Look what came out of my intake...

[fordktpjoe]

Mythbusters did a show on these things a year or so back..... BUSTED.

But hey, if it makes ya feel good....do it.

 

[triumphrider-1]

Can you PROVE they don't work? Link please!

http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/1802932.html

 

[Ranger Dave (B25)]

I'd say that's the final word...

 

[OldRedB2_84]

if u want to talk about restricting the air flow take a look inside the air intake of a stock 89 2.9. it comes stock with a spring inside and you can't tell me that doesn't stop airflow

Im pretty sure that spring is there to keep the intake hose from collapsing under w.o.t.

 

[Skid Vicious]

That is right, and IF it was a scam, they would have been removed from the shelves by now. Autozone, JCwhitney is still selling them.

riiiiight. and we all know that AZ and JC are so conerned with not selling products that don't live up to their hype......
For the record, I bought a tornado, used it for a month and noticed NO change in MPG's. I returned it. I also put Zmax in my car with no noticeable results. I returned that also. I didn't bother to try the fitch fuel catalyst as I had learned my lesson at this point. "A fool and his money are soon parted".
Other scam products-
A company is doing business as incrediblefuelsavings.com, mpgfreedom.com, Fuel Freedom International, etc. and markets a product called MPG-Caps.
ignition devices
liquid injection
fuel line devices, heating or cooling.

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/edu/pubs/consumer/alerts/alt095.shtm

Gas-Saving Products: Proceed with Caution
Gas prices are up, causing many drivers to look for ways to improve fuel efficiency. Although there are practical steps you can take to increase gas mileage, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) suggests that you proceed with caution when you consider buying automotive devices or oil and gas additives based on gas-saving claims. The FTC says that even for the few products that have been found to work, the savings to consumers have been small.

According to the FTC, it's wise for drivers to be skeptical of the following kinds of advertising claims:

"This gas-saving product improves fuel economy by 20 percent."
Claims usually tout savings ranging from 12 to 25 percent. However, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has evaluated or tested more than 100 alleged gas-saving devices and has not found any product that significantly improves gas mileage. In fact, some such products may damage a car's engine or cause substantial increases in exhaust emissions.

The products on the market that claim to save gas fall into clearly defined categories. Although the EPA has not tested or evaluated every product, it has tried to examine at least one product in each category. Check http://www.epa.gov/otaq/consumer/devicefs.pdf for category descriptions and product names of devices tested by the EPA.

"After installing your product on my car, I got an extra 4 miles [6.4 kilometers] per gallon [3.8 liters]."
Many ads feature glowing testimonials by satisfied customers. Yet, few consumers have the ability or the equipment to test for precise changes in gas mileage after installing a device or using a product that claims to save gas. Among the many variables that affect fuel consumption are traffic, road and weather conditions, and the car's condition.

Take the example of the consumer who sent a letter to a company praising its purported gas-saving product. At the time the product was installed, the consumer had received a complete engine tune-up - a fact not mentioned in the letter. The entire increase in gas mileage attributed to the product may well have been the result of the tune-up alone. But other consumers couldn't have known that from the ad.

"This gas-saving device is approved by the federal government."
No government agency endorses gas-saving products for cars. The most that can be claimed in advertising is that the EPA has reached certain conclusions about possible gas savings by testing the product or by evaluating the manufacturer's own test data. If the seller claims that its product has been evaluated by the EPA, ask for a copy of the EPA report, or check www.epa.gov for information. In some instances, false claims of EPA testing or approval have been made.

 

[Skid Vicious]

Can you PROVE they don't work? Link please!

I can flap my arms real fast and attain flight. Can you prove that I can't?
This is the classic example of a burden of proof (ad ignorantiam) or appeal to ignorance argument. Burden of Proof is a fallacy in which the burden of proof is placed on the wrong side. For example, in American law a person is assumed to be innocent until proven guilty (hence the burden of proof is on the prosecution)
The responsibility to prove they DO work is on the one who is making the claim.

 

[turbo cat]

those things work im telling ya..they'd be great for muddling limes for your drink!

 

[Wicked_Sludge]

what skid is trying to say is lack of proof that it doesnt work isnt proof that it does work.

but it works both ways in this case.

ive got two (count 'em TWO) tornados. one in the ranger that i picked up for $5 at a garage sale ("eh, why not?" i said), and one for the escort that i got for free after removing it during a used vehicle inspection. granted, the escort only has a few months of fuel economy logging with the tornado...but the ranger has had several years both with and without the tornado. net effect on mileage: zip. since i didnt LOOSE any economy, both tornados are still in there to this day. maybe they will "kick in" here shortly and ill start getting crazy MPG figures from both vehicles

note that im not saying they DONT work. im just saying that if they do, the improvement is immeasurable on a street driven vehicle. maybe if this was a test track under perfectly controlled conditions....but i dont have the resources for that kind of test.

 

[Psychopete]

Im pretty sure that spring is there to keep the intake hose from collapsing under w.o.t.

Yup (or if the air filter gets really dirty). And not an issue as far as air flow, ran the stock intake tube w/ an aftermarket cam in my 2.9L.

Pete

 

[kamps989]

oddly enough with that gone and the K&N installed my check engine light FINALLY turned off.

 

[Bob Ayers]

Can you PROVE they don't work? Link please!

Here ya go......It was also posted previously!!!

http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/1802932.html?page=1

 

[04 EDGE]

Here ya go......It was also posted previously!!!

http://www.popularmechanics.com/automotive/new_cars/1802932.html?page=1

i'm going to get one tomorrow.

 

[Plum Ranger XLT]

I used one of those Tornado inserts in the 1995 Ranger I used to have and it DID NOT work and that was the worst $80.00 I spent on anything.

 

[Will]

So you put that swirly thing in the intake.

After the plenum the air has to go into 6 intakes.

How does the swirl know to breakup into 6 little swirls?

It doesn't. That thing is stupid.

You want the swirl to occur IN THE COMBUSTION CHAMBER.

That thing is shit. A combustion chamber designed to swirl the charge air is not shit. That thing does not swirl the charge air.

 

[Mechanickid]

mmmm swirly air in the chamber.... can you say "HEMI" ?