The Unending Turbonator / Tornado / Spiralmax / etc Debate

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jromeos

Slanter...

When this thread started you were the most educated and skeptical of these products...

Did anyone way your opinion or have you found at least 1 of them to work (even a bit?)

---

To persuade me that one of these things works, I'd like to see a good dyno run of someone using this and picking up the claimed horsepower gains. I'd also listen if someone tested it out at the dragstrip and found a statistically significant improvement in performance. The more precise the measurements, the more I'm willing to listen. Since this thread started, I've found two people who have dyno tested this thing and had it fail miserably. Nobody so far has posted either a dyno test where it improved performance (I'm not counting uneed2know - if he were real, he would have posted the information I'd asked for and completely blown my claims out of the water) or dragstrip runs measured with precision timing equipment.

G-techs and other accelerometers are enough to make me listen, but I don't completely trust them, particularly if there's only two or three runs with it installed. I've done experiments where one or two data points were outside the range expected. Usually if it's just a measurement or two, the explanation is just as likely to be experimental error as any real results. Max, that's why I have been asking if you could try to back this up, preferably with something more precise. If I'm reading your post right, it sounds as if you've just made two runs where you've timed this with a G-tech, and neither of them lasted more than a few seconds.

And I have not seen anyone who could demonstrate that the "science" behind their claims was anything but nonsense, misused terminology, and hype.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NinjaArmadillo

I haven't baught one of these things but I have alot of friends who are mechanics and most of them say it might restrict airflow but would produce a better air/fuel mixture, which would give you more power due to a more efficient burn, IF the 'vortex' makes it past the throttle.
Personally I dont think it would do a whole heck of a lot, but I'd be willing to spend the money just to shut you people up. BUT it wouldn't help, the non-beleavers would say I was full of crap if it worked, and the beleavers would say "thats just your car" if it didn't.

And a footnote to the jerkoffs who said things like "85mpg increase ! My car would get like 106 MPG!" You really need to work on your reading and interpretation skills. It says "85mpg per tank increase" so obviously the guy messed up when he was typing and he meant to say 85 mile/tank increase.


Someone call MythBusters and we'll get this problem sorted out right away! :thumbsup:

---

NO "MythBusters" "corporate testing"!

CNN ran a test on a few "fuel-saving" devices, including the Tornado. Here are the results:

Quote:

---

Next up was the Tornado, a device that turns air inside a car's air intake valve into a mini-tornado. The manufacturer -- Tornado Air Management Systems -- said it makes engines burn fuel more efficiently.

In the test, the Tornado reduced a Lincoln Navigator's fuel mileage by just under a mile per gallon, from 18.4 mpg without the device to 17.5 mpg with it installed.

---

http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science...ion/index.html

For those interested in the full article.

~FordX

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FordXplod93

CNN ran a test on a few "fuel-saving" devices, including the Tornado. Here are the results:




http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science...ion/index.html

For those interested in the full article.

~FordX

---

Ill call this thread closed, if CNN says its a scam, thats good enough for me.

are you for real? really u think that shoving an obstruction in your intake will INCREASE hp? lets think about this. when you want more horsepower you can get an aftermarket intake. this will replace your original intake with a BIGGER one so that there could be more air flow to the engine rite? well now how is blocking the air going in to the engine going to help the gas milage? do yourself a favor and check out this site.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/TECH/science...ion/index.html

Now think about this for a second. Lets say this product really works. Then would the automakers all over the world spend millions of trying to devolop new technology to save gas. According to the turbonator representitive (who I called off of the phone # on their website) you can add up to 3 of these turbonators in certain cars & each of these are supposed to produce from 10% to 22% higher gas milage. So letsestimate for Chevy Tahoe for example. It gets abbout 16 mpg (stock) and we added three turbonators. This should give an end result of atleast 21 mpg and upto 29 mpg. Now thats almost hybrid numbers. Then why would they spend money on creating hybrid cars when they could do this for so much cheaper?

ITS ALL A SCAM AND HAS LAW SUITS PENDING ON MANY PROUDUCTS
tell me what you think about all of this

Wow... the Turbonator representative actually claimed that? I can see why they wouldn't say such a thing on their website, as that is way too absurd a claim to have put up where it would be easy to find and ridicule.

Thanks for the CNN link, everyone.

At this point, I'm tempted to lobby the FTC to force a test of these things. They've recently nailed quite a few snake oil companies and, while unfortunately not putting them out of business, forced them to drop all claims about their products making engines last longer.

I can't speak for Turboator or Tornado, but the Vortec Cyclone I bought has produced results for me. I'm getting an extra 30-40 miles per tank, and although I haven't tested it on a dyno, there definitely seems to be a horsepower boost. By the way, I asked their rep about using multiple units, and he said that their tests showed no additional results, and that claims by the other companies that putting 2 or 3 in will double or triple your results are marketing ploys. He also said that car companies are using this technology, but are building swirling fins into the intake manifold rather than putting a device in the air hose.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vetteran

I can't speak for Turboator or Tornado, but the Vortec Cyclone I bought has produced results for me. I'm getting an extra 30-40 miles per tank, and although I haven't tested it on a dyno, there definitely seems to be a horsepower boost. By the way, I asked their rep about using multiple units, and he said that their tests showed no additional results, and that claims by the other companies that putting 2 or 3 in will double or triple your results are marketing ploys. He also said that car companies are using this technology, but are building swirling fins into the intake manifold rather than putting a device in the air hose.

---

Hello, Vetteran, and welcome to the debate. Do you mind me asking you a couple questions so I can get a better idea of how much improvement you've gotten?

First, have you kept track of how much gasoline you added each time you filled it up? If so, what was your miles per gallon before and after?

Second, how many times have you measured your mileage before and after installing this? How consistant are your measurements?

Third, I know dyno tuning is expensive - have you tried bringing it to a dragstrip for a test and tune session and seeing if it produces any results there?

I've been reading everyone's childish insults and debates. Why does EVERY frickin thread on the entire God-forsaken internet always have to have some petty insult and then someone getting all fired up about it and using the **** words? You honestly HAVE to get lives. These threads are for trading ideas and advice on GENUINE topics. Jerry Springer may have a thread if you want to truly show the capacity of your childish minds.

But I do think the Turbonator is a too-good-to-be-true contraption. It would be a much bigger item and have much more publicity if it performed like it and some others on this thread claim. But again, I'll admit, I have not used one, I'm just sharing my first impressions.

I have kept a log of mileage for some time (sample size 20+). Before, I used to get about 290 miles per full tank, now about 340. In terms of mileage, although there is some variance depending on weather, how many highway miles, etc, I am averaging 1-2 MPG better than I did before, about what Vortec Cyclone claimed it would provide. I am in between vettes right now, using the device in my family car (Pontiac Bonneville), so I am unlikely to be spotted at the track anytime soon

Hi. I was looking for ways to tune up my 3000gt and i came across the turbonator, it claimed to give up to 30 hp and better fuel economy, with just a few non moving blades.
I realized that this is BS it is not possible for you to have more hp and more fuel economy with a performance part. The air intake allows the engine to get more air thus giving it more hp, the turbonator slows that air down. This takes hp away from the engine.
If you could have more horse power with better fuel economy than every car would have this part. If it is so revolutionary then why isn't it advertised more, shouldn't something this great be shared with the whole poopulation so it would get sold better. This thing has been out in the market for over a year, and most people still haven't heard of this thing.
Bottom line if you could have more hp and more fuel economy than a 500 hp car would be able to get 30 miles per gallon.

My friend reports on his small 199? Nissan Truck:

"I went from getting 300 miles per tank of gas (16 gallons) to almost 400."

(I'll report back about how well the thing does on my '02 Subaru Forester and whether or not I sent it back for a refund :-)

-p

(Oh, to the people who believe that "if these things worked the car makers would have already installed them on vehicles rather than selling hybrids"...do remember that they are out to make money, not save money for the consumers. They are the same people who install governors on all cars so that the don't get the top gas mileage they have the potential to get. And, wouldn't they rather sell us a new $15k car than a $15 upgrade to our old ones? :-)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paigeotheworld

(Oh, to the people who believe that "if these things worked the car makers would have already installed them on vehicles rather than selling hybrids"...do remember that they are out to make money, not save money for the consumers. They are the same people who install governors on all cars so that the don't get the top gas mileage they have the potential to get. And, wouldn't they rather sell us a new $15k car than a $15 upgrade to our old ones? :-)

---

Actually, while the OEM are in the business of selling cars, price is one of the main selling points to consumers, so it's in their best interest to maintain a solid line between profit and consumer value. And governors have very little to do with getting the "best" gas mileage. Rather, they are mainly there to ensure safe vehicle operation and prevent stupid people from wearing the components out abnormally.

~FordX

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paigeotheworld

My friend reports on his small 199? Nissan Truck:

"I went from getting 300 miles per tank of gas (16 gallons) to almost 400."

(I'll report back about how well the thing does on my '02 Subaru Forester and whether or not I sent it back for a refund :-)

-p

(Oh, to the people who believe that "if these things worked the car makers would have already installed them on vehicles rather than selling hybrids"...do remember that they are out to make money, not save money for the consumers. They are the same people who install governors on all cars so that the don't get the top gas mileage they have the potential to get. And, wouldn't they rather sell us a new $15k car than a $15 upgrade to our old ones? :-)

---

Well, let's follow that "they are out to make money" line. Compare a Honda Civic Hybrid to a Civic EX sedan, the top of the line non-hybrid Civic. The EX has an MSRP of $19,620 and gets 30 city mpg, 40 highway. The hybrid has an MSRP of $22,150 and gets 49 city mpg and 51 on the highway. So customers are paying $2,530 extra for 43% more mileage.

Now, if that Nissan really gets 33% more mileage, that's close to a hybrid gain in gas mileage - so in theory, automakers could charge nearly the same hybrid markup for a $15 part, because that's clearly what customers are willing to pay for such mileage gains. If the auto makers are out to make money, how could they ignore such a thing?

So, your friend claims that pickup truck has gone from 300 to 400 miles on a tank of gas. While the Turbonator actually working would be one explanation, I can think of three others.

1. The driver has been filling up later, either due to changed filling up habits or a more optimistic reading of the gas gauge. Remember, a gas gauge is not a precision instrument.

2. The driver's driving or environment has changed - more highway driving, for instance, or the seasonal change from summer to winter formulas for gasoline.

3. The driver is normally a pedal-to-the metal driver, and the Turbonator has plugged the intake so he can't actually use full throttle. So it is not actually working - it's not boosting engine efficiency, or horsepower, both of which its makers claim it should - but instead it is acting like a throttle stop.

I challenge you to prove all of these alternative explanations false.

I haven't seen any one of the people backing this device who have ever put one of these things through a test that rules out all three of these alternate explanations. And every time I have seen someone construct a test carefully enough to rule them out - it's failed. Every time.

its just a ******** product

I used a Snap-on scanner and checked the mass air flow at full throttle. 156 grams per second with the tornado, 152 without the tornado. Back to back runs. More air with it. Why?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maxc

I used a Snap-on scanner and checked the mass air flow at full throttle. 156 grams per second with the tornado, 152 without the tornado. Back to back runs. More air with it. Why?

---

You might want to make a couple more runs to make sure that's repeatable, but I'd say it is more likely that the Tornado screws up the MAF than that you actually get more airflow.

Was that a hot-wire MAF? That uses a hot wire and measures how much current flows through the wire when the wire is held at a certain temperature, so the greater the speed of the air flowing past the wire, the higher the reading. Only the wire can't tell if the air is flowing past it into the intake, or turning around in circles - it cools the wire the same, even if the extra speed isn't pointed into the engine. Here's a little test you can do: with the engine not running but the computer on, check the MAF reading, then remove the plumbing in front of the MAF and blow into it with a fan. Chances are the MAF will read that air is flowing into the engine even though it can't possibly be flowing in under those circumstances.

Vane air flow meters could probably have their readings thrown off by having the direction of the air flow change in such a way that it pushes the flap open differently, and I don't even want to think about what this would do to a Karmann vortex meter.

I'd say the test would be more accurate if the Tornado were downstream of the MAF (you'll notice their directions are usually to install it upstream of it), or if you used a differential pressure transducer (or a U-tube manometer - those are pretty easy to make at home with some clear plastic tubing and a yardstick) to measure the pressure drop with and without this.

That does add an interesting other possible effect to the Tornado, though - it may sometimes have an effect by altering the MAF reading to change the mixture. Still not the effect they claim.

[QUOTE=Slanter]You might want to make a couple more runs to make sure that's I'd say the test would be more accurate if the Tornado were downstream of the MAF.

Hot wire.

The tornado is downstream of the MAF.:D

I'll check and see if it's repeatable.

Note I install a smaller unit (75mm) was 85mm.

Average 5hp increase.@ 50Fout side temp:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zdriver28

Hi all:

Listen, just wanted to give my two cents worth about this whole "turbonator" discussion. (And you will notice that I neither have poor grammar, nor do I apologize in advance for it...) :)

Look, really, it boils down to this: if it were THAT easy, wouldn't everyone shell out the $70.00 and just be done with it.

I mean, especially us performance nuts! If we could spend less than 100 clams and get 20-30 horsepower out of our cars, hell -- we'd be knocking down their doors!

I own a 1995 Nissan 300ZX -- less than 55,000 miles. Factory rated bHP at the flywheel around 222-225. This car moves. 0-60 in just under 7 sec. Top speed -- 148 mph.

The twin turbos are even better. Legendary performance. C&D's Car of the Year in the performance class for 6 straight years. Performed like Lotus Esprit Turbos for less than $40,000 -- NEW!!!!!!

But the point I want to make is this: There is an ACTUAL "Stage Chart" that tells you step by step how to force bHP into this particular car. It was essentially designed to be really fast off the showroom floor, and crazy fast (like a Murcielago or f40) with a little time and dough.

AND NOT ONE OF THE STAGES INVOLVES INTRODUCING A "VORTEX" AIR-SPIRALLING MECHANISM INTO THE INTAKE!!!!

You start with a low-flow intake.
You go on to a hi-perf cat-back exhaust.

And so on...

All in all, I can make a 300ZX T.T. have more than 450 bHP for less than $4000.00.

But none of the stages costs less than $250.00 -- and only two of the first six stages in the process will yield a bHP gain of more than 30. (which is the amount that turbonator enthusiasts claim their product will yield.)

Those stages and their prices?

Stage 3: Upgraded ECU (chip) and boost jets -- bHP increase of about 50.

(Around $1000.00)

Stage 6: Bigger injectors and bigger turbocharger -- bHP increase of about 80.


Sorry, turbonator fans. Just don't think I could actually add 30 bHP for only 70 bucks...

---

I agree with you. I have a 96 Dodge Ram 5.9L . Performance wise I have mopar performance parts headers and 3" exhaust kit a 760 cfm throttle body, a knn cold air induction system an msd 6a ignition system, a jet performance stage 2, a transgo shift kit and 24 lb hr fuel injectors. After consistent dyno tests I have only 250 rwhp. That's weak for all the money that I have spent on these darn parts. I should have just bought the supercharger right off. There is no way a turbonator can give 30hp right off the line. That's BS. Really who does this guy think he is. Shows what type of performance guy he is. Ha ha splicing a resistor into a sensor gives about as much as my headers, computer and cold air intake did at the dyno for my 8 cyl. 5.9L. Maybe I could have saved myself $1300 and just bought the turbonator to get the same amount of power at the rear wheels huh. LOL.

Like many of you, I always have at least one eye open for an inexpensive performance mod and was immediately drawn into reading the threads on the Turbonator/Tornado/Spiralmax products. After reading through the majority of threads posted on this debate, and searching product information from other sources, I too wanted to comment.

I tend to agree with Slanter's general overview of these products, and apparently, so does Consumer Reports and the EPA. They don't work.

Consumer Reports link: http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/c...chTerm=tornado

As for you dyno enthusiasts, it should be noted that while dyno testing is an excellent tool to determine baseline increases/decreases for most any engine modification, and can "simulate" forces such as aerodynamic drag, dyno's cannot duplicate "real world" testing because the testing is performed in a controlled environment. When you throw Mother Nature, local traffic conditions, or any number of other "real world" factors into the equation, these products don't live up to their claims.

As Slanter stated early on in this debate, invest the $70 into a K&N air filter (or equivalent filter) and replace conventional lubricants with synthetic ones for consistent, noticeable gains in fuel economy and performance, not to mention increased longevity of powertrain components (Bonus! :thumbsup: ).

hi i just wanted to ask you if a turbonator would work on an audi a4 2002 1.8t FWD and how many i could install on it and if it would boost the hp any higher thanks alot please email me soon

thanks bye

y_salar,
You have got to be kidding? Look, forget what everyone is saying and look at a reliable source versus personal opinions; Consumer Reports. Here's the link:http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/c...chTerm=tornado

i got the tornado from kragen fo 70$. It was easy to install for the most part. however inserting the part into the tube was confusing, the instructions did not tell how far in to put it. it just said "snug" so thats what i did. I took it out and tested it. it could hear a faint whistle like sound from the engine. it sounder like a cold air intake or something so thats good. cant really tell about hp gains. i felt a bit more "get at 'ems" but that could easily be from the fact that it was cold outside or just a small fluctuation of horsepower.(everyone has gotten in their car and it seemed a little faster than normal for no apparent reason)

anyway i think i will take it in and out a few times to see if their is a difference. until then, 70 bucks could go towards an intake or exaust, something that is proven results of gains.

silveradozoom44

hey this is my fisrt time on here. i have a 94 mercury sable 3.8L and i really want to make it faster but i dont have alot of money does anyone have and ideas how?
i was intrested in buying a turbonater, so is it really just a wast of money or does it really work?



thanx

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CKY SKY

hey this is my fisrt time on here. i have a 94 mercury sable 3.8L and i really want to make it faster but i dont have alot of money does anyone have and ideas how?
i was intrested in buying a turbonater, so is it really just a wast of money or does it really work?



thanx

---

That's the entire point of this 6+ page thread. My suggestion is to read through the thread and decide for yourself.

~FordX

Thank you Slanter! I almost got suckered into the tornado....love your redefining "jury rigged repair" since 1997.......lol
Thanks to the others (you know who you are) that complimented Slanters take on the tornado and the likes of such gadgets.....
I'll be around the block looking in for more dependable advice(s)..

Regards, Aneet

Wow, I decided to take a look around here again and low-and-behold, this therad is still going. Are people so desperate to save a few bucks that they're willing to throw logic and reaosning aside and try anything, or are people actually this ignorant about the workings of their automobile that they believe this?

Guys, the people who are telling you about how its increasing their power and whatnot? They're on someone's payroll, or on something very powerful ;-)

I'm not sure if I've said this before, but I'll say it now.

The claims they're making about 'swirling' are absolutely and 100% correct...when they talk about swirling inside of the combustion chamber...The air enters in through your intake filter, travels up your intake piping, goes through your throttle body (a round valve which swivels open depending on how hard you press the throttle), into your intake plenums where it is broken up into 4-6-or 8 different runners depending on how many cylinders your motor has, into the intake holes in your cylinder head(s), then out of a little tiny (maybe a couple of inches wide) gap caused by a valve in your cylinder head being pushed down and opening. This is when is actually enters the combustion chamber (same place as the cylinder itself). It is at THIS point that air swirling helps a uniform burn. This is accomplished because the valve which the air exits is offset and the cylinder, is..well..a cylinder. The air rolls cockeyed right into the cylinder and as the fuel is sprayed directly into the cylinder with the swirling air, it helps it mix a little better. This is the fundamental design behind a 'Twisted Wedge Cylinder Head'.

I don't care if you get the air to dance an Irish jig while in that first part of intake piping. Look at all the pipes, runners, and valves it has to go through and then tell me...using REASONING, do you think it matters once it gets squeezed into the combustion chamber? Below is a picture of the valves (removed to show the runner which the air flows through) and a Twisted Wedge head. The larger valve is where the air travels into the cylinder from.
http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/p...mage_small.jpg

i went out and purchased one of these "turbonaters" to see the facts for my self and if they were any good, i would buy them for my friends... i have a 1999 suzuki grand vitara and it did on average worse then without having the turbonater... my dads friend knows a guy who works for this drag racing thing and he has a dyno... i put my car on there (paying a hefty fee of about $100.00) i put it on there stock no after market parts... i ran it for 10 miles with and without the turbonater. my suzuki got 22.7mpg going 55mph without it on and 21.1mpg going 55mph with the turbonater. i also checked the HP i had a max of 190.2HP without the turbonater. with the turbonater i had 190.3HP obviously there is no change between them the .1 difference isnt that great that could be a result of a bubble in the gas or somthing liek that (VERY INSIGNIFICANT) my studies say "NO" dont buy this. i recomend for easy HP boost is a K&N air filter thats somthing you know works!

P.S. i did a forum last year about the transitors that you put in your car that say they add HP and MPG they dont.. tests were the same and in most car companies that voids your warrenty.
have a good one!

Rom, has some great info that I agree with.

vip18971 referred me to this site

Slanter has some good points and well as Traqr

I was about to purchase a Turbunator or the Tornado since it seems to be the ORIGINAL

After reading different views of the unknown installers out there in which I have my doubts and pulling apart my intake and putting logic to work in my head on HOW ON Earth this is sopposed to work IN MY SETUP I say this is a JOKE !

I do not have proof that it does work in other cars but I see reason in what Slanter said about the buyer wanting it to work and thus thinking it helps. I also say if it does help it really depends on WHAT VEHICLE your installing it in !!.

Your more likely to gain from:
a K&N filter
proper air pressure in tires
Correct gas octane
turn off AC
softer smoother acceleration
Remove Roof Rack
than you are this Tubonator junk !


For instance my STOCK AIR box has such a small Almost closed Square 2"X 2" valve that allows air through, and if I disconnect the air box the engine dies.
If I replace the air box with a Big filter the Engine dies
There are many angles the Air intake tube takes and I call ******** on the Swiring action ( at least in my Intake system )
For those asking what vehicle, I have a 85 Toyota 22re 4cyl, 2.4 liter truck and a toyota V6 3.o liter .
Don't forget what ROM Said about valve plates and throttle body restrictions etc.

I did replace my 1985 4cyl. stock Exhaust with a Header which MADE HUGE RESULTS !
Best $220 delivered I ever spent !
And I'd have to say replacing your muffler will give you higher gains in HP maybe mpg than these gimmick Air swirlers- Tornado/Turbonator

You want to save gas !??
Then stop gunning the gas pedal from dead stops !
Keep your speed below 70 mph ! You waste up to .21 cents a gallon when you drive over 65 mph. Each 5 miles per hour you drive over 60 mph is like paying an additional $0.10 per gallon
If you drive 180 miles at 80-90 mph than you would at 70 mph you may save 20-25 minutes. big deal ! is it really worth it ??

Search on YAHOO for better gas mileage
http://www.ehow.com/how_6193_gas-mileage-with.html
Are your Fuel injectors dirty, I sent mine out and had them cleaned and calibrated for $110. had them back in 3 days !
Check air pressure, Use Aluminum Rims !
Replace Coolant

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/c...=tornado%20air

It's all about the research !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by toy4crawlin

..........For instance my STOCK AIR box has such a small Almost closed Square 2"X 2" valve that allows air through, and if I disconnect the air box the engine dies.
If I replace the air box with a Big filter the Engine dies..........

---

Oh boy - you replaced the stock air box with a big filter and the engine died? Does your air box contain a MAF (mass air flow) sensor? If so, you need to leave it in place and get an adapter for the filter, or replace the MAF with some other means of telling the ECU how much air is entering the engine. You can do this with the MAFT-Pro, a MAP sensor and a temperature sensor (~$500). Replacing the MAF with a speed-density system allows air to flow with less restriction through the intake piping, therefore allowing the engine to produce a little more HP. The more air you flow through your intake, the bigger the improvement. This mod is really meant for turbocharged engines. Back on the subject of swirling the intake charge, it is true that swirling fluids move more easily through a pipe. This means the Turbonator claims are truthfully based in fluid dynamics, even if the device does not work in practice. If the intake pipe were made larger, and augmented with internal structures that caused the gases to maintain the swirling action, then I could see where there might be some slight performance improvement. The intake charge might flow more easily to the throttle body, where the swirling action would be stopped by the butterfly valve. Unfortunately, adding fins to the stream of air without increasing the size of the pipe results in the restriction of airflow more than the swirling action improves airflow. On the other hand, I do believe that swirling the intake charge (on both sides of the turbocharger if so equipped), all the way to the intake valves would increase performance. The only way to swirl the air the whole way is to use variable intake valves without the restrictive butterfly valve, as BMW is doing currently with the Valvetronic system (variable valve lift) in the 550i. I would be curious to see if the BMW engineers have experimented with (or even adopted!) a swirling intake charge. The concept might require separate intake piping for each cylinder in order maintain swirl integrity all the way to the intake valve.

:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by M1A1

Hey,
I'm brand new to the forum and of course happy to be a part of it. I was reading your comment on this "Turbonator" thing. I've been thinking about buying it for my 1999 Camaro. Until I ran across this forum, I've seen other opinions that seems to differ from yours. However your comments tells me that you are very knowledable and well informed in the car business. So I'm very interested in what you have to say about this thing called Turbonator. Do you recommend something else that would do the job at a reasonable price?

Thanks Man,

Michael

---

I recommend a k&n intake

uneed2no, um... words fail me to describe the dumb crap that poors out of your mouth. Do you have any concept of boot psi? And that hooking up 3 turbos can blow pistons through engines? Further more, you have a serious fedish with the term "bhp". Do you know what it means? Now now, dont ask daddy, hes a liar. A resistor... or a "Performance chip" as they sell to you, DOES DO DAMAGE TO YOUR ENGINE!!!!!! It runs the engine with the choke on flooding it with gas and restricting the air. Try to run your lawn mower on choke. What happens? I'll tell you, it stalls. Your car will despritly want to stall, but has just enough air to where it wont.
I put a Tornado in my car just for shits and giggles. I work for a parts store call Royco Automotive and Marine Parts (and yes, we do sell your electric turbo, look in the marine section under blower). We do sell tornado and a whole lot of other fuel additives that are suppose to boost hp and econimy. This however is a lie. It goes against how an engine functions: more air and fuel the better the burn. To have econimy, you want just the opposite, less air and less fuel. The Tornado, RESTRICTS AIR FLOW. Thus LIKE SLANTER SAID, the engine compensates and puts less gas in the engine. I got 2-3mpg better, and probabily a 10%hp loss.
As for your civic. If it is as you claim, you have wasted alot of $$ tuning a non-race car and also destroyed a good econimy car. Buy a Nissan Silvia and with the SR20DET engine in it. Oh, and incase you didnt know, thats the one thats in the Skyline. It IS ment for high boost, and racing. IF it has 430hp, what is your torque? 430hp at what rpm????? When does yor v-tec kick in?? Its ok if you dont answer, its not your fault you dont know.

First off, Slanter has been spot on 100% of the way. He obays the laws of aerodynamics. Such is a law the tornado must obay. Someone said that it produces a minute psi boost i think? well, sorry, not possable. Air is not being forced into the engine, the engine is pulling it in. So, being it can only pull in 0psi (or 1psi, have not taken science for a while), it is not possable that it would increase the psi, its just not, think about it. It may however, increase vacume as you are restricting air flow. But the engine would adjust and than return to normal psi. Secondly, automakers are not using these or anything similar. Airflow completly changes as it enters/exits the air intake manifold. So in theory, (if of course by swirling the air you could force more air into the engine than the engine is pulling in), having a seperate manifold and filter per cylinder would make it work. But, the engine can never force more air into itself. Try putting one in your mouth. Can you breathe more air in or not?Compression can not be done by the engine alone. Thats why there are things like super and turbochargers. Spike TV's Powerblock tried various power and econimy boosters ----->ON A DYNO! <----- This included the Tornado. Several passes were done. None of the products held water. And for the same reason everone has been saying, you cant add hp and econimy. Air + Fuel = Combustion. This is basic, so lets assume that the grade of gas is constant. The stronger combustion there is, the greater the hp (again, VERY BASIC, there are trillions of other factors that come into play here). Economy runs on the opposite principal, Less Air + Less Fuel = Less Combustion. If you want the best of both worlds, put synthedic oil in all places that require lubrication. This includes wheel bearings. The engine turns easer using less gass, and the car moves easer resulting in an increase in PERFORMANCE. not hp. As for the friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend of a friend whith the mystery year truck, i have changed my driving habbits and had a 30% differance in economy. Its free, and always works, everytime. Slanter, as usual, is right on the money with this one. Good Job. You obviously know your stuff.:thumbsup:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hattaresguy

I can't beleive people actually buy that stuff! :D

If you think that helps throw a little Z max in your fuel and Slick 50 in your oil. :D

This thread was good for a chuckle though.

---

Check out AvBlend. It is commonly used by piston engine aircraft owners. It contains the same thing as Z-Max, which is still advertised by the way, and is endorsed by Caroll Shelby. How 'bout the never ending Z-Max thread? I'd like to see some real world tests of Z-Max in car engines.

to the top

I think that the Tornado is just fluff. If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.

just a comment on spiralmax & similar "performance boosters". I am an ex motorcycle racer ,engine tuner,mechanic,and avowed cynic living in the UK. The whole point of the type of insert claimed to "TURBOCHARGE" your motor is that it does not introduce more charge into your engine.It creates a swirl in the inlet charge which greatly improves mixing and combustion- in the same way that exaggerating the swirl angle of an inlet port when "gas-flowing"a cylinder head does.This is more effective in engines which have inefficiently designed inlet ports as there is more improvement to be gained.What it does is make your engine more efficient- and you either obtain better economy or improved performance depending on how you drive! I fitted a Spiralmax in my 2.5 litre Volvo and after about 2 years evaluation I can assure you that a fuel economy improvement of ten to fifteen percent has been gained, with improved low rev running ( much smoother in low speed traffic, -crisper response also). I have no interest in the argument other than to report the facts after 20,000 miles usage.I hate to give credit for something I did not think of--but IT WORKS, maybe not as spectacularly as some claims would have you believe, but well enough to please me and save some fuel costs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ivan Hackman

What it does is make your engine more efficient- and you either obtain better economy or improved performance depending on how you drive!

---

Thats exactly what the case is. There are no quick, magical wonder products on the market for fuel economy, just slight enhancers and long term savings devices.

stupid me went out and bought a 92 lumina z34 "mechanics nightmare", due to the fact there is absolutely no room at all to work under the hood. after dumping another 3 grand repairing/replacing a ton of parts, I wanna know how to gain more horse power without the hype of whirl-wind devices. I bought the tornado and tested it for a few months and found no change at all. Sooooo, I ripped out the stock "box air filter" and tossed in a k&n cone "sounds fantastic" but really didnt gain much HP. in the process, the IAT sensor has no place to plug into. it used to plug into the top part of the stock box filter. now it just hangs, plugged to nothing. Im seeing those IAT devices popping up everywhere, do they really work? tricking the ECU? do you REALLY gain any more power? I know they are fairly cheap and wouldnt take much to test it, but i want to hear from those that have actually used one and what difference did it make. I dont want to spend hundreds on a chip-set when they claim that a piggy-back can do the same thing for close to nothing. anyone out there wanna give me some info? I would greatly appreciate it.
Btw, dont buy a lumina! unless you like to either spend a fortune, or do alot of work youself, this car has something wrong with it ALL THE TIME! "sigh" but i love it.
sorry if some of my terminology is off, im no mechanic. but im learning. oh, and i drive hard. very hard. its like a disease, i simply cannot do the speed limit.

Gary

hi

My Land Rover Discovery 300tdi, for those not familiar, is a 9 year old 2.5 turbo diesel four by four. Having seen the blurb plus an article in the Discovery owners mag, which was positive, I bought a pair of these. Why a pair? Cos the manufacturers and the Owners' club geezer, said you need one before the turbo and one before the inlet manifold. With it came a "lifetime" air filter as a free gift. To see the cumulative difference, I put the air filter in first then the two Hiclones, one by one.

The air filter gave a big power boost straightaway, as you would expect then each Hiclone seemed to give a tiny bit more. I principally bought these to help fuel consumption. I then set off to the south of France to where we go all the time. I run on the same roads at the same speeds with the same urgency, or lack of it, on each trip, and I do about 6 trips per year.

The fuel consumption over about 3000 miles was WORSE. The performance at low revs seemed a little better.

So I took the Hiclones out, one by one, reversing the process. It made no difference except the fuel consumption climbed back to what it should be or nearly. Then last of all I took out the air filter and replaced it with a standard cheapo one. The performance went back to where it should have been before the "lifetime" filter was fitted.

Question, how can one of theses things fitted between the air filter and the turbo and intercooler make a scrap of difference? The air is swirled and then any swirl must surely disappear by getting "swirled" again in the turbo and the intercooler must knacker any swirl. Taking out or putting in the one between the filter and the turbo made no difference at all. Then what about the less than perfect fit in the section before the inlet manifold? surely it just disturbs or limits the airflow?

Also, if you look at the graph which the company supplies with the packaging, it shows performance WORSENING at anything over 70 mph, so forget saving fuel on the motorway. I came to the conclusion that the one in front of the manifold might make a tiny difference to low rev performance but the most important thing is to have a clean and free flowing air filter, like a K & N.

Their "lifetime" air filter, "just tap it if it gets dusty", is a load of rubbish. You can tap it till the cows come home, it will not unclog. The K & N is a bit pricey but it is a fit-and-more-or-less-forget way of improving airflow. I would also advocate ensuring that the intercooler hoses are silicone ones, that the intercooler is powerful enough and getting enough airflow over it, that the injectors are clean, that the exhaust is freeflowing and that tappet settings are correct.

All my life I have worked on cars of all sorts, I ran the Wessex Kit Car Club for 15 years and have seen many weird devices which purport to improve either performance or fuel consumption or both. At the end of the day, engines go suck, squeeze, bang, blow. To improve both performance and fuel economy, you need to improve airflow ("suck" and "blow") and burn ("squeeze" and "bang"). To improve performance but NOT economy, you need to increase the amount of fuel and air which goes through the engine as well as the above.

To make the situation WORSE all you need to do is to alter the crucial settings or impede either airflow or burn. Sticking things in either the intake flow or the exhaust flow impedes flow and reduces performance, as does poor timing of either spark or valves, and this includes tappet gap.

I feel fitting Hiclones probably comes into the category of "sticking things in the intake" and, as with things like advancing or retarding either the spark or the valve timing, possibly at a certain point in the rev range there may be a tiny advantage but this is probably outweighed by the disadvantage in the rest of the rev range. I just know that, after about 12000 miles of mixed driving, they are now decorating my workbench and the filter is in the bin. And yes I do a brim-to-brim mileage check on every fill. Before Hiclone, on a run to Mazamet in the Tarn from Le Havre I would get about 31 to the gallon. Running around down there, and it is in the Black Mountains, trying to keep to 2000 revs I would get about 26-28. With Hiclone the best I could get was 28. So it was a no-brainer.