A couple of things:

1) I hope everyone plays by the rules so this goes thru and everyone wins.

2) What about continuing the fabrication process to the passenger-side-faux-brake-duct so the ram effect can still be utilized. I would think that if the smooth molding process can be used it will provide better airflow than any accordian-type ducting use to connect the two.

 

Looked like a good idea, but we will need some real driving condition data to support the idea. A lot of idea look great on paper, but if it work or not in real world is another thing.

 

If you look inside the hole in the fender wall, you'll see there are objects in there that would act as an obstruction to such a mod. Also, if you do this, you will once again, bring in all the sand and grit that the current "snorkel" does.

Sometimes, one has to go by information that is already a known quantity. By this, I mean that we all know that the air just behind the fact air duct is going to be shielded from engine bay heat. That's proven as this is the premise on which AEM type of intakes are based. We also know from past temperature recording studies, that insulating the airbox and intake tube will reduce the intake temps by only another 2 to 3 degrees (when all other heat shielding is done). It's sorta like "If you drop a lead weight from a second floor balcony, do you really need to see it hit the ground to know that it indeed fell?"

Now to address both of the above quotes. "DieselPilot" is trying something new. He's willing to make them but I'm sure he's just as happy to NOT make them for others. If you want to "test" this product and prove its effectiveness, then maybe you should do it yourself. He's not trying to "push" this thing onto anybody. I don't see why there is any onus on him or anyone else to "test" this thing before it can be considered a viable "product", since he's not twisting anyone's arm to "buy" it (yet). For this thing to be accepted as a "product", it has to be advertised for sale and so far it has not. So far, "if you want one, he MIGHT make one". This, as yet, is not a device, the efficacy of which, must be "proven" with data and certainly not by its inventor.

 

Please put me on the list, too. Looks like a great solution.

 

As a snorkel type intake manufacturer and long time user I've found just the opposite to hold true for me. I recently removed my airbox lid for the first time in around 2 years and the airbox was clean as a whistle and the filter in perfect condition.

I'm sure if you regularly drive through dust or sand storms or on dirt tracks it may be possible to pick up some grit (which poses no problem anyway as it is easily trapped by the airbox and wouldn't get past the filter in any event) but for driving under normal conditions, at the track or auto-x I certainly don't see this being an issue of any concern.

The only issue at all that I can see with opening up a fake air duct is that the inlet would be quite low to the ground in comparison to most snorkel intakes which terminate 4 or 5 inches higher.

 

Great Idea! Count me in too.

 

While everybody is going mod crazy to the airbox, does anyone have a solution to the rubber intake tube. Somebody posted a ti hardpipe a while ago to replace the rubber tube, looked cool. Carbon fibre would look sick

 

If I remember correctly (my car is in storage in Colorado and I'm in Bahrain), the hole this device is utilizing is basically the headlight bullb replacement access which terminates in the front at approximately the same height as all the snorkles I've seen.

 

The cavity extends down to the faux air vent. Here's a picture of the space without the front bar:

 

very nice! looks good. i think getting patent is a good idea too