The Tornado Fuel Saver: Does it really work?
Author:Timion, Matt
Publication:www.gassavers.org Date:10/19/2005 The Tornado Fuel Saver has been around for years now, claiming to give you an increase up to 24% in gas mileage. The theory behind this device is that is will swirl the air coming in from the intake, which when mixed with gasoline will increase combustion and make the combustion more complete. In theory this means you have to use less gas to achieve the same speed and power, resulting in higher miles-per-gallon. Many independant magazines and websites have tested this device over the years, which have all concluded that this device will not work, especially on modern fuel injected cars. Even though Consumer Reports, the Department of Energy, the E.P.A, and countless other resources have tested this and other similar products with no positive results, people still convinced that this item may work. Below is a review of the Tornado Fuel Saver from amazon.com Quote:
On John Matarese's "Don't Waste Your Money" website, he found the Tornado Fuel Saver to offer no more than 1% increase. Read about it here. Click this link to search google for more information on the Tornado Fuel Saver. View this site to read more about turbulence devices such as the tornado. The bottom line is that if such a simple device really worked, it would come pre-installed on all vehicles from the manufacturer. If you insist on spending this money on your vehicle, you would be much better off getting new tires or perhaps buying a bicycle to use instead of your car. |
As the review from Amazon
As the review from Amazon states, swirling air fuel mixtures is nothing new. I just thought I'd add this tidbit of information:
During the gas crisis of the 70's with increasingly stringent EPA emission standards coming out, Honda motors was developing a technology called Compound Vortex Controlled Combustion, or CVCC [yes, this is where the name for the beloved Civic comes from]. A more appropriate name for the technology they were developing would be 'Stratified Intake Charge, Compound Vortex Controlled Combustion.' The idea was to create a cylinder head with a pre-combustion chamber right next to the spark plug electrode and a regular combustion chamber. The smaller pre-combustion chamber was filled with a richer air fuel mixture [actually, closer to a regular AFR found in most cars] than the regular combustion chamber, which was filled with a larger but leaner mixture during cylinder intake [hence the 'stratified intake charge']. The small rich charge was easy to ignite, and the flame could then propagate across and ignite the leaner charge. This allowed for overall leaner fuel mixtures to be used, hense better gas mileage and lower emissions. Honda tried to introduce a compound vortex into the mix, but found it difficult to control, and abandoned attempts, especially since the stratified charge worked so well. Anyhow, thought that was interesting. |
Constant Velocity
The idea of managing the turbulence of the intake air flow first appeared to me when I was shopping around for Motorcyles (great gas mileage...) in the early 80s. Most companies offered a standard butterfly valve to manage the air/fuel mixture enterig the carborator, however the competition offered a Constant Velocity alternative featuring a clam shell design of two plates converging in the shape of an eye. Imagine what water would look like being poured over a butterfly value. It would be all over the place. Now imagine it being poured into your cupped hands, and then seperate them in the middle. Smooth huh? Why would I want to "swirl" my airflow if it was going to be directed at a butterfly valve, which would mess it up again? The Tornado device would have to be mounted AFTER the butterfly valve which would require cutting most intake plenums in half! Gotta be a gimick. :|
|
Popular Mechanics tests the Tornado
Popular Mechanics tests the Tornado
<a href="https://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/auto_technology/1802932.html?page=2&c=y">test results</a> |
I went to Pep Boys yesterday
I went to Pep Boys yesterday and I was shocked to see the Tornado for sale.
$65. Even if it did work, screw that. |
Re: Popular Mechanics tests the Tornado
Quote:
that's awesome!! i love to see sound testing techniques thrown at these gimmicks. they all ended up either hurting both power and efficiency, or having no effect at all (aside from lightening your wallet). |
Water injection is not a
Water injection is not a gimmick, sir.
|
Re: Water injection is not a
Quote:
I know that we've talked about water injection on this site before, but I'm still waiting for numbers to show it is not a gimmick. Even most of the h2 generators cannot provide actually evidence that their product helps with gas mileage. Properly controlled testing has no bias, and as such will show gimmicks as gimmicks. If you are convinced that water injection is not a gimmick please point people in the right direction. |
Well, if you want proof it's
Well, if you want proof it's not a gimmick go to basically any forced induction section of any serious forum (h-t por ejemplo) and ask if it's a good idea. I may say whatev popular mechnics tested may be crap, because FI people spend hundreds on these kits. But they do indeed cool the charge, allow for leaner burn conditions, more ignition advance, and suppress knock. So bleh.
|
to be clear, the article
to be clear, the article doesn't trash water injection as a theory, just the kit tested.
actually, it starts out describing how water injection does work under extreme conditions - for short bursts of more power though, not for fuel economy. |
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:42 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.