R50/53 My idea!
My idea!
Hello all!
I've had this idea for several months and it's been burning through my brain to tell someone about it since similar systems have already been patented. Some day down the line I plan to do this to my MINI, but for now its just a dream.
Here it goes: I am getting into being "green", yet I am a rabid car enthusiast. Not a very good combination these days unless I can afford a Tesla Roadster. Thinking about more realistic ways of being efficient, I sought a way to make my future MCS as efficient as a MC with the power of a MCS when I wanted it. Here's my solution: Using a servo-actuated clutch system between the SC belt and shaft, in conjunction with a second ECU mode to transition to non-forced induction air/fuel ratios, why not have a cabin switch that "turns off" your blower? Easy efficiency when you need it, and when you want to go, just flick a switch and you have nearly 50 more horses at your reigns. Its like nitrous without hassle of having a finite capacity. Or engine failure. Or rice burner-ness.
What do you guys think? Using my colleges machine shop, this is actually a relatively simple upgrade if you really think about it, and you'd have way less of an impact on the environment. Makes both sides of me fuzzy all over!
I've had this idea for several months and it's been burning through my brain to tell someone about it since similar systems have already been patented. Some day down the line I plan to do this to my MINI, but for now its just a dream.
Here it goes: I am getting into being "green", yet I am a rabid car enthusiast. Not a very good combination these days unless I can afford a Tesla Roadster. Thinking about more realistic ways of being efficient, I sought a way to make my future MCS as efficient as a MC with the power of a MCS when I wanted it. Here's my solution: Using a servo-actuated clutch system between the SC belt and shaft, in conjunction with a second ECU mode to transition to non-forced induction air/fuel ratios, why not have a cabin switch that "turns off" your blower? Easy efficiency when you need it, and when you want to go, just flick a switch and you have nearly 50 more horses at your reigns. Its like nitrous without hassle of having a finite capacity. Or engine failure. Or rice burner-ness.
What do you guys think? Using my colleges machine shop, this is actually a relatively simple upgrade if you really think about it, and you'd have way less of an impact on the environment. Makes both sides of me fuzzy all over!
Don't forget that you would have to mount an electric water pump as the stock one is run by the auxilliary drive on the back fo the s/c. It also seems that air flow through the s/c would be horrible without the rotors turning. We already have a bypass valve that does basically the same thing that you are talking about.
If you can figure out a way to fit a clutch mechanism into that very tight space, more power to you. But do look at the area in question before getting too fuzzy; there ain't a whole lot of room to add anything.
Hmm I'll probably end up running the pump through another pulley or something... I haven't actually seen the engine bay in person yet. Airflow wouldnt be much of an issue: the servo actuation would have to have a brake for the SC shaft while the unit is "off", to prevent excess bearing wear. And running a bypass valve is not the same thing. not nearly. It may bypass the incoming pressure but the friction is still there from uselessly turning the SC, and thats where the real loss of MPG comes from. Think of it this way: 90% of the time you will effectively be driving an MC, until you actually want to go fast. I just think it would be a worthwhile project, no?
Yeah, the space issue is where SolidWorks comes in. I'm thinking a very small high torque DC servo would do the trick just fine.
As for the ECU flash, correct me if I'm wrong but I believe there are ECU modifiers out there that allow you to run multiple modes, switchable by a key fob? I almost had it done on my volvo 850, but then I remembered it's a volvo. Thatd be like putting a cow in a jumpsuit: still not gonna win any races.
Yeah, the space issue is where SolidWorks comes in. I'm thinking a very small high torque DC servo would do the trick just fine.
As for the ECU flash, correct me if I'm wrong but I believe there are ECU modifiers out there that allow you to run multiple modes, switchable by a key fob? I almost had it done on my volvo 850, but then I remembered it's a volvo. Thatd be like putting a cow in a jumpsuit: still not gonna win any races.
Last edited by slickfast; Jun 25, 2007 at 10:56 AM.
Neat idea....
But isn't the compression ratio way different on a normally asperated(SP?) car?
Not sure an MCS without the "S" would be able to get out of the way of itself.
Nik
But isn't the compression ratio way different on a normally asperated(SP?) car?
Not sure an MCS without the "S" would be able to get out of the way of itself.
Nik
Trending Topics
Uhm,
I have an '06 R53, BUT if you, say, slap a TURBO that is driven off exhaust gas (like the R56 and various conversions) then you have fewer losses through the impeller during partial loads (but then again, that's one of the things that leads to turbo lag)
I have an '06 R53, BUT if you, say, slap a TURBO that is driven off exhaust gas (like the R56 and various conversions) then you have fewer losses through the impeller during partial loads (but then again, that's one of the things that leads to turbo lag)
Well if that is what you are shooting for... give me $50,000.00 and I will build you a MINI that will turn EVERY head at the dragon in 2008!
$50,000? why so little? make it 100,000.
xsmini- you raise a good point. Does anyone know of a way around changing the compression ratio without resorting to spacers? If I can't figure that out I'm done.
xsmini- you raise a good point. Does anyone know of a way around changing the compression ratio without resorting to spacers? If I can't figure that out I'm done.
The "switch on" blower is purely the stuff of Hollywood, and not based in reality. Our cars are equipped with a bypass valve that effectively limits the amount of time the blower is functional (although it is always spinning), and it does it automatically without the driver having to think, "Hey, I think I want the blower on".
Now, if you could run the blower, by belt, off of an electric motor that was controlled by a rheostat to increase rpm directly proportional to engine rpm (or just mount/incorporate the motor directly to the blower), then you would at least theoretically have a "belt driven supercharger" without the parasitic power loss. In such an arrangement, you could also adjust the rheostat function to best match the blower rpm to the needs of the engine at any given rpm/throttle position. Hmmm...
Now, if you could run the blower, by belt, off of an electric motor that was controlled by a rheostat to increase rpm directly proportional to engine rpm (or just mount/incorporate the motor directly to the blower), then you would at least theoretically have a "belt driven supercharger" without the parasitic power loss. In such an arrangement, you could also adjust the rheostat function to best match the blower rpm to the needs of the engine at any given rpm/throttle position. Hmmm...
And running a bypass valve is not the same thing. not nearly. It may bypass the incoming pressure but the friction is still there from uselessly turning the SC, and thats where the real loss of MPG comes from. Think of it this way: 90% of the time you will effectively be driving an MC, until you actually want to go fast. I just think it would be a worthwhile project, no?
1. You would have to retrain the ecu. That may be easier said that done. This is not just a matter of shifting parameters due to an engine modification. You are talking about a fundamental change in the way that the engine is operating.
2. As someone else already pointed out I think that the lower compression ratio of the "S" engine would leave you with something more anemic than the higher compression Cooper engine. It would likely have a hard time getting out of its own way without some help from the s/c.
If the sc stops spinning, there will be NO airflow through it, period. In order for it to shove air through and pressurize the intake manifold, it has to create a continuous sealed barrier between "upstream" and "downstream". If the rotors stop turning, it's just a big dam.
As someone else already pointed out I think that the lower compression ratio of the "S" engine would leave you with something more anemic than the higher compression Cooper engine. It would likely have a hard time getting out of its own way without some help from the s/c.
no offense but the bmw engineers are quite good. You are playing with fire trying to beat their design. if you really feel like you need a more efficient MINI get a cooper.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
jennster
Stock Problems/Issues
3
Sep 28, 2015 06:19 PM




