WOW you must be getting better gas then us in the lower 49 states to be getting 47 at highway speeds. I usually only get that high driving around 30-40mph and I have some better lubes in my engine and tranny and it is a manual. Of course each time you have to stop at that high mileage will really kill it - like you can loose 1mpg for each 35mph stop. I get hit all the time coming back into town so I have a limit to what I can get.

Ok, another newbie here to bug you with questions :) I read 80% of this thread and haven't seen a single tC owner chime in, so I figure why not be the one to ask if this works for us, too... Again, I am a n00b, and having just read through this, I'm anxious to dive under the hood and remove the snorkel - if indeed the tC has one hahaha

Any thoughts/experiences on this?

That trip had no stops on the freeway. But there was about 8miles of the trip that were in town. There are gentle hills on that stretch of freeway and I was getting about 30mpg on the way up hills and 65+ on the way down the hills. Just tried to maintain good mpg on the way up while maintaining decent momentum and then just feathering the throttle on the way down to gain some momentum and coasting in nuetral if it was a very long hill. I don't know about the better gas up here but I'll see if I can do it again next time I go on the same trip. I'm sure if I did the 65mpg limit it would drastically drop down to 35mpg or less.

If the increased airflow offered by this mod results in better mileage, why wouldn't the same results be reported by short ram intake users? Or are they?

Ahhh AKXB that sounds like a pulse and glide which will net some great mileage if you can pop it in neutral on the glide.

If the increased airflow offered by this mod results in better mileage, why wouldn't the same results be reported by short ram intake users? Or are they?Thats a great question, Soooooo.....sri guys do you get better mileage?

Ok, another newbie here to bug you with questions :) I read 80% of this thread and haven't seen a single tC owner chime in, so I figure why not be the one to ask if this works for us, too... Again, I am a n00b, and having just read through this, I'm anxious to dive under the hood and remove the snorkel - if indeed the tC has one hahaha

Any thoughts/experiences on this?

Ok, since everyone's jumping to reply, here's pictures of the inside of the tC near the airbox:
http://www.apocrates.com/car/airbox2s.JPG

http://www.apocrates.com/car/airbox3s.JPG

I'm thinking that the hose with the big 3 on it is the one that would be removed, as on the other side of the box there's another hose that leads to the engine - am i far off here?

I welcome any thoughts on this, cuz I'd like to try this mod too if it won't kill my car :)

thanks!

changing the air intake period will allow you to use more fuel. more air equals more fuel to be used. that simple. In the case of removing the snorkle, the air flow is being freed up without adding more air to the mix. less restriction really over a shorter distance. the engine is working less hard now to produce power.
I have finally refilled the tank after $27.50 in gas( that's another story thanks to oil mongers) and I have recorded 28.8 this time over the 25 from last time. Now this data for me will inconclusive as I also added air to the tires and my wifes tC also got better than usual gas mileage. She was averaging 24/25 and she did 27! Her car extra stock too. My Daytona is also getting better than usual gas mileage this tank after a 19mpg run, down from the usual 25 as well. That was weird all in itself and I am still scratching my head on that one. I do the same things everyday when I go to and from work in that car or in both of my cars. I had to have gotten a better gas mixture this time. So, I am still watching and studying this in my xB. Back to rain for tomo and I put the car away.

I'll try the snorkle removal on the wifes car and see what happens to those that were asking.

I'll try the snorkle removal on the wifes car and see what happens to those that were asking.

Thanks - I'm looking forward to the results of this! I've got a K&N filter on the way to help with any issues of dirt/debris that might get inside, but overall I'm hoping this works as it does on the others :pray:

JDMJim I know what ur saying about more air means more fuel to burn but a mod like this does work. I did this on my last car, a 1996 Grand Am GT with a 3.1 v6. Snorkel removed and at the time was using the Fram AirHog filter and saw a whopping 1.3 mpg gain on pure city driving.

As far as the engine taking in more air, well how restrictive is the stock intake is the first ? The car takes in the same amount of air weather stock or modified up to a certain point of throttle opening. After that the effects of a low restriction intake gives the car more air than the stock setup allowed.

I'm debating this as well cuz it has worked for me personally on previous cars. Not to mention the added benefit of the increase throttle response and deeper intake sound. I'm just trying to see if a sri or cai will at least keep where I'm at mpg wise or maybe even increase it. I haven't done it yet cuz I still want the loud as hell intake noise from an aftermarket intake.

Yeah, the car isn't louder with the snorkle off. I may try out the TRD filter to se what happens. mine is really dirty and hasn't been changed sinceI bought the car. oops...
but why we get better mileage than those with a CAI/SRI makes no sense, to me. could be the placement of the intake sensor as I noticed some companies put it @ the TB and that isn't very smart. My friends car runs rough with it there.

What's better? TRD filters or K&N for mileage and/or performance?

TRD/K&N/AirHog/etc. all seem to be about the same to me as I have used them all. Most likely any real difference between them can't be told by the average consumer. They all work fine, I'd use whatever one u can get the best deal on.

Removing any snorkel or resonator box plus the high flow filter helps make breathing easier with the stock setup. Power gains n noise r their but not as signifigant as with a sri/cai. When alot of people get n intake they want to hear it and feel the power gain so their always flooring it, which u can't blame them. That's how u kill gas plus the compter is relearning and by constantly gettin up on it the computer is goin to run richer all the time.

Going to remove the snorkel tomorrow, but does anyone have ANY idea why the snorkel is there in the first place? Like I said, I am going to remove mine for the MPGs, but it seems like the factory wouldn't have put it on, if not for a good reason.

Going to remove the snorkel tomorrow, but does anyone have ANY idea why the snorkel is there in the first place? Like I said, I am going to remove mine for the MPGs, but it seems like the factory wouldn't have put it on, if not for a good reason.I feel your pain bunk...I have removed the snorkle on my box (this will be the third week its been off), and although I get a bit nervous while driving when it rains (hydrolock scares me to death) I have gotten my best mileage with the snorkle off, BoxOffice just might have come up with the best overall mod that you can make under the hood. Having said that, I also wonder why toyota put it there in the first place, I also wonder why toyota states in the owners manual not to warm up the engine of the xb...inquiring minds want to know! :P

Someone out there must have access to a Toyota Mechanic's ear. Couldn't you just ask for an opinion from them?
I have no doubt that the mileage reports are true but excessive engine wear takes more than three weeks to show.
A follow up question : Has anyone who has completed this mod completed an oil change after driving about 3000 miles and did the oil look ( or feel) any different than normal?

Someone out there must have access to a Toyota Mechanic's ear. Couldn't you just ask for an opinion from them?
I have no doubt that the mileage reports are true but excessive engine wear takes more than three weeks to show.
A follow up question : Has anyone who has completed this mod completed an oil change after driving about 3000 miles and did the oil look ( or feel) any different than normal?I did an oil change to full synthetic oil a few weeks ago, 2 weeks into the removal of the snorkle and approx 950 miles the oil looks perfect, and the oil leval unchanged.

I took mine off yesterday. Still have about a half a tank of gas so we'll see what happens with the mpg when I fill up. I was kinda reluctant to do this also. I'm not to thrilled about taking something off that I'm not sure why it's there in the first place, but seems like a lot of people have done it with no ill affects. I had heard it was there to keep water from entering the air box? Not sure where I heard that or how true it is.

It's more likely with the snorkle removed you are taking in warmer air from the radiator and engine block instead of from behind the left headlight and fender area. This reduces pumping losses of the engine by reducing vacuum when taking in warmer air to meet the needed air mass to produce power and also increases combustion temperature making the gas burn better. It should work great until the summer arrives and the air gets too hot. Anyone with a ScanGauge should check the AIT air intake temperature to see how hot it is getting. The chance of getting water directly into the air box would depend upon how the water splashes up from the left tire into the engine compartment. Then the water would have to travel up the intake through the air filter and over the top to get through the mass air flow sensor and throttle body - pretty hard to do unless you drive through a foot or two of water.

I removed my snorkle on my 2006.5 Xb when this thread started. My first tank of gas yielded me 33mpg, which is the best that I have ever achieved. However, my second tank of gas only got 28 mpg, which is one of the worst tanks that I ever got (I average 31mpg).

So what does this mean? What happened?

I believe that the snorkle removal basically does nothing. I think the change in mpg that everyone is seeing is only because they are mentally aware of saving gas when they drive. I think that's what happened to me. On that first tank, I was so interested on what type of mpg I was going to get that I was shifting into 4th gear when typically I would be crusing in 3rd. I was taking it easy on the highway, and driving less agressively. On the second tank, thinking that the 33mpg would continue, I drove my car like I normally would and maybe even more agressively. Hence, the crappy 28 mpg.

After 28mpg, I put the snorkle back on because I felt as though I lost some torque, and the engine wasn't running as smooth. Since the snorkle has been back on, I have been seeing 31mpg again, and in some cases 32 mpg.

I just installed the K&N Typhoon Cold Air Intake on Friday, and we'll see what happenes to my mpg.

The bottom line to me is that removing the snorkle did have a positive effect. It made me aware of mpg. I now pay attention to my driving style, and try to do what I can to conserve on gas. People with the Scangauge II (I don't have one yet), probably go through the same process.

I've read thru 75% of this thred, and I still don't understand what part I'm supposed to take off..

could somebody try to explain it to me as if I was a 3rd grader?

http://tijil.org/xB_intake01.gif

look at the graphic you posted, go to the very bottom, see the hose going into the air box? Thats the snorkle,

got cha!

Still thinking about the snorkel removal. I get 37 MPG as an average / last three tanks 39 MPG and have gotten over 400 miles on th tank twice.. Maybe in the summer time when I'm bored.

The purpose in removing this is to help the engine breath. Just look at how small the opening is on the end of the snorkel to when it gets to the airbox. Its there to not only restrict incoming air but also to quiet intake noise. If anyone sees a loss in mpg its because ur using the better trottle response much greater and u also want to hear the deeper intake. A snorkel delete plus a highflow filter netted me a 1.3 mpg gain on a V6 Grand Am in pure city/short trip driving plus some neck snapping throttle response, so for the 1.5 it should be greater. Perfect example of all this, my friends 06 corolla S. The car has a very narrow snorkel and removing that with the TRD filter gained a much deeper sound n much greater throttle response. Yes he has complained about mpg but he's gettin very good mpg now that he finally learned to not floor the car all the time, lol.

The purpose of the box itself is to created a nice shot of air when u floor it which in term gives u a hard off the line launch that a cai just lacks. But with that nice shot of air there is the drawback in the upper range pull because of the restriction in the snorkel, so by pulling it out u get a bigger opening in the box so u see gains throughout the entire rpm range. Again if anyone is second guessing a mod like this don't, I've done it to 3 totally different model cars and all have seen gains, the biggest was an 05 accord only because the intake resonator was sooo huge/restrictive/ and heavy.

About 6 months ago (before I had heard of removing the snorkel), I started watching my driving style and tried to get high MPG :lalala: . I went from 32 to 37 on my commute (~60MPH). I kept the revs below 3K during acceleration, but I think the biggest gain was due to slower top speed. The drag on the box is a MPG killer.

bunkla "The drag on the box is a MPG killer."

Thats y u get an egg, lol. Just playin, but seriously yes keep the speed low n u will see big gains in mpg. With my 5spd I can do 40mph in 5th gear which is great for around town, this helps me get about 31mpg with very little highway driving. So something like this will deff be a plus to me, still wounderin about an sri or cai n how they do though.

I removed my snorkle on my 2006.5 Xb when this thread started. My first tank of gas yielded me 33mpg, which is the best that I have ever achieved. However, my second tank of gas only got 28 mpg, which is one of the worst tanks that I ever got (I average 31mpg).

So what does this mean? What happened?

I believe that the snorkle removal basically does nothing. I think the change in mpg that everyone is seeing is only because they are mentally aware of saving gas when they drive. I think that's what happened to me. On that first tank, I was so interested on what type of mpg I was going to get that I was shifting into 4th gear when typically I would be crusing in 3rd. I was taking it easy on the highway, and driving less agressively. On the second tank, thinking that the 33mpg would continue, I drove my car like I normally would and maybe even more agressively. Hence, the crappy 28 mpg.

After 28mpg, I put the snorkle back on because I felt as though I lost some torque, and the engine wasn't running as smooth. Since the snorkle has been back on, I have been seeing 31mpg again, and in some cases 32 mpg.

I just installed the K&N Typhoon Cold Air Intake on Friday, and we'll see what happenes to my mpg.

The bottom line to me is that removing the snorkle did have a positive effect. It made me aware of mpg. I now pay attention to my driving style, and try to do what I can to conserve on gas. People with the Scangauge II (I don't have one yet), probably go through the same process.

I don't quite agree with you. I think my first tank after removing the snorkel I was mindful of how I drove but after that I went back to my normal driving style (much to the chagrin of my girlfriend) and for the 5 or 6 tanks I've done since I've seen a solid 2-3 mpg increase. I averaged 31 normally and without the snorkel I'm doing 33-34 and have never dropped below 33. Though I'm curious as to how a CAI or even a K&N drop in will do.

Maybe you just put your foot into it bit too much when you were getting the 28? I would think that, being the engine is probably running a little richer, that with more "spirited" driving, your mileage will go down.

I removed my snorkle on my 2006.5 Xb when this thread started. My first tank of gas yielded me 33mpg, which is the best that I have ever achieved. However, my second tank of gas only got 28 mpg, which is one of the worst tanks that I ever got (I average 31mpg).

So what does this mean? What happened?

I believe that the snorkle removal basically does nothing. I think the change in mpg that everyone is seeing is only because they are mentally aware of saving gas when they drive. I think that's what happened to me. On that first tank, I was so interested on what type of mpg I was going to get that I was shifting into 4th gear when typically I would be crusing in 3rd. I was taking it easy on the highway, and driving less agressively. On the second tank, thinking that the 33mpg would continue, I drove my car like I normally would and maybe even more agressively. Hence, the crappy 28 mpg.

After 28mpg, I put the snorkle back on because I felt as though I lost some torque, and the engine wasn't running as smooth. Since the snorkle has been back on, I have been seeing 31mpg again, and in some cases 32 mpg.

I just installed the K&N Typhoon Cold Air Intake on Friday, and we'll see what happenes to my mpg.

The bottom line to me is that removing the snorkle did have a positive effect. It made me aware of mpg. I now pay attention to my driving style, and try to do what I can to conserve on gas. People with the Scangauge II (I don't have one yet), probably go through the same process.

I don't quite agree with you. I think my first tank after removing the snorkel I was mindful of how I drove but after that I went back to my normal driving style (much to the chagrin of my girlfriend) and for the 5 or 6 tanks I've done since I've seen a solid 2-3 mpg increase. I averaged 31 normally and without the snorkel I'm doing 33-34 and have never dropped below 33. Though I'm curious as to how a CAI or even a K&N drop in will do.

Maybe you just put your foot into it bit too much when you were getting the 28? I would think that, being the engine is probably running a little richer, that with more "spirited" driving, your mileage will go down.

I've got to agree with SecretAgent; there are just too many other folks here who have increased their mileage. And I'm not a kid; being 49, at my age (and the inherent perceived "responsibility") you can believe that I ran several tanks to make sure my improvement was not just some weird fluke before I posted it to a world-wide forum! My only guess is that something's not right with your car somewhere. If you're truly not driving it any harder, I'd have someone run a diagnostic on it for you. OR, you might want to consider resetting your ECU first, just to see if that helps the situation.
When just about everybody else here has gotten at least a LITTLE better MPG after ripping out the snorkle, the evidence certainly seems to scream "IMPROVEMENT". Based on pure logic, the removal of such a restriction to the intake speaks for itself.
I definitely understand your statement about thinking that maybe everybody's just driving smarter (which is still great!), but I personally have stopped my quest for high mileage the last several tanks and am now driving quite "normally", and I'm still in the high 35 to high 37 mpg range commuting (with aftermarket tires back on), which is still FAR higher than before I started with the K&N and no snorkle (see first post).

Someone out there must have access to a Toyota Mechanic's ear. Couldn't you just ask for an opinion from them?
I have no doubt that the mileage reports are true but excessive engine wear takes more than three weeks to show.
A follow up question : Has anyone who has completed this mod completed an oil change after driving about 3000 miles and did the oil look ( or feel) any different than normal?I did an oil change to full synthetic oil a few weeks ago, 2 weeks into the removal of the snorkle and approx 950 miles the oil looks perfect, and the oil leval unchanged.

Ditto. My car's a perfect test bed for things like this, because I drive around 3,000 - 3,500 miles a month, and change my oil at exactly 5,000 mile intervals, which works out to about every 6-7 weeks (!). My car is only a little over 8 months old, and has over 25,000 miles on it, but have had NO oil issues whatsoever.
I'm assuming you're basing your "engine wear" question on the assumption that taking off the snorkle will allow additional contaminants into the intake? If so, think about it; your air filter - which is the real point at which air enters your engine - is unchanged. It is STILL filtering exactly as it was before, there's just a shorter trip the air is traveling to it.

Going to remove the snorkel tomorrow, but does anyone have ANY idea why the snorkel is there in the first place? Like I said, I am going to remove mine for the MPGs, but it seems like the factory wouldn't have put it on, if not for a good reason.

Although it's somewhat to help capture cooler air from closer to the front of the engine compartment, the biggest reason -as with almost all new cars -is to reduce the intake noise. All those bends and nooks in tube are computer designed to help act as a sort of muffler on the woosh of the air rushing into the airbox.
Manufacturers believe that most of the buying public wants a quiet, comfortable, isolated driving experience, and that's why even new Toyota Corollas have more body and cabin insulation than say, full size American cars of 15 or 20 years ago....

yup the difference between stock and a cut up air box on my 97 blazer was/is amazing. 4.3 v-6 fed through a snorkel a baseball couldn't fit through. cut half the air box off and yes it's warmer air but the engine doesnt have to work as hard to get it anymore major improvement in accel, mileage plus it now has this cool gulping sound when i stomp on it.

hopefully will remember to de-snorkel the toaster later this week.

Ditto. My car's a perfect test bed for things like this, because I drive around 3,000 - 3,500 miles a month, and change my oil at exactly 5,000 mile intervals, which works out to about every 6-7 weeks (!). My car is only a little over 8 months old, and has over 25,000 miles on it, but have had NO oil issues whatsoever.
I'm assuming you're basing your "engine wear" question on the assumption that taking off the snorkle will allow additional contaminants into the intake? If so, think about it; your air filter - which is the real point at which air enters your engine - is unchanged. It is STILL filtering exactly as it was before, there's just a shorter trip the air is traveling to it.

Ooh, I may have you beat. I've had mine about 7 1/2 months and have 24,800. :)

Ooh, I may have you beat. I've had mine about 7 1/2 months and have 24,800. :)

WOW! That's too weird - I have exactly 24,796 miles on mine right now!
I got mine Aug. 8th...

Man, I thought I was racking up the miles quickly! :doh:

I'm assuming you're basing your "engine wear" question on the assumption that taking off the snorkel will allow additional contaminants into the intake? If so, think about it; your air filter - which is the real point at which air enters your engine - is unchanged. It is STILL filtering exactly as it was before, there's just a shorter trip the air is traveling to it.[/quote]

Yes , the picture Thomas posted earlier is easily understood .You have also suggested a higher flow filter which would could increase dirt I believe I have read some owner studies on this as well.

My continued skepticism is based on not understanding why Toyota would include ( and pay ) for a totally us less part . I am still hoping a Toyota mechanic will offer their opinions. Secondly , the kind of wear I'm worried about will not show up in a couple oil changes. I usually keep my vehicles to about 100,000 on the od.

Exact numbers? 24,746. I got it September...I wanna say the 10th. So what's that? Almost 8 months?

I've noticed I just end up racking up more miles than most people and have for the last decade or so. I guess I always end up with my life on the other side of the city from where I live. If I live on the south east, my office is on the west and my friends/church on the north side. Then if I move to the north, everything changes on me! On top of that, I'm a Realtor® so driving is a big part of my job.

What's your excuse, BoxOffice? :)

Sorry for the threadjack.

If you were on Synlube you wouldn't have to be changing the oil every 6 weeks - I just hit the 1 year mark and just shy of 10,000 miles on it and everything it still looking great and running smooth.

Exact numbers? 24,746. I got it September...I wanna say the 10th. So what's that? Almost 8 months?

I've noticed I just end up racking up more miles than most people and have for the last decade or so. I guess I always end up with my life on the other side of the city from where I live. If I live on the south east, my office is on the west and my friends/church on the north side. Then if I move to the north, everything changes on me! On top of that, I'm a Realtor® so driving is a big part of my job.

What's your excuse, BoxOffice? :)

Sorry for the threadjack.

:silly:
Unfortunately, I've got a 160 mile commute 3-4 days a week into L.A. That racks 'em up pretty quickly, which is why I bought the Toaster in the first place. Economy AND style! :wink:
I just realized mine will be 9 months old tomorrow! :eyes:

(P.S. Threadjacking forgiven. :rofl: )

I've read all 15 pages and finally decided to do it. Installed K&N filter, filled up my tank and ready to everything, kinda. Before I got from my automatic 26-28 mpg. Will tell u results in two weeks.

I've read all 15 pages and finally decided to do it. Installed K&N filter, filled up my tank and ready to everything, kinda. Before I got from my automatic 26-28 mpg. Will tell u results in two weeks.

Wow, congratulations! You actually read all 15 pages! I would get a little annoyed by all the people who come in on page 13 and say "I've read half" or "I don't want to read it, just give me the highlights" or wotnot. I have to hand it to you for sticking it through!

:bow:

I just did another small hwy trip again to go fly my rc airplane this weekend. Exact same route as last time. 43mpg for a total of 100miles. Couldn't quite get that 47mpg on the return trip like I did last time. But at an average of 55mpg on the freeway I'm happy with 43mpg.

ok, after reading every page and message in this thread, i'm gonna try this tomorrow..

I don't have the K&N yet, hopefully I can find it local. Is it a fairly common size? or are they all different?

Should I wait to pull the snorkel until I get the K&N?

ok, after reading every page and message in this thread, i'm gonna try this tomorrow..

I don't have the K&N yet, hopefully I can find it local. Is it a fairly common size? or are they all different?

Should I wait to pull the snorkel until I get the K&N?

I took my snorkel off a couple weeks ago and am still running the stock filter. My mileage improvements are modest. I think the K&N will help more. But I don't think it'll damage the engine to be using stock filter.

OK. I read all 15 pages and have just one question. Has anyone done this mod who lives where it gets hot? I live in the Sacramento area and today the temp was 95 degrees. **May 8th and its 95 frickin degrees sheesh** My concern is that with the snorkle off the intake will be drawing in really hot air from the engine compartment. My box is black and it is not unheard of to get 110+ degrees during the summer here. Im thinking that I will have to rig up some sort of custom intake tubing like the guys at the beginning of this thread. Any thoughts?

OK. I read all 15 pages and have just one question. Has anyone done this mod who lives where it gets hot? I live in the Sacramento area and today the temp was 95 degrees. **May 8th and its 95 frickin degrees sheesh** My concern is that with the snorkle off the intake will be drawing in really hot air from the engine compartment. My box is black and it is not unheard of to get 110+ degrees during the summer here. Im thinking that I will have to rig up some sort of custom intake tubing like the guys at the beginning of this thread. Any thoughts?

Ive done it and im in San Diego. No problems so far.

Ok, just pulled the snorkel. Way too easy.. :)

The box sounds a lot throatier, very nice, we'll see about the mileage soon! :)

OK. I read all 15 pages and have just one question. Has anyone done this mod who lives where it gets hot? I live in the Sacramento area and today the temp was 95 degrees. **May 8th and its 95 frickin degrees sheesh** My concern is that with the snorkle off the intake will be drawing in really hot air from the engine compartment. My box is black and it is not unheard of to get 110+ degrees during the summer here. Im thinking that I will have to rig up some sort of custom intake tubing like the guys at the beginning of this thread. Any thoughts?

Ive done it and im in San Diego. No problems so far.

Ditto. Its been over 95 here all week. No diff at all in running temps so far.
My MPG has taken a hit however, with running the A/C all the time! :eyebrow:

Wow. What a difference. I didnt even bother to take the bolt off. I just pulled the end off of the air box and tucked it off to one side then re-set the EFI fuse. The engine does sound much more throughty and it is peppier too. This mod is a must do. I dont know if I will get any better milage as I tend to drive like a mad suicide bomber and more power will just cause me to put my foot in it even more but the box feels great now.

:rofl:
Enjoy!

I feel your pain bunk...I have removed the snorkle on my box (this will be the third week its been off), and although I get a bit nervous while driving when it rains (hydrolock scares me to death) I have gotten my best mileage with the snorkle off, BoxOffice just might have come up with the best overall mod that you can make under the hood. Having said that, I also wonder why toyota put it there in the first place, I also wonder why toyota states in the owners manual not to warm up the engine of the xb...inquiring minds want to know! :P

I was worried a little bit about water getting in it as well after doing the mod. However, a couple weeks ago I was driving in a torrential downpour. I was following my friend and couldn't see a massively deep puddle along the road next to the curb (about 6 inches deep) Anyways, I went right through it (with all four tires) at about 35mph and my car bogged way down cause it was so deep. When I was able to park my car I popped the hood and ran my finger around the hole where the air is drawn from, and not a drip of water. Plus, I think the only way you will get hydrolock is if you practically drown the car.

That's EXCELLENT news! I didn't think it would be a problem, but I did have just a slight concern, being that its tough to plan for every variable with other peoples' driving. I'd say you got the "worst case scenario" covered! :clap:

I finally got around to taking the snorkel off last week. I realize that it's in this thread somewhere but can someone quickly tell me if I need to do something with the EFI fuse and if I can find it's location in my owner's manual. Or just ignore the question, lol.

I can't say for sure if the snorkel removal has made a difference as I had forgot to hit the odometer when I filled up (I filled up last night though, I can't wait to see the results) but I swear I can visibly see the difference in my gas gauge. I deliver newspapers 80+ miles a night so I'm pretty talented at knowing how much my needle goes down per night.

After I took my snorkel off I reset it. Check out this thread it will explain how to do it. It made a 2mpg difference in mine.


http://www.scionlife.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=33062

Night Shadows, you're my most favorite poster today. Thanks!

Not a problem. I have gotten a lot of help from people on here, just happy I can help someone for a change.

I pulled the snorkel last weekend, ran 2 tanks through to/from work, got maybe 1 mpg better.

I CANNOT get over 37 MPG!!! - No matter how conservative I drive!

I have 50K on the odo, so time to put in a new air filter and I am going to reset the EFI fuse. Maybe THAT will help.

This hasn't been working for me. Well, I normally get 28mpg and after filling up and checking my mpg at only half a tank, I got 33.99 and was very happy.

I then finally did the EFI thing. I thought I was getting good gas mileage at first but further down in my gas tank I got, the worse the gas mileage was getting (that might of been the case with the first tank but I didn't go any further than half empty) and ended up at my typical 28mpg.

Sooooo, I rechecked the EFI reset/removal whatever thread and saw that I messed with the wrong fuse, lol.

Sooooo, I just got done messing with the correct fuse. I really, really hope that does the trick!

two tanks into this test and I have achieved 32mpg's. Altho I have slowed down a bit thanks to gas prices too.

After I took my snorkel off I reset it. Check out this thread it will explain how to do it. It made a 2mpg difference in mine.
http://www.scionlife.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=33062
What possible connection is there between removing the snorkel and removing the EFI fuse or resetting the ECU?
The "rebooting" of the ECU is a misconception with no basis. It persists because it is an appealing placebo that does no harm.

I don't know about that - it may reset the a/f mixture fine adjustment that the engine has been doing as you drive back to factory default and that could make your mileage vary. Real test would be to reset the ECU on a low mpg xB and then drive slowly and see if the mileage improves.
I think the summer gas is here at last because I just drove home about 30 miles and got 47.2mpg and returned to my office via a different route of 19 miles and got 53.0 mpg carrying 12 gallons of water added to the xB on the return trip.

... Real test would be to reset the ECU on a low mpg xB and then drive slowly and see if the mileage improves....So, reset the ECU on a stock car before doing any mods? That's good one. I do like to reset mine every month just to keep it fresh and on its toes. Can't do any harm, can it ;-)

That IS the question - does it learn fast or slowly to adjust the A/F Ratio and does resetting it loose the aquired tuning?

I think I'm finally going to go out and do this mod.
I'm averaging about 32.5 mpg currently (x1.03 adjusted) and if I can add 4 mpg from this, that'll be sweet.
Is the concensus around 4 mpg benifit from all those who have done it?

So I should pull the snorkle and it sounds like I should pull the EFI fuse and let the ECU reset then correct?

I think I'm finally going to go out and do this mod.
I'm averaging about 32.5 mpg currently (x1.03 adjusted) and if I can add 4 mpg from this, that'll be sweet.
Is the concensus around 4 mpg benifit from all those who have done it?

So I should pull the snorkle and it sounds like I should pull the EFI fuse and let the ECU reset then correct?

You got it. Pull the snorkle and then the fuse, give it a few minutes then put the fuse back in and let it run for awhile. Should be good to go. I did it awhile ago and was averaging about 32 before I removed it and now I average around 36. So yeah 4 mpg. I even got it to 38mpg not to long ago. I only got a 2 mpg increase at first but now it has gone up to 4. So if you don't get the 4mpg increase right away don't get discouraged. Give it a few tanks and everything should be fine.

well i did it and so far compared to what i was getting 23.5 uncorrected i am now getting 29.5 uncorrected. i have taller aftermarket tires so not sure how the correction factor would go but being as though i calculated the same way with the same tires it shows a pretty dang big increase in mpg. now before you freak out about my mileage i drive very hard and very fast when on the freeway so i won't get nearly as good a mileage as most of you would to begin with.

well i did it and so far compared to what i was getting 23.5 uncorrected i am now getting 29.5 uncorrected. i have taller aftermarket tires so not sure how the correction factor would go but being as though i calculated the same way with the same tires it shows a pretty dang big increase in mpg. now before you freak out about my mileage i drive very hard and very fast when on the freeway so i won't get nearly as good a mileage as most of you would to begin with.

That's a MONSTER increase in MPG! Way to go! :clap:

^^^^^^^^^^ yeah that was this am from jax to valdosta at speeds that coulda gotten me in BIG TROUBLE had i been caught. through the smoke/fog mix that is the current around here due to the fires in the area. so way fast and dirty dirty air pretty excited

You are probably running even higher mpg than you think - and you should consider checking your air filter. All that smoke got into it and clogged it up.

i have done the mod, which works great. My best tank was at 37.8 mpg. the only problem i am having is the efi fuse. I pulled it and waited about 30 min, plugged it back in, idled for about 15 min, and my service light still comes on. I have tried this many times. Now the service light is on all the time. Is my only option now to disconnect the battery?? I don't mind doing this but I just want to know if there is another way.

I've read all 15 pages and finally decided to do it. Installed K&N filter, filled up my tank and ready to everything, kinda. Before I got from my automatic 26-28 mpg. Will tell u results in two weeks.

Finally I have some results. But before the actual numbers I'd like to say, that I have auto and I didn't drive like grandma at all, I used A/C, had road trip to Chicago, IL (70-80mph) and so on. And still have mpg improvement: from 26 to 30-31 mpg. ME like it :love:

... the only problem i am having is the efi fuse. I pulled it and waited about 30 min, plugged it back in, idled for about 15 min, and my service light still comes on. I have tried this many times. Now the service light is on all the time. Is my only option now to disconnect the battery?? ... Were you led by remarks in this forum to remove the EFI fuse? Were you trying to educate the ECU to something? Is removing the battery a better way to teach the ECU? Under what situations does the ECU need this? When you change air filters, remove the snorkel, change gas octane, change the muffler? How often does the ECU need reminding, or can it remember, or does it forget? What about regular, pre-emptive resetting, to freshen up the ECU and head off any possible problems? So confusing :rofl:

I WANT MY MOMMEEEEEEE!!! WAAAAAAA!!!

Ok, after about 2 weeks of being "snorkel-less" I've driven down to the gas light coming on..

I removed the airbox snorkel, and replace the stock filter with a K&N Dropin filter. When the gas light came on, I calculated my MPG to be about ... 23.5 MPG...

Am I missing something? Why such low MPG? It is because it's my daily driver? But here's the catch.. I only drive about 1/4 a mile to work and back home every day.. and also I had 1 100mile trip on this tank too. A couple days of about 20-30 mile around town trips as well.

Could this be affecting my MPG? Or should I look at popping the ECU fuse to reset it? Or will it take another 2-3 tanks to work out the kinks? Before the snorkel mod and filter, I was about 28-29MPG..

1/4 mile drives will kill your fuel efficiency. If you haven't changed your driving habits that's not the reason for the change, though. I'd stick with the mod for a bit to see if maybe it's a math error or just a one-off flukey thing. Wouldn't hurt to double-check that the filter's properly in place, I suppose.

As mentioned in previous posts, these cars get CRAPPY mileage until they're warmed up, and with a 1/4 mile drive, it sounds like yours just isn't ever warming up.
Some folks here have had a bad tank or two right after doing these mods, so it may just take a couple before things settle in for you, as Gs noted.
The ECU reset may help, too, but I'm no expert in that field.

Ok, after about 2 weeks of being "snorkel-less" I've driven down to the gas light coming on..

I removed the airbox snorkel, and replace the stock filter with a K&N Dropin filter. When the gas light came on, I calculated my MPG to be about ... 23.5 MPG...

Am I missing something? Why such low MPG? It is because it's my daily driver? But here's the catch.. I only drive about 1/4 a mile to work and back home every day.. and also I had 1 100mile trip on this tank too. A couple days of about 20-30 mile around town trips as well.

Could this be affecting my MPG? Or should I look at popping the ECU fuse to reset it? Or will it take another 2-3 tanks to work out the kinks? Before the snorkel mod and filter, I was about 28-29MPG..

If I missed it somewhere I am sorry but what kind of mileage were you getting before you removed the snorkel? My mpg increased even more after a couple tanks. I agree with the above posters about the 1/4 mile drive killing your mileage. Do you just start it up and take off driving like normal, or do you let it warm up a bit? I try to drive very easy until the blue temp light goes off. Yeah I would stick it out a couple tanks and see if it increases after that. Oh yeah and I would go ahead and reset the ECU. It won't hurt anything and could possibly help you out.

Yeha sounds like on the brake on the gas for that 1/4 mile hey why not WALK!! Even a half mile is quicker to walk and way better for the engine. Not getting it warmed up you will probably loose your exhaust system pretty quick with all the acids and water trapped in it. Heck for 1/4 mile you should be able to start it up gas it once in a gear and then coast the rest of the way.

I only drive about 1/4 a mile to work and back home every day.
Oh fer gods sake, you kiddin me? A quarter mile?
WALK! or hop on a bike!

I only drive about 1/4 a mile to work and back home every day.
Oh fer gods sake, you kiddin me? A quarter mile?
WALK! or hop on a bike!

I would, but with my job, at any given time in the day, I might be called to make a run to another store about 10 miles away.. :)

I'm sure it has to do with the short drive. I know I could walk, but given that I might have to run somewhere else, and that all the resturaunts in the area are about 1.5 miles away, if i get hungry, I have to go get food.. :)

btw, things will change in a couple weeks where i'll be moving and the short drive will be irrelevant..

Well I just did the snorkle removal and filled up a fresh tank.
It takes me a little while to go through a tank but I will keep y'all posted on MPG of the next several tanks. We'll see if my MPG gets worse before it gets better.
37 mpg here I come

after reading all 17 pages, I am going to do this. My drive is 98% highway, 2% street. Right now I average about 33-35mpg already, but I am a conservative driver in it. It has 11k miles.

The only thing I may try as well is get larger tubing and route it to the side.

Is there any place that may sell K&N filters, such as a pep boys, napa, o'reilly's? I live in Oklahoma, so I don't know if these same stores will be everywhere, they are just generic here. Any help is appreciated.

BoxOffice, thanks for the thread!

My pleasure!
Pep Boys (out here in CA, anyway) stock them now, but there are also several discounters on-line you can order from.
Good luck!

Wow, I just discovered another advantage to this mod.
Now that the weather is warmer, I've been driving around town with the windows down (which I seldom do), and man, does that exhaust tone sound great! Definitely healthier sounding than stock, with a deep, mellow tone that sounds awesome without being obnoxiously loud. Coolness! :D

Am I missing something? Why such low MPG? It is because it's my daily driver? But here's the catch.. I only drive about 1/4 a mile to work and back home every day.. and also I had 1 100mile trip on this tank too. A couple days of about 20-30 mile around town trips as well.

Could this be affecting my MPG? Or should I look at popping the ECU fuse to reset it? Or will it take another 2-3 tanks to work out the kinks? Before the snorkel mod and filter, I was about 28-29MPG..

I feel your pain g0nk. I have the same driving pattern. I live & work in town, as a city employee I drive between buildings in town 88% of the time. I average around the low 20's for MPG. An odd tank her and there with 65% highway jumps me up to around 28 mpg. Even worse in the winter... not to mention I've only got 1400 miles on the car at this point....

Woohoo an hour and a half reading this and I'm finally thru it all! Sounds like a good mod and will definately try it soon.

Finished my first tank after the snorkle removal. Mostly city driving and I got a .3 MPG improvement over my last tank that was 150 miles of tailwind freeway trip.

35.71 MPG on this tank (x1.03 adjusted)

And I have not changed my driving habits at all (except I don't redline much anymore)

Well, I thought I'd toss up an update now that the weather's changed, and so has my MPG. Now that I've got a mostly-local-city-driving only commute, and the temperature's been in the 95-105 degree range, so the A/C is on almost full time, the odds are now pretty well stacked against me, mileage-wise. Regardless, I still haven't really been driving all that conservatively - at least not like when I was really TRYING to get the best MPG - but somehow, I'm still averaging in the 33-34 range. I even had a recent best tank of almost 36! Not bad for lagging around town with the air cranked just about all the time!
On the other hand, my worst tank ever was a couple of weeks ago, running A/C constantly, and a few too many jumps on the gas pedal, for just a tick over 30 mpg. Also not so bad really, for the way I was driving, especially on sticky 205s. Some people would kill for that kind of mileage on their best tank!
Did I mention the exhaust tone sounds _____in', too?!

De-Snorking Ruleth! :)

Thanks for the update Box! Anything 30 and over (mpg wise, lol) is pretty decent, especially there in cali with the high price of gas (what does it cost there in OC anyway? Here its $2.82). Refresh my memory about your I/H/E, I know what you have for an intake :P , are you running a header yet? And what kind of exhaust?

Since my car is a daily driver Ill probably stick with the stock size tires (lighter rims and some better tires one of these days). My next big mileage mod will be a 'fog warmer' http://www.brightgreen.us/photos/ , funds are tight right now because of all the rain we've had here in texas, I should be getting all the overtime I want and then some this time of year, but not so far, its like spring time just hotter.

After the fog device Im leaning toward a 4-2-1 header, but only if it will improve my mileage.

My trip home -19 miles was 47.2mpg there with a tail wind and coming back with the AC on just about all the time was 44.6mpg. No Acetone or GP7 in this tank either although I feel it running a little rough sometimes espicailly with the AC on it really does some weird things when shifting and engine braking down hills.

Thanks for the update Box! Anything 30 and over (mpg wise, lol) is pretty decent, especially there in cali with the high price of gas (what does it cost there in OC anyway? Here its $2.82). Refresh my memory about your I/H/E, I know what you have for an intake :P , are you running a header yet? And what kind of exhaust?

Right now, we're about $3.05 or so, on average.
I'm totally stock, but for the de-snork and a K&N filter. I keep thinking about a header and exhaust, but I keep coming up with other superficial or handling mods instead (I'm in the midst of a big one right now...)! :eyebrow:
As proven previously, my mileage is MUCH better when I run the stock tires, and actually TRY to drive for economy. I just posted that last bit because I was really impressed that my normal, old, everyday driving still netted me some decent numbers, even with the A/C on almost continuously.
Once it cools off again I may take another stab at MPG; reading you and Jan06's high-mileage posts is lighting a fire in me again! :P

There is a pretty decent header on the xB already - keept the AC vents blowing on you - recirculate most of the time - shut down the right side window vent by flipping it down - fan on low max cold and it should be pretty cold and dry in the cabin. Then on engine braking crank the fan up two notches for extra cooling and braking action. If you have a white box it should stay pretty cool if you are not going too fast and in traffic stay back extra from the car in front of you pumping out heat to keep the condensor cool for more efficient AC operation.

my mileage is MUCH better when I run the stock tires.
I read somewhere that OE tires tend to be lower rolling-resistance tires than most replacement tires. The reason being: Auto manufacturers want good EPA MPG numbers to show off to the public. And specing good tires for low R.R. is one easy way.

Most replacement tires stress low cost and longevity over low R.R.

One question for the snorkel-removal crowd; especially those of you with ScanGauges: Doesn't snorkel removal increase the intake air temperature?

And isn't REDUCING the intake air temperature supposed to increase fuel economy?

OK, that was two questions; anyone have some answers?

No scan guage here, but I'll take a whack.
The higher the incoming air temp, the less dense the air. Hence the computer will lean out the fuel injected. Comparable throttle position now burns less fuel. That's my take on it, I could be wrong though.

(Although if there is NOT an intake air temp increase: The benefit might be, the engine works less hard for any given speed because it can breathe easier, like on a CAI.)

Off-the-cuff, I'd say Typhoon's guess is right on the money. While I couldn't really definitely say specifically or scientifically, all I know is it works. I'm getting a solid 3.5-5 mpg better with nothing more than the de-snorking and K&N filter, no matter my driving behaviour.

engine doesn't work as hard to pull air thru that tiny pipe either. I had a drastic jump in mileage after doing. read 24 mpg's with air, bodykit and heavy low offset rims. now I do 32!! I'll take it.

I agree with typhoon, Box and JDM, what Ive read on the subject is that a higher air temp is needed to more fully 'ignite' or 'combust' the fuel so that less fuel is wasted, removing the snorkle is a win win because it does at least 2 things, maybe more; it raises the intake air temp, and it lowers the 'resistance' if you will, of the engine getting the air it needs.

With the above thoughts in mind what do you guys think of this device (added to a de-snorkled xb) for helping maximize the fuel combustion:
http://www.brightgreen.us/photos/

The fog device is my next mod, Ive already seen atleast a 2 mpg gain using the acetone and torco gp-7, I think the fog device could be the golden ticket for my driving situation. I also forgot to mention how smoothly the box runs with the above gas mixture, no more rattles casused by a ruff idiling engine.

Boy it sure sounds like they are fogging a LOT of acetone and xylene and GP7 into the engine 2000 miles or less with 26 oz MAN that is a lot of juice!!! A gallon 128oz of acetone should go for about 18,000 miles at 400 miles per tank of 10 gallons - sounds like they are using a lot more than the usual amount like 2000 miles at 400 miles per tank would be about 5oz of the mixture . . . humm ok I spoke too soon - it's late and I have been up since 1:45 am. Well it is a LOT of GP7 anyway! Hey that can't possibly be injecting much when a lot of throttle is being used if it relies on vacuum to draw it into the engine.

Boy it sure sounds like they are fogging a LOT of acetone and xylene and GP7 into the engine 2000 miles or less with 26 oz MAN that is a lot of juice!!! A gallon 128oz of acetone should go for about 18,000 miles at 400 miles per tank of 10 gallons - sounds like they are using a lot more than the usual amount like 2000 miles at 400 miles per tank would be about 5oz of the mixture . . . humm ok I spoke too soon - it's late and I have been up since 1:45 am. Well it is a LOT of GP7 anyway! Hey that can't possibly be injecting much when a lot of throttle is being used if it relies on vacuum to draw it into the engine.Boy you must be tired cuz you lost me already, lol...26 oz?...oh well, I cant wait to get the fogger, I think with the snorkel off and that fogger adjusted perfectly will make for some killer mpg's.

New Update:
Well, this IS a thread about miles-per-gallon after all, not just the snorkle removal...
All this talk about high MPG got under my skin again (yeah, yeah, I've got the competitive gene, too! :P ), especially due to this exchange:

my mileage is MUCH better when I run the stock tires.
I read somewhere that OE tires tend to be lower rolling-resistance tires than most replacement tires. The reason being: Auto manufacturers want good EPA MPG numbers to show off to the public. And specing good tires for low R.R. is one easy way.

Most replacement tires stress low cost and longevity over low R.R.

Yup, I slapped the stock tires back on.
As mentioned, the stock tires are a much harder compound, and nearly an inch narrower than the sticky BFG 205s I've been running. The stock wheels also tuck much further into the wheelwell, all that adding up to giving you less aerodynamic drag, and less rolling resistance from both the width AND harder rubber compound.
I picked a perfect time to try this, since the weather here has been exactly the same for the past week, and my commute was identical, too.
My last tank with the aftermarket tires and A/C on constantly was 31.86 mpg.
This tank on stockers and same A/C use was 36.11!

I can't wait for the hot weather to be over to really start the MPG-Quest again.
Somebody pass the acetone... :eyebrow:

The air getting into the engine is a little backwards - if the intake is restricted by the snorkle or the throttle it still is restricted. However the hotter air now means less dense air - bigger throttle opening to get the same power - less VACUUM thus less work on the pistons to suck the air in and better vaporization of the gasoline that doesn't want to evaporate in the first place. In a perfect world we should run the engine in a vacuum but the radiators don't work too well that way.

No snorkel and 3oz of acetone got me 32mpg last tank. It took two tanks to get there though. The first tank there was no change. In the previous four months of owning the car, I never got above 29.1mpg.
3700 miles, '06 auto.

Dang that box is still breaking in!

first off i cant believe how completely massive this thread has gotten. i just wanted to lay out my recent changes to my de-snorkled airbox. as posted elsewhere i got rid of the charcoal filter in the upper half of the of the box, just above the stock air filter. next i took out the air filter completely and put a cone air filter where the snorkel origionally connected. to stop TOO much warm air from finding its way to the engine i still have the flexible hose feeding the area with outside air. the new filter setup was a fun, well see if it makes any difference. pics

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v635/dmpsk8/IMG_0086.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v635/dmpsk8/IMG_0087.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v635/dmpsk8/IMG_0088.jpg

Heya dmpsk8, you want that warm/hot air to get into the intake, it helps the fuel combust more fully for better fuel efficiency, just my 2 cents. :wink:

interesting thought...have to play with it a bit

interesting thought...have to play with it a bitI believe one of the main reasons the snorkle removal improves mileage is because warmer air from the radiator and engine get into the intake. Again, just a thought.

thats funny, in all my years in building cars, the whole idea is to keep the intake temp as low as possible and the exhaust temp as high as possible. i.e. intercoolers and heat wrap the headers. i dont see how hot air can do anything for your motor other than rob hp. jmo

thats funny, in all my years in building cars, the whole idea is to keep the intake temp as low as possible and the exhaust temp as high as possible. i.e. intercoolers and heat wrap the headers. i dont see how hot air can do anything for your motor other than rob hp. jmo

In case you missed the title of this thread, it is about increasing MPG not HP.

Warm air = more MPG
Cold air = more HP.

i didnt miss anything, if you are that hell bent on mpg get a prius or better yet duct the intake right off the header :rofl:

i didnt miss anything, if you are that hell bent on mpg get a prius or better yet duct the intake right off the header :rofl:Prius? All the extra complication . . . and cost . . . and reduced cargo capacity?? I think NOT!! We LIKE our xBoxen!!!!

a men to that one

i didnt miss anything, if you are that hell bent on mpg get a prius or better yet duct the intake right off the header :rofl:Prius? All the extra complication . . . and cost . . . and reduced cargo capacity?? I think NOT!! We LIKE our xBoxen!!!!

:eyebrow: Not to mention the additional $7K - $10K price of admission!
According to my calculations, that would buy a $&!%LOAD of gas! :silly:

here is a auction for a cheap $ going K&N drop in:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/K-N-AIR-FINTER-33-2211-SCION-XB-XA-YARIS-ECHO-1-5_W0QQcmdZViewItemQQcategoryZ33659QQihZ006QQitemZ160144712872QQrdZ1QQsspagenameZWDVW

I'm thinking about doing this snorkle design trick, but probably using a TRD drop-in.

i didnt miss anything, if you are that hell bent on mpg get a prius or better yet duct the intake right off the header :rofl:Prius? All the extra complication . . . and cost . . . and reduced cargo capacity?? I think NOT!! We LIKE our xBoxen!!!!

:eyebrow: Not to mention the additional $7K - $10K price of admission!
According to my calculations, that would buy a $&!%LOAD of gas! :silly:Plus you'd still be driving a Prius. Yuck!

That used K&N filter ebay thing is funny. With shipping it's the same price as a new one! :rofl:

Alright me being a previous mustang guy I can relate to these kind of experiments. I think mustang owners have put together some of the Weirdest/most effecient/least effecient CAI/RAI out there. Next weekend when I have time I am going to remove the lower snorkel and add a K&N air filter to it and I will let you all know the results. By then I will be passed 5k miles and hopefully my engine will have finished it's breaking in period.

Alright me being a previous mustang guy I can relate to these kind of experiments. I think mustang owners have put together some of the Weirdest/most effecient/least effecient CAI/RAI out there. Next weekend when I have time I am going to remove the lower snorkel and add a K&N air filter to it and I will let you all know the results. By then I will be passed 5k miles and hopefully my engine will have finished it's breaking in period.I just took my snorkel off today and filled my tank. I should now something in about 5 days when I fill up again. I figure it can't hurt to take off the snorkel. If nothing else it cleans the engine compartment up a bit !!! :P

I figure it can't hurt to take off the snorkel. If nothing else it cleans the engine compartment up a bit !!! :P

Well, that's taking a positive outlook on things! :silly:

I tried it early on. I am mixed on it myself. At the same time I put mobile 1 in my manual tranny, so may not be a good test. I will say it did go up 1mpg, but my interstate use is mixed with traffic and accidents. I think on gas savers . org the better idea is to take it off the exhaust manifold and or plug in a dummy value into the oxygen or temp sensor so it runs leaner than normal.

I have the stock filter as it seems fairly free flowing and the modified one aint cheap.

i didnt miss anything, if you are that hell bent on mpg get a prius or better yet duct the intake right off the header :rofl:

Actually you did miss....everything.

This is an xB thread, not a Prius thread.
This is about increasing the mPG for the box, not the most fuel efficient car.
As mentioned, 10-15K more would buy enough fuel for the lifetime of my box.
You missed the title of this thread....again.
Some other points were mentioned as well.

If you reread what you wrote, you went into a rant about robbing HP from your motor w/ warmer air. Totally had nothing to do with the thread dude.

:loser:

i didnt miss anything, if you are that hell bent on mpg get a prius or better yet duct the intake right off the header :rofl:

Actually you did miss....everything.

This is an xB thread, not a Prius thread.
This is about increasing the mPG for the box, not the most fuel efficient car.
As mentioned, 10-15K more would buy enough fuel for the lifetime of my box.
You missed the title of this thread....again.
Some other points were mentioned as well.

If you reread what you wrote, you went into a rant about robbing HP from your motor w/ warmer air. Totally had nothing to do with the thread dude.

:loser:Thank you for pointing out the obvious. Some folks need that. I don't understand his rant, but hey, it's Monday and I'm good !!! :silly:

:rofl:
Ah, the joys of on-line forums!

I did this mod today, with a drop in TRD filter, reset the ECU, then right after I went to Chevron and filled my tank w/ 87 octane. I did not notice much of a engine noise change from before- maybe slight.

I'll check back with my results. I am using 16"X7 alloys(approx. 15 lbs each, about 4 pounds less then stock) , w/ 205-50-16" tires(about 2-3 pounds heavier then stock) , and nice lightweight lug nuts( 3.8 onces per wheel .. less then stock) - so theres that element. I drive a 5-speed 2006(last date produced) xA. I'll make sure my air pressure is proper(need to invest in a nice pressure guage) , the tires were last checked about 2 weeks ago, I'll check them again in about a week.

BoxOffice , I hope some of your good Scion vibes rub off on my Scion. It would be dope if I can get 5-6 more MPG's per gallon... that would be like saving $4 per tank of gas- or its basically like adding an extra gallon to our smaller gas tanks!!!! :pray: :bow: :pray:

... with a drop in TRD filter, reset the ECU... I just changed my dirty air filter and put in a clean one. Do you have to reset the ECU when you put in a clean filter?

I never reset my ECU and got a significant jump in mileage anyway. So I wouldn't know.

I did this mod today, with a drop in TRD filter, reset the ECU, then right after I went to Chevron and filled my tank w/ 87 octane. I did not notice much of a engine noise change from before- maybe slight.

I'll check back with my results. I am using 16"X7 alloys(approx. 15 lbs each, about 4 pounds less then stock) , w/ 205-50-16" tires(about 2-3 pounds heavier then stock) , and nice lightweight lug nuts( 3.8 onces per wheel .. less then stock) - so theres that element. I drive a 5-speed 2006(last date produced) xA. I'll make sure my air pressure is proper(need to invest in a nice pressure guage) , the tires were last checked about 2 weeks ago, I'll check them again in about a week.

BoxOffice , I hope some of your good Scion vibes rub off on my Scion. It would be dope if I can get 5-6 more MPG's per gallon... that would be like saving $4 per tank of gas- or its basically like adding an extra gallon to our smaller gas tanks!!!! :pray: :bow: :pray:

Good luck! :wink:
Keep in mind that it seems like quite a few people haven't gotten much in the way of results for a tank or two (why, I don't know, other than the possible ECU re-set), so don't be disappointed if things don't improve right away.

Speaking of which, I just got the best tank I've had in a while - constant A/C has been killing my mileage.
All city driving, plenty of A/C use, but drove pretty carefully for the whole tank = 390 miles!
That worked out to a decent 37.65 mpg!
Can't wait for fall and cooler weather (no A/C!). :eyebrow:

I am using 16"X7 alloys(approx. 15 lbs each, about 4 pounds less then stock) , w/ 205-50-16" tires(about 2-3 pounds heavier then stock) , and nice lightweight lug nuts( 3.8 onces per wheel .. less then stock) - so theres that element.

Are you saying that the 15" steelies weight 19 lbs. each? That's a lot higher then I would have thought.

Unfortunately your tires are heavier and since they are the farthest out from the hub, they become the most consequential weight on your whole wheel/tire package.

Are you saying that the 15" steelies weight 19 lbs. each? That's a lot higher then I would have thought.

Unfortunately your tires are heavier and since they are the farthest out from the hub, they become the most consequential weight on your whole wheel/tire package.

On a couple of sources here on the forums, both tire + wheel weight = 38 lbs (the 185/60/15 Goodyear Eagle LS) which I've seen listed online as weighing 18 lbs per tire.

You are correct on the tire situation.. as it being the furthest distance out from the hub - creates the most important wheel weight (centrafugal force/rotation) .... however that also tends to be the case when getting up to speed 0-25 mph. If your cruising on the highway @ 60 mph , the wheel is in motion... and the engine (for the most part) doesn't have to work any harder to keep it rolling forward(hills /moutain passes are another situation) , but like the old scientific fact states " an object in motion.. stays in motion" - I believe thats how the addage goes.

Boxoffice- thanks for the tip ! I commute to work 4-5 days per week, and its only 5 miles away... so I know gas milage will not be optimal givin the shot distance commute. I'd ride my road bike to work , but 1. I either have to be there early in the morning by 7am- then by the time I get off its 100+ degrees outside , or sometimes I'm there until 11pm at night.. and I'd rather not ride in the dark+ dealing with a major highway :no:

Yeah I guess the effect of that outside weight is somewhat mitigated when simply maintaining speed. It is still something to be avoided though in terms of it's effect on acceleration(as you said) but also wear and tear and performance on braking and cornering.

BTW I've found Falken ZE-512 to be lighter tire than any Yokohama.
If you switched to some 195s Falkens next time, you'd be doing that much better on weight. Not sure what the RR is.

Boxoffice- thanks for the tip ! I commute to work 4-5 days per week, and its only 5 miles away... so I know gas milage will not be optimal givin the shot distance commute. I'd ride my road bike to work , but 1. I either have to be there early in the morning by 7am- then by the time I get off its 100+ degrees outside , or sometimes I'm there until 11pm at night.. and I'd rather not ride in the dark+ dealing with a major highway :no:

Yeah, I'd really like to ride to work, too, but I've got similar circumstances. That kills me now that I've got one branch just 6 miles from home...

thanks bro

Yeah I guess the effect of that outside weight is somewhat mitigated when simply maintaining speed. It is still something to be avoided though in terms of it's effect on acceleration(as you said) but also wear and tear and performance on braking and cornering.

BTW I've found Falken ZE-512 to be lighter tire than any Yokohama.
If you switched to some 195s Falkens next time, you'd be doing that much better on weight. Not sure what the RR is.

Yeah.. believe it or not, the difference from stock wheels/tires , to my aftermarket wheels/tires in terms of get up/go acceleration is very-very similar- if not identical.. its very difficult to tell the difference.

I went with the 205/50/16" due to the wheel/tire diameter being as identical as possible to the stock situation ( there is a definite difference in terms of tire contact surface on the ground w/ the 205's ).

I remember when I had the stock wheels/tires on + stock suspention.. going down the highway at 60-65 mph .. with a cross wind of ..ohhh say 20-25mph it was WAY sketchy, the wind would literally blow me over 3-6 inches at a time !!! :nails: :nails:
Now that I've lowered the car 1.5 inches tastefully, anti-sway bar, nicer/wider contact tires (BFG G-force sports) ..... I'm pretty much good to go now...no real worries with high winds.

I need to check that one website out again with all the tire weights again.... then again I'm 40K miles away from replacing tires again- I may go 195 then.

My experience exactly, though I'm running 15 x 7s with 205/55-15s (G-Force Sports are incredible!) with about a 2" drop. Way more stable in crosswinds, near semis, etc.

right on Boxoffice.. the G-force sports are a good deal/quality tire @ $80 each.

I need to ride more.. I'm probably only doing 40-60 miles per week now... hopefully by Fall I can work back up to 100 per week w/ some mountain bike trails riding mixed in there !!! Its also fun trying out different road/mountain tires - given the terrain changes!

Can't wait for fall and cooler weather (no A/C!). Only problem is the winter blend fuel sux for mpgs :cry:

Can't wait for fall and cooler weather (no A/C!). Only problem is the winter blend fuel sux for mpgs :cry:


Maybe where you live, but in Cali. where smog emissions are very strict ... all gas retailers have to offer fuel that meets a minimum standard. The Chevrons + Shell gas stations also provide more detergents then other stations ... but everyone in Cali. must abide by a set of rules.

Can't wait for fall and cooler weather (no A/C!). Only problem is the winter blend fuel sux for mpgs :cry:


Maybe where you live, but in Cali. where smog emissions are very strict ... all gas retailers have to offer fuel that meets a minimum standard. The Chevrons + Shell gas stations also provide more detergents then other stations ... but everyone in Cali. must abide by a set of rules. :doh: forgot about the non winter states :rofl:

kinda funny, but actually last winter it did get to 9 degrees here on a couple of occations, and on one of those early mornings- 6 people died due to hitting black-ice at an uncontrolable speed, kids + women died!

Well, 1st tank since removing the snorkel netted me 32.2 mpg. That was mostly all city driving, with A/C on (it's been 100+ degrees here the last nine days) and driving very very conservatively.

I was hoping for more, but I guess I'm satisfied with that. I could change my route to work which would substitute highway for city streets, but the distance is greater, thereby negating any increase in economy.

I'll run another few tanks this way but if I don't see an improvement, I'm putting the snorkel back on.

For some people it took a few tanks to see an improvement.
I saw an improvement right away, but then again I did a battery disconnect, and the ECU reset as a result.
I got about 1.5 better mpg on compairable driving.

For some people it took a few tanks to see an improvement.
I saw an improvement right away, but then again I did a battery disconnect, and the ECU reset as a result.
I got about 1.5 better mpg on compairable driving.Yeah, I'm just thinking about these folks saying they got 4-5 mpg higher right off the bat. I don't know what an ECU reset would do, but I certainly am not an expert (no sh*t).

I will continue for a few more tanks, but I just don't see 35-40 mpg like others are posting.

well, my last tank was 35, the one before that, 37 mpg

well, my last tank was 35, the one before that, 37 mpgI guess I can always cross my fingers. LOL

Well, whada ya know!! Filled up today: 287 miles on 8.14 gallons for 35.26 MPG !! This beats my best city tank by 3 mpg.

I said I would be happy if I could get 35, so I'm happy !!http://friendsforever.foren-city.de/images/smiles/a084.gif

You can add about 1 MPG too if your running the stock tire size, don't forget.

double post

Well, whada ya know!! Filled up today: 287 miles on 8.14 gallons for 35.26 MPG !! This beats my best city tank by 3 mpg.

I said I would be happy if I could get 35, so I'm happy !!http://friendsforever.foren-city.de/images/smiles/a084.gif

Ah, Ye of Little Faith!

*..congrats! :wink:

Can everyone here that has benifited in this snorkle removal, please post when

1. you started doing this snorkle removal- what was your odometer reading(approximate), and what is your odometer reading now

2. what else have you changed along the way, ie. synthetic oils used? reduced wheel/weight size ? etc.

3. manual or auto trans

Started at 37800, now at 387xx. Nothing changed within this time, still getting around 32mpg.

After 4 gastankfuls:
pre-snorkel removal -- 33.4 mpg
post-snorkel removal -- 33.7 mpg

Statistically insignificant improvement.

No other changes.

I drive an '06 stick with around 13K miles.

Looks like the snorkel is going back on . . . .

I have a 2006 Scion xB Auto. 14k miles
I have tried both the K&N Filter and Disconnecting the Snorkel mods seperately, both undoubtably decrease MPG for my car. Also I think the Lucas Oil Treatment and the temperature drop from 70's-80's to 40's-50's has caused my milage to trend down.

29.538 MPG 11/09/2007 disconnected snorkel, major drop in milage ---------------
37.396 MPG 10/31/2007 50psi
32.985 MPG 10/29/2007 aggressive
34.0 MPG 10/22/2007
36.553 MPG 10/12/2007 Lucas Oil Treatment
36.646 MPG 10/04/2007 87 oct, 40psi
37.64 MPG 09/28/2007 87oct, 200lb. load, 35psi
39.458 MPG 09/27/2007 Yoko Avid TRZ new tires, 40psi, 93oct,oil chng,

wow

06 xB
Standard
15" OEM tires w/ aftermarket wheels, 38 psi. in all 4.

Now im at 18,xxx and did the removal around 17K.

I average 36 - 38 MPG


-I run Pen. Plat. in the engine (5w30) Soon to make the permenant switch to 0w30 though. Have never gone a full 5K between OCI, but I have gone 4 months.

-Removed snorkel. The 8 fillups after removal compared to the 8 fillups before resulted in an average increase of 2.45 MPG. I don’t know for certain how important it is, but I did reset my ECU by pulling the fuse and reinstalling after 15 min. right after the removal. THERE IS A HOW TO IN THE TECH SECTION!

-I clean my MAF/AIS once per year when I change out my air filter.

-Shell gasoline has given me the best reults when compared to Arco, Exxon and Chevron.

I just finnished putting my snorkle back on. Before I removed it I was getting around 31-32 MPG. With it off, I was getting around 25-26.

2005 xB, manual, 80,000 miles, Toyo Avid TRZ tires on stock alloy wheels at 32 psi.

Its amazing how many different results peeps are getting by removing the snorkle. Me personally, mine is off to stay, I have an '06 xb auto and I've been consumed with trying to get my gas mileage as good as it can be. I drive 90% highway miles to the tune of 440 miles a week and I get 38-40 miles per gal, is it all due to removing the snorkle? No. But it is part of the package of things I do to get such good mileage...you da man BoxOffice! =D

thought some of you might find this interesting, intake component restriction measurements:

http://www.autospeed.co.nz/cms/A_0892/article.html

geared towards power rather than MPG tho.

I think it's awesome that some are getting 38-40 mpg out of their box. That's awesome!

But I have never gotten more than 33 out of 1 tank. I ran snorkel-less for 5 tanks of gas, and never got better than 26. The car also felt a little sluggish, especially during cold mornings. I'll keep track, to see if the mileage goes up now that I put the snorkel back on.

I also have not replaced the spark plugs yet, at 80,000 miles! I will not run more air pressure in the tires, as that will wear them down more in the center of the tire, and it must give a harsher ride than it has already! I also use regular oil, not synthetic.

So, what else are you people doing to get 38 mpg? What kind of plugs? Synthetic oil?

Air pressure in the tires is the easiest way to up the MPG so on a trip that is on smooth roads try upping the air pressure to about 40psi or at least 35 - a few more pounds is not going to feel that much bumpier. Then you can decide if the harsher ride is worth the extra MPG. I think you are ready for new plugs or at least checking the gap on the ones you have. If you have not removed them to at least check them in 80k then you may have a problem getting them out - be very careful - I think removing them when the engine is cold is going to be important. My mileage is down a bit due to a lot of 1 -3 mile trips . . . only averaging about 40mpg.

first look at how much weight I have added to the car. then realize that removed snorkle bumped me from 25 to 33 mpg's. went back and put in a TRD filter and dropped it back to 27 or so. still better than before. and my OEM filter had 28K on it. never changed until the TRD filter went in.

While I can't explain some folks not getting any improvement (or even some negative effect), all I can tell you is that after almost 9 months - which for me has been over 25,000 miles! - the improvement in both power (albeit subtle) and MPG has been constant for me. My only mods were the snorkle removal, and the K&N replacement filter. During this period I've even managed 43.86 MPG and 486 miles on a tank! Yes, I was working at it pretty hard, but that's still an impressive feat!
In the last couple of months my drive and conditions have changed dramatically; I used to drive 160 miles a day in L.A. traffic (mixed highway, city, stop-n-go rush hour driving) 4 days a week on sticky aftermarket tires and wider than stock wheels, and still averaged 35-37MPG. I now have a 12 mile roundtrip (100% city), and have swapped my running gear back to the stock factory 15" alloys and tires - though I've upgraded the tires to Michelin Exaltos in a 195/60-15 size, just 32 PSI - and my average is still a dead-steady 34-35MPG!
These values do NOT reflect any kind of "granny" driving, just normal, average habits, although honestly, I seldom floor it. My MPG went up a solid 3.5-4MPG from the first day I made the mods, and has stayed there ever since. I never even did the ECU re-set.
So - as far as I'm concerned, I'm extremely satisfied with a mod that's done so much for me, and only cost $45 for the K&N and probably less than 5 minutes of my time! I couldn't imagine changing back for any reason, especially when it even SOUNDS so much better! :clap:

I'm wondering if it's just because it's colder here than LA, that my car feels very sluggish at take off when the snorkel was removed. May also explain the worse mileage I was getting. I ran without the snorkel for 5 tanks of gas. And like I said, never got above 26. And this is a 20 min. commute, mostly highway.

I think this spring I'll try it again.

This weekend, I'll be cleaning the K+N filter and replacing the sparkplugs. What is anyone using for plugs? Stock gap?

Would this work as well on a tC??

I"m thinkin I'm gonna give this a shot considering that i've maxed out at 272miles/ 30mpg on a tank. Mind you I'm in a colder climate than most people here but still, I'm looking for the best results too. I'll post updates after my next tank fill.

Would this work as well on a tC??

Since all of us are xB owners, why dont you try it and find out? Its not like you can hurt anything and its not like you cant return it to stock.

Let us know.

I havnt hit 38MPG in the past two fill-ups...36.9 and 37.2 MPG, but I was expecting that with the cooler weather and all.

I'm wondering if it's just because it's colder here than LA, that my car feels very sluggish at take off when the snorkel was removed. May also explain the worse mileage I was getting. I ran without the snorkel for 5 tanks of gas. And like I said, never got above 26. And this is a 20 min. commute, mostly highway.

I think this spring I'll try it again.

This weekend, I'll be cleaning the K+N filter and replacing the sparkplugs. What is anyone using for plugs? Stock gap?

Air too cold will not help you run better - you need higher temps to ignite the fuel in the winter - remember the plastic intake keeps the air from warming up so it stays cold and doesn't vaporize the fuel very well. The word is to get Iridium plugs and gap them at 0.044" yeah nice and big! I didn't get into the garage before I had to packup and leave the house I was sitting for a month with the heated garage so I didn't put mine in yet but the next time I get into a garage in they go. Not too crazy working outside with any kind of wind blowing sand and dirt into the engine with the plugs removed so I wait.

Just put my new plus in this weekend. My mileage has been bad since this sexpirement started, even after I put my snorkel back on. I have been averaging around 25 mpg.
In October I did a cross-country drive, and I got around 33 mpg the whole trip.

I put the plugs in, and the tank was only about 3/4 full, and I just filled up. Just with the new plugs, and on 3/4 of a tank, I got 30 mpg. The plugs were in bad shape, since this is the first set in 80,000.

I will be trying the snorkel removal this spring. I think I got real bad numbers because of the plugs.

Also, I put in Platinum NGK's at factory gap.

... got me thinkin to adding a larger diameter intake port rather than removing the original altogether.The Toyota engineers put a lot of thought into the size of the snorkel. They could have made it any size. So you think they deliberately made it too small with intent of reducing mileage? Or did they make it too small by mistake, like a miscalculation? And have we discovered something here that they did not realize in 3-4 years of production? Or is it that people remove the snorkel thinking to save gas and then begin to drive more economically?

I removed the snorkel and gained a little bit of ooompf-especially near the top end where it sucks more air. It did make it a little bit louder.

This is one of the main reasons that Toyota added that snorkel along with protection from the elements because they do not know where the cars will end up (rain, dust, sand, dirt, snow, etc) added maybe 1-2 mpg at most-never dropped though.

I added the K&N drop in as well after this and noticed more mid-range power which actually at first made it feel slower because it flattened out the powerband-then I realized I was actually traveling faster while accelerating than before on certain daily roads and highway entrances.

My mileage seems to be all over from 26 (that only happened once though) to between 28-34 even toguh I drive a fairly consistant route. There is extra drag from rain so the weather effects it some and I lowered the pressurte in my front tires to 31psi to help correct the steering response (it turns in better and grips better-remember Sammy Hagar's video for can't drive 55-where he corrected the tire pressure-works on xBs also not just Ferrari 512 boxers)

Yeah it is called a tuned intake designed to provide some added performance where it is needed like at low rpms. Gosh 26mpg I never got mileage that low only about 30 when it was new and breaking it in and my lowest recently was the last tank at 35.8mpg which was mostly 1 mile or less trips in cold weather.

The Toyota engineers put a lot of thought into the size of the snorkel. They could have made it any size. So you think they deliberately made it too small with intent of reducing mileage? Or did they make it too small by mistake, like a miscalculation? And have we discovered something here that they did not realize in 3-4 years of production? Or is it that people remove the snorkel thinking to save gas and then begin to drive more economically?

Don't knock it 'til you've tried it! :wink:
Actually, if you query most engine design and management engineers, you'll find that a good deal of the reason for those snorkels is to quiet intake noise. While most of us here prefer to hear a snarly-sounding intake, Big Corporate believes that the public at large (especially for small, economical cars) wants their vehicles quiet and unassuming, and something they never have to think about. All those bulges and side pockets are computer designed to catch and quiet the airflow to the air box.
Yes, they also extend toward the front of the vehicle to catch cooler air, and their opening is mounted higher to help keep water, etc. out, but their biggest mission is noise management, and they are very definitely somewhat restrictive in reference to airflow.
Removing them and adding a higher-flow K&N filter greatly reduce that restriction, improving both mileage and performance, to some small measure.

I removed the snorkel and gained a little bit of ooompf-especially near the top end where it sucks more air. It did make it a little bit louder.

This is one of the main reasons that Toyota added that snorkel along with protection from the elements because they do not know where the cars will end up (rain, dust, sand, dirt, snow, etc) added maybe 1-2 mpg at most-never dropped though.

I added the K&N drop in as well after this and noticed more mid-range power which actually at first made it feel slower because it flattened out the powerband-then I realized I was actually traveling faster while accelerating than before on certain daily roads and highway entrances.

This has been my experience as well, nearly exactly, though I picked up closer to 3-4 MPG on average. After about a year, and 30,000 miles with these same, extended results, I refuse to believe it's only because I've always been "driving more economically"! :eyebrow:

K, my snorkel's off. I did notice a hp boost too, right away actually. Slightly louder but considering how loud the music is, I'd never really notice. I'll report my MPG once I fill up again. SHould be much better now that I've combined this with the K&N.

The Toyota engineers put a lot of thought into the size of the snorkel. They could have made it any size. So you think they deliberately made it too small with intent of reducing mileage? Or did they make it too small by mistake, like a miscalculation? And have we discovered something here that they did not realize in 3-4 years of production? Or is it that people remove the snorkel thinking to save gas and then begin to drive more economically?The only way to know for sure would be to conduct a series of before-removal/after-removal tests on a dyno under controlled conditions with several different xB cars . . . and that ain't gonna happen. Meanwhile, the ones who think they're getting better mileage or more horsepower or no change (me) will go on thinking that's what happened no matter what anyone else thinks. And that's the way it is . . . .

Finally pulled mine off this morning. Obviously I haven't had a chance to check any fuel economy readings yet, but I seem to notice a little more power. It could be though, because with more intake noise :clap: I keep my foot in it a little more. My mileage has been down a little this winter,(probably some winter-type additives they put in the gas here). I'll just have to see. :lalala:

I started reading this thread just for info on the bumper intake inlet. The true of the matter is that I have a cold air intake (off Ebay + Mugen Headers) and to this day I still am only able to put out 268miles and that with the light on and 10 + Gallons to refill. I do have the stock Air box, Here the dumb question: I'm I to understand that I will fair better in mileage if the cold air intake with all its bents that hang right below the front fog light is swapped out for the stock air box without the hose?

Help and thanks in advance

I started reading this thread just for info on the bumper intake inlet. The true of the matter is that I have a cold air intake (off Ebay + Mugen Headers) and to this day I still am only able to put out 268miles and that with the light on and 10 + Gallons to refill. I do have the stock Air box, Here the dumb question: I'm I to understand that I will fair better in mileage if the cold air intake with all its bents that hang right below the front fog light is swapped out for the stock air box without the hose?

Help and thanks in advance

Correct. Remove your CAI (I'd personally sell it for what you can get for it), and initially just go back to the origional stock air-box system(even w/ paper filter). Maybe once you sell that CAI, then take $50 of that money, and buy a K&N or TRD drop in air-filter = then your golden.

Wow, I can't believe my post is still going after almost a year! :D

Wow, I can't believe my post is still going after almost a year! :DSure do love that Mustang.

I have a cold air intake (off Ebay + Mugen Headers)

MUGEN HEADERS? :eyebrow:

Wow, I can't believe my post is still going after almost a year! :DSure do love that Mustang.

Thanks - me too!
It was just chosen to be featured for a Mustang show on SPEED channel!
I'm so stoked I can't stand it - and it's being filmed right here in Huntington Beach! :clap:

I started reading this thread just for info on the bumper intake inlet. The true of the matter is that I have a cold air intake (off Ebay + Mugen Headers) and to this day I still am only able to put out 268miles and that with the light on and 10 + Gallons to refill. I do have the stock Air box, Here the dumb question: I'm I to understand that I will fair better in mileage if the cold air intake with all its bents that hang right below the front fog light is swapped out for the stock air box without the hose?

Help and thanks in advance

If it's the two piece CAI then you can salvage it by removing the tubing that the filter is currently connected to and attach the filter to the tubing that is connected to the throttle body. That way the filter will be closer to the back and you'll get some warmer air and possible mileage gains. It will look something like this http://www.injen.com/galleries/products/IS2105_directions.pdf

Interesting...

Finally pulled mine off this morning... I seem to notice a little more power. It could be though, because with more intake noise :clap: I keep my foot in it a little more. ... I noticed that with cards in my bicycle wheels. I know I definitely made more power. Got tired sooner from doing it, too.

Finally pulled mine off this morning... I seem to notice a little more power. It could be though, because with more intake noise :clap: I keep my foot in it a little more. ... I noticed that with cards in my bicycle wheels. I know I definitely made more power. Got tired sooner from doing it, too.

...was that recently??? :silly:

:rofl:

So, just for kicks I put a brand new TRD airfilter in my BLitZ Induction Cover and it is no different than the Blitz filter.

I wanna see those Mugen headers on the xB! Still Vintage, stop tryin to be an expert. It did work...

It's true, you can get crazy MPG just by driving efficiently. I've been learning how to hypermile my car recently and here's the results:

1st try, 35 mpg
2nd try, 36 mpg
3rd try, 38 mpg
4th & 5th try, 40.4 mpg

Yes, 40.4 MPH! No engine mods just good and efficient driving habbits.

I love when people especially those xb owners driving an auto brag about their gas mileage.... Here's my rebuttal: dude mines a stick, and I drive it like a race car... I'm lucky if I see 28mpg, but you know what? It doesn't ____ me off... because I drive the hell out of her and while you're pansy'n your way on down the road get the heck outta my way!

i did this mod and dropped in a k&n filter also.

last tank with snorkel: 29.37
first tank w/o snorkel: 30.48

not much improvement, haha. i would say i'm an extremely "efficient" driver when it comes to coasting and braking, but that doesn't mean im not aggressive when it comes to passing up cars. so would this mod even help if a majority of the tank is spent driving at 75-80mph highway?

I love when people especially those xb owners driving an auto brag about their gas mileage.... Here's my rebuttal: dude mines a stick, and I drive it like a race car... I'm lucky if I see 28mpg, but you know what? It doesn't ____ me off... because I drive the hell out of her and while you're pansy'n your way on down the road get the heck outta my way!

Wow. That's really impressive. (Well, at least you think so, right?!) :wink:

Thanks for attempting to crap on people for trying to squeeze a few more MPGs out of their rides. I guess you think fossil-derived fuel is an infinite source, and paying over $3.50 a gallon for it is no big deal. :silly:

Know what cracks me up? When people talk about driving their xB (Toyota Echo-based econo-box) like a "race car"! :rofl:

I love when people especially those xb owners driving an auto brag about their gas mileage.... Here's my rebuttal: dude mines a stick, and I drive it like a race car... I'm lucky if I see 28mpg, but you know what? It doesn't ____ me off... because I drive the hell out of her and while you're pansy'n your way on down the road get the heck outta my way!

Wow. That's really impressive. (Well, at least you think so, right?!) :wink:

Thanks for attempting to crap on people for trying to squeeze a few more MPGs out of their rides. I guess you think fossil-derived fuel is an infinite source, and paying over $3.50 a gallon for it is no big deal. :silly:

Know what cracks me up? When people talk about driving their xB (Toyota Echo-based econo-box) like a "race car"! :rofl:

you must have an automatic

Sorry, 5 speed here.
Mmmmm...makes it feel just like a Ferrari F2008 Formula 1 car, too! :rofl:

Sorry, 5 speed here.
Mmmmm...makes it feel just like a Ferrari F2008 Formula 1 car, too! :rofl:

Hahaha :rofl:

I love when people especially those xb owners driving an auto brag about their gas mileage.... Here's my rebuttal: dude mines a stick, and I drive it like a race car... I'm lucky if I see 28mpg, but you know what? It doesn't ____ me off... because I drive the hell out of her and while you're pansy'n your way on down the road get the heck outta my way!Sigh.

Taken from somebody's profile... not gonna say who, that would be mean. :Phome made intake (gutted out unecessary tubing, cloth MAF pre filter, excess tube on inside top of air box, removed snorkel, cut bigger opening on bottom of air box, installed K&N drop in filter) LOUD sounds like B16 when VVT-I kicks in , , not going to do anything else... what`s the point? Our cars would lose to a stock neon even with intake headers and exhaust... I wouldn`t want to live after that.RRRRACE CAR!

Taken from somebody's profile... not gonna say who, that would be mean. :Phome made intake (gutted out unecessary tubing, cloth MAF pre filter, excess tube on inside top of air box, removed snorkel, cut bigger opening on bottom of air box, installed K&N drop in filter) LOUD sounds like B16 when VVT-I kicks in , , not going to do anything else... what`s the point? Our cars would lose to a stock neon even with intake headers and exhaust... I wouldn`t want to live after that.RRRRACE CAR!

...must...not...laugh...must keep...straight...face...

:rofl:

http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/2/21/Whambulance.gif

That's the same guy that will be complaining that the brakes wear out in 20k miles . . .

Ok the cost of getting 28mpg instead of 38mpg and I do better than that but anyway . . . 100,000 miles later at $3 a gallon = $2819.54 more spend on gas alone.

But I have been in Norfolk VA and they have nice long flat straight roads there and 64 is a great highway that goes on for miles and miles.

That's the same guy that will be complaining that the brakes wear out in 20k miles . . .

Ok the cost of getting 28mpg instead of 38mpg and I do better than that but anyway . . . 100,000 miles later at $3 a gallon = $2819.54 more spend on gas alone.

But I have been in Norfolk VA and they have nice long flat straight roads there and 64 is a great highway that goes on for miles and miles.

Cool, I never really looked at it that way. Now that you see it in actual dollars saved, it makes a much bigger impact.

I love when people especially those xb owners driving an auto brag about their gas mileage.... Here's my rebuttal: dude mines a stick, and I drive it like a race car... I'm lucky if I see 28mpg, but you know what? It doesn't ____ me off... because I drive the hell out of her and while you're pansy'n your way on down the road get the heck outta my way!

I love it when people with XB's drive like idiots on the roadways and give Scion owners a bad rep. It's what all the cool kids are doin, y'know.
Keep it up junior, we'll be sure to put up the pics from your high speed wreck on here so we can analyse how fast you were going when you hit the lampost.

And lets not forget that the faster you go the bigger the crack in the windshield when that flying rock hits it! Not to mention the speeding ticket and the higher insurance rates and the generally lower safety rating it puts on the other xB drivers which ends up raising our insurance rates too.

That's the same guy that will be complaining that the brakes wear out in 20k miles . . .

Ok the cost of getting 28mpg instead of 38mpg and I do better than that but anyway . . . 100,000 miles later at $3 a gallon = $2819.54 more spend on gas alone.

But I have been in Norfolk VA and they have nice long flat straight roads there and 64 is a great highway that goes on for miles and miles.

Cool, I never really looked at it that way. Now that you see it in actual dollars saved, it makes a much bigger impact.

Yeah my last car was a 94 Geo Metro 5 door and a couple of years back when gas was more reasonably priced I spent a little over $100 a YEAR on gas . . . now that is about 3 months/ tanks worth with the xB.

just how much was gas when you spent $100 a year on gas? and how much did you drive it?

just how much was gas when you spent $100 a year on gas? and how much did you drive it?


I also owned the three cylinder Geo Metro for a while.
My calculated fuel burn was:
Averaged48-50 MPG.
BUT ONLY
42 MPG with the A/C on. ;)

The Geo was about $10 to fill it so the gas prices were a lot lower then but about a tank a month which was about 450 miles a month. I would get a little over 50mpg all the time in the Geo unless it sat too long and then it would get less mileage from the gas evaporating. The xB is getting filled about once a month also but I only get about 41mpg average per tank and the price is 3x what it used to be. I never had A/C in amy of my cars until now and I don't see much of a fuel hit when I use it in normal driving - there is more of a hit on the mpg at highway speed due to the added heating of the cabin from the air passing over it at higher speeds but still not to bad. Just close it up and recirculate on low fan and it barely impacts mileage at all.

Does not having the snorkel void the warranty? I'm sure it would, but anyone doing this get an earful from the dealer for doing it?

Does not having the snorkel void the warranty? I'm sure it would, but anyone doing this get an earful from the dealer for doing it?My guess would be no. If anything just claim it fell off and if they give you a hard time about it make them replace it with a new snorkle. :rofl:
Another plan would be to just swiss cheese the snorkle by drilling huge holes all over it. That way it will officially still look like it's there doing it's job to the service techs.

Does not having the snorkel void the warranty? I'm sure it would, but anyone doing this get an earful from the dealer for doing it?Here we go again with the "does blah-blah-blah void the warranty?" I suppose ANY change you make to your car could possibly void some part of your warranty, but the dealer would have to show why your modification voided which part of the warranty that's being challenged. How removal of the snorkel would void any part of the warranty is beyond me. Ideas, anyone? Please be specific . . . .

just put it back on when you go to the dealership for service if you have to. it'll take only a few minutes....

My guess would be no. If anything just claim it fell off and if they give you a hard time about it make them replace it with a new snorkle.
Sounds bogus to me, this guy is spewing disinformation! :lalala:

My guess would be no. If anything just claim it fell off and if they give you a hard time about it make them replace it with a new snorkle.
Sounds bogus to me, this guy is spewing disinformation! :lalala:You are jealous cause it works for me. That was how I got my Free lower grill piece. It was covered under warranty. :P
You must be more carefull about what you say. That way you won't look so foolish. :lalala:

I removes the snorkel and got some improvement and now I have added this very low tech mod and it seemes to pick up some more power especially when it's hot (not like mega hp or anything-just seems a little smoother)

http://i255.photobucket.com/albums/hh143/greybb06/intake004.jpg

http://i255.photobucket.com/albums/hh143/greybb06/intake003.jpg

http://i255.photobucket.com/albums/hh143/greybb06/intake001.jpg

I've noticed that rain makes a big difference in my MPG-I'm assuming it's the extra drag from the water on the ground but ?

That was going to be my next question, How does the rain affect opperation? I'm going to take mine off for a month and see if I get any "big gains"

it won't be any legendary gains. it will just be a little bit more power as you get up above 3k rpm if you're hard on the gas and if you just drive economically you'll notice a slight boost in mpg maybe 1 or 2. that's all removing the snorkle did for me anyways.

I got a scan guage and I'm interested in taking mine of for a tank or two to see how it affects my MPG.

Please do and let us know!

Stay off dusty roads or you will have a really dirty filter real quick from the dirt the front wheel kicks up.

My car is slightly over 32,000 miles and I just got a fill-1/2 highway and 1/2 city and I got 37+MPG-I was so amazed I checked it like 3 times-always over 37-before this it would hover at 31+ a little-crazy!

That's with my pattened ram air replacing the snorkel (not really pattened)

I removes the snorkel and got some improvement and now I have added this very low tech mod and it seemes to pick up some more power especially when it's hot (not like mega hp or anything-just seems a little smoother)

http://i255.photobucket.com/albums/hh143/greybb06/intake004.jpg

http://i255.photobucket.com/albums/hh143/greybb06/intake003.jpg

I've noticed that rain makes a big difference in my MPG-I'm assuming it's the extra drag from the water on the ground but ?

I just took off my snorkel tonight :) Too early to see if there's any MPG gain, but I could sure use it. Having the A/C on here in Phoenix is murder on the mileage.

I'll see about doing some kind of cold air hose this weekend. How much are those K&N filters? Should I wait until after my 20k service coming up?

do know, using a K&N drop in kinda screws you in the behind after it saves your mileage. because you are spending nearly $50-60 for a new filter rather then 12 for a stock filter AND the K&N wears out faster because K&N uses a oil to help collect more impurities in the air then a normal filter thus clogging faster which decreases filter life span...

you want a good way of getting good air, use an Injen RAM or make your own intake similar to it. use a normal air cone and when it's dirty, take it out, clean it, dry it, stick it back on and you're good to go and works just as well and actually saves your money... you'll see the same mileage and waste alot less money getting it.

EDIT: i've had my snorkel piece off for some time now. no difference that i can tell other then a difference in intake noise which just makes the 1NZ more throaty sounding. the only reason why i would think it helps increase mileage is due to the snorkel's restrictive construction which could hinder mileage and power combined, obviously something that Toyota would find sacrificially acceptable to please that ONE sissy out there saying "oh the xB's engine is too noisy blah blah blah biz-nitch biz-nitch biz-nitch"...

do know, using a K&N drop in kinda screws you in the behind after it saves your mileage. because you are spending nearly $50-60 for a new filter rather then 12 for a stock filter AND the K&N wears out faster because K&N uses a oil to help collect more impurities in the air then a normal filter thus clogging faster which decreases filter life span...

you want a good way of getting good air, use an Injen RAM or make your own intake similar to it. use a normal air cone and when it's dirty, take it out, clean it, dry it, stick it back on and you're good to go and works just as well and actually saves your money... you'll see the same mileage and waste alot less money getting it.

You can get a K&N for $35-40 .. it is possible. K&N wearing out faster?? I don't understand this statement. Faster then what? They have a million mile warrenty dude. Surprisingly, when a K&N or TRD drop in filter does get dirty, thats actually when it performs the best, since the contaminants act as a further filter. These reusable air filters are clean/washable ... no worries, take them out every 30-40K and clean them, let them sit to dry, then reapply the oil.. drop it back in the ride and roll.

On that Injen... are you speaking of a WAI ? Any CAI will for the most part decease mpg. A WAI like the Blitz , or something custom fabricated .. say using a K&N cone, etc. .... could be good to get more HP , however its presenting the engine with a larger surface area to suck in air into the throttle body. More air = more gas mixture = less mpg. If your easy.. easy on the foot, the WAI could be a good idea, if done right.

hen a K&N or TRD drop in filter does get dirty, thats actually when it performs the best, since the contaminants act as a further filter. These reusable air filters are clean/washable ... no worries, take them out every 30-40K and clean them, let them sit to dry, then reapply the oil.. drop it back in the ride and roll.

um... where do you get that the contaminants act as a further filter at all? if anything that is only restricting air flow even more.

i wasn't aware of the million mile warranty, but i still don't see how a more restrictive *because of the oil* would increase mileage in any way. i could see some slight power increase because of the oil acting as an air cooling additive... but having the oil there only restricts the air flow more and that means the engine would have to compensate by using more fuel. i know people have their claims of increased mileage, it just doesn't make any sense at all.

hen a K&N or TRD drop in filter does get dirty, thats actually when it performs the best, since the contaminants act as a further filter. These reusable air filters are clean/washable ... no worries, take them out every 30-40K and clean them, let them sit to dry, then reapply the oil.. drop it back in the ride and roll.

um... where do you get that the contaminants act as a further filter at all? if anything that is only restricting air flow even more.

Exactly :clap:
More air = more gas
More gas = more $ spent at the pump
More gas consumed = OPEC nations love that

I wish we could get 200hp/torque , and 100 mpg .... if life was that simple.

In other words, its a F****** vicious cycle out there dude.
If you do one thing, it can knock everything else off kilter.
For every action, there is a reaction.
I dont know what else to say, other then life is complicated.. especially in these times we're living.

*sigh* nevermind... you don't get it. when there is less air flow, the ECU will compensate by using MORE fuel... a restrictive air flow does NOT yield higher mileage at all... an extremely dirty air filter is an example of that.

more air doe increase power, yes... but only if you MAKE that air go in I.E force induced. having a more direct to to an N/A air supply just means better throttle response which during acceleration MAY lead to lower mileage only because air flow is easily making it's way in, allowing the engine to perform at it's fullest but during cruising should yield little difference at most allowing the engine to run a lean burn and use LESS fuel...

EDIT: also, i'd like to clarify *just incase it is miss-understood* 100mpg does NOT mean 100% efficiency in anyway shape or form. 100% efficiency would be zero emissions whether it be carbon or purely water vapor, zero heat energy lose, zero drive-train power lose to the ground due to flexing parts. something that makes use of all energy sourced to it without lose of anything would be 100% efficiency.

when there is less air flow, the ECU will compensate by using MORE fuel... Sir, I believe you misspoke (mistyped? ;^) here. For optimal combustion, the ECU tries to keep the air-to-fuel ratio the same all the time, I believe. So when there is more air, the ECU will add more fuel; and when there is less air, the ECU will add less fuel. Or am I mistaken . . . ?

Since the amount of gas injected into the engine is always proportioned to the amount of air going in, which is determined by the throttle plate opening, would not the gas consumption be ultimately decided by how hard you are pushing the gas pedal?

Since the amount of gas injected into the engine is always proportioned to the amount of air going in, which is determined by the throttle plate opening, would not the gas consumption be ultimately decided by how hard you are pushing the gas pedal?I believe that is correct.

Sir, I believe you misspoke (mistyped? ;^) here. For optimal combustion, the ECU tries to keep the air-to-fuel ratio the same all the time, I believe. So when there is more air, the ECU will add more fuel; and when there is less air, the ECU will add less fuel. Or am I mistaken . . . ?

You sir, are (mostly) correct.

To be technical, the ECU dictates the amount of fuel used as it relates to the amount of O2 in the air. Since warm air has less O2, the ECU reduces the amount of fuel. The stoich mix (for arguments sake, lets say its 14.7:1 O2 to fuel ratio) is always maintained by the ECU.

So cold air = more O2 = more fuel used.
warm air = less O2 = less fuel used.

Since the amount of gas injected into the engine is always proportioned to the amount of air going in, which is determined by the throttle plate opening, would not the gas consumption be ultimately decided by how hard you are pushing the gas pedal?

Mmm....well, its not that straight forward, but you are basically correct. It is a looooong answer, which I do not currently have time for, but search terms like "pumping loss(es)" and/or "throttle plate", "stoich mix" along with "WAI" if you want to do some reading up on it.

Mmm....well, its not that straight forward, but you are basically correct. It is a looooong answer, which I do not currently have time for, but search terms like "pumping loss(es)" and/or "throttle plate", "stoich mix" along with "WAI" if you want to do some reading up on it.Thanx for your answer; I did some Googling, and I believe I understand what's going on inside my internal combustion engines a little better. Goes to show ya; we're never too old to learn . . . .

Goes to show ya; we're never too old to learn . . . .

Amen brotha! :bow:

Does not having the snorkel void the warranty? I'm sure it would, but anyone doing this get an earful from the dealer for doing it?

It shouldn't. Dealers do try and bluff crap sometimes but just stand your ground. And plus, how could they say missing your snorkel caused your tranny to go out?

Does not having the snorkel void the warranty? I'm sure it would, but anyone doing this get an earful from the dealer for doing it?

It shouldn't. Dealers do try and bluff crap sometimes but just stand your ground. And plus, how could they say missing your snorkel caused your tranny to go out?

wind forces pushing them selfs into the intake caused the transmission gears to rattle loose and start grinding... OR... your syncros are shot and you need a new set... but my money is on your intake snorkel not being there.























:lalala:

Since the amount of gas injected into the engine is always proportioned to the amount of air going in, which is determined by the throttle plate opening, would not the gas consumption be ultimately decided by how hard you are pushing the gas pedal?

partially, yes... from what I understand.

It is a function of the engine RPM, the amount of air flowing past the MAF Mass Air Flow Sensor, the temperature of the intake air, the temperature of the engine (coolent), The position of the throttle plate and the change in position of the throttle plate if the gas pedal is moving, the readings off the two Oxygen sensors in the exhaust, Intake valve timing (VVTi), and finally if the AC is running or not.

That's what we mean when we say it is complicated.

For people that are worried about removing the snorkel and having the bottom of the air box exposed. I've found that the snorkel from a stock tC air box will fit. Its shorter and the opening sits right in front of the battery.

For people that are worried about removing the snorkel and having the bottom of the air box exposed. I've found that the snorkel from a stock tC air box will fit. Its shorter and the opening sits right in front of the battery.

Pics?

For people that are worried about removing the snorkel and having the bottom of the air box exposed. I've found that the snorkel from a stock tC air box will fit. Its shorter and the opening sits right in front of the battery.

Or you can do as I and pickup one of these from home depot (first one, top of page):

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.idealtruevalue.com/catalog/MH656942.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.idealtruevalue.com/servlet/the-F-cln-FITTINGS-dsh-PLASTIC-DRAIN/Categories&h=366&w=224&sz=28&hl=en&start=6&um=1&tbnid=Fr1mEBPcOLxazM:&tbnh=122&tbnw=75&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dgrate%2Bplastic%2Birrigation%2Bcommon%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN

Cost me $1.99 and fits the opening perfectly. I already posted more info (SKU, etc) in this thread, so I wont do it again.

Actually, Im wrong. the one I bought was round, not square like the pic i linked to. but you get the idea.

Ram air dryer hose-it's the bomb....

can this be done with a tc? is so, how?

Just look for a place to run the hose so it gets air directly fed and then run as straight as posible to the airbox

Just look for a place to run the hose so it gets air directly fed and then run as straight as posible to the airbox

ya, i wouldnt have a clue how to do that.

http://i37.photobucket.com/albums/e85/bodybymiller/IMG_0168.jpg

I had a stock air box from a tC laying around, so I gave it a shot.

Hate to sound like a noobie (I never messed around under the hood) But could you theoretically remove the whole air box assembly and just stick an intake filter over there? If only that VSV connector wasn't in the way :(

you want to connect a filter to the throttle body?