which incurs losses from inefficiency) in order to drive a motor to convert the electrical energy back into mechanical energy, which incurs even further losses.

Actually, alternators/electric motors are pretty effficient. Well into the 95%+
range.

There is a lot of heavy equipment out there that would disagree with you. With a lot of heavy equipment nowadays they are putting a diesel engine in that only runs a HUGE alternator. They are putting electric motors at each wheel and using an electric pump to run the hydrolics. Not sure why, but there must be a reason.

I agree with you tho. It's not feasible to retrofit a car to do this. Much easier to install something belt or exhaust pressure drivin.

alexb_ · Oct 16, 2008

ForceFed70 said:
They are putting electric motors at each wheel and using an electric pump to run the hydrolics. Not sure why, but there must be a reason.

Electric motors have access to all of their torque at low RPMs.

65ShelbyClone · Oct 16, 2008

ForceFed70 said:
Actually, alternators/electric motors are pretty effficient. Well into the 95%+
range.

...But the engines running those alternators are not. Even if an alternator is 90% efficient, the engine powering it is only about 25-30% efficient. The inefficiencies only stack up from there.

I think a lot of the heavy equipment applications use diesel-electric because it is more effective than a mechanical clutch for starts and stops.

ForceFed70 · Oct 16, 2008

65ShelbyClone said:
...But the engines running those alternators are not. Even if an alternator is 90% efficient, the engine powering it is only about 25-30% efficient. The inefficiencies only stack up from there.

I think a lot of the heavy equipment applications use diesel-electric because it is more effective than a mechanical clutch for starts and stops.

So how does the efficiency of the gasoline engine come into play when discussing belt driven vs electric? Either way you've got the same engine. I agree tho, a gasoline engine wastes most of the energy in the form of heat.

Keep in mind that belt driven isn't 100% efficient either.

There hasn't been a lot of heavy equipment that uses a mechanical clutch. They've mostly been using a hydrolic drive system up until the last decade or so.
Hydrolic drive systems also have very good low end torque... so I don't think that's the reason either.

The point I was making is that there is no reason why you couldn't run an electric supercharger. It's just that finding and installing a charging system that could meet the demands of an electric supercharger is not practical. Especially when you could install a belt drive system instead. In fact, a system like this could end up being MORE efficient as you'd be able to "turn off" the supercharger when not needed which is typically 90% of your driving time.

65ShelbyClone · Oct 16, 2008

ForceFed70 said:
Keep in mind that belt driven isn't 100% efficient either.

That's a good point because it would most likely be a belt-driven alternator used to power an electric supercharger.

The more times energy changes form, the more losses that are incurred.

DK832 · Oct 17, 2008

I completely agree on the point about current charging systems. But it'll be very interesting to follow the new KERS developments in F1. Some serious power being shedded in those brakes, and it seems that some teams will store it electrically.
Anyone reading Racecar Engineering btw? Racecar engineering news | motorsport technology explained

Hack · Oct 17, 2008

ForceFed70 said:
The point I was making is that there is no reason why you couldn't run an electric supercharger. It's just that finding and installing a charging system that could meet the demands of an electric supercharger is not practical. Especially when you could install a belt drive system instead. In fact, a system like this could end up being MORE efficient as you'd be able to "turn off" the supercharger when not needed which is typically 90% of your driving time.

You could use an electric supercharger, but you would want a special alternator that runs at a very high voltage and you would want a lock out on the hood so that someone who doesn't know what they are about wouldn't die. That would be an electrical system that could take you DOWN!

I think it would be crap because it would be too heavy. You need a big, heavy alternator PLUS a big, heavy electrical motor, PLUS the supercharger guts. An extra 100+ pounds on the front of your car doesn't help performance.

bnickel · Oct 17, 2008

i've often wondered how you could make an engine driven supercharger run with an electric actuated clutch, like what the mad max car was supposed to be in the movie, seem like it could be done rather easily except for needing an air intake bypass when the blower is switched off since air can't to the engine past the blower if the impellers aren't turning. this would obviously be easier to with EFI since the injectors would still put fuel into the engine either way but it would definitely need an air intake bypass, similar to a blow off valve type thing to allow the intake charge to get into the engine.

would be super cool to be able to make something like that work, hell you could even "hide" the blower if wanted to, kind of like one of those STS rear mounted turbo systems but have the blower be run off the driveshaft or something, might even be fun to do it with 2 "drive by wire" throttle bodies on mounted on the intake and another mounted at the blower, when you flip the switch to turn the blower on it disengages the intake mounted throttle body and air could be routed through a hidden opening at the back of the intake via the blower mounted throttle body. it'd be the ultimate sleeper style power adder

65ShelbyClone · Oct 17, 2008

You could always model it off of a Mercedes-Benz system. They used a clutched supercharger on some of the smaller Kompressor models.

bnickel · Oct 17, 2008

65ShelbyClone said:
You could always model it off of a Mercedes-Benz system. They used a clutched supercharger on some of the smaller Kompressor models.

might have to investigate that, thanks for the tip

ForceFed70 · Oct 17, 2008

65ShelbyClone said:
That's a good point because it would most likely be a belt-driven alternator used to power an electric supercharger.

The more times energy changes form, the more losses that are incurred.

Yes I know that. I don't understand why are are arguing this with me. I already said twice now that it's not practical. My point is that it IS possible.

I still think that an electric system would be more efficient in the end. With electrical you can effectively "turn off" the supercharger when you don't need it. Which is at least 90% of your driving time. Even with the extra conversions and weight involved, I think you'd come out ahead.

A clutched setup would be the ideal solution.

ForceFed70 · Oct 17, 2008

Hack said:
You could use an electric supercharger, but you would want a special alternator that runs at a very high voltage and you would want a lock out on the hood so that someone who doesn't know what they are about wouldn't die. That would be an electrical system that could take you DOWN!

I think it would be crap because it would be too heavy. You need a big, heavy alternator PLUS a big, heavy electrical motor, PLUS the supercharger guts. An extra 100+ pounds on the front of your car doesn't help performance.

I agree somewhat.... A 240VAC alternator would still be somewhat safe and would only need to put out approx 150amps of current. An alternator like this would definately be larger than normal, but not huge.

A lot of the weight doesn't need to be on the front of your car. The alternator could be driveshaft driven. The supercharger and motor could be located behind the engine or even in the passanger compartment.

Again... definately not practical, but not impossible either.

Electic motorized supercharger

69shocktower

Active Member

wild70stang

New Member

fast_back_gta

New Member

Hack

gtss

Member

ForceFed70

That's why they call it "dope"

Hack

65ShelbyClone

ForceFed70

That's why they call it "dope"

alexb_

New Member

65ShelbyClone

ForceFed70

That's why they call it "dope"

65ShelbyClone

DK832

New Member

Hack

bnickel

65ShelbyClone

bnickel

ForceFed70

That's why they call it "dope"

ForceFed70

That's why they call it "dope"

Similar threads

Electic motorized supercharger

Active Member

New Member

New Member

Member

That's why they call it "dope"

That's why they call it "dope"

New Member

That's why they call it "dope"

New Member

That's why they call it "dope"

That's why they call it "dope"

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency