Stock snorkel removal
02-21-2012 | 07:02 AM
#21
Senior Member
SL Member
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 2,102
From: Nashua, NH
It's a pretty well known psychological phenomenon. You think that you are getting higher quality and therefore will perceive that you are actually getting it.
The simple fact is, 87 octane and 93 octane fuels burn the same. They both have the same potential energy and release the same amount of energy when burned. The only difference is that it is possible to compress the higher octane fuel more before it detonates. The scion engine isn't designed with high compression, and does not require "premium" fuel.
In general, higher performance engines will "require" higher octanes fuels because they are designed for higher compression. But using a higher octane fuel will not make your engine perform better.
The simple fact is, 87 octane and 93 octane fuels burn the same. They both have the same potential energy and release the same amount of energy when burned. The only difference is that it is possible to compress the higher octane fuel more before it detonates. The scion engine isn't designed with high compression, and does not require "premium" fuel.
In general, higher performance engines will "require" higher octanes fuels because they are designed for higher compression. But using a higher octane fuel will not make your engine perform better.
i know/read of all of the above
i am talking from personal experience. if anyone wants to try or not its up to them. this has been discussed thousands of times on every car forum there is.
and there is always a split 50/50
02-21-2012 | 07:19 AM
#23
Member
SL Member
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 89
Fontana 2/04/2012
91 Octane
2k Launch
With the snorkel removed my mph went down.
With the mount no change in my 60 ft.
Only got two passes over 300 cars showed up.
No Snorkel and TS mount
1/4 Mile ET: 15.950
1/4 Mile MPH: 85.91
1/8 Mile ET: 10.285
1/8 Mile MPH: 68.72
60 Foot ET: 2.410
Stock
1/4 Mile ET: 15.999
1/4 Mile MPH: 86.41
1/8 Mile ET: 10.308
1/8 Mile MPH: 68.31
60 Foot ET: 2.408
I lost .5 mph in my top end without the snorkel but was I was faster in my ET
91 Octane
2k Launch
With the snorkel removed my mph went down.
With the mount no change in my 60 ft.
Only got two passes over 300 cars showed up.
No Snorkel and TS mount
1/4 Mile ET: 15.950
1/4 Mile MPH: 85.91
1/8 Mile ET: 10.285
1/8 Mile MPH: 68.72
60 Foot ET: 2.410
Stock
1/4 Mile ET: 15.999
1/4 Mile MPH: 86.41
1/8 Mile ET: 10.308
1/8 Mile MPH: 68.31
60 Foot ET: 2.408
I lost .5 mph in my top end without the snorkel but was I was faster in my ET
Last edited by Deathscythe40; 02-21-2012 at 07:58 AM.
02-21-2012 | 07:48 AM
#24
Member
SL Member
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 89
02-21-2012 | 07:50 AM
#25
Member
SL Member
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 89
Since no one has done a true test on a 2011 scion TC for 91 vs 87 or even 93 octane ratings I can go only conclude from other car tests car engine specs as a comparison
2010 Jetta 2.5l
Engine: 2.5L in-line 5 double overhead cam ( 9.5 :1 compression ratio ; four valves per cylinder)
Fuel: unleaded ( 87 octane)
Fuel consumption: city= 23 (mpg); highway= 30 (mpg); combined= 25 (mpg); vehicle range: 364 miles
Multi-point injection fuel system
14.5 gallon fuel tank
Power: 170 HP ( 127 kW) @ 5,700 rpm; 177 ft lb of torque ( 240 Nm) @ 4,250 rpm
2011 Scion TC
Engine: 2.5L in-linefour-cylinder DOHC with variable valve timing and four valves per cylinder
Unleaded fuel
Fuel economy: EPA (0:, 23MPG city, 31 MPG highway, 26 MPG combined and 378 mi. range
Multi-point fuel injection
14.5gallon fuel tank
Power (SAE): 180 hp @ 6,000 rpm; 173 ft lb of torque @ 4,100 rpm
03-23-2012 | 05:55 AM
#27
Member
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 32
From: NoVA
Scion202, i used to do the whole premium thing right when i got my tc. it's my baby, only the best for her.. and honestly i noticed no difference in performance, just a big hole in my wallet. this article saved me mad money. http://www.caranddriver.com/features/regular-or-premium
but if you're rich as hell and it works for you, who the hell cares. placebo is one hell of a drug.
but if you're rich as hell and it works for you, who the hell cares. placebo is one hell of a drug.
03-23-2012 | 04:48 PM
#28
Senior Member
SL Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 180
From: STL
All i know is that the removing the Snorkel will not realy give you more power, You just hear more noise. It seems to be faster but its not. If it gave you more power, we are talking like a 1-2Hp gain that you wouldnt notice.
03-23-2012 | 05:23 PM
#29
Senior Member
SL Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 732
From: Washington, DC
Scion202, i used to do the whole premium thing right when i got my tc. it's my baby, only the best for her.. and honestly i noticed no difference in performance, just a big hole in my wallet. this article saved me mad money. http://www.caranddriver.com/features/regular-or-premium
but if you're rich as hell and it works for you, who the hell cares. placebo is one hell of a drug.
but if you're rich as hell and it works for you, who the hell cares. placebo is one hell of a drug.
We should note that even cars designed to run on regular fuel might require higher octane as they age.
Our low-tech Ram managed to eke out a few extra dyno ponies on premium fuel, but at the track its performance was virtually identical.
The Mustang's knock sensors and EEC-V computer found 2 hp more on the dyno and shaved a more impressive 0.3 second off its quarter-mile time at the track.
The turbocharged Saab's sophisticated Trionic engine-control system dialed the power back 9.8 percent on regular gas, and performance dropped 10.1 percent at the track.
Burning regular in our BMW M3 diminished track performance by 6.6 percent
03-23-2012 | 06:36 PM
#30
Member
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 32
From: NoVA
and? i drive a scion tc, you drive a scion tc, he drives a scion tc..
"Our tests confirm that for most cars there is no compelling reason to buy more expensive fuel than the factory recommends, as any performance gain realized will surely be far less than the percentage hike in price. Cheapskates burning regular in cars designed to run on premium fuel can expect to trim performance by about the same percent they save at the pump. If the car is sufficiently new and sophisticated, it may not suffer any ill effects, but all such skinflints should be ready to switch back to premium at the first sign of knock or other drivability woes. And finally, if a car calibrated for regular fuel begins to knock on anything less than premium or midgrade, owners should invest in a tuneup, emissions-control-system repair, or detergent additives to solve, rather than bandage, the root problem. Class dismissed."
"Our tests confirm that for most cars there is no compelling reason to buy more expensive fuel than the factory recommends, as any performance gain realized will surely be far less than the percentage hike in price. Cheapskates burning regular in cars designed to run on premium fuel can expect to trim performance by about the same percent they save at the pump. If the car is sufficiently new and sophisticated, it may not suffer any ill effects, but all such skinflints should be ready to switch back to premium at the first sign of knock or other drivability woes. And finally, if a car calibrated for regular fuel begins to knock on anything less than premium or midgrade, owners should invest in a tuneup, emissions-control-system repair, or detergent additives to solve, rather than bandage, the root problem. Class dismissed."
03-23-2012 | 06:46 PM
#31
Senior Member
SL Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 732
From: Washington, DC
and? i drive a scion tc, you drive a scion tc, he drives a scion tc..
"Our tests confirm that for most cars there is no compelling reason to buy more expensive fuel than the factory recommends, as any performance gain realized will surely be far less than the percentage hike in price. Cheapskates burning regular in cars designed to run on premium fuel can expect to trim performance by about the same percent they save at the pump. If the car is sufficiently new and sophisticated, it may not suffer any ill effects, but all such skinflints should be ready to switch back to premium at the first sign of knock or other drivability woes. And finally, if a car calibrated for regular fuel begins to knock on anything less than premium or midgrade, owners should invest in a tuneup, emissions-control-system repair, or detergent additives to solve, rather than bandage, the root problem. Class dismissed."
"Our tests confirm that for most cars there is no compelling reason to buy more expensive fuel than the factory recommends, as any performance gain realized will surely be far less than the percentage hike in price. Cheapskates burning regular in cars designed to run on premium fuel can expect to trim performance by about the same percent they save at the pump. If the car is sufficiently new and sophisticated, it may not suffer any ill effects, but all such skinflints should be ready to switch back to premium at the first sign of knock or other drivability woes. And finally, if a car calibrated for regular fuel begins to knock on anything less than premium or midgrade, owners should invest in a tuneup, emissions-control-system repair, or detergent additives to solve, rather than bandage, the root problem. Class dismissed."
03-23-2012 | 08:18 PM
#33
Senior Member
SL Member
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 732
From: Washington, DC
We can't deny that there may be gains by using premium fuel, no matter how minuscule they are. I'm here just to learn, so if anyone would like to show results from the 2.5L 2AR-FE straight-4, feel welcome.
04-07-2012 | 02:52 AM
#35
Senior Member
SL Member
Joined: Jun 2011
Posts: 752
From: Houston, TX
Its a carbon filter for emissions. It has been debated several time wetheror not you would see a performance gain if you remove it. My opinion is leave it in and keep that much more dirt out of the block, buts thats just me
04-09-2012 | 11:56 PM
#37
Junior Member
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 4
New member and first time poster, so what's up everyone first off.
2012 Tc owner here and I tried the snorkel delete and I gotta say - I like the throttle response and sound a lot better with it on. So much so, I just put it back on. And not claiming that I can "feel" 1-2 hp, but i'm pretty sure it kills the bottom end torque from my experience. Totally anecdotal though. Still sorting out in my head why torque would be less unless it has something to do with airflow temps.
Anyone notice the same thing?
2012 Tc owner here and I tried the snorkel delete and I gotta say - I like the throttle response and sound a lot better with it on. So much so, I just put it back on. And not claiming that I can "feel" 1-2 hp, but i'm pretty sure it kills the bottom end torque from my experience. Totally anecdotal though. Still sorting out in my head why torque would be less unless it has something to do with airflow temps.
Anyone notice the same thing?
