Wow, you guys are slow. I will use your own example and try to break it into soft little bites for you. A supercharger has TRADE-OFFS, it makes more power but has downsides like cost, heat, noise, reliability, etc. A manufacturer has to weigh these issues in their design. Go ahead and tell us what the trade-off would be to a little piece of plastic that supposedly creates more power and fuel economy with no downside. There is no free lunch.
Or think of it this way, if this was some real tech breakthrough every OEM would be tripping over themselves to be paying Crawford for the patent. Why don't they? How is moving a sensor away from the thing it is supposed to sense better?
Or how about Crawford's own advertising, you can't even read it with a straight face:
Familiar with a cold air intake? Those increase the volume of the intake, subsequently pulling the sensor out of the air stream. The Eco-Block does the same exact thing, but does so by utilizing a spacer to pull the sensor out of the air stream. The benefits you receive with the Eco-Block vs. a cold air intake:
- A fraction of the price: $50 vs. hundreds.
- Maintains smaller intake volume, maintaining air velocity. The larger volume from an aftermarket cold air intake slows the air down, creating lag.
- Keeps the stock air box / intake in place, which keeps your car smog legal and warranty safe.
- Does not require a tune to maximize it's performance.
You are basically using the same tactics as a Flat Earther, you make false equivalencies to to try and disprove reality, but you can not actually explain why your own theory is valid.
