Fabrik8

I've heard some very experienced race engine designers rip big holes in the way those work. There is a proper place to develop swirl, and in the intake isn't the right place. You can actually really disturb the flow into the engine, and reduce the amount of cylinder filling with any type of vortex device. You want nice laminar flow into the intake runners, and the Tornado-type devices give a lot of disturbed flow and can make stagnant flow pockets where air doesn't move. Not so good. I'm sure there are some engines that can be helped with a vortex generator; there are probably some combinations of factors that would work out for thebetter, but for most engines you're destroying a lot of very careful flow engineering. This is different from having swirl in the individual runners, which is often very good for atomization and cylinder filling. Swirl can be good or it can be bad, depending on where it is. This isn't luck, it's physics.

Here's something to think about.
One of the guys here did a interesting weekend experiment to test a similar theory out. He took a bucket, punched out 4 holes in the bottom, and put 4 pipe fittings (1" or something around there, I don't remember) in a square pattern on the bottom of the bucket, along with about a foot of pipe on each one. He filled up the bucket, and as he was doing that, timed how long it took to fill another bucket placed underneath that one (water draining through the pipes). He then took one of the propeller-type paint stirrers (on a drill) and did the fill-and-time again. It took measurably longer to fill the bottom bucket with the vortex in the top bucket.. Very interesting. Disturbing the flow into the inlet of the pipes had a visible effect. Draw your own conclusions..

94accord

Hmm.....that is interesting. Well, now that this has been discussed, i don't suggest that anyone buy this crap for their car unless you're that damn skeptical and want to prove everbody wrong, or you just want to waste your money. But, i was doing some forum research and they said that this device had been tested on myth busters, has anyone seen it?

BMW

There has actually been dyno proven results that state a loss in 1hp to the flywheel on certain applications. You are better off just buying an K&N air filter for better performance and gas mileage.

JStab

i assume you will be returning yours

I<3Strippers!

yeah ive seen it, i belive they said that its actully very bad, and under extreme conditions it can break apart and go into the engine. they also said that it does disrupt the air flow, and since like 99% of the gas is burnt youd only get a 1% increase in mpg. im pretty sure that caps it off

Fabrik8

I'm still of the opinion that if they were effective, something like that would be OEM on most cars. There is a lot of time, money, and resources into the hyper competitive world of fuel economy; anything that proves to have cheap efficiency gains is usually adopted across the board like wildfire. The only thing I can think of that comes close is the tumble generator butterflies in Suby engines, but again those are in the plenum runners, not the intake or manifold body. They are variable also. I think the coolest thing I've seen is on the Yamaha R6 (I'm sure it's not the only one); there are vacuum operated constant velocity valves that change the cross sectional area of the runners at low/no vacuum so the same amount of intake air has greater velocity.

mstr2

my brother's friend had one. after a couple months it broke and pieces got sucked into his intake and such, totally screwed his engine. DON'T BUY IT

94accord

never bought it.

damn, i know he was pissed.

2lateJr.

he should sue

mstr2

you can't. If you read their disclaimer, and his was from turbonator.com i think, it says that they can not be held responsible for any damage or wear to the buyer's engine that the turbonator causes, although they claim its durable and will not break.