Lexus IS Forum banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
81 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Haha, I know this shiet pisses a LOT of peeps off. The last topic on this was locked by God, and the ONLY answers people were giving as to why it doesn't work was "use your brain and think about it".

But trying to play devil's advocate:

The Mazda 6's V6 uses a similar idea in their intake runners to help promote a better fuel/air mixture in the combustion chamber and extract more efficiency.

There are vanes cast into the manifold to help promote swirl, which is the exact premise behind products like the Tornado and Spiralmax.

Before everyone and their grandma jumps down my throat, I DON'T think these particular designs will work well w/ our application since just looking at them tells you that they are pretty resitrictive. Besides, to make something like this work for our cars, you'd need one for each runner, not the one gay-ass unit that's supposed to be attached before the throttle body.

Haha, flame away. It's been awhile.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18 Posts
mhgsx - i do appreciate the fact that someone on this forum understands that "use your brain", and "do a search on retarded", are not answers to the question of why this is such a crappy product. This forum is supposedly for the enrichment of newbies, and experts alike, but I cant seem to get an intelligent answer (even when i do a search), on exactly what losses or gains are to be had from this product. Perhaps the reason this question keeps coming up is that no one seems to be able to provide a straight answer?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,157 Posts
i am getting sick of this topic, and answering this, but without me wasting too much of anyones time, lets put this in perspective (aside from the fact that i know people that have dynoed with it and lost power)

if i put something inline with your intake system that did not allow air to flow at a rate or path that was most beneficial, do you think that restriction would hinder or help horsepower?

do you know why exhaust systems that use mandrel bends and smooth transistions make more power than crimp bent? because of flow, a properly design intake manifold could have a swirling effect polished into it, or cast into it, but it would be a long transition, over 1/2 or more of a runner, and it would be specific to each cylinders runner, as well as it being only cast into the outter edge of the runner, it would not be an abrupt short transition that occurs before the throttle body (or right after) and that sits inside the intake tract, basically acting as a restrictor. do you all know what a restrictor plate is in nascar? well the tornado is the same damn thing, only it causes more of a power loss (relatively) than nascars restrictor plate.

oh, and poopoo, you need to do a search on the word retarded, it'll tell you exactly what questions not to ask, as every other newb has already asked them 44 times before you. 90% your questions are not unique, they serve no positive purpose, and have been thought of and asked by many many people long before you even knew that the IS existed.


that is all, if you can't understand that, you are just being stubborn, not trying to learn

one more thing, retarded now this will come up in the search as well :D

-gte



Mhgsx said:
Haha, I know this shiet pisses a LOT of peeps off. The last topic on this was locked by God, and the ONLY answers people were giving as to why it doesn't work was "use your brain and think about it".

But trying to play devil's advocate:



poopoo said:
mhgsx - i do appreciate the fact that someone on this forum understands that "use your brain", and "do a search on retarded", are not answers to the question of why this is such a crappy product. This forum is supposedly for the enrichment of newbies, and experts alike, but I cant seem to get an intelligent answer (even when i do a search), on exactly what losses or gains are to be had from this product. Perhaps the reason this question keeps coming up is that no one seems to be able to provide a straight answer?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
18 Posts
thank you for a straight answer Is300gte. But, how can a question serve no positive purpose to a newbie to this forum, when that question has never been answered in such detail? And by the way, when you were first hearing about the IS, i was probably already on the waiting list.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,168 Posts
popolo said:
And by the way, when you were first hearing about the IS, i was probably already on the waiting list.
What the hell does this have to do with anything? Are you more special because you knew about the car first? Please tell us when you were on the waiting list for the car, as a whole lot of us were on this site before the car even had an official name for the USDM.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,157 Posts
that waiting list thing is pretty doubtful, you'd be suprised, do some more searching on me if you think i'm out of the loop or whatever.

as for the forum, i have answered that question before, albeit not in the exact same words, but close enough. maybe it isn't coming up in the search, when using that function, if not, i appologize, and just consider what i wrote the new answer that will hopefully come up in this new version of php that the site has received.
hopefully all animosity is squashed, and questions have been answered

-gte






popolo said:
thank you for a straight answer Is300gte. But, how can a question serve no positive purpose to a newbie to this forum, when that question has never been answered in such detail? And by the way, when you were first hearing about the IS, i was probably already on the waiting list.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
81 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Devil's advocate question #2:

Ok, those products ARE a restriction and will NOT help in extracting more HP.

But, since we know the ecu can make corrections to the air/fuel ratio, and the restriction causes less air to be available for combustion, wouldn't their claim of improved gas mileage be correct???

Afterall the o2 sensors will read very rich, thereby forcing the ecu to cut back on injector pulse to lower the amount of fuel. And less fuel used should equate to more mileage per gallon, right??

Yes, this shiet will NEVER stop. haha :crazy:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,168 Posts
mhgsx said:
Devil's advocate question #2:

Ok, those products ARE a restriction and will NOT help in extracting more HP.

But, since we know the ecu can make corrections to the air/fuel ratio, and the restriction causes less air to be available for combustion, wouldn't their claim of improved gas mileage be correct???

Afterall the o2 sensors will read very rich, thereby forcing the ecu to cut back on injector pulse to lower the amount of fuel. And less fuel used should equate to more mileage per gallon, right??

Yes, this shiet will NEVER stop. haha :crazy:
This has been answered before, probably multiple times.

The answer is that IF you see better MPG, the most likely reason is that you're doing so because of what you said, as well as making less power.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
416 Posts
mhgsx said:
But trying to play devil's advocate:

The Mazda 6's V6 uses a similar idea in their intake runners to help promote a better fuel/air mixture in the combustion chamber and extract more efficiency.

There are vanes cast into the manifold to help promote swirl, which is the exact premise behind products like the Tornado and Spiralmax.

Before everyone and their grandma jumps down my throat, I DON'T think these particular designs will work well w/ our application since just looking at them tells you that they are pretty resitrictive. Besides, to make something like this work for our cars, you'd need one for each runner, not the one gay-ass unit that's supposed to be attached before the throttle body.
The rationale in your last paragraph as to why products such as the Tornado and Spiralmax will not work is correct. There are three problems:

1. Placement of the device ahead of the manifold, instead of in each intake runner...
2. The added restriction from failing to compensate with intake piping diameter for the added restriction of this device, and...
3. The ridiculous volume of air between the swirl generator and the combustion chamber itself.

Problems 1 and 2 are obvious. Problem #3 stems from the fact that although air movement through the throttle body and before can be roughly characterized as a continuous flow, air movement through each individual runner is more stacatto, and hence swirl generated by the device should be pulled into the cylinder immediately after being swirtled by the device, as opposed to losing its energy in move-stop-states waiting for several cycles to actually make it into the cylinder. This of course is completely dependent on the displacement (aspiration volume) of each cylinder and how much volume lies in the intake runners between that and the swirl device. The obvious conclusion as to the best place swirl generators should be? As close to the cylinder as possible.

But then again, decent swirl is already achieved in most cars with chamber and piston face design. This is the case with the IS300.

But a intake runner-located swirl generator might work wonders with a large-displacement hemi-type chamber design.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
About this Discussion
9 Replies
6 Participants
Off-TRAC
Lexus IS Forum
Community dedicated to Lexus IS Enthusiasts. Come in and enjoy our articles, galleries and information on aftermarket parts for the IS300, IS250, IS350.
Full Forum Listing
Top