Removed Intake Muffler, Sounds great!

[Brad Roberts]

Anyone recall the Excellence article where they pulled the pants down on EVO's intake tubes?? Ha ha the car's made LESS hp than stock?? If it isn't raining here in SoCal, the car will go to dyno Tuesday.

How about you ask TTP to show us their finding's? Surely they tested the stock components so they could improve on 100's of Porsche engineers work (partially being sarcastic) I just get tired of the BS claims by armchair engineers who make something for our cars and never thoroughly test it.. but release it. Kinda like MickeySoft.



B

[edevlin]

"How about you ask TTP to show us their finding's? Surely they tested the stock components so they could improve on 100's of Porsche engineers work (partially being sarcastic) I just get tired of the BS claims by armchair engineers who make something for our cars and never thoroughly test it.. but release it. Kinda like MickeySoft."

Good point, I was quite suprised to what claims were made by many companies for performance enhancements to our cars. I think the TTP intake I am using was really designed for their twin turbo mod, which could use the higher flow rate that the intake provides.

Based on my experience, TTP seems to be making pretty reasonable claims for their performance enhancing products. They say you should get about 25hp when you use the combination of their intake, exhaust and chip. Those numbers are pretty much what I got on the dyno when I added them all to my car.

That beign said, in hindsight, I would be suprised if the stock intake on 2.7L cars offers much restriction in airflow, even if cars are fitted with modified exhaust systems, but it sure sounds sweet....


Ed,

[jaykay]

Early on in this thread (1st page) there was a diagram posted showing clamp #4 and a small hose teeing off the main intake pipe. What is this for and how do the after market pipes handle this?

[Shehadehd]

So I removed the intake tube on my 2000 boxster and it looks a lot different than the ones described here. I wonder if that bulky portion is the resonator and if it will make a difference to cut out and replace. Can anyone chime in who knows something. Thanks.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

[Topless]

Definitely part of the intake tuning. It looks like an expansion chamber to change the resonant frequency of the system. You get to decide if it is important on your car. A brief reference on similar designs:

Patent US5572966 - Method and composite resonator for tuning an engine air induction system - Google Patents

[Shehadehd]

Originally Posted by Topless

Definitely part of the intake tuning. It looks like an expansion chamber to change the resonant frequency of the system. You get to decide if it is important on your car. A brief reference on similar designs:

Patent US5572966 - Method and composite resonator for tuning an engine air induction system - Google Patents

I appreciate the help. I think I'll leave it for now. If my friend, who did the deletion, has a much nicer sound than mine, maybe I'll consider retrofitting the old intake and see how it pans out in the 2.7l engine.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk - now Free

[epapp]

Yes that friend of yours just did the 2.5L resonator delete. I capped it with a rubber 1.5" cap from the hardware store meant for plumbing (in the section with PVC etc.).

At first it seemed to be not much of a change, but then you hit the gas at 3000rpm in 2nd gear and you really notice the difference. It is surely a nice sound. Louder than just de-snorkeling. If you hit the gas in first gear off the line, it becomes a gut wrenching intake beast.

No...its not drone-y or fart cannon sounding. It sounds like a beast taking a huge gulp of air.

[Shehadehd]

Originally Posted by jaykay

Early on in this thread (1st page) there was a diagram posted showing clamp #4 and a small hose teeing off the main intake pipe. What is this for and how do the after market pipes handle this?

I'd like to second this question. I'm looking to put the 2.5l intake on the 2.7l but I noticed some engines with the auxiliary tube and some without? I'm not sure what to put into google to find some literature on it. Anyone have a clue what it's for?

[Shehadehd]

Just wanted to update the thread for anyone with a 2.7l who thought it might be possible to use the 2.5l air intake to do the resonance chamber deletion; it isn't. Well, at least without some modification.

The intake tubes have different size fittings, with the 2.5l being slightly larger, in addition to a different form factor that prevents the older intake from fitting into the 2.7l. Basically, the amount of work it takes to retrofit the air intake would be better spent modifying the current one or make an entirely new intake track (at least IMO).

Sometime this week I'm going to head back to the salvage yard to see if I can get the 2.5l intake swapped for the proper intake. After modifying it I'll report back any breakthroughs.

[jaykay]

The throttle body position for the 2.5 is much different than the 2.7. In the stock configuration the 2.7 looks quite similar to the 3.2 intake plumbing as far as I recall. The 2.5 tb is oriented almost traight back.

The easiest route to remove the muffler or helmholtz chamber would to cut it off just be before the expansion (2.7 and 3.2) and fit a 45 degree elbow with appropriate leg lengths....or something close to it.

If you are really going to do this please do some timed accelerations from 3K to 4K rpm before and after the chamber deletion. I would be interested in throttle response times. Yes this will get you more sound but ....will it affect performance?

I personally would leave the chamber in there if you can...you are not piping a ipd plenum or other but I definitely like some test engine acceleration times in 3rd and fourth gear from 3K before and after.

One of the reasons I have not put in a 987 air box in is that it requires the removal of the integral helmholtz chamber for fitment. I don't don't want to do all that work only to find a performance loss due to poor acoustics

[CJ_Boxster]

I posted this so long ago and I'm embarrassed at how poor my explanation was... in a nutshell, i remove the muffler and plugged the hole on the intake pipe with a cap from a Gatorade bottle.

I was but a 25-27 year old baby when I first posted this wild discription that i called a DIY back in 2008, Im 32 now... without a boxster anymore. I was just overly enthusiastic when i first posted this thread, i meant well but I should have taken a sedative when before posting Anyway, It was nice stopping in for a bit.

[tommy583]

Brad did you ever get the dyno readings from this mod?

I bought a spare intake tube from Woody and think i'm going to try this. My plan is to cut out the section that has the hole for the muffler. Then use a silicone coupler join the two sections together. If it loses power, throws a CEL or doesn't sound better i'll just put the old one back in.

[Ben006]

You'll loose a bit of low end torque, get a slight increase in top end, and a different noise (when I did I lost the growl at low rpm for a slight increase of sound at higv rpm, but did not get a better sound)
But if you think about it, you spend more time between 1800 and 3000 than above 4500, so it won't benefit you everyday!

If you can do it for cheap, do it, you'll see for yourself if you like it
It won't light the CEL or make the car run rough.

Ben