laaaaaame

[danmangt40]

you know, if electric superchargers had somehow been able to pre-date conventional belt-driven mechanical superchargers, they might have had a shot as a legit, low-cost option, especially if they could run on a higher voltage. But after decades of blower glory, there is absolutely no love for a $15 anything under the hood, and the same for anything labeled a supercharger but only good for 30 hp "on some vehicles." switching from a stock air filter to a conical K&N is occasionally worth that much.

However, as voltage is likely the limiting factor in the effectiveness of an electric supercharger, they may get their comeuppance in the next decade or so, when cars start to switch to high voltage electrical systems. hmmmm..... might mean a smaller engine could be used to do the same work.... bah, that's what any wacky technical innovation gets labeled as.... but I would like to see what would happen when the hybrid escape comes out, especially since it has a 300V battery pack under the rear floor instead of a conventional 12V under the hood.

[Pigeon]

It's not voltage, it's power. A supercharger can consume several tens of horsepower on a road car. That's a big heavy motor with a lot of copper in it, and a big heavy alternator to supply the power. A belt drive is just so much easier and cheaper and probably more efficient too.

[Mr2Mike]

Pigeon said:

It's not voltage, it's power. A supercharger can consume several tens of horsepower on a road car. That's a big heavy motor with a lot of copper in it, and a big heavy alternator to supply the power. A belt drive is just so much easier and cheaper and probably more efficient too.

Power consumption is a problem, but a low voltage supply makes the situation worse as the current required becomes silly, requiring large and expensive switches/control systems.

[Apache]

Bbasic physics, the more you convert power the more you lose, hence a belt being the best option. Keep it simple stupid