Glad to hear all is finalized and together. At the very least, you spent a very small amount of money, got some grunt and atleast 5+ hp. And also a cleaner looking engine. Nothing wrong with any of that.

Billy

 

Nice job Lou!!

It really looks cleaner in there without all that extra junk on the intake.

 

Actually Rob, it is funny since all the marketing and application data and sales videos for snorkels emphatically illustrate how they are designed to allow deep water crossings while keeping it out of your intake. Are you saying that's not what they're for? And that all those "Action" videos are misleading? If a snorkel doesn't keep water out of the intake, what possible benefit could there be to running one?

As for the two magical water droplets that get by my filter and stay suspended in the airstream all the way up the 2 feet or so of intake tubing, past the throttle plate and around all the bends and curves of the intake manifold then into a cylinder; well I've yet to see that happen. Gadget doesn't seem to have any problems with his intake silencerless intake(s) as well. You going to tell Gadget he screwed up? I'm sure he'll have something to say about that...

I've shown the ISR mod to a few people who design engines and high performance parts for a living and they've all had the same thoughts about it as I did when I first came upon the idea; the intake silencer on these engines is simply that, and intake silencer and not a moisture collector or performance enhancer.

It won't contribute to any torque or horsepower gains since the volume of the silencer is too small for that on this engine. If the intake runners on the intake manifold were a lot shorter, then a resevoir in front of the throttle body would probably help with cylinder filling. Seeing that the size of the plenum itself is rather large, it has the characteristics of the aformentioned resevoir.

Concerning your statement about it not being proven to provide any gains except noise; Christian (96 Runner) gave us some hard data about that. But since he didn't do 100 runs, then I'm sure you've already poo-pooed the data as not being statistically significant. Which is why I'm not going to bother spending hundreds of dollars on dyno runs proving a mod that I know works and one that I spent about $30 on. It just doesn't make sense.

As for the noise, well it's pretty loud, but I still don't see any downsides other than that after living with it for over a year. And according to you, the ISR mod was supposed to be shown to be damaging to all the engines it's been installed on by now... Where's all your hard data about how bad it is? You haven't stepped up and brought anything to the table concerning it either, Rob. You just keep saying to people who chime in who've recently done the mod, "search some other forums and you'll find what I'm talking about". I get several emails a week from people asking for advice about the mod and I yet to get one from someone that tells me it ruined their engine, but they all tell me how it enhanced their engines performance.

It's time to put up or shut up Rob. You haven't proven that it's bad for these engines, nor have you proven that it doesn't provide any performance gains.

Peace.
G

 

Huh? Actually, it was you who implied that "a snorkel which extends above your roofline" somehow increased the risk of water ingestion. I simply explained that wasn't the case.

So you monitor ALL the air going into your engine? I am not sure how you would "see" that happen. I have never said that doing the mod would result in the spontaneous destruction of your motor or anything similar. What I have said is that the traps provide an extra magin of safety. When you go through something a bit more difficult than the "puddles" you held up as an example, those traps are there as a just in case.

I see. And the placement of the "J" tube directly over the exhaust is a coincidence I assume...

My point exactly. No torque, no horsepower. So that makes it a noisemaker that *might* improve throttle response a smidgen. Hardly worth the effort and certainly not worth the risk if my absurd fantasies about it catching water are true.

I think you will find that the figures there are within the error margin of the tools used to measure the run. You are correct. One run with homeowner equipment is not statistically significant.

If I wanted a noisemaker, I would put playing cards in my spokes.

Read more carefully. Not once have I said that the mod was damaging to all engines. But I will repeat what I have been saying just for you; "There is a potential for damage from this mod". Got it? Besides, your logic is flawed. You could drive around for a year without seatbelts without anything happening as well. But when the time comes that you need it and don't have it, WHAM!

I assume you are familiar with Google? I posted a mess of links once, since you are the chief proponent of the mod, you do some research this time.

hahahahahha! That's a riot! You are the one who claims gains from the mod and who took a mod that clubs have been doing for YEARS and named it after yourself. It is not up to me to prove a negative, that the mod does nothing for performance, it is up to you to prove what you assert, that it actually does something beyond making noise and that it won't cause damage.


Right back at ya.

 

For what it's worth - I thought the ISR mod did give a bit of a performance edge. BUT... the amount of noise that it gave out kind of poopooed the performance it provided. That and I was a little tired of listening for possible pinging and paying the extra .10-.20 per gallon for gas.

Whoa, loudawg - did you ever think that your post would trigger this debate again

EDIT-
I forgot to mention, I was also feeling a bit wary about the *possibility* of moisture. It can get quite foggy here sometimes - especially near the ocean. I haven't done enough research (too lazy, I'm sure someone else will ) so I figure I'm better off nearly back to stock.
That doesn't mean I've thrown away the parts. I may put it back on when I know exactly what I'm listening for and I know without a doubt that there is little to no possibility for damage.

 

i have this slow motion image of your truck driving through the surf on a Pacific Northwest beach, with seagulls flying and Enya music playing . . . .

think that would make a good Toyota commercial?



creed

 

Okay, great...
I'm going to have Enya stuck in my head all day now...
Grrrrrr!

 

Um, no I didn't. What I said was that it was funny that YOU were worried about injesting water into your engine because of some modifcation to the intake system between the airbox and the throttle body when YOU'RE running a snorkel. It was implied that snorkels go a long way toward preventing that from happening.

Not really, so I'll give you that one. My point was that there are a lot of places, even without the Silencer(s) in place for water to evaporate in the intake system. So, I guess charging thru waist high waves on the beach at about 30 mph or blasting thru what I would call puddles on fire roads at 30-40mph isn't any different than idling thru puddles on the street... I don't know what else to call large, muddy bodies of water that aren't technically lakes. I'm not stupid enough to bury the front end of my truck in a deep stream or creek since I almost never close the deckplate. Is that what you mean by more challenging?

I don't and have never had a J tube on my intake. Toyota calls it a resonator, not a water trap. Toyota also calls the Intake Silencer an Intake Silencer. These aren't my words.

The Intake Silencer doesn't ADD any performance, but it certainly detracts from it. You just refuse to listen to ANY evidence to the contrary, nor do you have any evidence that you're right.

I figured you'd say something along these lines since you just won't admit that you're wrong about this mod. Once again I ask, why is the Deck Plate accepted as a valid mod when it gives HP/Torque results which are in the "margin of error"?

You already bought one or two of them, but paid a LOT more money for them.

Okay. But you're the only person who seems to think so from what I can tell.

I don't remember you posting anything of the sort... I have searched google about this stuff and have never found anything that supports your paranoia about it. I searched for information before I even contemplated doing this on my truck.

When did I name the mod after myself? You want to point me to MY post where I did? OTHER people call it "Dr. Z's ISR Mod", not me. I'm not even the one who abbreviated it to the ISR mod. I have NEVER said that I thought up this whole concept concerning removing intake resonators. I just didn't see anyone doing it on these particular trucks, so I brought it to the table and that's all I've said. As for mentioning developing the mod, it was in the context of making it work on MY truck, not the whole concept. Don't put words in my mouth and get your facts straight before you accuse me of something. I KNOW that you don't like me Rob, that's no big secret, in case you weren't aware. It's obvious that you don't because you imagine me doing disgraceful things which I never done. What kills me is that you don't even KNOW me, at all, yet you've already made up your mind not to like me based on some words on the internet...


For the record, I meant what I said in your thread about your SAS. I think it's cool that you're brave enough to take a torch to your truck...

I'm done with this. I know that you'll never agree that this mod is a positive, even if I did 20 dyno runs to prove it, because the "margin of error" would be in effect...

G

 

Yeah, but only if I get to star in it! You can direct, Creed.

G

 

Likewise. I could go through and refute your statements, one by one, but I have said my piece and your are not likely to admit that this mod, like every other mod has the potential for a downside. But, I would certainly be convinced by a couple of consistant dyno runs before the mod, then a couple more consistant runs after the mod on the same day, same machine

My hope in voicing my concern is that people will not do ANY mod blindly, without putting in some research. They ALL have some sort of downside, it's a question of whether that downside is something you can live with. We have some rather non-technical folks on here and they need to know what they are going to get from a mod and what it is going to "cost" them. It doesn't matter what you or I say or what Toyota calls a part. Folks need to look into the vast wealth of automotive knowledge available and understand what they are getting themselves into.

Thank you! I am not convinced it's bravery as much as sheer stubborness. I was tired of beating the IFS to death and this made sense. For what it's worth, I suspect that were it not for the ISR Mod business, we would be fast friends. Folks who have met both of us have commented repeatedly to me that we are more alike that either of us would ever care to admit...

 

what we need here is a big cyber hug

great info. id love to see the dyno runs.

if i get my lazy ass to the dyno maybe ill do em
david

 

Well. I have looked at both arguments and i cant see any benefits to doing the mod other than making your rig noisy. But i was 20 once and if i could make my car noisier. Gad Damn it i was gonna make it noisier . And if you do swamp your motor in water those resonators might do a bit to help but who knows.
The way i see it is. toyota spends millions on R&D . They dont add things for no reason. But if you want to play with your truck and cut things off like i sure did when i was young. Then go for it.