Has anyone deleted the resonator in the stock airbox? or made a larger snorkel?

[Xdragonxb0i]

Okay so i bought Part #02606 (47mm-50mm) to delete the big resonator from advance auto
Do not buy this product, it is slightly to big, I say the hole is around 45mm. Long story short, it is too big and will crack the the airbox. After i cracked it i shaved the rubber piece with a dremel drill to make it smaller to fit.

[Kodename47]

I posted these earlier on:

Originally Posted by Kodename47

I also thought I'd add some measurements (in mm as I'm British ):

Main Resonator outlet:
Outer Diameter - 50mm
Inner Diameter - 46mm

Pipe Resonator:
OD - 30mm

Snorkel Resonator Connections (Both the same):
OD - 32mm
ID - 29mm

Basically if you want to cap them, use the OD. If you want to try and plug them then use the ID measurements.

[zoomzoomers]

Have you guys seen any benefit from deleting those resonator boxes? Or is it just to clean up the engine bay?

[Tim_Asphalt_FRS]

Originally Posted by zoomzoomers

Have you guys seen any benefit from deleting those resonator boxes? Or is it just to clean up the engine bay?

Both intake noise & cleaning up the engine bay. Power is the same.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Kodename47]

Originally Posted by Tim_Asphalt_FRS

Both intake noise & cleaning up the engine bay. Power is the same

Is everyone happy that theirs still feels good? Whilst I've proven on the dyno that power isn't any worse I sometimes feel at low RPM partial to full throttle isn't as reactive as it once was. This could be due to my testing with the holes all open and the trims all going out on the ECU but part of me thinks that the main resonator may have been there for that reason. After all it is making the air box roughly 15% larger in volume. Anyone got thoughts on that?

I'm waiting on a map update from Litchfield and then I'll see what I think, but seeing as it's not hard to put back on or remove again I may try it back in.

Apart from that, I'm still happy with it. Car is running well and the induction noise is awesome, especially with the resonator in the pipe blocked.

[vtmike]

Originally Posted by Kodename47

Is everyone happy that theirs still feels good? Whilst I've proven on the dyno that power isn't any worse I sometimes feel at low RPM partial to full throttle isn't as reactive as it once was. This could be due to my testing with the holes all open and the trims all going out on the ECU but part of me thinks that the main resonator may have been there for that reason. After all it is making the air box roughly 15% larger in volume. Anyone got thoughts on that?

I'm waiting on a map update from Litchfield and then I'll see what I think, but seeing as it's not hard to put back on or remove again I may try it back in.

Apart from that, I'm still happy with it. Car is running well and the induction noise is awesome, especially with the resonator in the pipe blocked.

Did you do a pre and post dyno? You would think as large as the opening left for the main resonator you would be pulling in a lot more hot air and making less power. It's been proven with removing the snorkel.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk HD

[maj75]

Originally Posted by sierra

Makes you wonder why they went to the trouble of working out the volumes, making and fitting them? They just clutter the engine bay up with cheap plastic.
Perhaps they engineered these first and decided to try the sound tube option later, liked it and didn't want to mess with the result by deleting the resonators?

You really are too much, could you please clutter up this thread with more uninformed crap

The resonators are to quiet external noise. Yes, they are carefully designed, but they are not designed to maximize performance. The resonators are designed to meet the external noise to the levels required by the EU. The EU has very strict noise levels and great effort is required by auto manufacturers to comply. The best that could be said for the resonators is that they are designed to minimize the loss of power due to the efforts to quiet the intake.

Toyota felt the sound tube was needed because the external intake noise had been made so quiet that enthusiast drivers would not appreciate the driving experience. They added the sound tube in an effort to get intake noise into the cabin where it could be heard by the driver and not heard by the external mics of EU testing equipment.

You are welcome. :happy0180:

[tennisfreak]

According to this: http://www.ehow.com/info_12156112_ai...onator-do.html

Resonator boxes serve a real purpose and can have a negative impact if you remove them.

Not sure I want to get rid of mine for no reason.

[sierra]

Originally Posted by maj75

You really are too much, could you please clutter up this thread with more uninformed crap

The resonators are to quiet external noise. Yes, they are carefully designed, but they are not designed to maximize performance. The resonators are designed to meet the external noise to the levels required by the EU. The EU has very strict noise levels and great effort is required by auto manufacturers to comply. The best that could be said for the resonators is that they are designed to minimize the loss of power due to the efforts to quiet the intake.

Toyota felt the sound tube was needed because the external intake noise had been made so quiet that enthusiast drivers would not appreciate the driving experience. They added the sound tube in an effort to get intake noise into the cabin where it could be heard by the driver and not heard by the external mics of EU testing equipment.

You are welcome. :happy0180:

Good to see you making an effort instead of the usual one liners but perhaps a little harsh?

[Kodename47]

Originally Posted by vtmike

Did you do a pre and post dyno? You would think as large as the opening left for the main resonator you would be pulling in a lot more hot air and making less power. It's been proven with removing the snorkel.

No pre-dyno but I organized a dyno day for local owners and on my standard map my power was in line with what I would expect. I may speak to my dyno guy and run some tests. I doubt that the power differences would even be noticeable tbh.

BTW, I'm not running with an holes open to engine heat, my pics are a couple of pages back in this thread, so the main resonator hole is blanked off. I'm just wondering if it's worth putting the main resonator back in to see if it cures it. I'm not on about a loss of power, its more a case of c.2k RPM going from part to full throttle it doesn't seem to pick up like I remember. Maybe its just me....?

Tennis freak, that link has a good point which I was/am aware of and why I asked what others think. I'm the kind of person that will try and test a theory. There is a nice improvement in sound with my setup and it makes good power. Is it better than with the full stock resonators in place, maybe I should prove it?

[vtmike]

Originally Posted by Kodename47

No pre-dyno but I organized a dyno day for local owners and on my standard map my power was in line with what I would expect. I may speak to my dyno guy and run some tests. I doubt that the power differences would even be noticeable tbh.

BTW, I'm not running with an holes open to engine heat, my pics are a couple of pages back in this thread, so the main resonator hole is blanked off. I'm just wondering if it's worth putting the main resonator back in to see if it cures it. I'm not on about a loss of power, its more a case of c.2k RPM going from part to full throttle it doesn't seem to pick up like I remember. Maybe its just me....?

Tennis freak, that link has a good point which I was/am aware of and why I asked what others think. I'm the kind of person that will try and test a theory. There is a nice improvement in sound with my setup and it makes good power. Is it better than with the full stock resonators in place, maybe I should prove it.

Oh ok, I got confused with the holes open comment. There was someone talking earlier about running with it open and having an extra orifice increasing the flow area. Seemed like a bad idea to me.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2

[Craig]

Almost done with my snorkel design. Gonna have a prototype done in a few weeks, heading to a dyno if all works out during weekend of April 20th or 27th. I'm excited to say it will fall under $125 as far as end user cost is concerned.

[Kodename47]

Originally Posted by vtmike

Oh ok, I got confused with the holes open comment. There was someone talking earlier about running with it open and having an extra orifice increasing the flow area. Seemed like a bad idea to me.

Air will take the path with least resistance, so I'd assume that the air box would get more air from that hole than the snorkel meaning higher IATs but without any real benefit except for induction noise.

Mine was driven with a few different configs while I waited for the delivery of the parts to finish the install and I data logged etc. My current setup is no resonators what-so-ever, all holes smoothed off but with the noise pipe still in place. I might dyno test with/without main resonator and the "bulb" one under the intake pipe. My dyno guy is away at the moment and I'll wait until my updated flash arrives. I'd bet the difference is so minimal though.

[vtmike]

Originally Posted by Craig

Almost done with my snorkel design. Gonna have a prototype done in a few weeks, heading to a dyno if all works out during weekend of April 20th or 27th. I'm excited to say it will fall under $125 as far as end user cost is concerned.

Nice, I'm hoping to dyno my car soon. I have the perrin inlet hose, drop in filter, nameless downpipe, and axleback. Thinking about seeing if I can increase the seal between the air box and snorkel. Seems to be some room for improvement there. You have any pics of your snorkel?

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2