I've removed the resonator can from the ineer wing of my jdm type s lude.

I also did this on my previous Accord type R.

I have also put a K&N panel filter into the standard air box and routed an aluminium flexi hose from the front grill to the air box pick up point within the wing.

This set up now acts like a Mugen style CAI.
There is now a nice induction roar and the car seems to pick up quicker (butt dyno)

However I have a question

Is the sole purpose of the resonance can to supress noise? or did Mr Honda have another purpose for it?

As far as I can see I have vastly improved the ease of air flow into the filter box with my mod.

Any comments would be appreciated.

 

Dude, i took mine out about a week ago and i can feel it too. (Butt dyno as well)
I took out the whole butterfly valve componant thing that runs to the IM.
Its like a performance mod that doesnt cost money and lightens your car

 

Yes mainly for noise. Partly to help keep water out.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by ItalynStylion &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Its like a performance mod that doesnt cost money and lightens your car </TD></TR></TABLE>

I hope this is a joke about the wieght reduction... So you saved about the same as you would taking your shoes off.

 

Your resonator sits in your wing? My car has no wings... Do they flap?

The resonator dampens sound as well as helps prevent excess water from entering directly your intake tract.

You can see air flow?

Man, I need to take some vitamins.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Sephro &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

I hope this is a joke about the wieght reduction... So you saved about the same as you would taking your shoes off. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Or taking a big dump.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by SuperSlow &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Your resonator sits in your wing? My car has no wings... Do they flap?

The resonator dampens sound as well as helps prevent excess water from entering directly your intake tract.

You can see air flow?

Man, I need to take some vitamins.</TD></TR></TABLE>

Well I can see the results of my work.

Sorry I don't get your wing comment

 

Has anybody Dyno'd pre and post resonator removal?

 

4+ pound shoes would be pretty impressive, although not quite as impressive as a 4+ pound dump. So take it easy on the haterade, guys.

jdm - congrats on the mods. Some people claim they feel a reduction in low-end throttle response when they remove the resonator, but I've never experienced it. All the literature I've ever found indicates that the resonator's primary purpose is for noise reduction.

One thing you might consider is enlarging the hole at the bottom of the intake box going down into the fender (where the resonator used to match up). Air-flow gets squeezed quite a bit through there.

 

When the resonator is all in working order - air under 4800 rpms only comes from ONE of those tube horns. So it's a lot tighter there than at the hole beside the battery. Does that tight hole make the intake velocity faster, creating more torque?

 

got any pics of this

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Jagan’92 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">When the resonator is all in working order - air under 4800 rpms only comes from ONE of those tube horns. So it's a lot tighter there than at the hole beside the battery. Does that tight hole make the intake velocity faster, creating more torque?</TD></TR></TABLE>

That's exactly what a reasonator does. Same applies to the butterflies in the intake manifold.

It also helps prevent induction of water into the IM.

If you are only looking for peak power output, removing the reasonator and intake manifold butterflies are a good idea. However, it is not the best thing to do if you are looking for bottomend tq. It WILL decrease it.

 

And that leads me to the final question - If you remove the resonator, keeping the airbox with a drop-in filter, you'd lose some bottom end, but not as much as from an aftermarket, right?

The ram-like setup jdm type s has is still choked at the wheelwell - but that choke gives low-end torque... and gives him some cold air (the ram doesn't do much I imagine)

Isn't this a better setup than a short ram? Maybe he could replace the rubber hosing with some smooth pipe. Is this a better setup than a cold air? Oh, my final question was the first one.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by AndyD &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">However, it is not the best thing to do if you are looking for bottomend tq. It WILL decrease it.</TD></TR></TABLE>
Thing is, I've never seen evidence of this decrease represented on a dyno.

 

Don't remove the whole resonator, only the bottom piece. Trust me, I've driven w/ the whole resonator removed and with my personal setup and removing only
the bottom section is the best.

This way you keep the butterfly action but remove the resonator box which adds too much restriction.

http://members.rogers.com/carlvella/mods/mods.htm

 

If a part of the resonators function is to increase air velocity at low revs (to help torque) surely any increased velocity will be lost by the time it has negotiated the filter, the turns in the intake, the TB butterfly and the inlet manifold.

However the increase in volume of air that is gained by the resonators removal would not be affected.

Just my thoughts which mean nothing without proof on a dyno.