Is KERS the future of "boost"?

[right to travel]

Did some reading up on this technology and it seems to produce some decent power gains. From what ive read it started as race tech and been showing up in production cars/motorcycles in various forms. Toyota, Peugeot, Volvo, BMW, Benz, Porche and that latest Ferrari either have or are in the process of putting it into not only high end cars like the new "La Ferrari" but into regular production cars like the Scion FRS.

There are several different KERS systems that use different parts of the car the brakes/fluid (HR-KERS), flywheel (F1-KERS), CVT transmissions + differential(CPC-KERS) and battery with electric motors (HY-KERS) are the most common. But the tech can be applied to almost any moving part on a vehicle such as the engine (like a supercharger does) and even fluid systems ie shocks and coolant.

So would you trade you turbo or supercharger for a small Volt like battery with a KERS system if the weight addition was a little more you got better MPG and a 140 hp bump vice a 180 hp bump.


And for the haters of anything "hybrid" a traditional supercharger could be added for more

Gen V LT(X) engine plus a KERS system and an 8 speed transmission in the ZR1? any buyers?

[right to travel]

no opinions of future v8 being boosted by batteries and electric motors?

[mikeyg36]

I'd take one. As long as it makes V8 noise and doesn't burn down my house I'm fine with it.

[DGthe3]

My money is on 'mild hybrid' systems, rather than the F1 derived KERS. Add a suped up battery & alternator instead of a flywheel based 'energy recovery system'. I'm not opposed to either technology, but KERS seems to be too specific and limited in terms of the gains it can deliver. Good for the performance it can deliver, but the real test is the EPA test and from anything I have seen it doesn't deliver as good of gains as more conventional setups.

[Zabo]

Sounds a bit like early turbo compunding systems on radial engines. Really was what supercharging today is but back then it was quite a bit like adding a power recovery system.

In fact many manuals list the entire turbine/spool setup as a 'power recovery turbine' because it did just that. Made many large radial engines so much more efficient per cylinder and by weight that you could bump the passenger/fuel/bomb load back in WWII.

Granted mechanics also called them 'parts recovery turbines' for a reason.. gains you could get out of them were wearing down motors so fast that's why Jets caught on so quickly.

I think we've reached a 3rd golden age of automobiles and one where it's not unlike when jets were coming onto the scene in the 50s.

[right to travel]

Originally Posted by DGthe3

My money is on 'mild hybrid' systems, rather than the F1 derived KERS. Add a suped up battery & alternator instead of a flywheel based 'energy recovery system'. I'm not opposed to either technology, but KERS seems to be too specific and limited in terms of the gains it can deliver. Good for the performance it can deliver, but the real test is the EPA test and from anything I have seen it doesn't deliver as good of gains as more conventional setups.

Yea think the hybrid systems will come first as well. seeing as how the LaFerrari has this and it adds 160-170hp and could be driven in all battery mode if they were to add that feature and a bigger battery. I think for us average folks we will get the bigger batteries (yea more weight) but the trade off will be the extra hp when its charged and all battery mode for startups, take off's, and very short trips. From the looks of things Toyota may be the first to deliver on this in the SCION FRS and Supra replacement and Im sure some yet to be named Lexus badged car will debut with it first.

Hopefully this system qualifies as a "HYBRID" so when your hit with the GG tax you can get the "Hybrid" tax deduction.