Acura MDX SUV Forums banner

1 - 3 of 3 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
235 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
in response to jon from the thread on "supercharger for the MDX..."

i originally bought the Tornado about a year ago for my toyota sequoia (which i traded in for my MDX) and because it also fit in my MDX, i decided to install it.

why did i buy it? because the principal made a heck of alot of sense to me. the principal of creating a vortex makes a big difference in alot of applications, whether it involves air or water.

does it work? i have not objectively measured the effects via dynomometer. any mpg observations or changes in acceleration/throttle response are not reliable as there are just too many variables that i cannot control- unless there was a clear difference.
i have not had the motivation to try and determine the differences by removing the tornado either.
on other threads on this topic the general concensus is that the Tornado does not work-this conclusion is from testimonials (these are of minimal value) and articles that try to measure the effects more objectively (these are of greater value).

would i recommend the Tornado? no

do i still consider the principle of creating a vortex beneficial? yes

will i leave it in my MDX? yes

regards,

chris

p.s.-on a thread discussing the performance air filters known as "green filters" this company has an optional attachment that is also designed to create a swirling effect (vortex) to the incoming air-very interesting!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
738 Posts
Another Principle

If creating a vortex in the airflow of piped air produced a significant flow increase, would this simple principle not have already been applied to all piped airflow technologies in every industrial, commercial and home use as well? Or is it an undiscovered technology? My doubts are based on the flaw of the water bottle test model demonstration used in the commercial.

The upside down 2 liter bottle of water slowly burping out the water compared to a whirlpool effect allowing faster flow is not compatible with either water through a pipe or the air in the intake system of an engine. In the bottle model, the amount of water flowing out is directly correlated to the amount of air that can get in. The air can't get in if the bottle mouth is obstructed with water. When a vortex is created, their is clear air passage up through the center. If we where to cut the bottom of the plastic bottle off first, cap it and fill it with water, then turn it upside down and open the cap, releasing the water, I'm sure it would flow faster than a sealed bottle with a vortex.

The vortex effect needs to be tested in a pass-through system rather than in an upside-down bottle. I know that some hot rod engine tuners create swirl grooves in the intake headers (did that myself once as part of a porting and polishing job) to create a vortex in the manifold and head passages. But this was not to increase airflow, but rather to create non-restrictive turbulence to enhance air/fuel mixing. With the advent of fine-spray fuel injectors, this practice became obsolete.

From my reading of blue-printing articles (designing custom performance engines) flow testing of swirl-grooved headers on a bench test machine did not significantly alter intake performance. I was more the size and shape of the air passages.

Please do not regard my comments as any form of criticism toward those who are using the Tornado product. I only desire to share my understanding of the concept. Chris, don't take offense, more power to you if you like it!

I too pulled out my credit card and while waiting for the othe end of the 800 number to answer, I thought, wait a minute, something's missing here.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,711 Posts
BINGO!

A+ Bruce! You must've paid attention in science class! I used to teach high school physics, and one of the most enjoyable things I'd do is have the kids "debunk" obviously unscientific advertising -- you would have gotten 100% if you were in my class.

The problem with the "tornado in a bottle" is, as you state, air has to replace the water for the bottle to drain. A pipe (or intake manifold) has no such problem, as there is a pressure gradient DRIVING the flow.

If anybody thinks that GM, Honda, Merceded, BMW, Nissan, Ford, etc ALL would miss an opportunity to improve performance/economy...

TheyCallMeBruce said:
If creating a vortex in the airflow of piped air produced a significant flow increase, would this simple principle not have already been applied to all piped airflow technologies in every industrial, commercial and home use as well? Or is it an undiscovered technology? My doubts are based on the flaw of the water bottle test model demonstration used in the commercial.

The upside down 2 liter bottle of water slowly burping out the water compared to a whirlpool effect allowing faster flow is not compatible with either water through a pipe or the air in the intake system of an engine. In the bottle model, the amount of water flowing out is directly correlated to the amount of air that can get in. The air can't get in if the bottle mouth is obstructed with water. When a vortex is created, their is clear air passage up through the center. If we where to cut the bottom of the plastic bottle off first, cap it and fill it with water, then turn it upside down and open the cap, releasing the water, I'm sure it would flow faster than a sealed bottle with a vortex.

The vortex effect needs to be tested in a pass-through system rather than in an upside-down bottle. I know that some hot rod engine tuners create swirl grooves in the intake headers (did that myself once as part of a porting and polishing job) to create a vortex in the manifold and head passages. But this was not to increase airflow, but rather to create non-restrictive turbulence to enhance air/fuel mixing. With the advent of fine-spray fuel injectors, this practice became obsolete.

From my reading of blue-printing articles (designing custom performance engines) flow testing of swirl-grooved headers on a bench test machine did not significantly alter intake performance. I was more the size and shape of the air passages.

Please do not regard my comments as any form of criticism toward those who are using the Tornado product. I only desire to share my understanding of the concept. Chris, don't take offense, more power to you if you like it!

I too pulled out my credit card and while waiting for the othe end of the 800 number to answer, I thought, wait a minute, something's missing here.
 
1 - 3 of 3 Posts
Top