All silliness aside --

If we were to build this, I think a SC would make sense for exactly the reasons you described (minus the small pulley part). Boost across full RPM range sans idle and redline.

It would in my mind be an adjustable boost limiter setup so that a conservative driver can drive it without squealing tires but goalie can turn up the boost and go zany if he chooses to do so.

A single vehicle that can be marketed to everyone at the same time; with ads for the vehicle displaying the "dial a boost" feature. Conservative drivers will lose some gas mileage due to still turning the S/C w the belt (unless you put in a clutched version similar to A/C), but if marketed mostly as a performance oriented alternative to the same boring crap year after year,

Here's the S3...
It's not for just anyone...
It's for everyone

Turn that dial
It'll make you smile....

bold above Copyright 2015 by the user known as "Derf" '

 

That's just it. The IRL was still getting good gas mileage. Not AS good as the base model, but still mid to high 20s.
If you turned boost down a bit (say 8psi instead of 12) with a boost controller as said, did some proper head work for better air flow, im sure we could get it into the mid 30s.
What displacement motor are we talking about? the 1.9 dohc? or a 2.2/4 eco?

 

The "dial a boost" feature has already been done(Nissan Juke), but I like the little jingle anyway...

At any rate, the S3 would be a lower volume model, kinda like the IRL... I would focus on getting the S1 and S2 models(highest volume models)rolling, then roll out S3, L1&2(due to the shared engine with S3), then make the five cylinder L3...

If bore, bore spacing, stroke, rod length and compression height could be kept nominally the same across all the models, then the different engines would be as simple as a designing a block, crank, head, and cams, then plugging in all the components... A 3.8 liter H-8 could be had as simple as a new block and crank,and a timing cover, because you would have the rest of the rotating assembly and the heads and the components that go in it...

There's a revolutionary thought right there(don't steal it)- at the beginning, design a modular engine platform using the exact same piston, rod, valves, lifters, cam followers, etc... Then, it would all come down to how many cylinders you could fit under the hood...

 

I was referring to a radical new version of the original 1.9 liter Saturn engine, the DOHC version...

Most times the performance variant of any engine loses fuel efficiency just because it's the sports car... Look at the IRL for instance... It has a shorter final drive that hurts fuel mileage(in the name of acceleration)... Most 4cyl performance cars don't seem to break out of the twenties(EPA) due to the weight of the cars and the expected load of the engines, while a 6.2 liter Corvette can get 30mpg highway and run to 60 in under 4 seconds...

Now, look what Mazda done with its SkyActiv engines... Around 2 liters displacement, no tech feature skipped, and near 40mpg highway in the C segment Mazda3... Accomplished with proper gearing and an efficient engine design...

We had great gearing, and a lightweight, aerodynamic design, but the engine was severely dated(and the car still performed well)

In 2002, it was using speed density(MAP based)fuel management, when most imports were using the more efficient mass air (MAF based) fuel management...

A large number of it's imported competitors offered some sort of variable valve timing or other, while the cams(and their timing) was static in the S series

...and I know that uncljohn will argue with me till the end of time, but more compression doesn't hurt, when using modern electronics... There were lots of factory built cars running higher compression(the performance variant of the 2002 Sentra used 11:1 compression)...

If I had $20k to spend restoring a late model S series, I could demonstrate what I'm speaking of...

 

No offense intended whatsoever. but I think one of Gm's fundamental flaws in managing Saturn affairs after it rammed its way into control was to focus so heavily on the low end cars where the profit per sale sux and not putting enough emphasis or designwork on the performance-driven type vehicle (IRL, SkyRL). The Sky is still a headturner for me ....but it was too little too late.

I don't see any entry level infiniti's out there....so do we want to start at a base model where we make little to no profit or lose money, or do we want to slam the industry with something that has never been seen in this form . No, it's not !00% new technology, but the implementation of it and the sector of the market we cold direct it at (the S3) would be (for the most part.

Who on earth put dial a boost on the Juke? That's gotta be a turbo anyway, not a dial a boost s/c. Totally different market segment than what I'm envisioning INITIALLY.

I'm thinking S3 launch with a boom; if it sinks, it sinks. if it swims it generates higher profit margin sales per unit, which funds development of the S1 S2 and L's.

If we launch a car line the way everyone has always done it, we're just another also-ran. If we turn the model upside down, we get exactly 1 chance to wow the market w the S3 --if it catches, then we're in full sprint mode on development or even production of other models since you two (not me) seem to have the engine design portion covered.

S3, sold at an affordable premium, sink or swim. Determine next step after smoke clears....

 

With my design, the only difference between the S3 and the two lower models is the engine... More specifically, the difference would simply come down to a thicker head gasket(to lower compression a little) and the addition of boost... Why not launch the entire S series line at the same time?

 

Well, then.....no arguments here....

 

I personally think a 3.8 is to big for a small, light weight, efficient car. But I could be wrong, you did the math for that motor.
And a boost controller is meant for a turbo. They do have em for the s/c set ups, but its more so bypassing the bypass to allow more pressure to build.

 

so what if it is bypassing the bypass, as long as it is done safely, the penny pincher can turn i all the way down/off and the lead foot can have max boost. Thinking of it for fuel consumption/mileage reasons/selling point as well as the fun factor of being able to dial in the power of your car.

 

It basically lets you adjust the amount of boost/air building so the computer doesn't let it out. Similar to the bypass mod.