SUPERCHARGER PATENT RELEASED!!!!CHECK IT OUT

[biffdotorg]

The chassis used in the patent filing has little to do with the technology, other than to show what their primary purpose is for the technology. I wouldn't read into the use of a Nytro chassis drawing. It's gone for a reason and most viper owners know the ProCross was a good replacement. And the note above about a patent filing using only Yamaha intellectual property is the proper way to file.

I didn't read every paragraph, is I have more exciting things to do like clipping my toenails. But the fact that they included a drawing of a Nytro, YXZ and a 2WD mini bike is telling me they would like to lock down the use of this technology in all formats. But the vehicle may or may not look like the drawing. They were just covering their bases.

That being said, they have yet to release anything but a naturally aspirated YXZ, so they really should beat Textron to the punch and get something like this in production "from the factory". The aftermarket is loving the Wildcat XX and it's ability to take boost. So many Wildcat owners are begging for a factory turbo, and not even looking at the aftermarket. That's because so many owners will not do it, unless it was released from the factory that way.

Similar to this, think of a 2020 release of a Yamacat Venom with a supercharged 1049. Just enough boost to drop into that untapped 150-160hp slot? Could be. We joke about it every year. But there is no sense to Turbo another triple to compete with the very successful 998T, when you can supercharge the 1049 to fill the gap.

Do you think this design was maybe made so that it could be sold as an aftermarket accessory like the Yamacharger was for the Apex? And that it could be applied to a current NA powered machines on the market today? That may explain why the supercharger is driven the way it is, as it was more user friendly for aftermarket or even end user install?

 

[rtx moose]

Just wanted to post this to prove engineers in japan are still at it...going to miss Haydays this year because i will be in the mountains where the snow is..i will post a pic if i have cell service of the white stuff

 

[earthling]

Interesting concept, but by driving the charger off the secondary it would appear to me that the greatest advantage of supercharge is no longer present. Crank driven chargers will spool up quicker and create much more low end torque. If driving off the secondary its not going to build any boost until the sled starts moving. Just my quick thoughts.

But its going to build pressure when the sled is moving, the important part , and the amount of boost is controlled by the output shaft to compressor drive ratio. Yes, it comes at some expense since there is no boost prior to track engagement but unlike a pure supercharger, there is also no waste and/or engine stress while the track is not engaged. Its an interesting concept as you get the ability to vary the drive ratio into the compressor, you have very linear response across the required power band (like a supercharger), and you have none of the issues of the turbo charger (waste heat, waste pressure, bearing stress, narrower operating range (RPM), etc). It should make terrific linear power for a trail machine. Turbo-rush without turbo-lag and a wider power band while sharing turbo efficiency off throttle and probably far more dependable operations than a turbo. (not knocking any turbo systems out there, just commenting on mechanical efficiency.

 

[rtx moose]

fyi