I am willing to be convinced, so I went to the web site and read what was there.
It had all the signs of a con.
For example they admitted that if you put a car fitted with it on a dyno you wouldn't see any improvement. But they blamed that on dynos not being a good enough test to show up the improvement. Then a bit further along they admitted that if you measured the emissions of a vehicle fitted with the product you also wouldn't see any difference. But again this wasn't because the product didn't do anything.
Supposedly it introduced turbulence into the airflow in the collector part of the manifold. Maybe that could have some effect on mixture homogeniety and atomisation for a car with single point injection. But its not going to any measurable effect on a car with multipoint injection. And by saying the dyno doesn't show any, and an emissions test doesn't show any, they're admitting it doesn't.
The only effect is on the belief of someone who's just paid good money for it who will imagine anything that they've wasted their money.
But then that 's the case with a lot of things car hotter-uppers do to their cars. They tell themselves that this or that "improves power" when all its done is created the perception the car's going faster because its making more noise, or that "improves throttle response" when if it has its only by virtue of lightening their wallet.
If you can't see something in the results a dyno produce, and you can't see it in the results an emission test produce, it ain't there.