Does the tornado booster really work?

I don't know for myself, but I've read they're a bunch of BS. (I believe for the exact reason you mention)

That's the problem with "customer testimonials". The customer can claim anything and it does not have to be proven by the manufacturer. Advertisers know that testimonials catch our attention. Little do we know it's mostly because of that loophole that they use so many testimonials.

Plus, anyone who can turn a quarter cent worth of metal in to a $50 miracle device makes me a little skeptical.

I believe if there was an advantage to twisting the air through the intake, then the manufacturer would deign it in. Is there a manufacturer who does so? (I don't know... but I've never heard of one)

MAYBE a teeny, tiny bit on a carburetor car. On a modern fuel-injected engine, with computer modeled air flow and mass air flow sensors and such, screwing with the air flow could make things MUCH worse.

Basically, it's snake oil.

if you believe that then i am selling an electronic gadget that you put on the fuel line that will get you double the gas mileage on your car.. you simply wrap the wire around the fuel line and it picks up electrons from the atmosphere and it is self energizing... it boost the gas up so much that if you fill your tank up once a week, you can now get two weeks of driving on one tank of gas.. the cost it $29.95 and no batteries are required and free shipping....if you are interested please post your good email address on this newsgroup.... and if someone tries to sell you the brooklyn bridge, well dont buy it as i will be selling it next week.....

The Tornado does not work..plain and simple. First, lets examine the obvious. If such a cheap device could give even a 2% increase in fuel economy the auto makers would pounce on it. Imagine meeting CAFE standards without having to spend millions in R&D. Obviously, since better fuel economy is in their interest and since they show NO interest in this device, one can surmise that they don't believe it works.

Second, with modern fuel injection, mixing problems are a thing of the past. In a carb set up, fuel is streamed in a course squirt from the jets into the venturies. There it mixes with the intake air and atomizes before being drawn into the combustion chamber. Long plenums, rough surfaces inside the manifold and polished intake ports all help to mix the gas/fuel mixture better so that it burns with greater efficiency. In such a case, a Tornado device "might" help unless it restricted air flow in which case it would reduce power rather than boost it. However, in the case of modern engines with electronic fuel management and port injection, the gas is as atomized as it is ever going to get. And the air flow is monitored to get the ideal fuel/air ratio. Thus, the Tornado won't to squat.

Third, have you ever heard of any racers using this device? I didn't think so. The reason is plain and simple. In a game where winning is measured in thousandths of seconds and where the slightest edge can mean the difference between taking home the money or going broke, these guys use what works and junk the rest. Since they don't use the Tornado, you can again surmise that it doesn't work.

Last but not least, have you ever wondered why the makers of the Tornado don't have lab tests to back up their product? I don't mean guys they hire to do biased, a-priori investigations but rather independent, nationally recognized labs such at those run by Consumer Reports or one of the automakers? It's because they won't get the positive results they need to sell the product. In a controlled averment where human input is removed, the Tornado just won't work...period. So you ask, why do some "satisfied customers" report such an improvement? Well, my guess is they subconsciously drive better because they are so intent on seeing what improvement they can gain through this device. If you pay attention to your driving and drive smarter, you will see an easy 2% increase in fuel economy, perhaps even as much as 10%.

So, in conclusion, the Tornado does not work. Save your money. Or, send your money to me. I do work but I get paid far too little and could use more money. I won't help your gas mileage any nor will I make your car run better but shoot, I will spend your money with the same enthusiasm the guys at Tornado do and I'll not lie to you to get it.

I think the Tornado thing really works for what it was designed to do. It enriches the people who sell it.

As far as improving gas mileage or efficiency, I doubt it. Turbulent does not flow as smoothly as air free of turbulence. Some cylinders would get air that has more turbulence than others. This would really mess things up. The passageways in intake manifolds and cylinder heads are designed to get air in the cylinder. Because the design of every engine is different, the makers of the Tornado would be hard put make a general design work with every engine.

Plus if it were that easy, the automakers would put it in their intake manifolds already.

So don't waster your money.

Jeff

Glad to hear the tornado is a bust. I don't need to be spending any more money anyway. Now my question will take a different turn...(haha a pun) Anyways, the tornado idea might have some implications. You know that when you tie two 2 liter bottles open end to open end and fill one with water... You can create a tornado in the water. To me it looks like the effect is optimizing the flow of water to the other bottle. If you were to take the same concept and apply it to... say...the gas line... Would the gas reach the motor at a faster rate than an open tube? I am only a student in working with cars now...Go figure my first repair job would the heater core of a 92 T-Bird. Just wondering, Darrenoid

It depends on the situation. If you are displacing air/liquid like in the cheesy bottle demo then yes, a swirling would be better as it will allow air to displace the liquid in the top container as its able to equalize through the middle if the swirl.

In a closed pipeline, I imagine you want the flow as smooth as possible with no current/eddies in it to compensate for friction against the walls of the tube.

As for why you would want "more gas" to get the the engine. The fuel system of a vehicle now doesn't use all the available flow from the gas line anyways. Most vehicles return the extra flow to the tank via a return line.

Those infomercials sure get people confused sometimes. You just need to step back and think "How will this claim make my engine more efficient".

Just my .02

-Dje

I'd doubt it. In modern cars, the fuel is already being pumped by a electric fuel pump in the tank, with a head pressure of about 35-40 PSI in most cases. Optimizing flow wouldn't help very much there.

-lee

1) It doesn't matter. More than enough gas reaches the engine that this is not a concern (the gas pump gets enough gas to the engine). 2) The "tornado effect" when you move the fluid from one bottle to other is because air can move freely (because the water in the necks of the bottles is along the sides -- so rising air doesn't get in the way of the water coming down) and because the movement of the water is more orderly than if you just turned the water bottle upside down.

This is a great advertising ploy. But it is exactly opposite of what is supposed to do in the engine: It makes the flow of water orderly and prevents the water and air from mixing well.

Jeff

I am only a student in

It is a scam. Do not waste your money.

Ed

Darrenoid wrote:

If this is some sort of powered fan that forces more air into the fuel chambers then it will indeed give you more 'power' under certain conditions. If it is just a windmill that is set spinning by the airflow then it will restrict the airflow and have an opposite effect.

No it would not. In the soda bottle example, gravity is pulling the water down and the swirl helps to overcome the natural vacuum created by the departing water on top. The vortex of the swirl permits air to rise up as it is displaced below thus permitting the water to pass between the two bottles without all of the usual gurgling and bubbling that disrupts the flow and slows the process. Fuel pumps put positive pressure on the line so no transfer of air back through the fuel line is necessary or desired. Simply put, the soda bottle example is a two-way transfer and the swirl makes it possible. The fuel line in a car is a one-way line and no swirl is required. The positive pressure model will always transfer more fuel per minute and is considerably more efficient.

It's not for the fuel line, but the air intake. OTOH, the same applies. IF the engine was generating very low pressure, it would help, but it isn't. The engine will pull in as much air as it needs - that's simple physics.

Barring insufficient airflow. which the car is generously designed to have to begin with, it will always work as well as possible.

The original poster switched concepts and wondered if a Tornado like device would work in the fuel line, hence my second post. Confusing isn't it?

Thanks for all the input everyone... Althought like many of you said, it really would be pointless to make the gas go any faster to the motor. It sounded good at the time when I thought of it... Thanks, Darrenoid