Electrocharger

I don't know what to think of this.. but it could be possible.
http://www.sigmaautomotive.com/electrocharger/electrocharger.php

It installs in place of your alternator and operates as an alternator most of the time. But, during hard acceleration it runs as an electric motor to ADD torque to the crankshaft (via the belt) instead of being a load like a regular alternator.
The website also claims that by using this your vehicle meets the definition of being a HYBRID, so you can qualify for Hybrid TAX Credits.
What do you think?

Definitely interesting. Possibly a scam, but who knows?

If it works the way they say it does, it would change the gas mileage in the city to about what it would be on the highway, but I doubt their electronics are that good as it is a universal type kit.

With the high electric load, the gain would be offset by the load of the high output alternator.

If you look at it from a purely electrical or energy stand point it is obvious that it can't operate as well as described. Basically it takes energy to create energy and even with all the advancements that have been made in the energy field it is still impossible to get more energy out of something than you put in.

Fuel is burned turning the engine, (energy is lost, wasted as heat energy) The engine turns the Electrocharger, (more energy is lost, resistance of the bearings, inertia, rolling load, etc...) The Electrocharger converts the movement to electricity (more energy is lost, the resistance of the wiring in the coils, energy used to generate the magnetic field, etc...) The electricity is stored in the battery (more energy is lost, no battery is 100% efficient) The electricity is used to turn the Electrocharger (more energy is lost, creation of the magnetic field, resistance of the coils, resistance of the bearings, inertia, etc...) The Electrocharger turns the engine using the remaining energy that wasn't used up as it changed forms.

There is absolutely no way that using the Electrocharger can be more efficient (engine efficiency is measured as MPG) than just using the gas to power the engine. At certain times the instant MPG may be more due to the release of the stored energy, but over all the average mpg will be lower due to all the energy that was lost storing the energy in the first place.

Wow, I said energy 16 times in that post. :)

and of course i went back and counted them too.. lot of energy

I agree with blazee on that one. but through the use of pullys or gears it is possible. Who knows though.

^^no, its not, power out, is NEVER higher then power in, that would be perpetual, and instead of developing a better alternator with perpetual motion, i would... i dont know... make a power plant and make billions selling the free energy i create... and cause billions in damage throwing the physics community into a loop

It mentions "regenerative braking" a couple times. This is how it would gain power that it otherwise lost in braking. You would need some type of coils/magnets assembly connected to driveshaft or in wheel hubs to accomplish this. It would have to be incredibly expensive to retro-fit. When Gas hits $5/gallon I'll take another look.

The regenerative braking would work best in a manual transmission if you didn't use your brakes and downshifted to let your engine spin the electrocharger, but even in an automatic, the engine braking effect is fairly signficant (even more so if you manually downshift the automatic while slowing), so the idea of recouping the energy that is otherwise lost to heat in your brakes makes sense.

you go right a head and constently downshift to slow yourselfe, not being cocky, but that will start to take a toll on the transmission, manual or automatic

I'll keep my opinion short:

This is just a more complicated version of The Tornado, fuel magentizers, or any number of other intake boosters... Big promises, a bit of name dropping, some hints, but in the end it's junk.

you go right a head and constently downshift to slow yourselfe, not being cocky, but that will start to take a toll on the transmission, manual or automatic

No argument there... brakes are a LOT cheaper than clutches. Also, I'm not suggesting that the electrocharger is necessarily a practical modification for any vehicle, but I could see it maybe being worthwhile on a small engined manual transmission car... even more so if it actually has enough torque to start the engine and vehicle from an engine-off dead stop like some other electric hybrids (like golf-carts) do. If you can get 4 or 5 horses from an electric motor/generator, that's a big boost for something like a Fiesta or a Metro... not so much for a 190 HP Blazer.

I don't think thier talking power in / power out with this type of charger. It works like alternator by charging your car battery and the chargers battery (only at high speed) that you put in the trunk, then when the charger reaches a certain speed (idle to certain speed), it turns into a motor and trys to spin faster than the crank taking some load off the crank. Will it work, maybe but more than likely not. There is always loss. The voltage drop from the wiring that runs to the trunk must have a huge drop when the charger turns into a motor. Think of the amount of current it must take to turn the charger fast than the crank. I might kill both batterys if you get stuck in traffic.

I Don't think it will work. It is working backwards in design of the new hybrid cars. The new hybrid cars use the gas engine up to a certain speed then switch to the electric motor when on the load on the engine is min. and the gas motor switchs from driving the car to charging the batterys.

More than likly a scam. Why are they waiting to post the data results till the end of the summer? If they are making claims about how well it works they would have the data already. They are just trying to suck people out of thier money before they disappear and are never heard from again.

Found this article in another forum... http://www.saturnfans.com/Cars/Future/beltalternatorstarter.shtml . Sounds like GM has something real similar aimed at future production. The article is from 2003, so they may have hit some roadblocks (like the variable transmission sucked).

I haven't read the website info yet, but after reading some replies, I think I can guess what someone's sellin'.

And there might be somethin' to it.

Your motor turns the alternator at a cost of some gasoline energy. With a standard-amp-rated alternator, most of the electrical energy gets used by the motor, accessories, etc., and the alternator's internal voltage regulator 'reads' how much electricity gets used up, and how much is needed. When the voltage regulator opens the circuit, cuz there's no load (400watt stereo off, A/C off, and battery pretty much full of charge), THE ALTERNATOR IS STILL TURNING, so you're wasting FREE POWER. If you have on your truck a high-amp-rated optional alternator, such as for a trailering package, sure - there's a SLIGHTLY greater draw on the motor, BUT, if you're not using that electrical power, MUCH MORE electrical energy is wasted by the alternator turning with the voltage regulator circuit open.

Depending on exactly how this discombobugonkulator [sp] thing works, might be something there, besides a scam...

That sounds similar to how the charging/starting system is set up on the Silverado hybrids. It isn't belt driven, but the alternator/starter is a single unit. That was actually how it used to be back in the early days of electric start cars but they went away for some reason. Using a higher voltage is also more efficient for any given amperage so using a 36 volt alternator makes good sense.

Unfortunately several automakers recently gave up on a joint plan to migrate new cars to a 24 volt system. With the amount of power many cars and their accessories are using now a 24 volt system could have allowed smaller guage wiring and had more room for expansion.

True, very true, about higher efficiency with higher voltage, Tangent. That's why in Europe they generate public utilities on 440V.
Now this Silverado charging/starting thing - interesting - how does that work...?

Forget the 24 volt electrical system. I just read in a mechanical engineering magazine cars are supposed to be 42 volt in the next 10 years to help power all the stuff that is becoming electronic on the cars....

Later

-Ryan