K&N WORKS, TORNADO DOES NOT!! Popular Mechanics dyono tested a vehicle with the Tornado and without. The Tornado resulted in an 11HP DROP when it was used! I've tried it, a friend has tried it, it doesn't help any!

I've installed one in back in 99 w/ my accord 4cy. I noticed that it picked up a go power instantly after the installation. I realized that MPG didn't changed much until my 3rd fill up. I've increased it from avg 25 per gallon to 28 per gallon.. Now, I have 2005 Pacifica Chrysler 3.8L 6cyl. I love my car, and noticed again an immediate change in accelerations instantly, and happily saving MPG. I am saving at least $25 per month. You need to hear testimonials from the real owners, like me...

Everybody has missed the point that it spins the air to optimise the gas particles for a better burn in the combustion chamber. A better burn should equal better performance and mileage. It's a small but noticeible difference. When you run out of gas you have a longer time to get to the station because of the mist vs unburn't droplets. These are seat of the pant's experience over many miles with various car's I still own. If you notice most people see a decent gas mileage with turbo's. Same effect but on a smaller volicity rate.

while i can not say anything about gas milage i have tested the tornado on the dyno on a few diffrent cars and seen an increase in horsepower

a product like this would only work if so many computers were not involved in cars today. when you got MAF that is basically the most important sensor for the ECU, this peice of metal that twists air does nothing with this sensor. I've tried it, don't waste the money.

we need more people that have actually used this thing to comment, some have said it worked others not, i need more info!!! lol

Conflicting information on VE.......Since VE is based on what the motor is taking in compared to the max it could take in at atmospheric conditions I will recant my statement about forced induction. If you increase the intake pressure above atmospheric pressure then you would obviously increase VE.

But you can't increase velocity without changing the motor intake track in some way. What cold air intakes are doing is removing a restrictive piece or lowering velocity and bringing in cooler air. Just because velocity decreases does not mean the amount of air going through the intake is less. For instance go to your A/C filter and take a piece of paper and stick it over the return. What you'll hear is an increase in turbulence and a decrease in CFM if you have a vane anemometer. Your not increasing VE of the motor with an air intake your removing the restriction to where the next bottle neck is the actual motor itself. Manufacturers make intakes restrictive to cut down on intake noise by adding things like a "silencer" box..... I haven't used one either :-) but their theory doesn't pan out unless the motor somehow can bring more air into the cyl which it is just not going to do with a orange slicer. The idea came from a tornado obviously which is fine in dandy in a very large open space. In the confines of an intake tract it's useless. All in good fun though I would like to see more test as one poster already said it was a waste on his "fleet"

actually if u increase intake air velocity IT WILL make the engine more efficient. when people install cold air intake kits on their engines that is essentially what they are doing, making their engine more efficient, increasing volumetric efficiency. same with less restrictive exhausts, u r increasing VE. again i agree with the THEORY of this thing as i have not used 1.

If it increased volume or pressure then you would have more air intake but it doesn't do either one. Velocity only changes with engine rpm or in case of a turbocharged car under pressure (forced). You could change velocity by making the intake track smaller but adding a swirl device will not change velocity. In physics what is the fastest from point A to point B? Straight line or running around in a circle?