davefoc
Philosopher
wow
To double the speed (assuming the air resistance is proportional to the square of the speed) requires 8 times the power. Assuming fuel consumption rate is directly proportional to power used, it therefore takes 4 times the fuel to cover the same distance in half the time.
The power requirement (and hence fuel burn rate) goes up as the cube of the speed, not the square. To understand why, realize that at double the speed, you have to overcome four times the resistance. Four times the resistance at twice the speed equals eight times the power.
The power requirement (and hence fuel burn rate) goes up as the cube of the speed, not the square. To understand why, realize that at double the speed, you have to overcome four times the resistance. Four times the resistance at twice the speed equals eight times the power.
_Q_---From your page 2 post. No, I am not yanking anyone's chain. I am going to buy one of these..AFTER I ask them if they ran a test on MY vehicle/engine...like they did for many vehicles. They have a printout on many vehicles that show what the fuel mileage was, and then is, after the installation. Same with horsepower. If this is some bogus product that relies on any form of trickery...then Jeff Brooks, a nationally regarded top mechanic and talk show host, has ALSO been duped..and/or he is working only for the almighty dollar as their spokesman.
I forget who the poster was that mentioned that the likelihood of the Tornado being a legitimate product, because the car manufactureres have spent LOTS of money in R&D on combustion chamber design, etc.? Well, What you are saying basically is that there can't possibly be a kitchen table inventor, ever, who has improved upon a product. We know that is not the case. But regarding THIS product...I reserve judgement till I get more info from the company, and/or simply buy one and try it.
I forget who the poster was that mentioned that the likelihood of the Tornado being a legitimate product, because the car manufactureres have spent LOTS of money in R&D on combustion chamber design, etc.? Well, What you are saying basically is that there can't possibly be a kitchen table inventor, ever, who has improved upon a product. We know that is not the case. But regarding THIS product...I reserve judgement till I get more info from the company, and/or simply buy one and try it.
teddygrahams
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2001
- Messages
- 276
ceptimus said:
The wind is slowing down your car. Assume your car is not doing any work except moving air out of the way. That will make it clearer. It is squared, not cubed.
Iconoclast
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2001
- Messages
- 1,786
I covered that in an earlier post.ceptimus said:
I'm not the one who said this, but I certainly agree with the sentiment. If I'm curious about who said what, I read the thread again.Iamme said:
Nonsense. The statement you make here simply does not follow from any claim that has been made by anyone in this thread.
_Q_
http://tornadoairpower2.com/page2.html
So, if you have a carbureted engine you put the Tornado in your intake before the carb and it creates swirl in the combustion chamber. How does it do this?
The air enters the air intake, passes through the air filter where it meets a blockage..umm...Tornado. It passes this blockage (can you say volumetric efficency?) and now has the property of "swirl." (Imagine a horizontal tornado, apparently). The air then has to pass the butterfly valve (choke) at the inlet to the carb. Then there is the venturi. The air and fuel mix. Then there is the throttle plate. Do we still have swirl at this point? Did we still have swirl after the choke? Assume we do, just for arguments sake. (I like to give the benefit of the doubt.) We now pass the poppet valve. Does the presence of swirl before the poppet valve have much effect on the flow after the poppet valve. Umm...I would think not.
Have a look at this admittedly crude CFD simulation (from my under grad days) of flow past a poppet valve. Notice how the flow is nice and "smooth" before the valve and gets all "messed up" as it passes it.
Now even ignoring the affect of the carburetor, as you would do if you have fuel injection and your Tornado is installed after the MAF sensor, how is swirl (as generated by the Tornado) preserved as it travels past the poppet valve?
If you want swirl and tumble in your combustion chamber you need to design a cylinder head/ manifold that promotes it. Blocking your air intake with $70 worth of crap isn't going to do it.
Of course, if someone wants to show me how the Tornado *does* create swirl in the combustion chamber, then I would of course have to eat my words.
Editted to add: If they mean to say that the swirl is generated before the combustion chamber (to promote air/fuel mixing there (which is not how it is worded on their website), then they might have a point. Subaru seem to think it is a good idea
http://www.drivesubaru.com/Win03_Manifold.htm
Notice however that their system contains nothing that looks like a Tornado device at all.
Nothing about increaseing the engines power by 20% either.
teddygrahams
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2001
- Messages
- 276
ceptimus said:
But only required for half the time, hence total fuel used does not get a cubed factor.... or does it ?
davefoc
Philosopher
Summary of reasons (many put forth previously) to be suspicious of claims for the Tornado.
1. If it were effective some engine manufacturures would incorporate the gadget or something similar into their engines.
2. If it offered anything like the horsepower improvement claimed it would be standard equipment on race cars. No one has of yet suggested that there is any use on race cars.
3. If it were effective the company would publish the details of their test methodologies and their detailed test reports. Without these their claims are useless.
4. If it were effective the company would not rely on advertising that is based almost solely on anecdotal evidence.
5. If it were effective the company would not promote the false notion that the average individual could determine its effectivity.
6. The company's theory of how their product operates seems to be unlikely to be true. See fsol's previous post for his discussion of this.
7. A link was provided to a test report by an individual that suggested that the product was ineffective. Repeated here for convenience: http://autorepair.about.com/library/products/aafpr052002.htm
8. The EPA has tested hundreds of add on fuel saving gadgets and has found none that were effective. Many of these products were advertised in similar ways to the Tornado and made similar claims. So the Tornado marketing approach is nothing new for fraudulent products.
9. Their celebrity spokesman seems lame. He touts the fact that his radio audience convinced him of the efficacy of the product. This, as previously discussed, is crap. If he is so technically non-astute as to not understand how useless anecdotal information is for something like this is, then his value as a source of useful informatin about the Tornado is zero.
10. One of the ways to get a product tested by the EPA is to request that the EPA test the product for effectivity. This is, of course, one of the first things that a company would do that had a product that actually improved fuel economy. There is no evidence that Tornado has done this.
edited to add:
11. Companies dealing with vehicle fleets can profit enormously from even small improvements in fuel economy. No information has been provided that any of them are using this device.
1. If it were effective some engine manufacturures would incorporate the gadget or something similar into their engines.
2. If it offered anything like the horsepower improvement claimed it would be standard equipment on race cars. No one has of yet suggested that there is any use on race cars.
3. If it were effective the company would publish the details of their test methodologies and their detailed test reports. Without these their claims are useless.
4. If it were effective the company would not rely on advertising that is based almost solely on anecdotal evidence.
5. If it were effective the company would not promote the false notion that the average individual could determine its effectivity.
6. The company's theory of how their product operates seems to be unlikely to be true. See fsol's previous post for his discussion of this.
7. A link was provided to a test report by an individual that suggested that the product was ineffective. Repeated here for convenience: http://autorepair.about.com/library/products/aafpr052002.htm
8. The EPA has tested hundreds of add on fuel saving gadgets and has found none that were effective. Many of these products were advertised in similar ways to the Tornado and made similar claims. So the Tornado marketing approach is nothing new for fraudulent products.
9. Their celebrity spokesman seems lame. He touts the fact that his radio audience convinced him of the efficacy of the product. This, as previously discussed, is crap. If he is so technically non-astute as to not understand how useless anecdotal information is for something like this is, then his value as a source of useful informatin about the Tornado is zero.
10. One of the ways to get a product tested by the EPA is to request that the EPA test the product for effectivity. This is, of course, one of the first things that a company would do that had a product that actually improved fuel economy. There is no evidence that Tornado has done this.
edited to add:
11. Companies dealing with vehicle fleets can profit enormously from even small improvements in fuel economy. No information has been provided that any of them are using this device.
FSOL & davefoc---I have just got back from many Tornado Air Mnagement Systems websites including the one I was turned onto, by a post above. This is where a mechanic by the name of Vince Ciulla shoots down the claims of the Tornado. He ran tests on three peoples vehicles and he recorded gains of only .1, and .2 ansd a minus .4 mpg. He says you are better off investing the $70 in a good tune-up.
Hmmmm. Yet at a Tornado Air Management Systems website where there were testimonials, they had testimonials from editors of car magazine(s) and Jeff Brooks, And owners that have businesses with fleets of vehicles they put them on, etc., and they all gave exact increases in gas mileage which were marked improvements (i.e., 16.8..going up to 19.2).
This thread should almost get transfered to the Paranormal forum. Why? Because just like debating things paranormal, you have scholars...you have witnesses, etc., that are both for a belief, and against that belief. Meanwhile, the outside observer (like us) can only read the anecdotal data, and try to come to some conclusion. A skeptic will generally discount any reputed valid claims and go with the more logical skeptical viewpoint.
Here is what I am going to do: They have a 30-day, no questions asked guarantee. I have both their order line and their tech line. I am going to call their tech line and tell them about Vince Ciulla. Then I will go on from there. I just might get one of these devices. I have found there are places you can get these at a discount. I need a Tornado KI-60. I found one auction website that says I can get it there for about $45. I will ask the company more about the price and where I can get these the cheapest.
But you can expect to hear more from me. I definitely want to get to the bottom of the truth regarding the Tornado. Could it just so happen to be that Vinces test vehicles just so happen to be ones that don't get marked increases? I know the vehicles he tested, so I am going to run these by the company, and see what they say. Vince said he had the OWNERS of the vehicles do the mileage checks. Hmmm. Did they know what they were doing?
Anyway...stay tuned for more. Too bad it is the weekend. I can't wait to get this show on the road.
Hmmmm. Yet at a Tornado Air Management Systems website where there were testimonials, they had testimonials from editors of car magazine(s) and Jeff Brooks, And owners that have businesses with fleets of vehicles they put them on, etc., and they all gave exact increases in gas mileage which were marked improvements (i.e., 16.8..going up to 19.2).
This thread should almost get transfered to the Paranormal forum. Why? Because just like debating things paranormal, you have scholars...you have witnesses, etc., that are both for a belief, and against that belief. Meanwhile, the outside observer (like us) can only read the anecdotal data, and try to come to some conclusion. A skeptic will generally discount any reputed valid claims and go with the more logical skeptical viewpoint.
Here is what I am going to do: They have a 30-day, no questions asked guarantee. I have both their order line and their tech line. I am going to call their tech line and tell them about Vince Ciulla. Then I will go on from there. I just might get one of these devices. I have found there are places you can get these at a discount. I need a Tornado KI-60. I found one auction website that says I can get it there for about $45. I will ask the company more about the price and where I can get these the cheapest.
But you can expect to hear more from me. I definitely want to get to the bottom of the truth regarding the Tornado. Could it just so happen to be that Vinces test vehicles just so happen to be ones that don't get marked increases? I know the vehicles he tested, so I am going to run these by the company, and see what they say. Vince said he had the OWNERS of the vehicles do the mileage checks. Hmmm. Did they know what they were doing?
Anyway...stay tuned for more. Too bad it is the weekend. I can't wait to get this show on the road.
davefoc
Philosopher
Iamme,
I look forward to what you find out. I think none of us know for sure that the product is useless and I for one have enjoyed your open mind concerning it.
I look forward to what you find out. I think none of us know for sure that the product is useless and I for one have enjoyed your open mind concerning it.
lamme,
Do the Tornado people suggest installing two of their product instead of just one (possible on some fuel injected vehicles)?
See the Hiclone web site . If it's mentioned here, then it surprises me that it isn't mentioned on the Tornado web site.
Of the "road test" results they show, two of the road tests show greater than 50% improvement in fuel economy!
_Q_
Do the Tornado people suggest installing two of their product instead of just one (possible on some fuel injected vehicles)?
See the Hiclone web site . If it's mentioned here, then it surprises me that it isn't mentioned on the Tornado web site.
Of the "road test" results they show, two of the road tests show greater than 50% improvement in fuel economy!
_Q_
teddygrahams
Critical Thinker
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2001
- Messages
- 276
_Q_ said:
The second one will make a turbocharger activate 600RPM earlier...
And the magnets will de-clusterize the gasoline... for a few hours.
davefoc & fsol---I have been thinking about HOW the Tornado can work, this morning. When I talk to those people, I want to find out if they have conducted tests on cars that are either new, or have engines that have been tuned up or rebuilt. This may be a better indicator of true performance by the Tornado, than it would be on some vehicle whose engine was not operating optimally.
It's conceivably possible in theory that even though the Tornado appears to be a 'restrictor'...that it really isn't. Consider the fact that the intake area in front of the carburetor is larger than the venturi areas of the carb itself. The air filter area is quite a bit larger. The fresh air intake hose is also.
It's possible that air speed is increased by the Tornado as claimed. (I'll call it the wind tunnel effect.) It's also possible I suppose, that the swirling action can stay this way around some turns in the area of the carburetor. Just suppose this part is true so far.
It may be possible that for some reasons we don't know, either more gas is fully burned in the chamber, or, this device acts like some 'lean burner'. That is why I want to know if tests are done on recvently tuned up engines, rebuilt engines, new cars, etc.
Suppose that the Tornado seems to correct over rich carburetion due to improper jetting or a vehicle in need of a tuneup. If some device like the Tornado turns out to be some sort of compensator for over rich conditions, that could be corrected in some other manner...is it so terrible that one pay $45-70 or so in order to get better gas mileage?...with some device any person can install in a few minutes?
There are probvably a lot of vehicles out there on the road which are not running at peak efficiency. If the Tornado some how causes a more proper mixture and or creates better firing conditions...is this such a bad thing that people buy such a device? Perhaps not.
But I also want to find out from the company what they have to say regarding emmisions, before and after. IF the tornado gains fuel efficiency AND horsepower...the emmissions HAVE TO go down, I do believe.
If they don't, i would have to suspext that the Tornado simply draws in more fuel mixture per the amount of throttle you are giving it. This then could also explain why people FEEL like there is a gain in horsepower: They got used to their gas pedal positioning at given speeds. if the car suddenly goes faster at that same given position, they would asume the car became more powerful, when in actuality, more fuel mixture is being drawn in at the same pedal setting due to the windtunnel effect of the Tornado.
Anyway, I plan on getting ahold of the company tomorrow.
It's conceivably possible in theory that even though the Tornado appears to be a 'restrictor'...that it really isn't. Consider the fact that the intake area in front of the carburetor is larger than the venturi areas of the carb itself. The air filter area is quite a bit larger. The fresh air intake hose is also.
It's possible that air speed is increased by the Tornado as claimed. (I'll call it the wind tunnel effect.) It's also possible I suppose, that the swirling action can stay this way around some turns in the area of the carburetor. Just suppose this part is true so far.
It may be possible that for some reasons we don't know, either more gas is fully burned in the chamber, or, this device acts like some 'lean burner'. That is why I want to know if tests are done on recvently tuned up engines, rebuilt engines, new cars, etc.
Suppose that the Tornado seems to correct over rich carburetion due to improper jetting or a vehicle in need of a tuneup. If some device like the Tornado turns out to be some sort of compensator for over rich conditions, that could be corrected in some other manner...is it so terrible that one pay $45-70 or so in order to get better gas mileage?...with some device any person can install in a few minutes?
There are probvably a lot of vehicles out there on the road which are not running at peak efficiency. If the Tornado some how causes a more proper mixture and or creates better firing conditions...is this such a bad thing that people buy such a device? Perhaps not.
But I also want to find out from the company what they have to say regarding emmisions, before and after. IF the tornado gains fuel efficiency AND horsepower...the emmissions HAVE TO go down, I do believe.
If they don't, i would have to suspext that the Tornado simply draws in more fuel mixture per the amount of throttle you are giving it. This then could also explain why people FEEL like there is a gain in horsepower: They got used to their gas pedal positioning at given speeds. if the car suddenly goes faster at that same given position, they would asume the car became more powerful, when in actuality, more fuel mixture is being drawn in at the same pedal setting due to the windtunnel effect of the Tornado.
Anyway, I plan on getting ahold of the company tomorrow.