i was wondering if you guys have heard anything about the tornado and does it work and what do you think about it

Typically, if it sounds too good to be true, it is.

_________________
The Old Goat '83 D150 225-2

AKA Ice Titan

Tornado is just like all the rest of the "fuel saver" gadgets: Complete crâp. At best all they do is lighten your wallet.

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

If indeed there is some type of "turbo action" above the throttle plate-the shaft and plates are going to negate it. I see now that someone is making something similar that goes between the bottom of the carb and the intake manifold. Don't know if that would be any more effective or just more snake oil. I think a good tune is probably going to get the best results. Mike

_________________
Good gun control is hitting your target repeatedly

I have seen two under slant carbs on 80's trucks

_________________
'72 Duster 198 stock cam, 3:23's Hookers on jack stands for 8 years in the driveway
'79 Maxivan 360 Offy Qjet Comp RV cam/rusting in the driveway.
93 D350 160HP Cummins Auto Dually Clubcab needs a injector pump
2005 Golden Couch Buick

Under-carb setups have the potential,(much better than a Tornado) to make a slight increase in power. But here's the deal:
A motor like our slant six has the intake ports in a "reverse-triplet" formation. You have an E-I-E-I-E-I-I-E-I-E-I-E port setup. Therefore, if the air is circulating, say clockwise, and it benifits 3 cylinders, it will actually hurt flow to the other 3. No good way around it. Flow is controlled by the design of the airflow path from the airhorn all the way to the valve seat. And $50 won't make up for nostalgic engineering. The best way to get power and economy from any motor is to increase volumetric efficiency. Like was said before, a good tune-up will do wonders.
When it comes to aftermarket stuff just remember: Fuel burns best when it's a fog, not a mist. If what your looking at can do it, it's worth at least looking at.

_________________
225 Cubic Inches of Iron-Head American Muscle

225 bored .040 /.100 off block, Schneider Cam 224@.050~ .480 lift - Stock valves, blended bowls, Offenhauser intake with 500 Edelbrock carb

The EPA tested a device like that in the 1980s; the one they tried didn't work.

_________________
"Mad Scientist" Matt Cramer
'66 Dart - turbocharged 225
My blog - Mad Scientist Matt's Lair

Didn't Myth busters do a show on all the fuel line magnets and airhorn beenies and such? Thought I heard something about that.

I watched the Tail gate down/Tail gate up episode. Chortle.

Back in the 60's my dad was busy playing mad scientist with a Poly. He melted the engine down with a fuel preheat scheme. Saved Lots of money there.
With fuel injection, some new(er) cars are successfully utilizing fuel preheat. The fuel is kept at much higher pressures though, and there are computers controlling what's going on.

CJ

_________________
Part of Tyrde-Browne Racing

I put one on my wifes 01 stratus and it seemed to get up and go much better but it only saw 1 to 2 mpg increase. Im testing it buy pulling it out and then reinstalling it to see the differance with 4 to 6 tanks of fuel for each setup. its almost time to put it back in.

_________________
it's like a vw, sounds like a million miles an hour but goes really slow. (for now)

The amount of data that would be required to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that these things work is too great and time consuming to gather. I've gathered a sufficient amount on 87 and 93 octane gas to be comfortable in saying 87 is better suited for my car, both mechanically and financially. But like all such claims, these devices don't rely on empirical data. There are too many mitigating factors that could affect how the engine operates. Driving practices, weather, maintenance, fuel additives.

_________________
The Old Goat '83 D150 225-2

AKA Ice Titan

I think the effects of these things is more mental than physical. If ya convince yoursef that it works, it has done it's job.

_________________
Official Cookie and Mater Tormentor.

KRC performance did some testing of throttle body spacers with the spiral grooving on late model Magnum V8 engines. Their conclusion was that they were worthless on a 5.2/5.9 because the configuration of the manifold negated any induced swirling. They said that there *might* be a very small improvement with the 4.7L engine which has a completely different manifold design. Of course none of this has any bearing on the slant since it is nothing like either of the V8's tested. Everybody's looking for the magic pill to unlock all the wasted mileage and horsepower but it really doesn't exist.

_________________
David Kight
'62 Valiant Signet, White
'98 Dodge Dakota
'06 Jeep Liberty

Growing older is unavoidable but growing up is strictly optional.

We did once install a "spiral spacer" on a 6-cylinder jeep. It did actually make a small difference.......probably due to the shape and design of the intake/ and ports. Was it worth $110.00????? probably not. It was a customers ride, and he wanted it done.

_________________
225 Cubic Inches of Iron-Head American Muscle

225 bored .040 /.100 off block, Schneider Cam 224@.050~ .480 lift - Stock valves, blended bowls, Offenhauser intake with 500 Edelbrock carb

i have not use on on my slant six i am using it on my daily dirver which is a 89 240sx nissan i think that you would mostly see a different drive at fast speed because you got more air going to the engine and i only pay like $25 for mine not 60 i will most like see a different with a cool air intake i am still working on my 74 duster doing body work