De-snorkeling 986: Yes or no?

[maytag]

Originally Posted by jaykay

Throttle response with a 74mm TB sufers without the snork

?
I certainly didn't notice this.
I don't think I've ever heard anyone suggest this, either.
Is this anecdotal? Or have you measured this?
What do you think would cause this?

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[jaykay]

I did measure it with a stopwatch way back.....3 to 5000 was significantly better. This was with a big 997 diverter tee. 5K onwards was not an issue. Unfortunately I did not record before and after times. I also reduced the diameter of the air duct from the MAF housing to the TB......I would surmise that this had to do with getting closer to optimum intake charge velocity and acoustics

The snorkel also has what everyone calls a drip tray. I call it an air deflector and think it is designed to direct air into the snork and air box.

[maytag]

Originally Posted by jaykay

I did measure it with a stopwatch way back.....3 to 5000 was significantly better. This was with a big 997 diverter tee. 5K onwards was not an issue. Unfortunately I did not record before and after times. I also reduced the diameter of the air duct from the MAF housing to the TB......I would surmise that this had to do with getting closer to optimum intake charge velocity and acoustics



The snorkel also has what everyone calls a drip tray. I call it an air deflector and think it is designed to direct air into the snork and air box.

It was enough different that you could measure it with a STOPWATCH!?

Jaykay, with respect man, I'm not sure how a guy would do that with any measure of repeatability / accuracy.

I'll give ya the credit though, because what you've done with that stopwatch is more than what I'VE done to try to measure throttle response.... which is nothing. ;-)

Your idea of reducing the size of the intake "pipe" is also counter to conventional wisdom. Again: i haven't tried it, but I'm sure having a hard time imagining improvement from this. Velocity is great, but not if you can't get the volume. That's the whole POINT behind the larger tb.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk

[itsnotanova]

I believe de-snorkeling might have a positive effect only on 1997-2002 boxsters as 2003/04 have a shorter and larger opening snorkel. Porsche thought there was a need to make it breath better.

[jaykay]

I am just sharing my experience and don't proport to be an expert. Yes, on my car with 74mm and 997 tee, changing the pipe and adding the stock snork made a measurable difference down low. One did not even need a stopwatch to appreciate it. It was that huge.

Your experience may vary. I have also found that the stock tune works really well with the 74mm whereas canned products do not. Again your experience may vary. One thing to note is that I have stock catted manifolds.

Trust me no one likes intake noise more than I so this empirical data was hard to accept. I have even made my own big short snork. You should be able to find it on here somewhere.

If you are tracking and are up at 5K plus most of the time this change may not be what you want

Originally Posted by maytag

It was enough different that you could measure it with a STOPWATCH!?

Jaykay, with respect man, I'm not sure how a guy would do that with any measure of repeatability / accuracy.

I'll give ya the credit though, because what you've done with that stopwatch is more than what I'VE done to try to measure throttle response.... which is nothing. ;-)

Your idea of reducing the size of the intake "pipe" is also counter to conventional wisdom. Again: i haven't tried it, but I'm sure having a hard time imagining improvement from this. Velocity is great, but not if you can't get the volume. That's the whole POINT behind the larger tb.

Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk