Removing Intake Resonator on Mazda3

Why would you do such a thing, you ask?

Well... cuz it not only sounds better, it improves airflow, thereby increasing performance and fuel economy! Well... theoretically, anyway.

Tools you'll need:
Jack and 1 jack stand
21mm lug nut wrench or similar tool
#2 Phillips Screwdriver
10mm deep socket or short socket with extension and ratchet (the smaller the better; 1/4" drive tools will work best.
10mm open-end wrench

Procedure:
1. Loosen lug nuts on left front wheel
2. Jack up left front corner of car
3. Remove lug nuts and wheel
4. Remove 3 phillips-head screws from left front underbody splash shield
5. Remove three phillips-head push pins from front of inner fender (two on the wheel opening lip, one inside the wheel well)
6. Using socket and ratchet, remove 6 10mm-head bolts from splash shields. These bolts only: One in wheel well next to the push pin from step 5, three across the front of the car on main splash shield, two on left side where main splash shield attaches to transmission splash shield. Do not remove the push-pins on the main splash shield.
7. Slide main splash shield free from lock-pin where it attaches to the transmission splash shield.
8. Pull front portion of inner fender back away from the front of the car.
9. See that big honkin hunk o' plastic inside there? That's the resonator. There are three bolts holding it in place.
-10mm Bolt #1: This one is easy. It should be staring you right in the face. Take it out.
-10mm Bolt #2: This one's a little more difficult. Lie on your back and look up between the resonator and the frame rail, next to the horn. You should see the bottom of the tab that bolt #2 is going through. Use a small ratchet and take it out.
-10mm Bolt #3: This one will take the longest. The resonator was put in before the headlight, so bolt #3 was designed to be accessed from the front. We don't want to take the headlight out, so we will be using the back door method. Take the 10mm open-end wrench, lie on your back and look up inside the fender/bumper area. You'll see the edge of bolt #3 tucked up about a foot from the bottom of the bumper. The resonator will be pretty loose, so just wiggle it and see where it pivots. Take bolt #3 out with the wrench and don't let the resonator fall on your face. You'll have to turn it this way and that but it will eventually come out through the wheel well.

10. Reverse steps 8-1, tighten lug nuts to 85-90 ft-lbs in a star pattern and you're off and running! (yippy)

11. Call K&N and bug them about getting a new filter.

yes that is the back door instructions for resonator....normally people added the frount facia removal for that.....also this made it a lil bit eaiser for whenever you get the cai cause the resonator is already gone so you are just dropping the splash guard 1 more time and putting the filter on the intake instead of dropping the entire frount facia....nice write up...

I did this a couple of weeks ago. I even opened the bottom hole in the filter box and added a extension with a 90* and a cone filter. Made alittle bit of differnce. I think a big part of the restriction is the housing the maf sensor is in!

--Herb--

Da 6 said:

yes that is the back door instructions for resonator....normally people added the frount facia removal for that.....also this made it a lil bit eaiser for whenever you get the cai cause the resonator is already gone so you are just dropping the splash guard 1 more time and putting the filter on the intake instead of dropping the entire frount facia....nice write up...

Click to expand...

Thanks.
I'm basically lazy, so I always try to find the fastest and easiest way to do things.

AzMz3 said:

I did this a couple of weeks ago. I even opened the bottom hole in the filter box and added a extension with a 90* and a cone filter. Made alittle bit of differnce. I think a big part of the restriction is the housing the maf sensor is in!

--Herb--

Click to expand...

Where did you find a 3" 90? Did you just use PVC?

did that on my neon ahile back...mandrel bent pipe from pepboys

Res. Removal.......

Just wanted to thank goldwing2000/~Kane for the post...
I might try this after break-in....

For those of you who have done this mod..., would you say it has made a significant impact on performance/economy?

....If so, was it worth performing the procedure...sounds relatively simple to remove the resonater per your instructions.....


(uhm)

I haven't had it done long enough to check the economy (I'll know next week) but it does seem a little peppier.
The biggest plus is the sound. The added growl puts it way up in fun factor. (2thumbs)

Hey just found out yesterday in another forum that the 6 resonator was desighned where the bults on the front that are hard to reach weren't eeded to be taken off...there are washers that are the sama size as the bolts and it pops right off after removal of the rear bolt that was accessable. not shure if the front pain in the ass bolt(s) were the same way for you guys?

Nice Post !!! Did it make the car any louder at highway speeds ?

Why do you think the Helmholtz resonator is part of the intake system in the first place and what effect on performance do you think it's removal will have?

Tonys3 said:

Nice Post !!! Did it make the car any louder at highway speeds ?

Click to expand...

Not really. Just from about 3/4 to full throttle.

goldwing2000 said:

Why would you do such a thing, you ask?

Well... cuz it not only sounds better, it improves airflow, thereby increasing performance and fuel economy! Well... theoretically, anyway.

Click to expand...

So in other words, Mazda incorporates the resonator into the air intake system in order to make it sound worse, impede air flow and decrease performance and fuel economy? Interesting concept.

02 DX Millenium Red

goldstar said:

So in other words, Mazda incorporates the resonator into the air intake system in order to make it sound worse, impede air flow and decrease performance and fuel economy? Interesting concept.

02 DX Millenium Red

Click to expand...

the stock intake assembly is used to minimize noise. it is not in the best interest of performance or fuel economy. why do you think CAI companies dyno test their intakes only to show that there are gains that can be had? it's because of the flowing nature of air. easy in + easy out = more power. the faster you can get air in for combustion and the faster you can move that air out of the combustion chamber allows you to combust more. so in a sense, yes, mazda incorporates a resonator into the air system to make it supress noise. when your motor doesn't growl at you after you hit the pedal, it sounds "worse" in my opinion.

tonkabui said:

the stock intake assembly is used to minimize noise. it is not in the best interest of performance or fuel economy. why do you think CAI companies dyno test their intakes only to show that there are gains that can be had? it's because of the flowing nature of air. easy in + easy out = more power. the faster you can get air in for combustion and the faster you can move that air out of the combustion chamber allows you to combust more. so in a sense, yes, mazda incorporates a resonator into the air system to make it supress noise. when your motor doesn't growl at you after you hit the pedal, it sounds "worse" in my opinion.

Click to expand...

Yes, the stock intake system is designed to minimize noise but that is not at all the function of the Helmholtz resonator. The resonator is incorporated to increase and maintain low-speed torque. Remove it and there will be a loss of low-speed torque with no consequent gain in performance. If you examine the positioning of the resonator, you'll note that it is in "parallel" with the intake system and does not constitutute an impediment to the air flow. Also, the sound of an intake system has little to do with its performance.

02 DX Millenium Red

please show me a stock intake vs. either short ram or CAI where the CAI or SRI actually LOST torque... from EVERY dyno that has been shown on here since i browsed starting in august of 2002 points to gains across the board. hp difference at lower RPMs are negligible, but torque, on the other hand, is about 3-5 lb/ft more across the board.

and regarding sound vs. performance... i didn't say there was a correlation. i am just saying that it sounds nicer when you hear a growl when you get on it. someone on here has it in their sig... a loud car doesn't mean a fast car, and vice versa.

goldstar said:

Yes, the stock intake system is designed to minimize noise but that is not at all the function of the Helmholtz resonator. The resonator is incorporated to increase and maintain low-speed torque. Remove it and there will be a loss of low-speed torque with no consequent gain in performance. If you examine the positioning of the resonator, you'll note that it is in "parallel" with the intake system and does not constitutute an impediment to the air flow. Also, the sound of an intake system has little to do with its performance.


02 DX Millenium Red

Click to expand...

......air box and resonator are only 25%30% efficent till vvt is reached......vvt isn't activated below 3000rpms....if you choose to not do this mod.....then it is your choice....if you like the sound of your car then don't mod it....reason the resonator is there is because hearing your engine isn't everyones cup of tea. so all car companies incorperate the resonator to make the car super quiet....resonator is soooo restrictive tha you can't even tell from the sound if it is a v6 or i4. Once again if you choose to deny testimony and dynos then we can't help you tune your car to where you wish it to be. find someone whit theirs off in your area...hell on my 6 I couldn't find the intake side of the box....60mm outlet into the air box but .22mm entry/rain drain hole. removing the resonator will not cause hydrolocking...

If you are trying to say we think mazda was dumb for the design..thats not whats going on...mazda designs the cars for everyone not a certain target group. thats why the resonator is restrictive and motor mounts are too soft for tuners....dynos show vvt responds to mods like this...exhaust didn't respond for the 6i cause there really wasn't a flaw in it perfomance wide cause it shares everything but 2 headers from v6 model. so looking at our(Mz6i) dynos on exhaust won't tell for shure of 3s gains. you may feel like you lost torque but you really havn't.Well known companies products are dynoed before being thrown randomly out there for the consumers. only thing that may have slipped in testing was cels for the 6. You do gain MPG cause the engine isn't working as hard when you are putting around...you loose it if you floor it every time to hear the engine. I don't regret cai on my last car or sri on this one...If you don't beleve it is restrictive...drive round....stop let it cool drop the resonator and drive the same exact way as before and you will feel it and hear it...a happy engine that can breathe. get a SRI or CAI and hear your happy engine sing

tonkabui said:

please show me a stock intake vs. either short ram or CAI where the CAI or SRI actually LOST torque... from EVERY dyno that has been shown on here since i browsed starting in august of 2002 points to gains across the board. hp difference at lower RPMs are negligible, but torque, on the other hand, is about 3-5 lb/ft more across the board.

and regarding sound vs. performance... i didn't say there was a correlation. i am just saying that it sounds nicer when you hear a growl when you get on it. someone on here has it in their sig... a loud car doesn't mean a fast car, and vice versa.

Click to expand...

First of all, I was not comparing the OEM system with either an SRI or CAI system. I was comparing the OEM system with and without resonator in terms of the resonator's function. I stand by my original contention.

Second, I will compare OEM with aftermarket. I would naturally expect companies like AEM and Injen to show increases in both HP and torque in their dyno charts because they want to sell their product. In fact, both systems probably do produce more HP at the higher end of the rpm range primarily because they eliminate some of the restriction present in the stock air box. In terms of low speed torque, however, this is a different matter since the torque enhancing function of the resonator and any contribution made by the plenum formed by the air box is absent.

You may have noticed that some Forum members after installing SRI or CAI report just such a loss in low-end torque along with an increase in top end power. I personally had installed an AEM on my car and noticed precisely this effect. When I switched back to a modified OEM system, I found that the increased torque in the lower range gave better all-around performance and flexibility for a daily driver, even with some loss at the upper end.

Da 6,

I have to strongly disagree with your view that the resonator is primarily a device to quiet intake noise and that it is highly restrictive. A simple inspection of the resonators placement in the intake system will show that it has little ability to restrict air flow.

Incidently, although this isn't relevant to the topic at hand, since Da 6 brought up the fact that he uses an SRI, this too can cause problems because it ingests underhood as opposed to ambient temperature air. HP varies as the square root of the change in ABSOLUTE temperature, so as intake air temp goes up power goes down.

Finally, I never argue with a man's (or a woman's) butt dyno. If you do any of these mods and find a performance increase then you should stick with it, no matter what anyone says.

02 DX Millenium Red

goldstar said:

First of all, I was not comparing the OEM system with either an SRI or CAI system. I was comparing the OEM system with and without resonator in terms of the resonator's function. I stand by my original contention.

Second, I will compare OEM with aftermarket. I would naturally expect companies like AEM and Injen to show increases in both HP and torque in their dyno charts because they want to sell their product. In fact, both systems probably do produce more HP at the higher end of the rpm range primarily because they eliminate some of the restriction present in the stock air box. In terms of low speed torque, however, this is a different matter since the torque enhancing function of the resonator and any contribution made by the plenum formed by the air box is absent.

You may have noticed that some Forum members after installing SRI or CAI report just such a loss in low-end torque along with an increase in top end power. I personally had installed an AEM on my car and noticed precisely this effect. When I switched back to a modified OEM system, I found that the increased torque in the lower range gave better all-around performance and flexibility for a daily driver, even with some loss at the upper end.

02 DX Millenium Red

Click to expand...

again, i must say that this is not the case in terms of anyone who has ran their car on the dyno. of the countless dynos that i have seen, not one have i come across where the torque or horsepower numbers at lower rpms are LOWER with an intake of some sort. they are either the same or overlapping each other at lower RPMS, meaning there's virtually no difference in torque or horsepower numbers. perhaps they are feeling the extra pull at higher rpms, hence feel that the lower rpms are more sluggish, OR there's a whole lot of torque that gets lost before 2500 rpms that the dyno doesn't account for.

now about the removal of the intake's resonator system all the way to the airbox, i think it's more important at this point to get a good filter. the stock's paper element is restrictive.

and about sri vs. cai, there have been dynos that show that neither of them make any significant gains over the other. sure, testing method is a little odd, being that the sri runs with the hood open, but in the real world, wind blowing through the engine bay is not an uncommon occurance. unless you're sitting there going 0mph at 6500 rpms, it doesn't matter which way you go in terms of cai or sri. again, this has been proven on the dynos for the fs-de. i know that cai design for other engines, specifically hondas, tend to produce a ton more power than the sri equivalent. the theory of air intake temperature charge seems to hold true for every engine but ours for some reason.

as for the resonator not being restrictive.....if you feel that removing it is a waste...try in and prove us wrong...what do you have to loose? other than the ability to stop grinning....all we are saying is try it out...won't void warrrenty and can be reversed if you choose. I like working on cars so I can justify jackin up a car and dropping the splash guard just to use 1 bolt for a ground. and as for SRI...the picture was of a CAI and this kinda showed up instead...live and learn...(price was way to good to pass up for even a SRI!!!)in the process of converting it over...short 90 degree bend pipe and coupler is all that is needed for me to leave the engine bay (lol2) till then I felt the gains of loosing the boxes and the wistle of the throttle body. yes if you choose to stick up for something then hell it's a free country...this is a friendly discussion on a car dicussion bord so you have a right to do so.


as for sri...i ran it hard a few times over....poping the hood revealed that the intake and filter were still cool to the touch....when you put a i4 into a v6 engine bay..there is plenty of space and opportunity...too much space. the filter sits behind the headlight and is maybe 7-8 inches to the left of the radiator over the hole where the resonator once sat...air flows in front of facia into the wheel well where the resonator sat and up into the engine bay. not saying ther isn't any heat under there...just not as much as you may think