Extra horsepower

[StephenRae]

http://www.turbonator.com/index.html

I tend to click on odd adverts in ten-tenths with the vague hope that it helps the site. This one looks a gem! I don't think for a moment it will work, but if it did would it be legal in, say FF1600. It doesn't have any moving parts so it should be.

[greenamex2]

Sounds about as believable as those magnets that you clamp round fuel lines.

Would Ford etc really ignore these types of 'technology' if you really got a 30% increase in power or fuel economy?

Let alone the likes of Cosworth etc?

Somebody must have really screwed up the design of the intake system for this to generate the improvements claimed!

Either that or it is reducing airflow and hence is either reducing fuel consumption or richening up the mixture to improve power on an engine running too weak.

[StephenRae]

Denis...On the theme of getting more air into an FF1600..how about leaving out the plug normally used for the servo and richening up the mixture to compensate for the extra air. It probably wouldn't tick over and you may have to block it off for start up but it would suck more air!

[johnw]

I've seen this advertised in North America as the Tornado.

Might just try ten in series to see if the BM will run on air, whilst giving an extra 350 hp

[1200Datto27]

Maybe if they where mounted directly to the inlet ports would it make a difference, otherwise the pulses from the valves opening and closing would cancel out any "vortices" generated prior to the throttle plate (another item that would stop a swirling flow.) Maybe these people notice the performance improvement from their lighten wallets.

[gttouring]

concerning technology tat Ford over looks for more eonmoy and power.
well, they use on few cars (Cobra R, adn some crate programs) Crank scrapers, and windage trays.
now i have done tests and a windage tray (i am designing engine parts and such at work) in fact has "found" 17 hp and 15 lbsft of torque on a ceratin V8 and V6 engines, and this is a simple or intricate addition between the crank and the oil pan...
now it is extra material and designing these things and making a uasable prototype takes a few days (and many man hours of labor), yet the engines and cars we race rarely ever have anything like this to begin with, economy and power increase with their addition, as it keeps the parasitic drag of oil around the crank off, and and fluid causing rouble around movingparts.
now some cars have a rudimentary or very simply metal fin that act as a scraper or an oil dam from the engine and pan but the designs are inefficient and frnakly 'cheap'
(honda b16,b18's have this, mazda 2.0 has an integral girdle, with such thickness and coverage a tray is impossible, but the Ford V8's and GM v8's and V6's have nothing like this, nor do toyota 6's or 8's.)
so a large manufacturer does indeed overlook some things in the over all plan as it is
to expensive to match with target price
target buyer, won't care or notice
conversely target audience will mdify the car and engine to the point of unrecognizable from the factory.
but the "turbulator" is something i haven't tested, and frankly it is so small it is another OEM thing to break or lose or slip and not work right..

[Goran Malmberg]

We should be careful with these 30% power gain claims.
But as gttouring say, a good oilpan is worth some Hp. I did somtesting with my 302 Falconeer&Dunn motor, using a lot of different design dry sump pan. At worst there was 1,1/2 litre oil trapped in the rotating assembley. The best pan ended up with 1/2-3/4 litre. This was easely measured by a oiltank sender.
Goran Malmberg

[greenamex2]

stephenrae - Now theres a cheat you don't see often enough! Having defective airbox/carb etc gaskets seems to happen a lot in karting though. These kart boys really do need to source better quality gaskets!

And it's amazing how often seals or pipes fail near turbo pressure control valves! Not to mention how often the actuating arms get bent!

'Free' power gains like dry sumping, oil scrapers, lightweight flywheels etc etc all make good scientific sense.

Something that claims to make your air all wurly so it improves fuel atomisation, is totaly universal and doesn't require any remapping is just plain dodgy.

Has anybody tested any of the current wonder gizmo's and been able to prove a repeatable gain on an engine dyno?

[dtype38]

Just had a quick look at the old Turbonator and it probably can improve things on a very badly designed intake system, but I wouldn't think it would have a noticable effect on a well designed one. Be careful not to completely dismiss the properties of swirly air though. Everyone thought Mr Dyson was barking until he actually got it to work. I've also seen some really strange refrigerators that have no moving parts and work on swirly air alone... and they really work!

[Dave Brand]

Originally posted by dtype38
Everyone thought Mr Dyson was barking until he actually got it to work.

Not everyone - he uses a principle which has been in use for years on industrial dust plants.

[dtype38]

So what's better. A man with a barking idea that sounds just plausible enough to get ignorant people to part with their money, or a man with a sound idea that appears so implausible he goes broke trying to convince ignorant people that it will work?

[R59]

You fit one of these Turbonaters, but it achieves next to no improvement because your head tuner's work already induces lots of swirl into the chamber. Or... your bog-standard head screws up all of the swirling that the Turbonater has created.

Never get something for nothing, not in this game! As has been said, if it's soooo good, why don't the likes of Ford, GM, etc.. all use it?

Like the magnets on pipes, and fullers earth to remove the red dye... oops, that's another thing...

Rob

[Al Weyman]

Well as far as the oil scrapers go on V8 Chevys I understand to get them to be effective the scraper has to be very close to the crank shaft and would be have to be be custom fitted and trimmed for each engine so not exactly a cheap bolt on. Also the effects are only benifitcial at high revs and I really dont think would be benifitial or worth the expence on a street driven motor, A windage tray as I use on my engines is easier to fit but is more about oil control than out and out power.

PS the windage tray is usually used with a deep sump which would also be impractical on a street motor.

[gttouring]

ah or stock pan with a welded scraper (ford 2300 pinto, turbo4's, and 302, and sbc stock pan...) and the tray well that is a custum part... all work well too

[shiny side up!]

Having seen many a 'faulty' gasket in my karting days, I decided to test the idea on a flowbench to see if it actually helped. It seems like it would... more air into the engine, no?

Well, in the tests I ran I found that a 'faulty' gasket actually flowed 5-15% LESS than a good gasket, depending on the size of the 'flaw'... basically, the extra air entering through the gasket met the primary airflow at a high angle and disrupted it, netting less total CFM...

So, next time you see that cheat, you can rest assured that they are hurting themselves, not helping!

[StephenRae]

I heard that someone once made a sump with a 'see through' panel, the oil thrown off the crank looked like a big roll of cotton wool. Apart from taking longer to get back into the system is this using up power? Removing it with a contoured scraper must sap some power.

[greenamex2]

StephenRae - The power gain is coming from less power from the 'explosion' on that cycle being used to accelerate the crank because it is lighter with less oil on it. I expect the additional friction created by the scraper is far outweighed by this reduction.

Oh, and the reduction in oil mist also means there is less aerodynamic drag to overcome on the crank, again reducing the power wasted just producing the power!

[Goran Malmberg]

Originally posted by StephenRae
I heard that someone once made a sump with a 'see through' panel, the oil thrown off the crank looked like a big roll of cotton wool. Apart from taking longer to get back into the system is this using up power? Removing it with a contoured scraper must sap some power.

I read it myself in a book. If memory serves it was described by Smoky Yunick. However both Carrol Smith and van Walkenbourg claim a 20 horsepower gain by using a properly designed drysump on a V8. The oil acts as a converter brake. Also, the losses is converted in to oil heating and air mixing, all very bad things.

Drive a few laps, stop the car after a heavy cornering and drain the pan. No more than a pint of oil should come out.
The rest should be in the oil tank, provided the car has a dry sump system.

The problem is that everything takes so much time to handle.
Goran Malmberg

[gttouring]

and remember that a crank scraper doesn't actually touch the crank-it gets close so it really poses no penalty in terms of friction on the crank, or anything for the crank to overcome.

[greenamex2]

gttouring - All things are connected. Whilst the scraper doesn't touch the crank it does touch the oil which is touching the crank so there is a VERY small amount of energy being consumed. But it is probably so small as to be irrelevant.

[Goran Malmberg]

Originally posted by Denis Bassom
gttouring - All things are connected. Whilst the scraper doesn't touch the crank it does touch the oil which is touching the crank so there is a VERY small amount of energy being consumed. But it is probably so small as to be irrelevant.

Everything takes energy, even to bring the oil away from the rotating assebley in a hurry.
We got two things to worrie about. 1, gettint the oil away from the crank. 2, making it stay in the pan then. (Beside evacuating tecnique with a drysump and baffling with a wet sump).
Those 1 and 2 is about the same for both wet and dry sump system. Myself I use a separate oilscraper and under it a "drainback area" to the pan-sump. (Wet sump system).
You may take a look at my site. http://hem.passagen.se/hemipanter/ klick "fabrication pictures". However, I do use another scraper design on my dry systems. I may mail pics in privat for those who want some.
Earlier I used scraper that was figure shaped to the crank.
Today I mostley have curved scrapers that direct the oil to the pan.
Goran Malmberg

[StephenRae]

Originally posted by Denis Bassom
StephenRae - The power gain is coming from less power from the 'explosion' on that cycle being used to accelerate the crank because it is lighter with less oil on it. I expect the additional friction created by the scraper is far outweighed by this reduction.

Oh, and the reduction in oil mist also means there is less aerodynamic drag to overcome on the crank, again reducing the power wasted just producing the power!

Dennis...does the crank actually have to accelerate the oil on the power stroke? As the oil is not 'attached' to the crank it could accelerate and the oil would 'catch up' in it's own time, however with a scraper the power is lost immediately.
I think I'm just playing Devils Advocate as I do use a scraper!

[greenamex2]

At some point the oils mass has to be added to that of the crank. Given that the crank is coated with oil and that nothing happens instantly I would still expect some effect.

Maybe the principle benefit of a crank scraper is the reduction in density (ie oil mist) that the crank has to pass through?

[StephenRae]

I think you are right...there is less oil on the bores and less work for the oil rings to do.

[dtype38]

I don't have a crank scraper and was considering getting one, but I worry that I will overheat my bores without all the oil splashing about. My cylinder block has no water circulation from the cooling system (only the head is circulated) and I rely on that oil to keep the liners and pistons cool.