HI CLONE

sorry mate, new to the site, and it was only a question, i hope you don't pull the bleep outa everyone that asks a question??

No its just the norm for questions relating to Hiclones etc.

If you use the search feature, punch in hiclone and read the vast quanities of debates about them.

Using the search for most queries answers most of them.
Don't be disheartened by the lack of constructive responses it usually gets better. LOL

Kev

ok, thanks for the help, i will do that, cheers!

You have gotten off lightly ,

If you had asked a question about fridges or tyres you would have gotten in real trouble !

LOL

Glenn

Glenn D,
it could have been worse...................he could have asked which was better a Toyota or a Nissan.....:-) Obviously the answer would have been Toyo.

Toytruck

and don't even think to ask about Daylight Savings

Andrew

by the way thats a sweet shot of ya GU, i have a very similar setup to you only a GU111, gotta love the datto's hey

Gday Moggs
Maybe i should invest in one as a pencil holder for my desk at the factory??

G'day Muzbry. Yes, definitely you should. They hold about 8 pens very well. I have been keeping an eye on ink levels and to my untrained eye I do believe my pens are writing faster, smoother and lasting longer.

It is also a great talking point at my work, as it has a "this way to engine" sticker on it - yet I cannot find anyone who can tell any difference from one side to the other! It is an amazing bit of folded metal!

BTW, it isn'y your average 1st version - it is a Hiclone II KI-58. As I sit here I am contemplating just what kind of magical improvements the II has over the I version. I just love the thing.

g'day runningu. Yep - go the dattos. Lets see a pic of your rig then!

i'm not a member, can i still post pics on the site, or if you want to i can email you some!

Actually Moggs, you've got to put them on back to front in the Southern Hemisphere to account for the Coriolis effect. Otherwise they don't work...

Moggs posted this followup
"It is also a great talking point at my work, as it has a "this way to engine" sticker on it - yet I cannot find anyone who can tell any difference from one side to the other! It is an amazing bit of folded metal! "

Yes it must be !!!

Look again and you will see the blades face one direction from the "this way to engine" side and the exact opposite direction from the OTHER side.... this directs the 'air' towards the centre of the manifold.
Install it the wrong way and you get the air being 'disturbed'
It acts as an 'air-brake' (roflmfao)

Hi Mainey, good to see you haven't changed one little bit.

My Hiclone is the same front to back. The blades meet in the middle of the barrel - the only difference I can see is that one side swirls to the left and if you turn it around it swirls to the right. Yep, an air-brake - glad you found it funny. Put an obstruction in an airpipe and it will slow the air down. I reckon they are a crock, however I wish you well with yours. Not going to debate it with you further though as I don't really have much more interest in the piece of bleep .

yeah, assisting ppl I suppose your referring to above L0L

You posted "It is also a great talking point at my work, as it has a 'this way to engine' sticker on it - yet I CAN'T FIND ANYONE WHO CAN TELL ANY DIFFERENCE from one side to the other" so I thought I should tell you and your friends what the DIFFERENCE really is in simplistic terms, as they are not the same from each side, hence the arrow giving direction of air flow.

I also don't believe the advertising blurb, so no 'debate' is needed!!

Don't waste money on a large free flowing exhaust. Just put another Hiclone in the exhaust and things should flow nicely and match the much improved intake volume. Better still, if you've got headers put one in each pipe to really get things flowing.

Bonz, if you have two of em then your economy should have improved by up to 50% ! Sorry mate, I'm an unbeliever.

yer I know footie but they worked for me, about 8% improvement

I'm happy for you Bonz. I have a long history with economy type devices on petrol engines, so I'm not slinging off. But in this particular case... :)))

I thought that you still sh1t but it was white!!

Only if the gypsy is a virgin....

Mainey just how is this swirling helping? On a petrol engine the air fuel mix is coming in at anywhere from 100 cubic feet a minute for a smallish engine and a big engine can swallow 600 cubic feet per minute(or more).
At that speed dont you think it would be already mixed after it has passed through the carb/injection and bounced through the manifold and cyl head intake valve port?

Next time you get a chance with a carbed engine,remove the air cleaner and look down the carb and watch the steady stream of air and fuel mixing as you hand throttle it.
If it wasnt mixing properly it would be running rough and blowing black smoke or it would be pinging.

The bottom line on fuel saver devices is that none of them will submit their product for independent testing.
Big carmakers will fall over themselves to gain a very small increase in power or economy out of their engines ,but none choose to use a device like the hiclown that would cost about 93 cents in a 3rd world country,why not?

If you dont believe me listen to a mechanical engineer www.fuelsaving.info/debunk.htm

As I posted I can't prove they work on diesels, however, I will use one (or two) on my next diesel, because I'm sure I get better performance on hills as I have posted, yes all contradictory statements I know, but if I 'think' it works then I'm happy to pay the price :-)

I have read the "/debunk" Link posted above and then entered the word Hyclone as it was not mentioned in the large list of devices tested & disproved....
The following Link appeared and makes interesting reading..

www.fuelsaver.com.au/

"The new (2004) Mercedes V6 fitted with Hiclone style swirl technology has 18% more power than the previous engine. The economy has also improved from 12L/100km to under 10L/100km, a 2L/100km or 17% fuel saving (figures from Govt. tests printed in “Car” and “Wheels” magazines)."

"Before this Subaru got 10% more economy and more power from their new (2000) WRX by fitting valves in their inlet runners to create a greater swirling of the intake charge in the combustion chamber (“Wheels” magazine)."

I'm not an advocate for Hyclone, I read what's available and wonder if it's sutch a total lie.... then why have Hyclone not been sued by Mercedes or Subaru etc...

Just my own thoughts, as they say where there is smoke there is usually fire, there does appear to be some connection with Hyclone and some form of performance increase, or were the "Govtonment tests printed in Car and Wheels magazine's" just a figment of some ones over fertile imagination, the report would make interesting reading....

Makes me ask the obvious question:
who or what organization has actually tested a Hyclone on a petrol or diesel engine and definatevely proven beyond any reasonable doubt at all it does NOT work, where is the test reported as it would be very interesting to read :-))

Mainey (WA),

The only real test would be to give you a vehicle and over a period of weeks YOU tell US if it has a Hyclone fitted (bonnet sealed to prevent tampering).

I'm quite sure that if you were put in the position of not actually KNOWING if one was fitted, you may not be so sure of your claims to better performance/economy...

Low and behold with these things if you look for better economy, you start being aware of how you drive and changing you driving habits, which affects the overall outcome anyway. This is what the marketeers prey on, and why these and many other products only ever offer "testimonials" from customers, and not hard cold scientifically proven evidence.

Stop trying to prove that it does work, and try to prove that it doesn't. If you fail to prove that it DOESN'T work then you have approached the problem scientifically and have valid results of your hypothesis. (this is the "scientific method" that you hear about.)

Well Mainey,Hiclone is on the site and it is listed under "turbulence generators"
www.fuelsaving.info/turbulence.htm

It looks like some of the info from your link has been borrowed as it uses some of the same examples but not the whole article which full explains swirl patterns.
I know that good swirl patterns are helpfull especially on diesels but as my link says, it has to happen at the point of combustion.

The RAC ,NRMA and others have tested these deivices in the past,and no they havent published reports but have issued statements in the press totally debunking them.
Its not up to the government to do reports on quackery but anyone who does not have an interest in exploiting gullible people would have their own tests carried out and proudly display them.

Just so we know for future reference Mainey, do you have any financial interest in fuel saver gadgets?
If you dont ,fine .If you do you should declare an interest at the earliest possible point.

"...The new (2004) Mercedes V6 fitted with Hiclone STYLE swirl technology..."

but not fitted with a Hyclone..... Most vehicles are designed with a cylinder design that induces some swirl. This is not new or uncommon.

The effect of adding swirl so far up the inlet manifold would be marginal given the various curves and restrictions (valves) compared with "fitting valves in their inlet runners to create a greater swirling of the intake charge in the combustion chamber (“Wheels” magazine)". This would be a well calculated design driven by studies of combustion dynamics in the cylinder during compression/ignition/expansion.

As has been stated on this forum before, what happens if there is a right hand design swirl into 3 cyls, and a left hand design swirl into the other 3 cyls of a V6? You add more swirl to 3 cyls and LESS to the other three....net effect, nil, or if nothing else a seriously confused ECU with one bank of cylinders that do not run correctly (misfire) due to poor combustion dynamics.

"then why have Hyclone not been sued by Mercedes or Subaru etc..."

The haven't...your quotes:

"The new (2004) Mercedes V6 fitted with Hiclone style swirl technology..." Not specifically Hiclones though....

"...fitting valves in their inlet runners to create a greater swirling of the intake charge in the combustion chamber..." Inlet runners go from the plenum chamber to the cylinder, valves over the cylinder.

The plenum is specificaly a large volume of almost stagnant air the the inlet runners draw from going to the cyls. The plenum is fed by the inlet tract where the Hiclones usually sit. So the Hiclones feed into a large volume of air that slows right down (larger X-sectional area) and the air is then "stolen" from various points around the plenum to go to the cyls... Now tell me how the Hiclone can specifically spin the air going to ANY cylinder???

Gary,
I can't prove they don't work, the question I've asked is:

"who can PROVE they don't work" ? ? ?

I have only put up a link to a site 'claiming' that Mercedes and Subaru both use a device similar to a Hyclone, both claiming performance improvements, are they both wrong ? ?

As I asked: who has tested them and can prove they don't work, have you ???

Ross, re your post:
"Just so we know for future reference Mainey, do you have any financial interest in fuel saver gadgets?
If you don't ,fine.
If you do you should declare an interest at the earliest possible point"

Nope, no connection in any way at all.
Solar systems, batteries etc, I will admit to :-)))

I have openly stated above I don't believe they work on diesels !!

What I can't find is a genuine test report stating they don't work at all.

I thought the hiclone was quite well debunked on the website mentioned above. If you take a little time to actually read the page it exlains quite logically how the device, and others like it do not work.

And besides, a product has to be PROVEN to WORK, rather than NOT to work. To counter your argument Mainey, nobody (including the manufacturer of hiclone) has any scientific evidence to prove they work either.

I certainly wouldn't waste my money.

"...As I asked: who has tested them and can prove they don't work, have you ??? ..."

I believe the NRMA/RACV/etc could find no evidence of any improvement in economy/performance. Implicit in that is an argument that they in fact do NOT work as advertised.... (hence the non endorsement by the peak motoring bodies of Australia.)

Plenty of respected motoring organisations have advised their members not to waste their money on them over the years.
Im quite sure Hiclone and the others would have had them in court IF they had a leg to stand on.; )

Oh have I tested them,well yeah but not in a matter that could be considered rock solid scientific evidence.(but still more scientific than those flogging them)
I had one in my petrol landcruiser when I bought it.
Over a period of 10 weeks I noted the klms driven and fuel used and wrote it down.
I then removed the hiclone and noted the fuel usage .I lost interest after 3-4 weeks as there was no difference.
Over the whole period it never varied more than 10% with or without the hiclone.

Another little snippet of info I found out was the mechanics and parts stores that sell these get about %50 of the retail price.
Considering I have seen them being sold for over $200 a pop for something that looks like it would cost a few dollars to make in a 3rd world country ,there is a lot of incentive to flog them to unsuspecting customers.
I once asked a spruiker how come it didnt work on my landcruiser and he replied it doesnt work on all cars even if they are the same model and have the same engine: )

For the record: As stated I don't sell them or recomend them either.
I have two hyclones fitted, I don't (note: do not) believe they work as well as stated in the advertising blurb, however I believe I do get better performance at 90/100 Klm while towing a 800 klg camper trailer over hills, it does not require a change to a lower gear now, but as they say, that is not a 'test' is it.

If you don't believe the advertising blurb "either" then simply don't fit them, make your life simple and let your vehicle stay as the manufacturer made it, don't fit extractors or wide wheels either :-)))

I was offered two for $300 and told "if your not happy with the performance increase return them in a few weeks, I (he) would give me back the 300 cash..."

They fitted them for me as well for the price so I don't understand how the claimed "I have seen them being sold for over $200 a pop" price stated above can even be justified, maybe it's just a special price including installation for me (no I don't think so either L0L)

I have never claimed they work as the advertising blurb states, however I do believe I get better top end power so I have never complained about paying $300 for the perceived (or is it real) pleasure of cruising over hills still in o/d at 100 klm while towing a camper in a little 2.4 Ltr diesel.

As we all know some people love Engel some love Waeco, maybe some are biased and some are just mistaken about their choice and did not want to pay for a 'better' fridge, it's a choice we make and live with.

With the Hyclone if your not 100% happy you definitely get your money back no questions asked, if you don't want to risk anything keep your money in the bank and wonder IF a Hyclone would work for you, it's only when you actually fit one (or two) that I believe you have the 'credentials' to make actual claims that they work or not in any particular engine.

As I have said I don't get better fuel economy but top end torque is more efficient.

"I have seen them being sold for over $200 a pop" price stated above can even be justified, maybe it's just a special price including installation for me (no I don't think so either L0L) "

So you got ripped off,not my fault you paid $300 for a pile of crap that cost 78 cents to makeLOL
Ive seen them as low as $150 and why not,they are still making $148 profit on them.

Mainey this is an internet forum and while its true of all products "you can take them or leave them" ,everyone has a right to discuss them.
This product has had at least 20 seriously long threads over the last couple of years that I know of.
As time goes on I see more and more people waking up to the carpet baggers that push products but wont back up their exhorbitant claims.
Hey,when someone proves that it will save me money or get more power for free,I will be the 1st in line to get one.
As for my experience with the Hiclone ,I neither got more power or more torque so I believe I do have the credentials and Im sure there is more than a handfull of others who have had the same experience.

Sure go out and buy them,fit 6 ,fit one to your pushbike for going up hills easier,stick one in the washing machiner for whiter y fronts ,its not my moneyLOL

Ross,
if you do the sums you will see I paid only $150 EACH - including fitting.

Something else you seem to have missed is I don't believe they work as advertised either, so your preaching to the converted.....

Good to see you admit you did pay your good money for a Hyclone...
pity it did not work for you 'either' so obviously you got your money back in full also, so the experience has cost you nothing in the long term.

I payed nothin,it was in there when I got the landcruiser;)
I remember the seller sheepishly telling me "its got a Hiclone in it",and me asking what does it do? and him shrugging his shouldersLOL

Oh only $150 ,you got real bargain there mate,keep up the good workLOL

ross,
is good to read you believe I did get a bargain :-))))

(now this has to be my 'last' post on this thread L0L, as I'm moving further down the coast and out of cdma phone coverage area for a while, maybe there will be more fish there)

Could it be they were actually trying to spin off the dust like those cyclonic vacuum cleaners? If the unit was well before the air filter this may be the case....

You got it exactly as I would have stated ,found the same plastic fixed fin type fan on our 80 series turbo diesel air intake when fitting the snorkel ,since fitting the snorkel fuel economy is better by 1/2klm perlt round town in stop/ start driving and 1klm perlt on the open road ,cant see how any device aka Hyclone could swirl the air intake more than the turbo does already !!

Gary, don't the cyclonic vacuum cleaners spin the air to the outside of the case ? ?
whereby the Hyclone spins the air to the inside of the (case) manifold, away from the manifold walls.

Alloy, can we assume the "plastic fixed fin type fan" is a genuine Toyota part ? ?

because as you state you "found the same plastic fixed fin type fan on our 80 series turbo diesel air intake"
or is it part of the new snorkel ? ?

Mainey, what the thing is doing is spinning the airmass. Air doen't decide on its own whether it spins to or away from the manifold wall, it is the laws of physics that decide that. The purpose of the "Toyota spin" is to allow the heavier dust/dirt particles to be slowed down enough from hitting the manifold wall that they do not get into or past the aircleaner and into the engine. Re-read Big-Woody's post again, all this occurs well before the aircleaner and the precleaner (Woody's "muffler")

I reread the post and understand the "fixed fin type fan" is in the Toyota air intake,
"found the SAME plastic fixed fin type fan on our 80 series turbo diesel air intake, when fitting the snorkel"

Remember the Hyclone spins air in an 'internal' pattern, not an 'external' pattern.

I believe this Toyota device spins the air towards the OUT-sides of the filter body and AWAY from the actual air filter membrane, as you say to stop heavier dust and dirt from going into the engine, but to 'store' it till emptied.

Mainey ,yes it is a standard Toyota fitting ,a fixed fan at the very front of the factory air intake ,from there the air travels past the air filter intake to a plastic box which is not easily accessable for cleaning out ,when fitting the snorkel this box was "full" of crap ,dirt ,dead insects ect ,no way would the "fan" have any possible swirl effect on the air post filter,other thing is that this "dirt magnet" box is not in any way designed to be serviced on a regular or even irregular basis as it is well hidden inside the inner and outer mud guard.

Question: is the air swirled like a CYCLONE, internally (like Hyclone) or outside against side of air box ?
I believe it moves the air 'outwards' away from the filter element, filtering out the larger crap and bugs etc from getting to the air filter and the engine.
Hence it's not relevant to compare it to a Hyclone as they do things in opposite directions.

Mainey, sorry but you have been reading too many sales brochures...................

If the air is spun it is spun...The laws of physics dictate that the heavier particles get spun out to the peripheries and the lighter items stay in the center (eg. cyclonic vacuum cleaners). That being the case then fuel droplets would end up against the side walls of the inlet manifold as they are heavier than air.

The whole concept is now inconsequential, as it may have only been effective when used with a carburetted engine or single point fuel injection, and pointless with multi point EFI due to the short distance between the injection point and the inlet valve, and in diesels absolutely pointless due to the fuel being directly injected into the cylinder as the compression stroke is occurring (ie ALL valves closed)

The advertising material you are apparently getting your information from and attempting to quote as "facts" ("internal" vs "external" rotation) is utter advertising bollocks.

You seem oblivious to the fact that the Toyota unit is long before a major constriction to the airflow or two - air filter, maybe throttle, 3' of curved inlet manifold, and collection of inlet valves. That of course does not include any of the designed in swirl components in the cylinder itself such as the shape of the piston, etc.

Toyota unit is used to clean out the air as much as possible before it leaves the air filter.
Hiclone is used to clean out as much money from your wallet as possible before you leave the store.

Depending on the customer, both are equally as effective...............

If you want to continue to believe that placing yet another airway constriction item with its loss of kinetic energy of the airflow, into the inlet will improve your economy, you MAY be right (dependiong on the age/technology of the vehicle). But it WILL come at a cost of overall quantity of airflow into the engine = performance.

Gary, you posted; "If the air is spun it is spun...The laws of physics dictate that the heavier particles get spun out to the peripheries and the lighter items stay in the centre (eg. cyclonic vacuum cleaners). That being the case then fuel droplets would end up against the side walls of the inlet manifold as they are heavier than air."

Have to correct your post above.... the design of the Hyclone sends the air into a 'cyclone' style spiral which is directed IN-wards... NOT OUTWARDS !!!

The 'Cyclonic vacuum cleaners' send the air/dust to the OUT-side of the cleaner to be collected as in the Toyota pre-cleaner system.

Yes as you say it is the laws of physics that dictate the way the air actually moves.

QUESTION:
How do you explain the cyclones up in the Northern Territory,
why are the rain droplets with-IN the cyclone spiral, not thrown OUT of the cyclone spiral as you are attempting to indicate ???

How many times do I have to repeat that I don't believe the advertising blurb, I'm only asking you questions that you either can't or won't answer...

As to your statement; "Mainey You seem oblivious to the fact that the Toyota unit is long before a major constriction to the airflow or two - air filter, maybe throttle, 3' of curved inlet manifold, and collection of inlet valves. That of course does not include any of the designed in swirl components in the cylinder itself such as the shape of the piston, etc. Toyota unit is used to clean out the air as much as possible before it leaves the air filter."

Yes, that is what I did post, the Toyota system sends the air to the OUT-side, NOT in a CYCLONIC swirl, to eliminate the 'bugs and dirt' from the air prior to it entering the air filter... please read the post again and lets stick to the facts. :-)))

I give up.

Both items send a helical spiral of air down a length of tube. End of story.

You obviously have no reasonable basic knowledge of physics.

FWIW, it actually matters where you pick up the air after the air is spun, as to whether you take the air from the outside the "spin area" (Toyota's dust collector, Cyclonic vacuum, both leaving a clean "core" of air to continue on it's travels) or the the entire stream of air. You have clearly not even fathomed this into your equations.

I am not going to argue the point any more with someone that is still trying to justify why they were so gullible as to spend $150 (x2?) for a couple of pieces of tin.

Find me some solid independent scientific evidence (NOT testimonials from customers) using modern EFI/diesel engines to back it up and then I will believe you.

Until then, quackery, same as the Futch......

Just ignore him Gary.
We've all seen him do this same type of back and forth arguing before over fridges and it gets annoying after a while.
Like a dog on a bone he won't let up and will go on for weeks if the replies keep coming. The last one got quite heated and very personal and sort of crossed the line in my opinion.
Hopefully if we don't reply all will go quiet again.

I don't know where all the hot air comes from - maybe he swallowed a Hiclone

HA!

Cheers,
Brett

Typical.... when you can't answer questions put to you, you 'give up' :-((

Next time I see a Cyclone in Darwin, I will look for the "length of tube" you say is around it.... yes to hold the raindrops in place L0L

As I've posted....
"I don't recommend the Hyclone system"

I could have received a full refund, but I continue to use them because I believe I do get 'better' performance towing a camper at highway speed over hills.

Yes, if you can't add logical,informative & factual information - don't reply !!!

......and what is in the middle of a cyclone????

Nothing, not even air (not quite, but it is certainly at a lower pressure than that on the outside of the cyclone.)

Maybe you should move north and see how your logic stands up. Stand in the ring of a cyclone and tell me how long it takes you to be hit in the head with debris (knock some sense into you????)

Tut Tut Tut, Gary you have posted above there is "NOTHING, NOT EVEN AIR" and then also claim there is 'debris' in there, yes, the debris has to be held up, supported and moved by "air"

I live up here many months of the year and know first hand the power that is unleashed from with-in a Cyclone.

Gary, get a life and post some facts, not half baked opinions, don't attempt to denigrate people who have different opinions to yourself, it shows a small man syndrome :-)))

My parents instilled in me, if you can't say something nice about someone, say nothing, as you will gain nothing worthwhile by revealing your own bad attitude.

Cyclones 101:

They eye (my "middle") of a cyclone is generally quiet and still.

It is the outer "walls" that contain the debris.....from the sounds of it you have been NEAR a cyclone (and its associated high winds and debris), but not IN one.

It is something called centripetal (NOT to be confused with centrifugal) force that keeps debris airborne in a cyclone, basically the air pressure going from the outside (high) pressure area, to the inside (eye) area, the air mass then being directed (funneled) up into the upper atmosphere.

The consequent effect is two vertical rotations of air when the cyclone is seen in vertical cross section ie O| |O with the "|" being the visible "walls" of the cyclone, and "O" representing air that is traveling up nearest to the eye and down away from the eye. Gravity may at some stage take over on the debris and it falls to earth if it is not carried into the downstreamimg air.

The force that acts in a horizontal sense to change the direction of the air as it is spun (remembering Newtons Laws) is correctly identified as a centrripetal force.

(Google it, if you don't believe me...)

Gary, I believe you, it's a nice picture BUT, it differs from the design of a Hyclone in this way....
the Hyclone has the air SUCKED through it by the pistons and according to the advertising blurb sending that air towards the centre of the manifold away from the walls because of the angle of the 'fins' for want of a better word.

In the picture you have posted it shows and states the air movement is in a vastly different way.

Your own information claims the air in the centre of Cyclone is "quiet and still" and NOT moving in the centre, which I'm sure you will agree is NOT as in the Hyclone.

You say "the eye (my "middle") of a cyclone is generaly quiet and still" which I'm sure is not the case in a Hyclone, because in a Hyclone the air is sucked inwards towards the cylinders through the centre of the Hyclone 'bit of tin' forcing that air inwards with-in the manifold and therefore causing the highest pressure to be in the middle and not the outside of the manifold as indicated in your Cyclone theory.

Just my thoughts, but I suppose you have another theory to explain it now!
As I have said I don't believe the Hyclone blurb either but on the other hand I believe your reasons are not really correct.

"...the Hyclone has the air SUCKED through it by the pistons and according to the advertising blurb..."

"...As I have said I don't believe the Hyclone blurb either but on the other hand I believe your reasons are not really correct...."

So why quote them as "psuedo-facts"?

I'm going straight from high school and 1st-2nd year uni physics. (any physics book will give you exactly the same information, or if you like I can post a LIST of online resources that were not funded by some two bit manufacturer of questionable products as a basis for explanation.....)

Back YOU comments up with FACTS, not advertising blurb.....

Gary, how do you believe the air is 'moved' from the air filter to the cylinders?

As I have stated, I believe it is "sucked" into the cylinders by the piston moving down with-in the cylinder, if I'm wrong please just come out and say so, and of course tell us how it gets there....

To be absolutely correct, air flows across a pressure gradient, ANY gradient.....

The engine is an air pump. It creates a negative pressure that causes air to flow from a high pressure (atmosphere) area to low pressure area (cylinder) on the inlet side. Precisely the same thing happens in the exhaust where the high pressure products of combustion are released into the relatively lower normal atmospheric pressure of the exhaust system.

Now what happens in that situation when you put an obstruction in the flow of exhaust gasses? The gasses cannot flow as easily the engine ends up with increased drag applied to it and the truckies call it an "engine brake", similar with the throttle of a petrol engine on the inlet side (if id didn't we would be driving around with our engine at 6800+ rpm) and similar to your other turbulence inducing blockage to airflow called the Hiclone

If the Hiclone spends the kinetic energy of the airflow spinning up the incoming air, only to be faced with other obstructions further down (throttle, bends in manifolds, plenum chambers, valves) then it is "wasting" energy on ineffectual modifications to the airflow. The basic design of the airflow is changed from what the manufacturers of the engine had spent millions working out, and you could bet if there was a way to get an extra 0.1 l/100km, the manufacturer would have.

If the energy of fwd motion down of the air down the inlet manifold resulted in laminar flow of the air then this is the most efficient way of transferring large volumes of air (concept used in "polished and ported" heads...). Any induced "turbulence" effectively narrows the aperture for the air to flow, whether it be from the rough walls or from an object in the airflow Throttle butterflies, small valves, and even to the length of the inlet pipe itself. As I have stated previously, if you can't get the air in, you can't get the fuel in, meaning your foot is a bit further to the floor, but at a cost of volumetric efficiency at higher revs.

BTW, technically the is no such thing a "suction", it is more correctly referred to as "negative pressure", the negative meaning less than atmospheric (14.7 psi, 1013.25 millibar, 760 mm Hg).

Gary, please don't take this personally.... but your statement:
"BTW, technically the is no such thing a "suction", it is more correctly referred to as "negative pressure", the negative meaning less than atmospheric (14.7 psi, 1013.25 millibar, 760 mm Hg)"
that information infers I should have said, 'the Hyclone allows the air move to "negative pressure" caused by the pistons and according to the advertising blurb..."

Question: is the air moved being 'pushed' as in a Turbo charger or 'sucked' as in a naturally aspirated engine, you see the air has to be forced by some means into the cylinders.

Either it is sucked in or pushed in, the more air 'forced' into the cylinder the higher the compression pressure and therefore more power created and since we are not talking about a turbo charged engine can we agree it is "sucked" into the cylinders by the pistons downward motion, which causes the negative pressure in effect sucking the air into the cylinder.

Can I ask you why Toyota use a 'restricting' device in the air inlet system as stated in this post and also Mercedes, Subaru and probably others I'm not aware of, if it does in fact reduce the engine performance instead of improving it ??

Air FLOWS from a high pressure area to a low pressure area (why we have wind on out earth). It is subject to both "suction" pulling the air (center of a cyclone), AND pressure blowing the air (center of a high pressure system), depending on which perspective you are viewing it from.

"Can I ask you why Toyota use a 'restricting' device in the air inlet system as stated in this post and also Mercedes, Subaru and probably others I'm not aware of, if it does in fact reduce the engine performance instead of improving it ?? "

already covered...remember the bit about Toyota spinning the dirt out of the air, and the MB/Subarus using them so close to the valves as an integrated fully engineered part of the inlet system????? Re-read the above posts, (all of them) and come back when you are prepared to say that you have UNDERSTOOD that the science behind it extends beyond your apparent grasp.

Pick up a physics book or two up to 2nd yr engineering level (Newtons laws, etc), do an electronics trade qualification, do your pilots licence (meteorology concepts, airflow, basic fluid dynamics), do your Nursing degree (ventilation concepts = airflow concepts, psychology) and have about 45 yrs life experience with a predominantly "engineering oriented" family (2 x mech eng, 1 x elec eng, extended family includes 2 mechanics), and you get the rough picture on where I am coming from.......................

Mainey .Why dont you have the HP of your vehicle tested on a dyno ,with/without the hiclone and come back with the figures?
I think you will be disapointed.

Gary, so do you agree the air is either 'sucked' or 'pushed' into the cylinder ??
lets just stay on one statement at a time, and when it is answered then move on to the next, or is that too hard?

As posted above and not answered:

Gary, please don't take this personally.... but your statement:
"BTW, technically the is no such thing a "suction", it is more correctly referred to as "negative pressure", the negative meaning less than atmospheric (14.7 psi, 1013.25 millibar, 760 mm Hg)"
that information infers I should have said, 'the Hyclone allows the air move to "negative pressure" caused by the pistons and according to the advertising blurb..."

Question: is the air moved being 'pushed' as in a Turbo charger or 'sucked' as in a naturally aspirated engine, you see the air has to be forced by some means into the cylinders.

Either it is sucked in or pushed in, the more air 'forced' into the cylinder the higher the compression pressure and therefore more power created and since we are not talking about a turbo charged engine can we agree it is "sucked" into the cylinders by the pistons downward motion, which causes the negative pressure in effect sucking the air into the cylinder.

To keep changing the subject of the post is only taking up space and not adding anything useful at all. To read your family has all the credentials to answer questions put to you is interesting, please contact them to get some assistance and answer the questions that you keep avoiding :-((

The really good Cyclone information you posted is not representitive of a Hyclone - is it?

ross; Ok, I am prepared to do that
will you pay the required fees ??

Have found the Hyclone web site, the pictures make interesting viewing:

www.fuelsaver.com.au/hiclone.php

but then I enjoy interesting pictures and information about thoughts from the technical people at Mercedes Benz about the power increase in their vehicles.
Have realised I did not even spell the name correctly... should be Hiclone!!

"Gary, so do you agree the air is either 'sucked' or 'pushed' into the cylinder ?? "

From the post immediately above yours:
**"Air FLOWS from a high pressure area to a low pressure area (why we have wind on out earth). It is subject to both "suction" pulling the air (center of a cyclone), AND pressure blowing the air (center of a high pressure system), depending on which perspective you are viewing it from."
In short, BOTH. Once again the basic physics of airflow is more important than the physical environment you chose to place it in. Read the first sentence and the last 8 words in that quote again.

"Question: is the air moved being 'pushed' as in a Turbo charger or 'sucked' as in a naturally aspirated engine, you see the air has to be forced by some means into the cylinders..."

As above. Having a turbo/supercharger only influences the QUANTITY of air flowing, it does not change the basic physics of WHY it flows. Turbo/superchargers allow a higher pressure gradient, starting at ~2 atm instead of free air at 1 atm, but going in to the cylinder at say 0.1 atm. gives an effectively higher average intra cylinder pressure at the point of valve closure = more mass of air and fuel = more generated power (given a fixed maximum physical volume of the cylinder).

"agree it is "sucked" into the cylinders by the pistons downward motion, which causes the negative pressure in effect sucking the air into the cylinder..."

This is the crux of you misunderstanding.... What if we were to put a "Hard" suction/"Perfect vacuum" on to your decending cylinder instead of air? If you agree that if the cylinder would suck the air and would in fact contain some air, would/could the "perfect" vacuum not suck harder, potentially pulling the piston UP???
This is what I (correctly) meant by "flowing from high pressure to a low pressure". In this case it would be from the relatively high pressure of the descending cylinder pressure INTO the perfect vacuum. You appear to be basing everything on the absolute (ie +/- standard air pressure) instead of relative pressure (+/- "where I am" pressure).

-------------------------------------

Changing of subjects was done in an attempt to relate back to phenomenon that may be more familiar as a description of the basic physics involved. ie, the Cyclone debate for how cyclonic filters work, related to the Toyota spinner on its inlet manifold pre-airfilter, a subject YOU initially brought up....

Repetition was done to try to get through the basic principles involved to someone that would not take an objective explanation over advertising blurb.

---------------------------------------

It would pay you to HAVE A GOOD READ

www.fuelsaving.info/turbulence.htm

But if you are more interested in believing the advertising blurb over the results of independent engineering studies/assessments, here is the short and curly bits for you... (minor edit: numbered points instead of bullet points for clarity. Text wholly intact)

"So in summary:

(1)Engines already have high levels of turbulence, and the physics is well understood
(2)Adding more turbulence can give only a tiny fuel economy benefit - this is proved by experiment
(3)Ignition must be adjusted to suit the faster burn, or the effect will be worse economy
(4)Increased turbulence at full load will most likely damage the engine unless the ignition is retarded
(5)Anything in the inlet manifold is extremely unlikely to affect in-cylinder air motion anyway"

1. We knew that already, manufacturers have gone to great pains to optimise this.
2. I have never doubted that it will potentially improve fuel economy
3 And I guess you have had your ECU remapped accordingly, or your diesel injection adjusted to compensate, because
4. Enjoy replacing you melted pistons when you are happily towing if you haven't................
5. ....so why spend $150 for something that does not work? Unless it is sitting over the top of a valve as a part of an integrated inlet design the idea is pointless.

Mainey, just admit it, you got conned. You are not the first and you won't be the last.

Based on Summary point number 4 and the fact you tow a caravan, I would be removing them. You might save a bit of fuel, or claim it to perform better with it in, but when the engine piston/valves/rings parts company, all that will pail into insignificance.

"ross; Ok, I am prepared to do that
will you pay the required fees ?? "

What for ?I already know the answer, its for your benefit,not mine; )

Being technically minded you would no doubt be aware that in a Commodore V6 with a 60mm throttle body you can fit a LPG system which will make this car breath through a hole between 46mm to 58mm Inside Diameter, and you obviously believe this is fine, that this 'restriction' does not 'restrict' the air flow at all ? ? ?
Maybe you just forgot to mention it as it shoots a hole in your turbulence theory.

I think I can say with confidence you have never owned a vehicle with a hyclone installed, so your 'opinions' are just that your opinion, based on what you have 'interpreted'
The companies like Mercedes etc who use a 'restriction' similar to a Hyclone don't get a mention because they don't agree with you :-))))

So in all fairness I think we should just sit back and have another bourbon and agree that you just can't believe the Mercedes Benz test results and I don't really care about the Mercedes results.
I won't remove the two Hyclones from my vehicle, I don't miss the money but I'm sure I would miss the performance and I not prepared for that...... and with that extreme heartfelt statement I wish you a Merry xmas and very happy 2007

"...The companies like Mercedes etc who use a 'restriction' similar to a Hyclone don't get a mention because they don't agree with you..."

They do and have been mentioned not more than 2-3 entries above this one, and discussed at length further up. They do not warrant a significant mention in the same breath as a Hiclone, because no clear indication is given my MB as to where the unit is located in the inlet tract (ie similar to Subaru with it right over the inlet valve) or way out before the plenum. The fact is that the MB unit is a part of a "total design" of the inlet manifolding area. Oh yeah, the don't actually use a Hiclone either...

Remember also that the MB engine was a NEW DESIGN (or did you miss that snippet of information, re-read it...) How much of a totally new designed engines power/performance do you want to attribute to you piece of bent tin?

"...Being technically minded you would no doubt be aware that in a Commodore V6 with a 60mm throttle body you can fit a LPG system which will make this car breath through a hole between 46mm to 58mm Inside Diameter, and you obviously believe this is fine, that this 'restriction' does not 'restrict' the air flow at all ? ? ?..."

And dual fuel systems (Impco etc) work how well??? no loss of performance on gas????? Very poor choice of argument..... I agree totally that it is a restriction and would (and does) affect power and performance. This relates to Hiclones how????

FWIW the newer injected gas systems are nearly as well as straight petrol, but they require a seperate computer to run the gas system, different ignition mapping in the cars ECU, and actually DO use the stock throttle butterfly and manifolding (less resistance). They do however use more fuel as any LPG vehicle will due to the lower calorific enery density of LPG (ie 1 litre of lpg goes "bang", 1 litre petrol relatively goes "BOOOOM", so to get LPG to go "BOOOOM" you need more of it). But we digress again...