Supercharged L28?
- Status
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Joined
·
1,609 Posts
> Anyone have any information on supercharging
> an L28? In general, supercharging is a
> simpler mod. than turbocharging, but I have
> never heard of supercharging a Z engine.
Coop:
I looked into this myself. I talked to a guy that works for Paxton in the Atlanta, GA area. He is high on the idea but no one makes a complete kit for doing this. It has been done, though, and several of the supercharger outfits will be willing to advise you on how to go about it - no liability if it blows up on you though.
A supercharger has two disadvantages compared to the Turbo.
1) It generally is only good for about 7 psi boost so you'll only get about a 40% HP increase and
2) It is powered all the time so you lose gas mileage - not much - only 1-2 mpg - but you still lose it.
The advantages the supercharger has over the turbocharger are:
1) No spool up time so the response is instant,
2) It is a torque generating monster
3) It doesn't have to deal with exhaust air heat.
I finally got tired of trying to decide which way to go so I'm going to opt for an aluminum block V-8.
Good luck,
Phantom
> an L28? In general, supercharging is a
> simpler mod. than turbocharging, but I have
> never heard of supercharging a Z engine.
Coop:
I looked into this myself. I talked to a guy that works for Paxton in the Atlanta, GA area. He is high on the idea but no one makes a complete kit for doing this. It has been done, though, and several of the supercharger outfits will be willing to advise you on how to go about it - no liability if it blows up on you though.
A supercharger has two disadvantages compared to the Turbo.
1) It generally is only good for about 7 psi boost so you'll only get about a 40% HP increase and
2) It is powered all the time so you lose gas mileage - not much - only 1-2 mpg - but you still lose it.
The advantages the supercharger has over the turbocharger are:
1) No spool up time so the response is instant,
2) It is a torque generating monster
3) It doesn't have to deal with exhaust air heat.
I finally got tired of trying to decide which way to go so I'm going to opt for an aluminum block V-8.
Good luck,
Phantom
There is a supercharger for L28!
> Coop:
> I looked into this myself. I talked to a guy
> that works for Paxton in the Atlanta, GA
> area. He is high on the idea but no one
> makes a complete kit for doing this. It has
> been done, though, and several of the
> supercharger outfits will be willing to
> advise you on how to go about it
> - no liability if it blows up on
> you though.
> A supercharger has two disadvantages
> compared to the Turbo.
> 1) It generally is only good for about 7 psi
> boost so you'll only get about a 40% HP
> increase and
> 2) It is powered all the time so you lose
> gas mileage - not much - only 1-2 mpg - but
> you still lose it.
> The advantages the supercharger has over the
> turbocharger are:
> 1) No spool up time so the response is
> instant,
> 2) It is a torque generating monster
> 3) It doesn't have to deal with exhaust air
> heat.
> I finally got tired of trying to decide
> which way to go so I'm going to opt for an
> aluminum block V-8.
> Good luck,
> Phantom
JCR (Jim Cook Racing) offers a supercharger for L-series engines. It is in their catolog and it is a roots-type blower that looks like it's a Whipplecharger type, not like the Paxton or Vortech type. I don't have a price but it uses a holly pro-jection to supply fuel/air mixture (pro-jection, $$$$$$). It looks very simple to install. Contact JCR at 1-800-JCR-1440
> Coop:
> I looked into this myself. I talked to a guy
> that works for Paxton in the Atlanta, GA
> area. He is high on the idea but no one
> makes a complete kit for doing this. It has
> been done, though, and several of the
> supercharger outfits will be willing to
> advise you on how to go about it
> - no liability if it blows up on
> you though.
> A supercharger has two disadvantages
> compared to the Turbo.
> 1) It generally is only good for about 7 psi
> boost so you'll only get about a 40% HP
> increase and
> 2) It is powered all the time so you lose
> gas mileage - not much - only 1-2 mpg - but
> you still lose it.
> The advantages the supercharger has over the
> turbocharger are:
> 1) No spool up time so the response is
> instant,
> 2) It is a torque generating monster
> 3) It doesn't have to deal with exhaust air
> heat.
> I finally got tired of trying to decide
> which way to go so I'm going to opt for an
> aluminum block V-8.
> Good luck,
> Phantom
JCR (Jim Cook Racing) offers a supercharger for L-series engines. It is in their catolog and it is a roots-type blower that looks like it's a Whipplecharger type, not like the Paxton or Vortech type. I don't have a price but it uses a holly pro-jection to supply fuel/air mixture (pro-jection, $$$$$$). It looks very simple to install. Contact JCR at 1-800-JCR-1440
Joined
·
107,597 Posts
Rough picture of blower inside:
> JCR (Jim Cook Racing) offers a supercharger
> for L-series engines. It is in their catolog
> and it is a roots-type blower that looks
> like it's a Whipplecharger type, not like
> the Paxton or Vortech type. I don't have a
> price but it uses a holly pro-jection to
> supply fuel/air mixture (pro-jection,
> $$$$$$). It looks very simple to install.
> Contact JCR at 1-800-JCR-1440
I have a older JCR catalog, I think from 91'. Anyway the retail price back then was $3300.00 but they had a sale for $2800.00.
Said 200 plus horsepower at the rear wheels.
0-60 under 5 seconds
13 second 1/4's
Pretty cool but too expensive for me!
Dave
> JCR (Jim Cook Racing) offers a supercharger
> for L-series engines. It is in their catolog
> and it is a roots-type blower that looks
> like it's a Whipplecharger type, not like
> the Paxton or Vortech type. I don't have a
> price but it uses a holly pro-jection to
> supply fuel/air mixture (pro-jection,
> $$$$$$). It looks very simple to install.
> Contact JCR at 1-800-JCR-1440
I have a older JCR catalog, I think from 91'. Anyway the retail price back then was $3300.00 but they had a sale for $2800.00.
Said 200 plus horsepower at the rear wheels.
0-60 under 5 seconds
13 second 1/4's
Pretty cool but too expensive for me!
Dave
Joined
·
185 Posts
Re: Rough picture of blower inside:
> I have a older JCR catalog, I think from
> 91'. Anyway the retail price back then was
> $3300.00 but they had a sale for $2800.00.
> Said 200 plus horsepower at the rear wheels.
> 0-60 under 5 seconds
> 13 second 1/4's
> Pretty cool but too expensive for me!
> Dave
For the same price, you can build a N/A motor that will do the same thing, or a Turbo motor that will do even better. (And you'll get better gas milage from a Turbo motor.)
Chris Behney
Redline Autosports
> I have a older JCR catalog, I think from
> 91'. Anyway the retail price back then was
> $3300.00 but they had a sale for $2800.00.
> Said 200 plus horsepower at the rear wheels.
> 0-60 under 5 seconds
> 13 second 1/4's
> Pretty cool but too expensive for me!
> Dave
For the same price, you can build a N/A motor that will do the same thing, or a Turbo motor that will do even better. (And you'll get better gas milage from a Turbo motor.)
Chris Behney
Redline Autosports
Joined
·
107,597 Posts
> I have the same question for a long time and you know what I found a real good answer. It is a company in california called spiral max. what it does is it is a non moving supercharger that you put into the boot between your air filter to your air flow meter and you can also put one from the air flow meter to the manifold. you can have up to two units per tube so its posible to have 4
units on a fuel injected l28! with these superchargers, a ram air air filter system, and a big bore throttle body you could easily add 50 to 120 horses in about two and a half hours. you might want to check out motorsport auto for the air filter and big bore if you are interested. heres the phone # 1800-633-6331. You can get a 144 pg catalog for free. nothin but z parts. its awesome. Amd for just the superchargers you can go to spiralmax.com. its a very good web site. there superchargers will work on any car. for 2 units its 130.00 for 1 its about 60-70. you would want to do 2 if you wanted to really notice a difference. 4 would be just awesome. 4 units is what I am saving up for and I am probably ordering 2 of them this friday. its the best thing for your money.
units on a fuel injected l28! with these superchargers, a ram air air filter system, and a big bore throttle body you could easily add 50 to 120 horses in about two and a half hours. you might want to check out motorsport auto for the air filter and big bore if you are interested. heres the phone # 1800-633-6331. You can get a 144 pg catalog for free. nothin but z parts. its awesome. Amd for just the superchargers you can go to spiralmax.com. its a very good web site. there superchargers will work on any car. for 2 units its 130.00 for 1 its about 60-70. you would want to do 2 if you wanted to really notice a difference. 4 would be just awesome. 4 units is what I am saving up for and I am probably ordering 2 of them this friday. its the best thing for your money.
> units on a fuel injected l28! with these
> superchargers, a ram air air filter system,
> and a big bore throttle body you could
> easily add 50 to 120 horses in about two and
> a half hours. you might want to check out
> motorsport auto for the air filter and big
> bore if you are interested. heres the phone
> # 1800-633-6331. You can get a 144 pg
> catalog for free. nothin but z parts. its
> awesome. Amd for just the superchargers you
> can go to spiralmax.com. its a very good web
> site. there superchargers will work on any
> car. for 2 units its 130.00 for 1 its about
> 60-70. you would want to do 2 if you wanted
> to really notice a difference. 4 would be
> just awesome. 4 units is what I am saving up
> for and I am probably ordering 2 of them
> this friday. its the best thing for your
> money.
i would be VERY skeptical without seeing a dyno run from a reputable facility proving your claims. you should be too, especially if you are having to save to accumulate this much money! my z has been dyno proven at 270 rwhp, and believe me, there is no such thing as one dollar per horsepower.
> superchargers, a ram air air filter system,
> and a big bore throttle body you could
> easily add 50 to 120 horses in about two and
> a half hours. you might want to check out
> motorsport auto for the air filter and big
> bore if you are interested. heres the phone
> # 1800-633-6331. You can get a 144 pg
> catalog for free. nothin but z parts. its
> awesome. Amd for just the superchargers you
> can go to spiralmax.com. its a very good web
> site. there superchargers will work on any
> car. for 2 units its 130.00 for 1 its about
> 60-70. you would want to do 2 if you wanted
> to really notice a difference. 4 would be
> just awesome. 4 units is what I am saving up
> for and I am probably ordering 2 of them
> this friday. its the best thing for your
> money.
i would be VERY skeptical without seeing a dyno run from a reputable facility proving your claims. you should be too, especially if you are having to save to accumulate this much money! my z has been dyno proven at 270 rwhp, and believe me, there is no such thing as one dollar per horsepower.
> i would be VERY skeptical without seeing a
> dyno run from a reputable facility proving
> your claims. you should be too, especially
> if you are having to save to
> accumulate this much money! my z has been
> dyno proven at 270 rwhp, and believe me,
> there is no such thing as one dollar per
> horsepower.
I agree completely. If it was that easy all the winning racers would be using it. Also, this is NOT any type of supercharger - all it's supposed to do is get better atomization by 'swirling' the intake charge before the fuel is added (and I seriously doubt that this will do anything other than add restriction, or possibly screw up the metering on a carb). By definition, a supercharger increases the mainifold pressure to some level above atmospheric pressure. A passive device like this swirly thing simply cannot do this. The best you can hope for is for it not to decrease the manifold pressure appreciably, due to the restriction it adds.
Actually, though, if you look at their website, the horsepower claims might not be that hard to meet - they claim typical increases of 0 to 35 hp - so as long as they don't decrease the power output, they've met their goal. I personally think they'll still have trouble meeting that goal.
Caveat Emptor.
> dyno run from a reputable facility proving
> your claims. you should be too, especially
> if you are having to save to
> accumulate this much money! my z has been
> dyno proven at 270 rwhp, and believe me,
> there is no such thing as one dollar per
> horsepower.
I agree completely. If it was that easy all the winning racers would be using it. Also, this is NOT any type of supercharger - all it's supposed to do is get better atomization by 'swirling' the intake charge before the fuel is added (and I seriously doubt that this will do anything other than add restriction, or possibly screw up the metering on a carb). By definition, a supercharger increases the mainifold pressure to some level above atmospheric pressure. A passive device like this swirly thing simply cannot do this. The best you can hope for is for it not to decrease the manifold pressure appreciably, due to the restriction it adds.
Actually, though, if you look at their website, the horsepower claims might not be that hard to meet - they claim typical increases of 0 to 35 hp - so as long as they don't decrease the power output, they've met their goal. I personally think they'll still have trouble meeting that goal.
Caveat Emptor.
Re: Rough picture of blower inside:
> For the same price, you can build a N/A
> motor that will do the same thing, or a
> Turbo motor that will do even better. (And
> you'll get better gas milage from a Turbo
> motor.)
> Chris Behney
> Redline Autosports
Wouldn't the supercharger be a more efficient and more reliable upgrade though? That is, over the turbo...??
> For the same price, you can build a N/A
> motor that will do the same thing, or a
> Turbo motor that will do even better. (And
> you'll get better gas milage from a Turbo
> motor.)
> Chris Behney
> Redline Autosports
Wouldn't the supercharger be a more efficient and more reliable upgrade though? That is, over the turbo...??
Joined
·
94 Posts
Re: friend did it, don't do it!
> I agree completely. If it was that easy all
> the winning racers would be using it. Also,
> this is NOT any type of supercharger - all
> it's supposed to do is get better
> atomization by 'swirling' the intake charge
> before the fuel is added (and I seriously
> doubt that this will do anything other than
> add restriction, or possibly screw up the
> metering on a carb). By definition, a
> supercharger increases the mainifold
> pressure to some level above atmospheric
> pressure. A passive device like this swirly
> thing simply cannot do this. The best you
> can hope for is for it not to decrease the
> manifold pressure appreciably, due to the
> restriction it adds.
> Actually, though, if you look at their
> website, the horsepower claims might not be
> that hard to meet - they claim typical
> increases of 0 to 35 hp - so as long as they
> don't decrease the power output, they've met
> their goal. I personally think they'll still
> have trouble meeting that goal.
> Caveat Emptor.
YES, YES, YES!
I have a friend who told me about this devise three months ago and explained how it would increase airflow, like getting the fluid swirling and dumping it out of a two liter bottle. It definitely will empty faster. Try it. However, he bought two of these swirly gigs, one for each of his cars. He has a mid 90s Taurus, and a late 80s Trooper. He said that he thought he maybe could feel a little more torque at low end on his Trooper, but it had no noticible affect on his Taurus.
So, Spend your hard earned dollars on a K & N filter and other intake and exaust mods, not the Swirly gig.
> I agree completely. If it was that easy all
> the winning racers would be using it. Also,
> this is NOT any type of supercharger - all
> it's supposed to do is get better
> atomization by 'swirling' the intake charge
> before the fuel is added (and I seriously
> doubt that this will do anything other than
> add restriction, or possibly screw up the
> metering on a carb). By definition, a
> supercharger increases the mainifold
> pressure to some level above atmospheric
> pressure. A passive device like this swirly
> thing simply cannot do this. The best you
> can hope for is for it not to decrease the
> manifold pressure appreciably, due to the
> restriction it adds.
> Actually, though, if you look at their
> website, the horsepower claims might not be
> that hard to meet - they claim typical
> increases of 0 to 35 hp - so as long as they
> don't decrease the power output, they've met
> their goal. I personally think they'll still
> have trouble meeting that goal.
> Caveat Emptor.
YES, YES, YES!
I have a friend who told me about this devise three months ago and explained how it would increase airflow, like getting the fluid swirling and dumping it out of a two liter bottle. It definitely will empty faster. Try it. However, he bought two of these swirly gigs, one for each of his cars. He has a mid 90s Taurus, and a late 80s Trooper. He said that he thought he maybe could feel a little more torque at low end on his Trooper, but it had no noticible affect on his Taurus.
So, Spend your hard earned dollars on a K & N filter and other intake and exaust mods, not the Swirly gig.
Joined
·
185 Posts
Re: Rough picture of blower inside:
> Wouldn't the supercharger be a more
> efficient and more reliable upgrade though?
> That is, over the turbo...??
For once, I finally don't know what to tell ya.(Sort of.)
I have heard the argument of Super VS. Turbo, for years, and I just don't know.
I know guy who put a super charger on his Camaro, and gas milage went up, power went up, top speed went up, and there didn't seem to be a down side. Then I have seen guys put a Turbo on thier imports, and the **** thing lasted for OVER 100,000 miles. I've never seen a super charger do that. In fact I've always seen in increase in fuel milage go up with a turbo, and down with a super, except in one case. The super chargers from what I've seen, always seem to be bad-ass torque monster down low, buut they loose the high end punch that a turbo has. Possibly dou to compression, amoung other things.
From personal experience, I have seen Domestic cars do better with supers, and imports do better with Turbos. I have always been pleased with the reliablity that I've seen with turbo owners. There is also a lot more flex in the area of adjustability with a turbo. It takes less power to run a turbo, boost pressure is capable of higher numbers, and you can still run a low compresion motor around town, but just bring the big numbers when you need it. Supers have a pretty complex system at times, ans you can get alot of adjustments out of some of them, but they just seem to rag out an engine faster. (Gaskets, boots, rods, etc) There are times when I wish I would havewent with a turbo, but. . .I just can't forget that look on the guy in the Firehawk Formula, when I pulled 2 car lengths, out of the hole. Turbo motor will never do that, due to compresion numbers.
There are ups and downs of all of the motor set-ups that someone can come up with. That's why all of us seem to have distinctly diffrent engines. If there ws one way that was best, I think that everyone would save up $3000, and do it. But, instead everyone goes there own way, and has an engine that is diffrent from everyone elses.
Chris Behney
Redline Autosports
> Wouldn't the supercharger be a more
> efficient and more reliable upgrade though?
> That is, over the turbo...??
For once, I finally don't know what to tell ya.(Sort of.)
I have heard the argument of Super VS. Turbo, for years, and I just don't know.
I know guy who put a super charger on his Camaro, and gas milage went up, power went up, top speed went up, and there didn't seem to be a down side. Then I have seen guys put a Turbo on thier imports, and the **** thing lasted for OVER 100,000 miles. I've never seen a super charger do that. In fact I've always seen in increase in fuel milage go up with a turbo, and down with a super, except in one case. The super chargers from what I've seen, always seem to be bad-ass torque monster down low, buut they loose the high end punch that a turbo has. Possibly dou to compression, amoung other things.
From personal experience, I have seen Domestic cars do better with supers, and imports do better with Turbos. I have always been pleased with the reliablity that I've seen with turbo owners. There is also a lot more flex in the area of adjustability with a turbo. It takes less power to run a turbo, boost pressure is capable of higher numbers, and you can still run a low compresion motor around town, but just bring the big numbers when you need it. Supers have a pretty complex system at times, ans you can get alot of adjustments out of some of them, but they just seem to rag out an engine faster. (Gaskets, boots, rods, etc) There are times when I wish I would havewent with a turbo, but. . .I just can't forget that look on the guy in the Firehawk Formula, when I pulled 2 car lengths, out of the hole. Turbo motor will never do that, due to compresion numbers.
There are ups and downs of all of the motor set-ups that someone can come up with. That's why all of us seem to have distinctly diffrent engines. If there ws one way that was best, I think that everyone would save up $3000, and do it. But, instead everyone goes there own way, and has an engine that is diffrent from everyone elses.
Chris Behney
Redline Autosports
Joined
·
107,597 Posts
Explanation of bottle test, swirlygig worthless.
> YES, YES, YES!
> I have a friend who told me about this
> devise three months ago and explained how it
> would increase airflow, like getting the
> fluid swirling and dumping it out of a two
> liter bottle. It definitely will empty
> faster. Try it.
There is a big difference between emptying water from a bottle and getting more air into your cylinders. The engine is more or less an open system, whereas the bottle is closed. With a bottle, water can't leave unless air comes in. When you get the water swirling, the centrifugal force holds the water to the sides of the bottle opening and allows water to leave and air to enter simultaneously, so you end up emptying the bottle faster. But try this: cut a big hole in the bottom of the bottle to let air in as you empty it. Now compare emptying the bottle with water swirling or not swirling. With this setup, the swirling water will take longer to empty. The passive swirlygig is worthless junk, plain and simple. It can only add restriction to airflow. If you wanted to improve combustion, you'd have to do what every automaker has done: change the flow of air into and within the combustion chamber itself. This doesn't add lots of power but does reduce unburned hydrocarbons and other pollutants, and the automakers have had to drastically improve the cleanliness of their engines lately.
Ask yourself this, if the swirlygig worked, why haven't automakers installed them on their cars from the factory, and don't tell me because it would be too expensive for them. Any fuel or horsepower advantage is worth huge bucks to them.
My $0.02
Spend your hard earned dollars on a K
> & N filter and other intake and exaust
> mods, not the Swirly gig.
> YES, YES, YES!
> I have a friend who told me about this
> devise three months ago and explained how it
> would increase airflow, like getting the
> fluid swirling and dumping it out of a two
> liter bottle. It definitely will empty
> faster. Try it.
There is a big difference between emptying water from a bottle and getting more air into your cylinders. The engine is more or less an open system, whereas the bottle is closed. With a bottle, water can't leave unless air comes in. When you get the water swirling, the centrifugal force holds the water to the sides of the bottle opening and allows water to leave and air to enter simultaneously, so you end up emptying the bottle faster. But try this: cut a big hole in the bottom of the bottle to let air in as you empty it. Now compare emptying the bottle with water swirling or not swirling. With this setup, the swirling water will take longer to empty. The passive swirlygig is worthless junk, plain and simple. It can only add restriction to airflow. If you wanted to improve combustion, you'd have to do what every automaker has done: change the flow of air into and within the combustion chamber itself. This doesn't add lots of power but does reduce unburned hydrocarbons and other pollutants, and the automakers have had to drastically improve the cleanliness of their engines lately.
Ask yourself this, if the swirlygig worked, why haven't automakers installed them on their cars from the factory, and don't tell me because it would be too expensive for them. Any fuel or horsepower advantage is worth huge bucks to them.
My $0.02
Spend your hard earned dollars on a K
> & N filter and other intake and exaust
> mods, not the Swirly gig.
Joined
·
94 Posts
Re: Explanation of bottle test, swirlygig worthles
> There is a big difference between emptying
> water from a bottle and getting more air
> into your cylinders. The engine is more or
> less an open system, whereas the bottle is
> closed. With a bottle, water can't leave
> unless air comes in. When you get the water
> swirling, the centrifugal force
> holds the water to the sides of the bottle
> opening and allows water to leave and air to
> enter simultaneously, so you end up emptying
> the bottle faster. But try this: cut a big
> hole in the bottom of the bottle to let air
> in as you empty it. Now compare emptying the
> bottle with water swirling or not swirling.
> With this setup, the swirling water will
> take longer to empty. The passive swirlygig
> is worthless junk, plain and simple. It can
> only add restriction to airflow. If you
> wanted to improve combustion, you'd have to
> do what every automaker has done: change the
> flow of air into and within the combustion
> chamber itself. This doesn't add lots of
> power but does reduce unburned hydrocarbons
> and other pollutants, and the automakers
> have had to drastically improve the
> cleanliness of their engines
> lately.
> Ask yourself this, if the swirlygig worked,
> why haven't automakers installed them on
> their cars from the factory, and don't tell
> me because it would be too expensive for
> them. Any fuel or horsepower advantage is
> worth huge bucks to them.
> My $0.02
> Spend your hard earned dollars on a K
I wasn't advocating or supporting their theory of swirling air being able to enter faster into the engine. Simply stating that example as they did to my friend when he called them to get more information. Actually, I believe it is Tonado Air not Swirl Whatever that uses this water evacuation example to sell their gadget. Unfortunately, he, my poor gullable friend, bought the whole package. Fortunately for me, he was honest enough to himself and me to admit it didn't do much, if anything.
I hope that clarifies, if their was ever any cloud.
Good luck.
Matt
> There is a big difference between emptying
> water from a bottle and getting more air
> into your cylinders. The engine is more or
> less an open system, whereas the bottle is
> closed. With a bottle, water can't leave
> unless air comes in. When you get the water
> swirling, the centrifugal force
> holds the water to the sides of the bottle
> opening and allows water to leave and air to
> enter simultaneously, so you end up emptying
> the bottle faster. But try this: cut a big
> hole in the bottom of the bottle to let air
> in as you empty it. Now compare emptying the
> bottle with water swirling or not swirling.
> With this setup, the swirling water will
> take longer to empty. The passive swirlygig
> is worthless junk, plain and simple. It can
> only add restriction to airflow. If you
> wanted to improve combustion, you'd have to
> do what every automaker has done: change the
> flow of air into and within the combustion
> chamber itself. This doesn't add lots of
> power but does reduce unburned hydrocarbons
> and other pollutants, and the automakers
> have had to drastically improve the
> cleanliness of their engines
> lately.
> Ask yourself this, if the swirlygig worked,
> why haven't automakers installed them on
> their cars from the factory, and don't tell
> me because it would be too expensive for
> them. Any fuel or horsepower advantage is
> worth huge bucks to them.
> My $0.02
> Spend your hard earned dollars on a K
I wasn't advocating or supporting their theory of swirling air being able to enter faster into the engine. Simply stating that example as they did to my friend when he called them to get more information. Actually, I believe it is Tonado Air not Swirl Whatever that uses this water evacuation example to sell their gadget. Unfortunately, he, my poor gullable friend, bought the whole package. Fortunately for me, he was honest enough to himself and me to admit it didn't do much, if anything.
I hope that clarifies, if their was ever any cloud.
Good luck.
Matt
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
- Status
Join the discussion
