986 Forum - The Community for Porsche Boxster & Cayman Owners - View Single Post

MNBoxster · 03-08-2006, 10:21 AM

[QUOTE=SD987]MN,

You may be right in your dismissal of reports on the negative impacts of desnorkeling as urban myth and anecdotal, but generally speaking I'd value the input of someone who actually has a 987 and desnorkeled versus the theorizing of a 986 owner.

The owner I'm referencing is from PPBB. His comments are below and the whole thread can be found by searching their archives with "987" and "snorkel" using the "AND" search-qualifier.

Hi,

First off, not too appreciative of the slight that because I don't own a 987 somehow my knowledge of the Car, and it's workings, is less accurate, but whatever...

Second, I read those posts on the other Board and dismissed them the first time. The Lister's experiment is not controlled in ANY way. Reversing a Trip is not the same Trip - You go Up the Mountain and get X MPG, now you descend taking the same road, same speed - MPG improves - Valid..??

He goes on to speculate that he's allowing less Air into the Engine. Not at all true because the Engine DRAWS in the Air it needs, there is no RAM effect necessary or else how do you rev the Engine in a stationary position? But, even if he were correct, how does that consume more Gas as the MAF sensor would detect less Air and signal the DME to CUT the Fuel supply, not increase it?

Did he maintan the same shift points, speed? - he only admits to thinking he did so. Did he hit the same number of Stop Signs (for the same period) or the same number of Stop Lights? Was he on level ground the entire trip? Did he operate the OBC correctly? He admits to a Temp and Weight difference which squewed his comparison, although I admit not 10 MPG worth. He seems to infer that the Car was recently serviced as he had use of a Loaner, was the Battery disconnected during this Service or the DME reset? It could have been in Memory Acquisition for the initial trip(s). None of this is detailed in his Report.

Just explain to me exactly what mechanism is at play here to cause this variation, how it could happen, and you may convert me. Otherwise, my explanation is the much more credible of the two, whether I own a 987 or not. I'm not even heavily disputing his variation in MPG, only that the Snorkle, or lack of it, was somehow the cause.

You wanna believe this guy and his Methodology, OK, that's your right, but don't profer it here as FACT that others may act upon. And don't arbitrarily impune my knowledge and experience just because you're willing to be led down the proverbial path without any examination of the facts. I don't know which is sillier, his assertion, or your believing it...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

03-08-2006, 10:21 AM	#15
MNBoxster Registered User Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota, USA Posts: 3,308	[QUOTE=SD987]MN, You may be right in your dismissal of reports on the negative impacts of desnorkeling as urban myth and anecdotal, but generally speaking I'd value the input of someone who actually has a 987 and desnorkeled versus the theorizing of a 986 owner. The owner I'm referencing is from PPBB. His comments are below and the whole thread can be found by searching their archives with "987" and "snorkel" using the "AND" search-qualifier. Hi, First off, not too appreciative of the slight that because I don't own a 987 somehow my knowledge of the Car, and it's workings, is less accurate, but whatever... Second, I read those posts on the other Board and dismissed them the first time. The Lister's experiment is not controlled in ANY way. Reversing a Trip is not the same Trip - You go Up the Mountain and get X MPG, now you descend taking the same road, same speed - MPG improves - Valid..?? He goes on to speculate that he's allowing less Air into the Engine. Not at all true because the Engine DRAWS in the Air it needs, there is no RAM effect necessary or else how do you rev the Engine in a stationary position? But, even if he were correct, how does that consume more Gas as the MAF sensor would detect less Air and signal the DME to CUT the Fuel supply, not increase it? Did he maintan the same shift points, speed? - he only admits to thinking he did so. Did he hit the same number of Stop Signs (for the same period) or the same number of Stop Lights? Was he on level ground the entire trip? Did he operate the OBC correctly? He admits to a Temp and Weight difference which squewed his comparison, although I admit not 10 MPG worth. He seems to infer that the Car was recently serviced as he had use of a Loaner, was the Battery disconnected during this Service or the DME reset? It could have been in Memory Acquisition for the initial trip(s). None of this is detailed in his Report. Just explain to me exactly what mechanism is at play here to cause this variation, how it could happen, and you may convert me. Otherwise, my explanation is the much more credible of the two, whether I own a 987 or not. I'm not even heavily disputing his variation in MPG, only that the Snorkle, or lack of it, was somehow the cause. You wanna believe this guy and his Methodology, OK, that's your right, but don't profer it here as FACT that others may act upon. And don't arbitrarily impune my knowledge and experience just because you're willing to be led down the proverbial path without any examination of the facts. I don't know which is sillier, his assertion, or your believing it... Happy Motoring!... Jim'99 Last edited by MNBoxster; 03-08-2006 at 10:32 AM.