Printable View
I am by no means a scientist, but the physics involved seem to me that it's a really good idea, and works
as a money making scheme:twisted:
They don't do jack, and I can't see HOW they would.
However, you'd be better off getting one of these, the Peter Brock "Energy Polarizer"
http://www.axg.net/gg/ct/images/polarizer/polarizer.jpg
Sounds just as good a ultra high mileage diesel! (available soon at no outlet near you) :twisted: :twisted:
In these days of super efficient diesels from europe I would have thought that if these things made anything like the difference they claim, the manufacturers like Mercedes and Peugeot would have them fitted as standard. Just imagine if these things could make a 15% power OR economy difference in large trucks???
I reckon the fact that there is no real proof means they are just a BS gadget.
my question still stands,
I've heard the for / against arguments before, but does anyne have personal experience with them in a 300 Tdi?
Given the skepticism above, I would say the answer will be no.Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael2
Martyn
Some of you have said that in the turbo the turbo creates massive suction and the hiclone would do zip. It sounds very plausible, but then I thought of all these new age vaccuum cleaners with their cyclonic suction, and all those new trucks you see where the air cleaner is a series of smaller cyclonic air intakes, rather than one. Obviously there is some application of this technology elsewhere. I'm just thinking aloud here:confused:
Why ask that question- it can only ever be anecdotal and anyone who has spent big $$ on these things will be reluctant to say they didn't work and acknowledge they were a waste.Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael2
I bought one as a present for my brothers Miti****ty Tritoo Turbo diesel and he says that he cannot tell any difference in either power or fuel consumption and it has been fitted for about 5 years - he is just too lazy to take it back out.
If they worked the makers would have the scientific support and they don't - that says something.
You should be asking the question "does anyone have a scientific report on how well these things work" - I think A Current Affair did some testing about 3 years ago in a scientific manner and they failed - they may have also used Monash Universiy.
The technology ideas above are more of a cyclone, and is used as a centrifuge to throw out the dust from the air. With high speed spinning of the air the heavier particles are thrown to the outer ring or rim for collection. Your centrifugal oil filter does the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael2
:idea:Maybe the Hiclone throws the heavier air to the outside so you get more lighter air into the engine! :D:D:D:D:D
Oh well, its sounds good.
Trev.
as said above....with a carby setup it might make a difference.....
it all depends on when the fuel meets with the air.....if its direct injection like on the diesels
and most efi engines.....i dont think it would make much difference.....if any.....
if it was throttle body injection.....or carby system.....it may allow the fuel to mix with the air charge
a bit better as it travells through the inlet manifold......this would give a more complete burn
of the air fuel mix which would increase the efficiency slightly.....
if anyone on here has one or more fitted.....pull them out and let us know the result......
you dont need to admit to buying one......you can simply say it was on there when you bought the car......
Get castrated the weight saving will improve performance and fuel economy
Performance in the bedroom might be deminished but hey you cannot get everything
I cannot see a hiclone to be of any benifit. The best place to fit one would be after the turbo, but wouldn't it further restrict the airflow to the engine? Any advantage gained by the vortex would be offset by the restriction, then the ECU would sense the drop in air preasure then flow more diesel. I am not an expert but anything within the piping would restrict flow and cause more fuel to be pumped wouldn't it?