20 captured repliesPartial discussion capture · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHDe-snorkeling 986: Yes or no? - 986 Forum - The Community for Porsche Boxster & Cayman Owners
Leading reported evidence
Fill intake system and covered the maf
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
I'm 99 percent certain that dust filled the intake system and covered the MAF.
De-snorkeling 986: Yes or no? - 986 Forum - The Community for Porsche Boxster & Cayman Owners
Read full discussion summary
Leading evidence: 'Fill intake system and covered the maf' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Fill intake system and covered the maf' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
Takes longer to remove the grill over the intake opening then it does to remove or replace the snorkel.
De-snorkeling 986: Yes or no? - 986 Forum - The Community for Porsche Boxster & Cayman Owners
Use tapatalk
Suggestion or failed attempt
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
De-snorkeling 986: Yes or no? - 986 Forum - The Community for Porsche Boxster & Cayman Owners
Coverage and how to read this overview
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
20 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
986Forum: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261026T165820Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
Is there any reason NOT to de-snorkel a '99 Boxster? I guess the only thing that would concern me is debris or water getting down into the engine. Any opinions on this?
For a short period I parked my car on a very busy Los Angeles street. I let it sit for about a week once and the car had serious problems starting. I'm 99 percent certain that dust filled the intake system and covered the MAF. When you desnorkle it does all more dust in there. But so far, there isn't a downside that I see. I removed MAF, cleaned, and was back on my way in ten minutes.
I hope that wasn't intended to sound snarky.
When I say busy street, I mean very busy. There way a drag race at least hourly all night long, Thousands of cars a day braking intensely from long uninterrupted stretch. I saw people travelling over 100 mph every day on that road. So yes, dust can get past all that stuff. I offer firsthand experience, this is exactly what happened. There's zero doubt in my mind.
Then you have a leak in your system, somewhere past the air filter. I'm sorry, but that's just fact.
And, it has absolutely Nothing to do with whether the car is snorkeled or DE-snorkeled.
Sent from my SM-G970U using Tapatalk
Related to OP's inquiry, what is intended to be the point of the snorkel? Agreed that the lack of the snorkel should have no impact on getting dust/debris to the MAF; the filter should have prevented that. @junkley, is it possible that your air filter wasn't positioned correctly or that there's a leak that's allowing air past the filter?
No snark intended on this end. Just trying to 1) learn why Porsche installed the snorkel if it's extraneous, and 2) hopefully help spot why @junkley had dirt in the MAF.
I've read that the snorkel was specifically for USA market to meet noise pollution controls.
It is possible that something was out of whack but I'm 99 percent sure the added dust was the problem.
The snorkel is about noise control. It is otherwise superfluous.
To get water into the engine from the intake on the side of the car, you would need to direct a high pressure blast straight into- and- back, in essence TRYING to get water into the motor.
There is no harm in removing it. But those who tell you they felt it increase power have succumbed to placebo. ;-)
De-snorkeling will give you increased intake noise.
And that's all it will do.
It's not going to add power.
And its not going to allow any extra dirt or dust into your system.
If "Perception is 9/10 of reality", then if for example it sounds like it has 20 more HP, in reality it has 18 more HP. You can't argue against that!
Some even argue that "Perception IS reality" but that would spiral us into a political argument...
Based on my experience, the car does sound a lot cooler with the snorkel removed. Probably no power increase, but it sounds like it's making more power!
The snorkel is just snapped into place.
I stuck a broom handle in mine shoved to the left and right and popped it out in seconds.
It can be snapped back in place in about the same amount of time.
Takes longer to remove the grill over the intake opening then it does to remove or replace the snorkel.
