tss Posted May 29, 2013 Report Share Posted May 29, 2013 Ok, so I helped one of my business partners locate and buy a 2010 SHO PP last week. Great car, candy apple red, nav, 29K miles, inservice date of 2011. Enough of that... Anyway, I raised our hoods side by side and found that he had an extra black tube on the passenger side, breaking off from the throttle body area. At the very end, it is open. I tried to use photobucket edit to circle the part, but failed. It is the curved black tube with the white sticker on it. It is open on the left side (end) of the tube. I took the photo standing at the front passenger wheel. It does not appear aftermarket and it doesn't look like mine ever had it, as it seems to be molded into the larger tube leading to the throttle body. In other words, I could not remove his and add it to mine. Any clue experts????? [/url=http://s285.photobucket.com/user/mclspllc/media/shopart_zpsa3d3b640.jpg.html] . EDIT: here is a close up of the part number and some arrows on the part: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpd1151 Posted May 29, 2013 Report Share Posted May 29, 2013 That part is essentially what Ford refers to as their "noise maker". It does absolutely nothing, other than to direct "noise fluff" towards the passenger cabin compartment area. Stupid? Absolutely. I would bargain to say that the Mercury doesn't have it because it's a "higher line" of product, and therefore, most typical Lincoln owners will prefer a quieter engine. Some SHO owners have chosen to replace this with a after market BOV, which, quite honestly, wasn't ever designed, or never intended for such a modification in that location. Puzzles me as to why owners would choose to add a 3rd BOV in that spot :noidea: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gpfarrell Posted May 29, 2013 Report Share Posted May 29, 2013 Those Mercury MKS's are really rare. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
83racecrew Posted May 29, 2013 Report Share Posted May 29, 2013 Yea, totally silly imo. I am going to make an aluminum puck and remove mine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tss Posted May 29, 2013 Author Report Share Posted May 29, 2013 Thanks for the explanation bpd. I was baffled, and concerned, that the car had been crazy modded and that was left.... LOL I could not think of any reason why one 2010 Ecoboost would have it, and another didn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjhpadi Posted May 29, 2013 Report Share Posted May 29, 2013 It was my understanding (and I may be wrong) but I thought it was not a noise maker but more of a expansion box device that was intended to reduce noise from the engine when shutting the engine down or starting....that it in some way made the engine quieter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucelinc Posted May 29, 2013 Report Share Posted May 29, 2013 A number of road-tests of SHOs mention the sound generator. Here is one from Autoweek: [/url=http://www.autoweek.com/article/20090617/CARREVIEWS/906179975] I had my MKS on order in June of 2009 and my dealer got a 2010 SHO in before my car arrived. I drove the SHO and I recall looking at this device and wondering if my MKS would have it. Obviously, it did not. I also recall the first time I drove my MKS, I was surprised how quiet it was under WOT compared to the SHO I had driven earlier. I am sure that Ford Motor Company assumed that the typical Lincoln buyer would not want the unruly sounds that you SHO hooligans desire. (I would put a smiley-face here if I could figure out how to do it.) Timeless 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timeless Posted May 29, 2013 Report Share Posted May 29, 2013 A number of road-tests of SHOs mention the sound generator. Here is one from Autoweek:[/url=http://www.autoweek.com/article/20090617/CARREVIEWS/906179975] I had my MKS on order in June of 2009 and my dealer got a 2010 SHO in before my car arrived. I drove the SHO and I recall looking at this device and wondering if my MKS would have it. Obviously, it did not. I also recall the first time I drove my MKS, I was surprised how quiet it was under WOT compared to the SHO I had driven earlier. I am sure that Ford Motor Company assumed that the typical Lincoln buyer would not want the unruly sounds that you SHO hooligans desire. (I would put a smiley-face here if I could figure out how to do it.) Not only are smilies gone, but at least to me your link is not clickable either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brucelinc Posted May 29, 2013 Report Share Posted May 29, 2013 User-error on my part....I have not been on the forum as much lately so I guess the old "copy & paste" routine obviously is not the way to add a link. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glock-coma Posted May 29, 2013 Report Share Posted May 29, 2013 Here's the quote from autoweek "For a performance car, the SHO is relatively quiet, despite the addition of a sound generator on the engine's intake. The trumpetlike device directs sound coming from the intake toward the dash panel, and the result is pleasant, if subdued. The exhaust note also is subdued, in part because the overall car is quiter." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K4U2LUZ2 Posted May 30, 2013 Report Share Posted May 30, 2013 It does have some function to it. Recently I took my 2010 to the track and I made a few normal runs then made the runs without it. The car without would not make (sustain) any boost and it ran a 2.5 second slower quarter mile run. I then put it back in and I was right back to running a 13.1. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjhpadi Posted May 30, 2013 Report Share Posted May 30, 2013 OK, so I was wrong...nothing unusual....but I still don't hear much sound from it....must be my old ears...that standing between two fuel funny cars without hearing protection in the 70's is catching up with me.:violin: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kolk1 Posted May 30, 2013 Report Share Posted May 30, 2013 It does have some function to it. Recently I took my 2010 to the track and I made a few normal runs then made the runs without it. The car without would not make (sustain) any boost and it ran a 2.5 second slower quarter mile run. I then put it back in and I was right back to running a 13.1. You did seal the hole air tight after removing right? If not, you had a major boost leak, and would explain everything you just posted. You cant just take it off, you also have to seal the hole air tight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpd1151 Posted May 30, 2013 Report Share Posted May 30, 2013 It does have some function to it. Recently I took my 2010 to the track and I made a few normal runs then made the runs without it. The car without would not make (sustain) any boost and it ran a 2.5 second slower quarter mile run. I then put it back in and I was right back to running a 13.1. You did seal the hole air tight after removing right? If not, you had a major boost leak, and would explain everything you just posted. You cant just take it off, you also have to seal the hole air tight. Ha! My thoughts EXACTLY! :doh: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TuxedoSHO Posted May 30, 2013 Report Share Posted May 30, 2013 It does have some function to it. Recently I took my 2010 to the track and I made a few normal runs then made the runs without it. The car without would not make (sustain) any boost and it ran a 2.5 second slower quarter mile run. I then put it back in and I was right back to running a 13.1. You did seal the hole air tight after removing right? If not, you had a major boost leak, and would explain everything you just posted. You cant just take it off, you also have to seal the hole air tight. was thinking the same thing Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tss Posted May 30, 2013 Author Report Share Posted May 30, 2013 It does have some function to it. Recently I took my 2010 to the track and I made a few normal runs then made the runs without it. The car without would not make (sustain) any boost and it ran a 2.5 second slower quarter mile run. I then put it back in and I was right back to running a 13.1. You did seal the hole air tight after removing right? If not, you had a major boost leak, and would explain everything you just posted. You cant just take it off, you also have to seal the hole air tight. That makes 4 of us thinking alike. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kolk1 Posted May 30, 2013 Report Share Posted May 30, 2013 I just mentioned this to my wife, and she goes "you cant just take it off, you have to cap off the hole!" thats a major LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.