Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Gas Saving Gizmos & Gadgets
332 messages, Last post on Jul 20, 2009 at 12:19 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
eham,
Those are great accessories! You can find parts numbers and prices at http://www.WeAreTheBorg/YouWillBeAssimilated.com
tidester |
|
| I was as skeptical as anyone when I first saw the device, actually laughed at the student in class because it couldn't possibly work as claimed. Well to my surprise after installation some results were worth investigating. Started testing on our Clayton chassis dyno and recorded positive results in almost every vehicle we tested. Remember I am a racer and don't really worry about MPG. Saw some interesting HP gains on the dyno and lost them when we removed the device, remember this is all done in a 10 to 15 minute test period. Please don't bad mouth this device until you have actually tested it in your vehicle, don't forget to disconnect your battery to erase ECM memory so it can relearn the fuel trim curve faster. | |
|
|
|
Seeing HP gains on a chassis dyno still doesn't mean it works in the real world. 1) Which vehicles did you test? 2) Were they stock vehicles, since you're a 'racer'? 3) Were the tests all conducted under the same conditions or was the humidity/pressure/temperature of the air varying from test to test? 4) Were all of the engines and drive trains warmed up to the same operating temperatures each time? 5) Were the vehicles you tested fuel injected or carbureted? 6)What is an 'interesting HP' gain? The only reasons the tornado would work is if the engine has a very poorly designed intake system. There is no reason to 'swirl' air any more than what the intake runners are doing in most cases. Go sell snake-oil in another forum please! |
|
| IF they really worked the factorys would install them on all new cars. The factorys will stop at nothing to increase fuel enonomy 1 or 2 MPG. | |
| Why then do they sacrifice the gains of an unrestricted air intake system for the reduced engine noise (while accelerating) that the stock airbox, etc., provide, with all their baffles, chambers, and twisty-curvy air paths? | |
| i have 250k miles on my 94 accord i have stayed with the manufacturer recommended oil 5w30 dont burn a drop and its the best way i know how to save gas after your regular maintenance schedule it works on hondas | |
|
As a starving college student, I was actually considering installing one of these gimics in my Elantra (the "tornado fuel saver"), however common sense and this forum have snapped me back into the realm of reality. Thanks guys. I wish Ithese gimmics worked, though. |
|
|
I see the claims for improved power/economy for aftermarket air filters, and ask, Has anyone you know attached a digital vacuum gauge ABOVE the throttle plate, and driven the vehicle at constant speeds on the same roads before and after the change? If the filter is really reducing restriction, there will be measurable vacuum above the throttle with the stock filter. Some years ago I used a clear plastic tube with a teaspoon of water for a manometer, and could not measure a vacuum above the throttle on my car at idle. The system did not allow me to test it under load with any equipment I had available at the time. This was in the late sixties when self proclaimed "experts" were turning their air cleaner covers up side down to "increase air flow". Some of us at the school did an experiment (U S Navy fleet training - mechanics, Davisville Rhode Island). We asked ten of our students if they would participate, and not look under their hoods. We had them fill their tanks every Monday and Thursday. We checked their oil that day, and either installed the covers correctly or turned over. They were told to drive normally, and report the amount of fuel, and miles on the car at each fill up. Without exception, the times when the cover was upside down for "more air" the fuel economy went down. The reasons most likely were: 1. The carbuerators were less efficient when the air heating system did not work. 2. The engines required more throttle to produce the same power when not fully warmed up but after choke opened. 3. Some restriction was required to insure proper mixture with the carbuerator. I now tend to be very skeptical about claims for air filter devices. The manufacturers can reduce restriction if there is enough to matter, by simply increasing the size of the flter element. The only possible time there could be a problem IMO is wide open throttle. That problem actually did exist in the sixties on some Chevy II's. GM accidentally put air cleaner housings for 4 cylinder engines on some sixes. The tsb said to measure the diameter of the intake opening and replace with the appropriate part number if wrong. Harry |
|
|
Merely replacing the stock air plumbing with something non-restrictive helps the most, and this usually ends up with a cone filter, so it's hard to say just how much the filter by itself does. As long as the new filter gets outside (not engine compartment) air, it is an improvement. What is this upside-down cover stuff? Was it meant to get more air through the same filter? If it gets more engine air, it was a stupid mod, unless warm air was desireable for carbuerators. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Gas Saving Gizmos & Gadgets
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
