Mixing of air and fuel IS the most critical aspect of efficient combustion. The Honda CVCC engine uses this concept, by swirling the air and fuel inside of the combustion chamber. A very uniform mixture of air and fuel will burn more efficiently. When designing indutrial burners the most important factor taken into account is the mixing chamber, not only mixing the air and fuel but getting the right percetage mix.

 

What happens to the "swirling air" when it hits the throttle body?

 

At that point it is swirling and a more uniform density. This would allow a more even distibution into the air plenum and equal air flow to the engine. Granted, this may be small but we'll see if my theory works. I'll keep my fingers crossed. Nothing ventured, nothing gained. Who would ever have guessed even 30 years ago that fuel injected vehicles would be the norm!!

 

You're talking about swirling the air INSIDE the combustion chamber vs swirling the air before it ever gets to the throttle body, there is a MAJOR difference. My car has swirl polished valves and the floors of my intake ports of my CNC heads were intentionally left slightly rough for the purpose of increasing fuel / air mixture. Guess what, they work, my car makes more power than cars with identical CNC work and regular valves and smooth porting.

Focus on the device in question, we are not talking about wide open throttle, we're talking about fuel economy. How much is the throttle body open at cruising speeds? I will bet you money that if you were to somehow measure turbulence AFTER the throttle body at part throttle you would find that there is virtually no difference between a car with or without the tornado. It might be of some benefit at wide open throttle but fuel efficiency there is so minimal that it likely won't matter at all.

 

Don't you suspect the automakers would be all over these things like stink on poo-pooh if they could improve fuel economy and/or improve power?

If you want to swirl something save it for after the fuel is added, or better yet swirl the mixture in the combustion chamber. Save your money for Tornado, K&N, shiny valve covers, airfoil, ported throttle body... spend it on nitrous oxide, and then you have something.

Clyde

 

I bought one for my wife's GP back in 2001. I never noticed any difference at all, other than the fact that my wallet was lighter. I eventually took it out and the car actually runs better without it. Big suprise.

Oh, BTW... I have a Tornado device that fits a GM 3800 for sale cheap. Maybe someone else wants to try their luck.

-Ed

 

Tornado,
If I paid that kind of money for one I would be screaming that it worked too.
Show me the science on how it works with a modern injected motor.
Show me the dyno pulls.
1 or 2 MPG increase: is the placebo effect, due to people who buy crap like this want it to work, and drive just a little bit easier ie: the self fulfilling prophecy.

For those that believe in the tornado, I have some rare earth magnets that will increase your milage up to 25% for forty bucks, the rare earth magnets harnesses the power of the pyramids.

 

The knife edge of your throttle blades would serve to straighten out and stop your mighty swirling vortex!

Most turbos don't mix anything they compress air, then on good systems the air is push through straight tubes to cool (intercooler/aftercooler etc) it which help make it even more dense. Often the fuel is injected after the air is in the cylinder, with the valves closed and the piston is traveling upward. Your tornados' mighty vortex has no power there either.

If making a more efficient automobile was a simple 15 cents worth of plastic, someone would be using it. Ok maybe not Detroit however, the Japanese or the French auto industries would use it.

Again I say shenanigans! This is up there with the water burning carburetor.

 

I feel dumber after reading this thread.

 

If all of these cheap horsepower installs worked you can be sure GM would have used them. Same for the gas mileage improvers. As for those who say their gas mileage was improved did they do a test that involved humidity, air pressure, temperature, and exact same driving style/route?

 

I'm sorry but WHAT THE HELL! Only 40% of the energy is used?!?!?! Burning some of the CO into CO2?!?! Converted to liquid water instead of water vapor!?!??! Where the hell did you go to school? I feel a bit like a mosquito at a nudist colony... I really don't know where to begin.

This is one of those cases where a little bit of knowledge is dangerous. When fuel is combusted, 100% of fuel (chemical potential energy) is converted to energy (assuming 14.7:1 stoichiometric ratio). This is NOT to say that 100% of the chemical potential energy is converted to kinetic energy (energy to drive the car). MOST of that potential energy is lost to heat. You are referring to thermodynamic efficiency. And it is TRUE that most internal combustion engines are less than 40% thermodynamically efficient. (<25% is more realistic).

But there is absolutely NO energy to be gained by obtaining more liquid water Vs. water vapor. Or combusting CO into CO2. THINK ABOUT IT! Let me make this is simple as possible. Energy is stored in chemical bonds. How are we going to FREE UP energy by combusting CO into CO2. We are adding another oxygen atom and freeing up energy?!?! The laws of thermodynamics dictate otherwise. Also the difference between liquid water and water vapor is simply a phase change. While there is a measurable change in ENTHALPY between the two states, there is NO CHANGE IN ENTROPY. If you wish to discuss this further attend one of my chemistry classes (I have a Ph.D in synthetic organic chemistry and teach at a small college in Michigan)

As to the tornado idea. Yes, swirling of the air intake mixture will more evenly distribute fuel and result in a more homogenous mixture. But in the case of LT1/LS1 engine intake systems it probably impedes airflow more than accomplishing its goal. I say waste of money, but whatever helps you sleep at night.

 

I would argue that correct ignition timing is more important than a proper stoichiometric ratio.

 

The Tornado insert is not rocket science. Don't you think that General Motors would duplicate the device if it worked? Enough said.

 

This issue has been discussed on the forum numerous times. The Tornado is a waste of money, PERIOD. Before you waste money on a mods that advertise they do this and that better or increase performace, get feedback from others that my have tried it. This forum is a good place to start, and it won't cost you a dime.

 

Um. Probably not. Don't give them that much credit.

 

Scam!

 

I swear I did not read any of this thread. I am dumb enough already.

 

It's a riceware ghetto gadget. DO NOT install on your Vette or any other car you care about...

 

The tornado device has been discussed before on CF. I'll post my standard reply: It can't work because nowhere in the advertising are the words, "hotsy totsy".

 

It doesn't work because it doesn't have magnets.


http://www.smithenviro.com/magnetizers/engine.html