The Unending Turbonator / Tornado / Spiralmax / etc Debate

[vtec78]

ok..Guys. firstly thanks for all your disccusions about the turbonator the on and off supporters.
I have one my self but in Australia its called Hiclone. THEY both are the same.

Before I purchse the product, I thought its only a cheap money. If it does not work out/? Fine with me. Remember its only 69$. But Hiclone has won three international awads about the device that saves fuel and MORE POWER..... We will talk about it when I ACTUALLY G TEC it and see if it does better.

I know "SLANT" want us to dyno it...but it all comes down to cost??? It would cost US 50$ to do a run. [B]Remember I have done all the time trials WELL before I discorved your forum.[/B]Any way I bought a gtec pro vs the hand held stop watch. The aim is too see if BOTH gave the same trend.

On my b18c vtec civic (www.geocities.com/johnmarshome) ...I did lots time trials trust me using hand held stop watch before switching to G tec.(3 years).

Before the Hiclone placed.
0-100 (km/h)time 7.14;7.23;7.22.sec
G tec 6.99sec; 7.03;7.09

After 7.08/7.12/7.13
G tec: 7.02;6.95;6.89

In gear accleration using only hand held stop watch rolling 2nd gear comming from the corner TIME form 1000rpm to 4000rpm. Average about 3.95 sec(1000-4000 rpm ).

With hiclone its reduced from 3.95 to 3.85.
The test results are the only the edited version from my time trials since I have done so many runs on the civic to see if the Hiclone are actually work.

The answer is YES IT worked for my Vetc and also my Integra LS 1990. In both case it reduced 0-100km or In US 0-60 mile time by around 0.1 to 0.15 sec. The fuel consumption is dropped by around 3-5 % ONLY NOT 10%.
I know it does not sound much. At least I HAVE PROVED IT on the g tec and stop watch.
Remeber 20 hp is around 0.25 sec reduction in 0-100 km/h time.
So I would say Hiclone?turbonator has gained some power by around 3-6 hp.

I also tried on my friends V8(5000cc xr8 falcon). and he noticed a power gain straight away in the down low section.

I got one for my fathers new corrola ascent. And He told me the fuel consumption SEEMS to be better BUT A slight gain in throttle response(power).
I hope this will CLEAR OUT SOME OF YOUR uncessary argrunment about Hiclone.
They do work.
By the way I forgot to mention(very important) that the ALL Mercedice BENZE C320(V6) and late 2004 wrxs has the HICLONE look alike blades inside there intake runners. -NO BULL ****. I seemed the pictures, unless its a lie. So if they did it, IT MUST BE THERE for a reason. I know the swirl effects is staightend by the throttle blade. But I am sure the turbulace STILL creats a small pressure in the intake chamber that acts as a very smaller super charger.Whats your say????

[rmcc70]

A big Wow to Vtec78, mate your English is even worse than mine and mine ain't good.

Just where in Oz do you reside?

Ok, Vtec78, if you are prepared to loan me a Hiclone (or whatever) I will dyno my Stag (once the water leak is fixed!) before and after at my expense. The dyno's will be scanned and upped to here (or a linked place).

If the Stag results are curious and I am motivated I will even Hiclone the STi.

I will return the Hiclone afterwards. Now all I need is a donation (loaner) and NO I ain't buying one.

(Apologies for my English as I am Australian).

[Slanter]

I did a little bit of digging about this Hiclone thing. This appears to be their website. Looking at their website doesn't leave me very convinced. The prizes often seem to be simply awarded by popular vote from people who visit invention exhibits like this one. The prizes seem to show no indication that the group that awarded them did any actual testing.

By the way, I have a G-tech too. I'm not sure which version you have, but mine is a bit touchy. If it's not mounted perfectly flat or gets tilted by a degree, that can affect the results. Even with back to back tests on an identical car, your tests seem to vary by a tenth of a second. Are you sure that your results are statistically significant?

[vtec78]

ok, guys....I am from Sydney.
Now,...my g tec is version 1 not the g tec pro version. But its good enough for budget people like me. As I said before, I cross checked with my stop watch. And the results obtained from g tec and stop watch are quite consistent...so you cannt beat that. .....

The best place is place the hiclone is just after the filter and after the bend. around 30-40cm before the throttle plate which ever is avaliable for your car. You wanr max air speed and length(capacity.
I only tuned and tested on HONDA 1990-1995 cars. ANd the effect of hiclone varies from car to car.

STi boy, your turbo car is poweful enough, you need reset the ecu and run for 40kms before hiclone comes into effect...........I thought you can just boost up your turbo a little bit more instead of "hiclone

[vtec78]

Slant, I just have to confirm with you about the g tec and stop watch times.
When I first started the time trials....3 years ago. The first 20 runs was bad(stop watch). I do 5 runs a day on the same street and same time(within 3 minutes). Of cause I only do it on the sunny day if not cloudy and dry. No trials on wet...... I found a place in Sydney thats is a dead end street with no cars.

The same methods repeated after one week or evry third day if time permits for the last 2 years. ALL my friends called me a freak...crazy guy .

I restrained my time trial to max 5-6 runs per day as the clutch gets really hot(brass bottom) thats when the time trials starts to decline after 6th runs by around 0.2 sec or more . Always pick the best three out of 5 runs as mentined in Gtec and scientific methodogy.

Sometimes if the measured times are WELL OUT eg, 7.03. 7.15, 7.45, 7.12 ; 7.18 the one with 7.45 does not account for totall average. In the case I take 7.15, 7.12. 7.03(lower and upper limit). Vice versa, I remebered one day the time was 6.55(gtec) the whole car jumped and I knew it was not real so that run did not count. Later, I got more consistent runs 7.13;7.09, 7.15..etc.
It took me at least 20 runs before my hands become steady when I release the clutch. With the Gtec, it came after 2 yeras of my stop watch trials...therefore my launch has become more consistent.

With the gtec, I MUST set the reading to zero if not +/_ 0.1 other wise no run. SO I tried to be as accurate as I can in all circumstances.

I hope this will clear out some confusions.

Thanks

[Narfman]

i seem to remember Ford having these "vortex generators" in their early 90's stangs.....

[300ZXJON]

Hello from Cali! Ok so far what I hear is that this turbonator does not work. I cannot say if it does or doesn't but if it claims to increase velocity it is sadly mistaken. In my studies of engines of all types I have found a structure similar to the "turbonator" device in a modern day turbine engine, otherwise known as the jet engine. It looks like the "turbonator" is suppose to work as the stator vanes in a turbine which ACTS AS A DIFFUSER, DECREASING AIR VELOCITY AND RAISING PRESSURE. Now in an N/A engine this pressure is 14.7 psi or 0 psig (pounds per square inch, gage and yes long live the queen! I guess?). The increase in pressure is so low that it cannot bring greater performance because of it but only slow the air down due to the nature of the device. I am GUESSING that in a long, long series of these little devices it MAYBE could bring a decent amount of performance gain, but then it would be impracticle (did I spell that right?). Anybody who is a knowbody can add more body to this argument POR FAVOR.

[vtec78]

A very good feed back from you.
I actually have spoken to the owner before buying the hiclone as I was very skipticle about its claim. Since its only a small money and 90 days trial I have nothing to lose.

The owner told me that the combustion charmer are made to be rough to creat a better mix of air and fuel therefore a better burn--more power. The hiclone is placed 20-30cm before the throttle body regardless the air is straightened by the throttle plate.

If hiclone adds air restriction in the first place than my time trials shoul come up with ZERO improvement OR negative improvement.
The weird thing was IT came up with more PLUSES than ZERO improvement. The average improvement was 0.1 to 0.15 sec. I HAD no negative results. The worst case was SAME OR NO improvemet compared to stock(with out hiclone).

My conclusion was, hiclone may add to air restiction as every one said so BUT the effect is less than a better combustion/mix in the charmber, the turbulance created by the hiclone and rough surface of the charmber.

I think thats the best answer I can give.
You never know until you try it. REMEMBER an old saying...SCIENCE IS NOT A COMMON SENSE.

Thanks

[The New Guy]

Im the new guy! can you help me! i want my new 05 hyundai accent to go fast can you help me find a turbo thingy that would help? thanks

[vtec78]

No worries, if you got 3000$ to spend just put a low boost turbo kits on it. There are plenty of bolt on turbo kits in australia for Hyudai. I am sure you have no problems in US.

Option 2, is exhaust increase by 1/4 to 1/2 inch at max right from cat back. CAI prefered by iceman intake(made out of plastic instead of metal for better heat insulation).
And get a turbonator from US, place it 20-30cm before the throttle body( as worked for hondas and Corrola ascent(100kw); and v8 ford xr8(200kw). You will be amazed with the outcome. This set up should cut down your 0-60 mile time by apprx 0.5- 1 sec. on an average car. a car length. The down side is the car is much nosier than before.

Option 3.
With all the option 2 set up; spend 500$ eg unichip on a after market computer not ecu that tuned your car on the dyno.

I hope this helps.....

[The New Guy]

Thanks vtec78 for the tip! but i really have no idea how that goes sinces i dont know anything about cars yet? and also i thought turbonator dont work?!

[Slanter]

Some more material for the debate: the current (September 2005) issue of Popular Mechanics includes a dyno test of the Turbonator's cousin the Tornado, as well as a very cheap knock-off on Ebay. It's the issue with a blurb, "Bogus MPG Gadgets!" splashed along the very top of the cover. They subjected each device to four dyno pulls and a 70 mph cruise on the dyno rollers with a measured amount of fuel in the tank.

Well, the results are in. Both the Tornado and the cheapo knockoff reduced power by over 10%. The Tornado did nothing to improve fuel mileage, while the cheapo also brought gas mileage down by 20%. To top it off, they commented that the Ebay special was so flimsy it looked like it might fall apart and get sucked into the engine. The only good thing they had to say about the Tornado was that it seemed to be very well made and didn't catch fire like one other device they tested. So their verdict was that it took a big bite out of the test truck's horsepower and did nothing to improve gas mileage.

There are a few things I didn't like about the article, mostly that they didn't print as much raw data as I would like to have seen. They did not print the actual horsepower numbers or mpg, just how they compared to each other. Still, from what I can tell, their test procedure was a sound one, and the vortex generators soundly failed.

----------------------------------------

VTEC78, the reason I've been quibling with you is that I can't tell if your test results are due to an actual improvement or random noise in the test results. The theoretical claims seem kind of doubtful. I've already covered why it is not likely to remove restriction. Now I'll cover why I can't see the installation you describe would produce extra swirl in the combustion chamber.

I can't see how any of the motion from the Hyclone would actually get that far in the intake.

From what you've said, the Hyclone sits about 20 cm upstream of the throttle body. The tube itself will reduce the swirling motion considerably, because as the air rotates, the walls of the tube produce a drag that slows its swirling down. A substantial part of the swirl motion would be lost when it reaches the throttle body. Then we have the throttle itself, a flat plate sitting perpendicular to the airflow. So you've got another fin besides those on the Hyclone, and this fin acts to reduce the swirling action.

Then the air exits into a plenum. This usually means the passage flares out and the air slows down as it flows into a large chamber. At that point, the runners pull pulses of air in from the plenum, usually making the air do an abrupt 90 degree turn. The motion in the plenum is extremely chaotic as the individual valves open and close and pressure waves bounce back and forth down the runners. Then it's through the complicated port shape on the cylinder head itself. At that point, the valve closes, and the piston compresses it before ignition.

Consequently, the biggest effect of the motion of the air in the combustion chamber would come from the design of the combustion chamber itself, as well as the piston. Then we have port design, followed by the design of the intake manifold. The effect of some set of fins 30 cm upstream of the throttle body will be just a drop in the bucket.

----------------------------------------

By the way, I've started looking to see if a magazine will sponsor me to do my own test on the Turbonator. If that goes through, I'll not only dyno test it, but I'll try putting one in a transparent tube and running a smoke stick test to see just how far the vortex can persist. Stay tuned...

[vtec78]

Slander, Your feed back was overwhelming....I have to say the electric fan type supercharger that is a waste of money as due to its design and regidity. If you look it carfully by comparing it to a turbonator, its a differnt design. The turbonator has holes in its fins(less air restriction?)

I am difinately support your future trials on hiclone and I would like to hear that you have proved that its does no power gain or so ever. So I can rest my case.

The New Zealand company-gizzimo electronics told me they tried on dyno (on a integra) and PROVED no power gain or LOSS. But this is only the email feed back from them but no raw test data...a bit doggy.

Due to many uncertainties about the hiclone. I actually stop watch timed again the 2nd gear accleration(1000-400rpm) after 2 weeks of hiclone installed. The time has "improved" from 4.25sec to 4.06. This is not a very accurate results but bear in mind that I know my car so well due to driving 82 kms each day to work(city driving). The car weight may vary sligtly due to different level of fuel tank. But enought to give me 70% confidence level that Hiclone is doing its job. Again I may be wrong. Thats why I am very eager to hearing your future test results on the turbonator.

Why dnt you try out youself for a start using a good stop watch(the one used for running) not the one build in the watch. You may need to run 10 runs in a short session before and after and repeat the same next day or so(with different fuel level). The aim is to see whether the in gear accleration time is improved in all differnt/conditions /sessions.
I prefered a dryday.
If you do so, it may has answered some of the uncertaines.

We are looking forward to hearing from you.

[Slanter]

I'm glad we have been able to discuss this like gentlemen, Vtec78. There have been a few cases before where something that shouldn't have worked did for some specific cars.

At any rate, I'm planning three tests if I can find a sponsor. I plan to test their claims of more horsepower at both a local dyno shop and at Atlanta Dragway. I also plan to test their theoretical claims by using a smoke stick and a clear tube to see if the fins actually make the vortex last or if it just peters out 10 cm or so downstream. I've used smoke sticks before for testing a device at work that amounted to an industrial-strength vacuum cleaner. If I can find someone who rents one, I'll even see if I can have one flow bench tested - if not, I'll see what I can improvise. Then I will be able to write a thorough article that I can sell to a magazine so I can get my testing expenses and a bit more back. I wouldn't be surprised if my tests may actually be more complete than what the makers of the Turbonator have done themselves. That's my plan, anyway - I've written to one magazine already to see if they're interested.

I will definitely keep everyone posted on how this turns out!

[geosooner]

I just want to let everyone know that I have a device that is guaranteed to save fuel and increase power in any vehicle, gas, diesel, or electric. I will even venture to say it will improve mileage on fuel cell and hydrogen vehicles. I will sell this device for the same price as the Turbonator ($69.95) and offer the same money back guarantee.

The important thing is the money back guarantee. If you read closely you will notice the money back guarantee does not include shipping and is subject to a 15% restocking fee. This amounts to $10.49 for the restocking fee and I'm sure a few dollars the company charges for handling. The device costs a few cents to make, so if everyone who buys one returns it, the company still makes a hefty profit.

By the way the device I want to sell you is a piece of duct tape. You simply tape it over the intake (securely so it doesn’t get sucked in). This reduces air flow and fuel flow, creating more mileage. As for increased power, oh well, just request your money back and I'll be happy to refund 85%.

[vtec78]

Geosooner, I liked your incentives, please call again.
You must be a very successful business man.

[nagelxj]

300ZXJON, Flying turbine airliners and having several college coursed on turbine engines, I can say the stator veins in the turbine engine are made to decrease airflow. A turbine engine at low speeds (less than 25,000RPM) are very inefficient. They have compressor stalls which basically is too much air in the engine causing the compressor section of the engine to stall (disruption of airflow). The purpose of the stator veins are to cut off airflow at low speeds to allow a less efficient compressor to work until the speed is high enough for the axial compressor to work. Sorry way off topic. I've seen the infomercial for this product and the theory of the "swirling turbine like airflow" would make since if the air was forced through, maybe by a 20,000hp (lb/thrust) turbine engine, but if its put in a non-forced air air intake like on a car, its called a plug.

Mark

[rmcc70]

Hi All,

interesting thread and polite too which is always a plus.

The thing with my STi (ok, not mine it's a company car) is that it has to be kept factory for warranty/insurance and more to the point it goes fast enough as it is. My goal is not to increase the STi speed but increase my understanding of cars and mechanicals. As it is, I have my own car (a Stag which is still not going) which I would be happy to HiClone/Turbinate (whatever). However I not ashamed to say that I am know (sic) Rhodes Scholar and so thus the interest. I have looked at supercharging using http://www.capa.com.au/ but they t`ain`t cheap.

On an aside, look at this
http://www.kfor.com/Global/story.asp?s=3390503

Also, I still wonder if the Vortex (bigger spark) is not abetter investment http://www.vortex-performance.com.au/

Bye for now.

Falusi the IVth

[Slanter]

The cryogenic metal treatment is interesting, but I suspect the 120 mpg is mostly due to careful driving and the car's hybrid system. Just like I once managed to wring nearly 40 mpg out of a Chrysler LeBaron by driving it at 45 mpg in fifth gear on the freeway (it was having some pretty serious overheating problems).

The Vortex system seems like another variation on the capacitive discharge ignition. CDI's are pretty well proven - it's pretty rare to see cars in some racing classes without one. The only odd thing about that is its switchable spark advance curve. Most cars don't need that; I suppose motorcycles might be different. I plan to use a CDI in my Dart, but mine will probably be from a more established company like Mallory or MSD.

[rmcc70]

A taf off topic is http://byronw.www1host.com/ as it gets free energy systems but it also has references to 200mpg carbs etc.

A long read.

[Gaelen]

Hi all,

I am self-employed and put on around 20K/year. I purchased a 4WD MT 05 Element which I love in late July and would really like to get as much gas mileage and/or hp as I can out of it.

I have attempted to read as much of this thread as I can, but frankly am still a bit cautious about intake mods in general.

Can anyone out there with a real clue and actual evidence recommend anything to help me out here?

Thanks.
--
Gaelen

[rmcc70]

Hi Gaelen,

I know what a 4WD is but w/o a Google I am at a loss on MT 05 Element. Petrol (sorry, GAS) is now at $1.30Oz per litre (can someone translate to USGallons please), petrol is down from $1.45 in Melbourne, so it is cheaper.

As a previous poster put it. The #1 saving method (short of public transport) is slow down, acclearate slowly, anticipate red (or green) lights, change to a higher gear.

Perhaps of interest is I have 2 cars. A V8 (bored,blued,big carb,balanced) Stag and a 2 litre WRX. The WRX bogs all over the Stag even if I drive slowly.

My theory is ECU, small engine, big turbo, light foot and no towing.



HTH's

[genghis]

Hi guys,
Man really a laugh reading all the threads but also really enlightening too.
I don't really have an engineering background so it's sort of like reading your threads and thinking about what I watched on Discovery channel.
Was thinking about the vortex generators to increase bhp but sounds like they may not work after all.
You know the side discussion of jet turbine engines? I don't think they work the same as vortex generators. One is trying to create turbulant airflow ( or something about airflow) and the other is trying to compress air for a better burn so in my humble opinion it's like comparing apples and oranges. Of course I could be wrong.
But as a car newbie and a poor one at that, purchased a subaru impreza 1.6 ( yes I know underpowered but what to do? cars are so expensive in singapore). Was wondering if anyone can give me ideas to boost/increase performance?
Thanks inadvance

Genghis

[intel]

It is amazing how many people buy this stuff and don't know about all of the law suits these companys have against them.

The gov rulled that Slick 50 was using false advertising and cannot make any of the claims on the bottle anymore.

first of all i'd like to know exactly if ur even sure of anything thats comin out of ur mouth
secondly i'd wanna know if u ever tried the product for yourself
and thridly you quite fankly seem to be absolutely bias against the issue and theres nothing wrong wit you thinkin its a piece of crap but if u dont know what the hell you're talking about then just shut up about it!!!!!

[Slanter]

first of all i'd like to know exactly if ur even sure of anything thats comin out of ur mouth
secondly i'd wanna know if u ever tried the product for yourself
and thridly you quite fankly seem to be absolutely bias against the issue and theres nothing wrong wit you thinkin its a piece of crap but if u dont know what the hell you're talking about then just shut up about it!!!!!

Intel, if you want proof that Hatterasguy is telling the truth about Slick 50's claims being false, I suggest you go read the terms of the government's cease and desist order against Slick 50 for yourself. It is quite clear that Slick 50 was completely unable to prove their product actually worked to any standard that would hold up in a court of law.

If you want to claim otherwise, I suggest you present actual evidence that it works.