Negative supercharging in the outback??

-
Sounds fishy. I didn't read much, but I do know that heating the intake charge will not increase combustion efficiency. Cooling the intake charge along with dramatically increasing its heat right before combustion (higher compression) will give you better combustion.
 
Actually a warmer intake charge will be more efficient by atomizing the fuel better but it won't make as much power. The cooler charge doesn't atomize as well but since cool air is denser it makes more power.
 
fishy68 said:
Actually a warmer intake charge will be more efficient by atomizing the fuel better but it won't make as much power. The cooler charge doesn't atomize as well but since cool air is denser it makes more power.
Click to expand...

Well, you could just heat the fuel and spray it into a cold air charge. Then cool off the mixture even more downstream of the carb.

edit: I did a google search for this and came up with an engineering forum thread that talked about this. Seems many of the engineering students on there couldn't come up with a definitive "yes" or "no" on its effectiveness.
 
I gave it a cursory glance, and didn't see that they really said anything meaningful. The generic depiction of a valve timing diagram looked pretty convincing though. :yawinkle:

Efficiency can be increased by elevated temperatures in the fuel charge, but I'd think it would quickly raise oxides of nitrogen enough to negate the gain (in terms of saving the planet and all of that crap). It seems like Smokey Yunick tinkered with this stuff years ago. While he is/was (not sure if he's still around) a good builder, his name isn't exactly associated with playing fairly.

My gut tells me that it's little more than fleecing the masses.
 
Dart-swinger said:
But it only works in Australia where they are located:glasses9:
Click to expand...

It may have merit if stuff were inverted to compensate for the difference in coriolis effect north of the equator. I may have been too quick to dismiss this new-fangled gadgetry.
 
I'm not going to bag on something because it's from Australia. The Australian members on this forum are some of the most loyal Mopar followers out there. But here's my take on this negative supercharger thing. Let's use the "stage 3" kit as an example.
http://www.impulsengine.com/kits/fullkit-stage3.shtml
The kit claims 500 lbs/ft and 340 HP for a 360.

1) The cost in US $'s is $3,720. You can buy a supercharger kit for the same amount of $'s or less and achieve the same torque figures and more HP.
2) There seems to be a whole lot of parts in the NPS kit, more than a positive supercharger kit. This translates to more work for less gain than a comparable, traditional roots or centrifugal type supercharger.
3) Narrow powerband range 1500-4500 RPMs. This (IMO) would seem more benificial in towing situations vs racing. This is not necessarily a drawback if the NPS target market is in towing.
4) In the 1 example where they compared a stock 2000 Subaru WRX Turbo vs an NPS modified Hemi 6. This is an apples to oranges comparison. I would be more convinced if the test compared the NPS Hemi 6 car vs a more traditional supercharged Hemi 6 of comparable value.

I must add that this company seems to have put a lot of research into this and may be onto something. But I don't see advantages yet. Hopefully, someone from this company can chime in.

Just my .02 cents.
 
This stuff is just not worth the effort - take it from an aussie. If it was capable of delivering everthing they say then more of us would be using it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
-

Back
Top