Ehhh....but how would this theory pertain to a supercharger being driven off of the belt system???

I understand that theorhetically a supercharger would make more power than a cold air intake chilled by the A/C compressor. However, if one was to design a way for the compressor to chill the air coming through the intake it could possibly make a few ponies. At the very least you would prolly not be at a disadvantage to a stock S2000 with the A/C "off" as you suggested.

Craig

 

here's an offshoot of this theory:

What if you had an AC system with TWO lines. One for the cabin, the other goes through plumbing integrated into a blower. The second lines never discharge; instead it is like a freon line.

That may help.

 

http://www.v6performance.net/forums/...ead.php?t=2909

reminded me of this post, dunno if that helps.

 

I think that Incubus got it right. It will cost more energy to cool the intake air than the benefits derived from the cooled air. If you want to transfer more HP to the road, then turn the damn A/C off and push the little pedal on the right.

 

Actually I wasn't trying to get a lot more power, just trying to help with heat soak on hot days when your driving around town and a normal cai isn't pushing in enough air to help. Looks like someone else has tried this in Florida. I wonder how it worked.

 

Adding a supercharger makes a different system alltogether. The A/C idea is a modification to an existing system. In other words, without adding any "machines", you should not expect any gains.

I DO see your point though...What I'm tring to convey is that "You could not expect any constant gains...without adding another 'machine' to the current system"

example:
A is the power without modification and A/C off.
(A-X) is the power without mod. and A/C on.
Running all day with power "A" will be better than with power "(A-X)"

A is the power WITH mod. and A/C off...It is the same as withOUT mod and A/C off...naturally!

(A-X) is the power that is left over after the A/C has its way with the engine...Now, in its modified state, the gains have to be greater than the loss or we have a problem. My theory is that, being governed by certain proven laws, the engine's power WITH mod. and A/C on will be NO GREATER THAN...
(A-X)+X = X

Now if we could store cold air in a tank while driving around in "A/C on mode", then switch off the A/C when we're ready to discharge the tank. The thing could even work when the A/C is running, because we've "stored" energy, but don't expect the power surge to last any longer than it's taken to "fill up" the "tank".

Sorry if it is not legible, I am on my lunch break and in a hurry.

 

Incubus-

I kinda understand what you are saying. But wouldnt that only be true if the ONLY purpose of the A/C was to cool the air box? The original argument consisted of the fact that the A/C (when on) creates more cold air than is needed in the cabin. All he wants to do is re-route this air that is already being produced to the air box. This should take no extra work on the behalf of the compressor, as the natural laws of pressure equalization of gasses should take care of this (air box will create a vacuum under throttle and will "suck" air from A/C instead of relying on the A/C to "push" the air. There should be no extra losses if the A/C is already on w/ mod and w/o mod. The only variable should be the colder air being produced, as all other things should be constant.

I agree about the advantage only being felt when the A/C is on, and no advantage with the A/C off, but I also live in FL, and in the summer, the A/C is on ALL THE TIME, or you will cook.

A HUGE disadvantage would be in the winter....you do not want to be pumping the HEATER into the air box.

I understood the equation you wrote above, but that is assuming the A/C would be working harder to create more air for the air box. It would not be working any harder, just that the excess air would be pulled into the intake.

Why not just run the intake from the cabin? This may be a retarded question, but if you run an insulated line from the cabin area to the air box, you would be pulling cabin temp air into the engine.

John

 

good analysis, but I think the gain COULD exceed X.

The power with the compressor on is (A-X). The power gained from the cold air ALONE is a % of X. But, with the cooler air, more GASOLINE goes into the engine, possibly producing a power gain of more than X.

So, with an AC line cooling the intake manifold, more power COULD be produced overall. I'm sure if you used a redundant line for cooling you would need a bigger compressor to keep the cabin cool.

The price of the power increase is more gas

 

I just got back from driving all over town another hot day. I use my car as my work car, and since I'm in sales I'm all over town.I drive with the top down and the air conditioner running anyway. Since its already on, I don't see where I'm using more energy to flow into the air box. My idea was similar to the other web site, I would use the foot deflector on the passenger side and divert the air to the air box. Turn the air switch to other parts of the cabin and you wouldn't be sending any air to the box until you turned to the floor setting. When winter comes just block off the pipe for a couple of months. Again I'm just thinking of ways to have more fun driving around town on hot days than making allot more HP .

 

What I said above was...
So, I agree with what you say here. I never argued against it. I just think that an S2000 with the A/C off would have similar, if not more, power. And I'm the kind of guy who will just as well turn off the A/C and have a smoother "feeling" engine (yes, the engine feels smoother to me with the A/C off).

That said...Steven, I did not take into account that the "system", i.e. engine, could simply ask for more fuel as a result of the denser air. This, of course, resulting in more power. You have a valid (in my opinion) point. I'm still going to stick to my guess that this won't work

I would LOVE to be proven wrong because it sounds so easy...


SOMEONE'S GOTTA TRY IT!