Ford Focus Forum, Ford Focus ST Forum, Ford Focus RS Forum - Reply to Topic
Ford Focus Forum
HomeContact UsAbout UsGalleryDiscussion ForumsMarketplace


Go Back   Ford Focus Forum, Ford Focus ST Forum, Ford Focus RS Forum > Ford Focus Third Generation > DURATEC Ti-VCT Performance (2012-Current) > Snorkel Delete

DURATEC Ti-VCT Performance (2012-Current) The place to chat about any Duratec 2.0L Ti-VCT engine performance, tuning and exhaust related upgrades.

Search This Forum | Image Search | Advanced Search    
FocusFanatics Merchandise

Thread: Snorkel Delete Reply to Thread
Title:
  
Message:
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Focus Forum, Ford Focus ST Forum, Ford Focus RS Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Topic Review (Newest First)
Yesterday 02:36 PM
dyn085
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2 View Post
Are you ignoring the fact that the ST has a Turbo, or am I just crazy? It's not even that the thing has a Turbo, it isn't even the same engine.

Essentially, what I was saying was, "you can still flow a lot of water through a restrictive pipe, you just need a bigger pump to push it".
The ST has an "air pumping ability" or so I'll call it, many multitudes higher than the NA engine.

I'm not necessarily arguing that the hole isn't big enough, but the main reason her statement has no merit is because she (and you, as well), seem to act like the ST and N/A engines are similar or the same, and they aren't even close.

Also, there are huge diminishing gains as far as intakes go, too. If the stock paper filter medium is enough in the ST for 252 hp, then hell, we must not need more.

By the way, that hole in the frame is the same size, but the rest of the air intake components are not all the same. The ST has larger tubes from there back to the airbox, for example.
Ugh. No, I'm pretty sure that neither she nor myself are ignoring the fact that the ST has a turbo. If anything, I'm pretty sure that we're using that as a fundamental part of the discussion.

I had a long reply typed out, but I just deleted it. Let me simplify-the part that we are talking about is exactly the same. To incorporate what you are trying to say, you can assume that if you are able to find a way to increase the negative pressure in the tract of the normally aspirated version that you will be able to support up to and over 252 hp (crank). It doesn't make it any less valid that we are able to increase the negative pressure in that tract with a turbo because the part being discussed is exactly the same.

Circular discussion is circular.
Yesterday 01:35 PM
BeepBeep2
Quote:
Originally Posted by dyn085 View Post
Actually, her statement has plenty of merit. Unlike the Crown Vic/Focus example, the Focus/Focus ST example is legitimate because the structure utilized for the snorkel is exactly the same. If it can flow enough air for 252 hp (and more, such as the Ford Racing upgrades that utilize the OEM box/snorkel opening [but has a different snorkel]) then it can surely flow enough for a 150-160whp Mk3.

I could break down your exhaust example, but it would be time consuming. Let's leave it at the fact that exhaust is an example of diminishing gains and drop scavenging effects and all that other jazz. I'm sure the Crown Vic would benefit from even stripping up to 2.25" exhaust, which would be a great example as to why the Focus benefits from a larger exhaust as there is a similar comparison then.

Anywho, I think bama_focus was referring to the cap on the open-ended drop-in filter. If so, that's exactly why I had multiple intake setups. I drove on the closed filter/OEM box for the majority of the year but ran the Steeda setup for car shows and in the winter. The OEM box with a closed filter felt much more linear in its power delivery than any other setup that I used, so that is what I preferred to drive on 90% of the time.
Are you ignoring the fact that the ST has a Turbo, or am I just crazy? It's not even that the thing has a Turbo, it isn't even the same engine.

Essentially, what I was saying was, "you can still flow a lot of water through a restrictive pipe, you just need a bigger pump to push it".
The ST has an "air pumping ability" or so I'll call it, many multitudes higher than the NA engine. By the way, that hole in the frame is the same size, but the rest of the air intake components are not all the same. The ST has larger tubes from there back to the airbox, for example.

I'm not necessarily arguing that the hole isn't big enough, but the main reason her statement has no merit is because she (and you, as well), seem to act like the ST and N/A engines are similar or the same, and they aren't even close.


Also, there are huge diminishing gains as far as intakes go, too ... and, if the stock paper filter medium is enough in the ST for 252 hp, then hell, we must not need more?
Quote:
I will repeat, the ST with 250+ hp uses the exact same opening through the front frame member as the regular Focus MK3.
So that engine is making 90 more hp through that same air intake. Plus the ST uses the SAME AIRBOX and filter.

So seriously the hole through the frame is good/big enough for any regular MK3 as far as airflow.
I do 100% agree removing the restrictive snorkle helps. And the free flow airfilter does too.
So the same hole when the ST makes 252 HP means that it is good enough, but obviously the same filter making 252 HP is not? Obviously, that filter is good for 252 HP, so why do we get gains when we change it? It's flawed logic to make such huge claims.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elizabeth View Post
Such a nice rant. All sorts of 'ranty' sort of ranting. No proof or discussion anywhere. just a 'I think you are wrong' and all sorts of hot air to go with.
Thank you for the entertainment. LOL
No, thank you. All sorts of "I think I am right", and all sorts of hot air to go with. You make your statements in 100% confidence with at-best, iffy evidence, and it is extremely laughable. I clearly gave you the reasons I thought you were wrong. You can't even look at what I said and say I was trying to prove I was right about anything, except for the fact that maybe you were wrong.
01-30-2015 06:37 PM
dyn085
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2 View Post
Your statement has zero merit.
You're talking about an FI engine with different internals and a turbo vs. this NA. You can not just apply apples to carrot comparisons like that all over the place. Intake diameter, exhaust diameter, whatever you'd like.

It starts sounding silly. Under this logic, why do exhaust upgrades for example? Here is a similar statement: "I will repeat, a 2 inch diameter exhaust is perfectly fine to handle 281 TQ and 239 HP on a Crown Vic. That engine makes 130 lb-ft more torque and 80 hp more on a similar exhaust diameter to what is on a Focus. So seriously, that is more than enough for exhaust flow. "

Obviously, exhaust upgrades have proven more power for the 2.0L NA Focus.

Why even say it? The ST and NA engines are fundamentally different. The whole goal is to remove as much restriction in both cases, but the ST can cram lots more air through a small hole anyway. You still lose power if the turbo can't make your target boost pressure, but these aren't even similar cases.
Actually, her statement has plenty of merit. Unlike the Crown Vic/Focus example, the Focus/Focus ST example is legitimate because the structure utilized for the snorkel is exactly the same. If it can flow enough air for 252 hp (and more, such as the Ford Racing upgrades that utilize the OEM box/snorkel opening [but has a different snorkel]) then it can surely flow enough for a 150-160whp Mk3.

I could break down your exhaust example, but it would be time consuming. Let's leave it at the fact that exhaust is an example of diminishing gains and drop scavenging effects and all that other jazz. I'm sure the Crown Vic would benefit from even stripping up to 2.25" exhaust, which would be a great example as to why the Focus benefits from a larger exhaust as there is a similar comparison then.

Anywho, I think bama_focus was referring to the cap on the open-ended drop-in filter. If so, that's exactly why I had multiple intake setups. I drove on the closed filter/OEM box for the majority of the year but ran the Steeda setup for car shows and in the winter. The OEM box with a closed filter felt much more linear in its power delivery than any other setup that I used, so that is what I preferred to drive on 90% of the time.
01-30-2015 06:01 PM
Elizabeth
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeepBeep2 View Post
Your statement has zero merit.
You're talking about an FI engine with different internals and a turbo vs. this NA. You can not just apply apples to carrot comparisons like that all over the place. Intake diameter, exhaust diameter, whatever you'd like.

It starts sounding silly. Under this logic, why do exhaust upgrades for example? Here is a similar statement: "I will repeat, a 2 inch diameter exhaust is perfectly fine to handle 281 TQ and 239 HP on a Crown Vic. That engine makes 130 lb-ft more torque and 80 hp more on a similar exhaust diameter to what is on a Focus. So seriously, that is more than enough for exhaust flow. "

Obviously, exhaust upgrades have proven more power for the 2.0L NA Focus.

Why even say it? The ST and NA engines are fundamentally different. The whole goal is to remove as much restriction in both cases, but the ST can cram lots more air through a small hole anyway. You still lose power if the turbo can't make your target boost pressure, but these aren't even similar cases.
Such a nice rant. All sorts of 'ranty' sort of ranting. No proof or discussion anywhere. just a 'I think you are wrong' and all sorts of hot air to go with.
Thank you for the entertainment. LOL
01-30-2015 03:31 PM
BeepBeep2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elizabeth View Post
I will repeat, the ST with 250+ hp uses the exact same opening through the front frame member as the regular Focus MK3.
So that engine is making 90 more hp through that same air intake. Plus the ST uses the SAME AIRBOX and filter.

So seriously the hole through the frame is good/big enough for any regular MK3 as far as airflow.
I do 100% agree removing the restrictive snorkle helps. And the free flow airfilter does too.
Your statement has zero merit.
You're talking about an FI engine with different internals and a turbo vs. this NA. You can not just apply apples to carrot comparisons like that all over the place. Intake diameter, exhaust diameter, whatever you'd like.

It starts sounding silly. Under this logic, why do exhaust upgrades for example? Here is a similar statement: "I will repeat, a 2 inch diameter exhaust is perfectly fine to handle 281 TQ and 239 HP on a Crown Vic. That engine makes 130 lb-ft more torque and 80 hp more on a similar exhaust diameter to what is on a Focus. So seriously, that is more than enough for exhaust flow. "

Obviously, exhaust upgrades have proven more power for the 2.0L NA Focus.

Why even say it? The ST and NA engines are fundamentally different. The whole goal is to remove as much restriction in both cases, but the ST can cram lots more air through a small hole anyway. You still lose power if the turbo can't make your target boost pressure, but these aren't even similar cases.
01-29-2015 04:19 PM
Elizabeth
Quote:
Originally Posted by bama_focus View Post
Reporting back after driving around with the cap on the end of my k&n. Overall I miss the noise it made, but the powerband feels much smoother with the closed end. I am a firm believer that the stock airbox is efficient for this car and the open end just attracts hot air from the engine bay. Gunna keep my filter plugged until I want the noise back lol.
I will repeat, the ST with 250+ hp uses the exact same opening through the front frame member as the regular Focus MK3.
So that engine is making 90 more hp through that same air intake. Plus the ST uses the SAME AIRBOX and filter.

So seriously the hole through the frame is good/big enough for any regular MK3 as far as airflow.
I do 100% agree removing the restrictive snorkle helps. And the free flow airfilter does too.
01-29-2015 02:51 PM
bama_focus Reporting back after driving around with the cap on the end of my k&n. Overall I miss the noise it made, but the powerband feels much smoother with the closed end. I am a firm believer that the stock airbox is efficient for this car and the open end just attracts hot air from the engine bay. Gunna keep my filter plugged until I want the noise back lol.
01-28-2015 03:25 PM
schrodingersbox
Quote:
Originally Posted by cjpasch View Post
So if I do the delete, will getting a prefilter to just play it safe for water, will that undo the benefits of the delete.
I think more about playing safe for matter like leaves, bugs, etc. The physical stuff. But yes a bit of water protection and no the reduction in airflow should be so minimal you won't even notice.
01-28-2015 11:04 AM
cjpasch So if I do the delete, will getting a prefilter to just play it safe for water, will that undo the benefits of the delete.
01-28-2015 10:25 AM
schrodingersbox
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tigeo View Post
With the CAI, the delete won't do much IMHO as the snorkel is no longer a restriction.
But it is, particularly so if you use the Steeda which uses the factory downpipe for airflow. Despite the increased airflow over/behind the light, the suction may and probably will still be pulling air from the direction of the original vents and again more so if there is an airdam/shield thingy, in myyyy opinion :D
This thread has more than 10 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:56 PM.


Copyright 2002-2014 FocusFanatics.com. All Rights Reserved : Privacy Policy : Advertise Information

Focus Fanatics Ford Focus Forum offers many fun ways for you to engage with other Ford Focus Owners from across the world. Whether it be about the aftermarket performance modifications, technical how-to's, European tuned suspension or awesome fuel economy similar to the Audi S3, Ford Fusion and Acura TLX. You can find all Ford Focus and Focus ST related information here. Join our Ford Focus discussion forums and chat with local Focus enthusiasts in your area. Challenger Hellcat - Charger Hellcat