The Tornado Fuel Saver: Does it really work?

[GasSavers_katman]

How about starting a new thread on using the G-Tech and give some details?

[GasSavers_maxc]

After i eat.

[ZugyNA]

Originally Posted by MetroMPG

I think it makes sense to pick the low-hanging fruit first, and to do the stuff that isn't hypothetical or based on questionable "science".

You're right that I haven't been doing as many tests recently, mainly because I've been spending most of my tinkering time working on the EV.

I'd love nothing more than to do an experiment each week, but to do one properly takes a significant amount of time. I have to budget at least 2 hours to do & write up a very basic one.

I agree with Metro95 - if there's something that you'd particularly like to see tested, go for it, and present the detailed results for all to see.

I'm depending on you to do the serious testing. I try to keep an open mind about mods though.

The mpg game is ripe for exploitation. Some think...oh they are looking for mpg gains...so I'll just post some really good gain from some fictious mod and watch them take the bait. Or I'm selling this "device"...maybe I can drum up some business. Or somebody finds something that works and doesn't give good details.

In reality this mpg game isn't an easy one...I find that I'm lucky to manage a 2-3% gain from one mod if that. With no scan gauge I'm limited to fillups...plus I'm messing with 2 different cars...and maintaining them also.

The fuel heat is one thing I've tested and have some decent data on....one specific car though.

I mostly try to think about what is likely to work and what makes sense and just do it.

Recent mods: air dam at height of most undercar components....blocked front openings other than for rad...partially insulated fuel tank...EFIE...warm air intake...ozone air bleed....fender skirts...

So it just takes a lot of time...might actually get my FA2000 clone tested and dialed in this summer after having it installed for 2 years now.

[95metro]

Originally Posted by ZugyNA

In reality this mpg game isn't an easy one...I find that I'm lucky to manage a 2-3% gain from one mod if that. With no scan gauge I'm limited to fillups...plus I'm messing with 2 different cars...and maintaining them also.

And we're just trying to point out that gains (or losses) of 2-3% can be seen on any vehicle at any time due to the excessively high variability of fuel efficiency. For that matter, the difference could be 20-30% depending on the circumstances.

For ANY single device/additive to improve FE by 20-30% is a huge claim and should be supported by mass amounts of data and tons of A-B-A testing before it should even be considered as legit. Even at that point, 20-30% on a 20 mpg vehicle is only 4-6 mpg...generally attainable simply by adjusting your driving habits.

But, there's not much point it going on about it. I just felt like writing something...

[ZugyNA]

I will tell you what I've told other people with this kind of opinion...if you continually insist that something doesn't work...then it follows that you would be required by adherence to the scientific method...to PROVE that it doesn't....by testing to see if it does.

It's not enough to give a lot of reasons why it won't...or probably won't.


With this particular car my worst mileage this last winter was 23.5...while the previous winter it was pretty consistantly around 21. Winters before this averaged lower.

I can understand wanting massive amounts of clean verifiable data to prove something....but in the DIY world...it won't happen too often.

I also understand the placebo effect...and the difference driving habits can make.

My approach is to look for evidence (such as it is) that something might work...and then go ahead and test it. I also try to find examples involving the same make/model of vehicle...cause not everything works with any particular car.

I haven't seen the 20-30% gains from one mod some claim.

Main thing is to spend 80% of time spent actually testing this and that...and keeping accurate notes...NOT 80% researching and talking about it....or why it won't work.

Or so I tell myself.

And...it's only a hobby...not an obsession.

As far as the swirlers...I think it's possible one might work on some EFI cars...but I won't pay $70 to find out. Got some sheet metal and metal shears though. And enough pics around to try and duplicate one.

[GasSavers_maxc]

Originally Posted by maxc

I gained 1 more mpg on my F150, enstalled a smaller one, an additional mpg, all mixed driving. Size dos make dif.

I lost 10 hp with the smaller one. One vortex can be composed of smaller vortexes.

[ZugyNA]

Originally Posted by maxc

I lost 10 hp with the smaller one. One vortex can be composed of smaller vortexes.

How about a few details...I'm eventually going to try to make one myself.

Does your truck have two intake inlets or do you have the 2 swirlers in series?

Smaller vs larger....do you mean the opening thru the vanes where the air passes thru?

[GasSavers_maxc]

Originally Posted by ZugyNA

How about a few details...I'm eventually going to try to make one myself.

Does your truck have two intake inlets or do you have the 2 swirlers in series?

Smaller vs larger....do you mean the opening thru the vanes where the air passes thru?

I have 1 85mm one, then enstalled 65mm one. Right now i have a bad injector and old plug wires. When i do tests same place on road. I do tests @70F and 50% humd. bar. at 30.00. 4.6 F 150 2wd auto.

[GasSavers_maxc]

Originally Posted by maxc

I have 1 85mm one, then enstalled 65mm one. Right now i have a bad injector and old plug wires. When i do tests same place on road. I do tests @70F and 50% humd. bar. at 30.00. 4.6 F 150 2wd auto.

I did the tests 3 years ago. It was + or- 2 hp with the g-tech. A year ago i put 85mm one on my dads 5.4 F150 4wd without telling him. He's normal mileage was 12.2 it went up to 13.5. Most small engines already have to large of a throttle body so it cracked open only a little at low speeds. A 50mm throttle body can flow 500cfm way to much for a 2.0 liter.

[ZugyNA]

Originally Posted by maxc

I did the tests 3 years ago. It was + or- 2 hp with the g-tech. A year ago i put 85mm one on my dads 5.4 F150 4wd without telling him. He's normal mileage was 12.2 it went up to 13.5. Most small engines already have to large of a throttle body so it cracked open only a little at low speeds. A 50mm throttle body can flow 500cfm way to much for a 2.0 liter.

Generally you are inserting these right before the throttle body?

That's a 10-11% gain. Pretty good for a big 4WD.