Supercharging

[GreyGoose006]

the fact is, that a supercharger is being driven by a power source that makes over 100 hp. trying to replace the engine in your car with another system isnt really a good idea.i cannot believe that the compressor idea wouldnt work, but it makes sense.did you take the pressure into account?10 gallons is 38 liters.10 gallons at 100psi is a lot more.a 3.8 liter engine will eat the 38 liters in 10 revolutions?i say it will last 20 revolutions because of the fact that a typical engine only ingests every other revolution...either way, with 100 psi, it would last a around 7 times longer.thats not counting the fact that the compressor would be adding air to the tank constantly.what if you had a supercharger that fed air into a tank and released it at a constant psi?it would be the same idea, but you are replacing the supercharger with a compressor.

[GreyGoose006]

wow. for some reason, my browser isnt reading my formatting. it must have html turned off or something. sorry if its hard to read

[534BC]

You need both the pressure and volume to feed an engine, multiply by 2 to force-feed it. Unfortunately the huge volume of air that an engine needs makes it unpractical to "store" any of it in a vapor state. We can store the fuel easily as it uses much less. A storage of air for a stationary engine would be just fine as there would be no issues of tank size and weight to carry around with you.

How would you make the transition from N/A to blown without ALL the air coming from the storage facility?

[GreyGoose006]

ah... good point about making the transition.
that'd be tough

[UncleBob]

3.8L engine, 38L. 20 revolutions per equivalent atmospheric pressure.

6000 RPM's divided by 20 = 300 "tanks" per minute. (assuming 100% VE)

300 * 14.7 *2 = near 9000 psi to sustain double atmospheric pressure for a full 60 seconds at 6000 RPM's

The numbers simply don't work. even at 1000psi, which is still more pressure than is realistic, the time frame is tiny.

A small bottle of nos will go way further