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.

 

Don't knock it 'til you've tried it!
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.

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"!

 

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 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 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.

 

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

 

Sure do love that Mustang.

 

MUGEN HEADERS?

 

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!

 

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/produ...directions.pdf

 

Interesting...

 

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???

 

 

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...