View Single Post
Old 06-21-2010, 12:27 AM   #13 (permalink)
Baggage Handler #2
EcoModding Lurker
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Indiana
Posts: 17

Boris - '04 Saab 9-3 Linear
90 day: 22.75 mpg (US)

Natasha - '10 Saab 9-3 Combi 2.0 T
90 day: 24.42 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I think it would reduce efficiency somewhat.
Here's why.
To put a restriction in the intake, it isn't going to matter a whole lot whether it is in front of or behind the MAF sensor. Either way, you have a pipe of diameter X that is getting necked down, then back up - creating a little venturi. In this, the air is getting accelerated across the throat of the venturi then decelerated again, also the pressures and temperatures are being forced to change artificially (albeit by very small amounts). This takes work - if it didn't we'd have a perpetual motion machine. This work comes from the engine.
It should be slightly less efficient than running at a reduced throttle setting because it is an additional obstruction, rather than a single obstruction.

Finally, a well done OBD suite will catch such an obstruction and flag it with a check engine light.

Interesting idea, though.