I've relied on this forum and it's posters in the past to help me out with some things - so I thought I'd detail my experience with two things recently that hopefully will help some others out here.

TORNADO (CYCLONE, TURBONATOR, et al)

We've all seen the ads, and the claims - and it's been discussed infinitum here before as to it's merits. Well, two months ago I decided to order one - with a 30 day money back guarantee - and see for myself.

I must admit, I didn't expect it would work - but I did have this little twinge of hope - that maybe I would be pleasantly surprised.

Via crunching actual mileage/refeuling data, as well as relying on the build in trip/mileage computer on my 98 LXi - I dropped in a Cyclone to see what would happen.

After 26 days of usage, and incredibly close observation, here's what I experienced:

1) When I first put it in, around 9pm one night, I back out of the garage and took it for a spin. That night, and the day after, I was convinced the car felt more responsive.

2) After that, I began to get a completely different impression. It began to feel (and continued) like it was perhaps not quite as responsive before, it seemed to labour a little more when passing or accelerating.

3) Average temperature during my test period actually sank below temperatures experienced before and after the test, which I thought may have had some impact on this result - my average fuel consumption during this period was 18.6 L per 100m. Prior to the test, I had been experiencing 17.4.

4) Upon removing the Cyclone and returning for my refund (which I have yet to see credited to Visa) my mileage returned to the 17.4 / 17.2 range within half a tank. After refueling, my consumption average dropped to 16.6. It was starting to warm moderately during this period.

Conclusion: There is no doubt at all to me that both my performance and mileage were affected by this device - both negatively. I will not discount entirely the possibility that perhaps this unit would have a different, more positive result on another application - with a different air intake set up - but I find that highly dubious.

SYNTHETIC MOTOR OIL

In another life, I spent 10 years in the automotive after-market parts field. As a manager of a local parts outlet, I had the opportunity to attend many product information sessions put on by various manufacturers. I can tell you that the message then from Pennzoil, Quaker State and Valvoline was all the same. That the main benefit of synthetic was that it would last longer in the crankcase without breaking down and thereby demonstrating decreased efficiency leading to premature engine wear. Conventional motor oil, with it's hosts of detergents and additives was state of the art - and worked just as well if it was faithfully changed every 3000km.

That, incidentally was around 1997 - and I have begun to wonder just how much of that was true - or perhaps how much has changed since then.

Well, for the first time (outside of synthetic diff oil I ran in my Tahoe's 10.5) I decided to use synthetic engine oil in my 98 3.2l LXi. That was weeks ago. Here's what I have experienced:

1) The engine seems to run smoother (it was always very smooth and well tuned) but it's smooth and quiet to a point where even my wife commented on it.
2) I have not noticed any power discernible power difference
3) My average fuel consumption has progressively dropped, from 15.2, to 14.4, for the last week it's been in the 13's.

I drive the same route to and from work (18km) per day, 5 days a week.

Conclusion: I don't know whether or not one could/should go longer in-between oil changes with synthetic oil, but there is no question that synthetic has had a very positive impact on my vehicle with respect to mileage and quality of drive.


None of this is scientific at all, of course, and may very well illicit a few "well duh" from some, but if these experiences can be of use to anyone, it was worth the time typing.

-Scott