This morning I was minding my own business, just standing there and casually opening the hood of our 2009 Suzuki SX4 in preparation for an oil change. And then I saw what you see above.
What the? How did this happen? I don't think it could have come off on its own. The motor mounts prevent the engine from torqueing over too far. Besides, there has to be some torque. (OK, that was a low blow.)
Could someone have left it off while poking around in there, looking at something? Or maybe they took it off thinking they'd discovered some hot-rod performance trick. Not likely. This set-up ensures that engine breathes nothing but hot underhood air. The pipe brings cooler, denser air from outside.
Luckily, the air filter is integrated into the engine cover to the left so the engine wasn't wheezing on dust and twigs and bugs.
Let's pop that baby back on there.
Let's see ... it goes like this.
There, good as new. Maybe this explains why the SX4 felt slower than usual coming home yesterday.
Dan Edmunds, Director of Vehilce Testing @ 20,051 miles
estreka says:
02:39 PM, 01/ 9/10
Was this piece found at the dealership? The office? JRiz'z basement?
actualsize says:
04:13 PM, 01/ 9/10
No, it was sitting right where you see it in the first photo. Maybe someone checked the transmission fluid, removing it to access the dipstick that you can see in the second photo, and neglected to reinstall it. Weird.
firstwagon says:
04:26 PM, 01/ 9/10
Has anyone looked under the hood since it was last serviced?
ddoouugg says:
04:30 PM, 01/ 9/10
All right IL Editors! Time to fess up. Who sabotaged the car? Maybe it was a Toyota executive who hoped to make this car slower so you would give it an awful review.
hybris says:
04:41 PM, 01/ 9/10
Time to get a Cold Air Intake!
actualsize says:
10:17 PM, 01/ 9/10
You know, I no longer see the failure to lift the hood once in awhile as a character defect. There's nothing good to look at anymore on most new cars--unless you like plastic--and not much to do. Coolant and spark plugs last longer than you'll keep the car, there's practically no such thing as a tune-up, there's usually only one big belt that tensions itself, steering is going electric and oil change intervals amount to once every 6 to 9 months. The days of popping the hood to have a routine look are long gone. *shrug*
billt9 says:
10:44 PM, 01/ 9/10
no clamps? wtf? How would it stay on for more than a month with no clamps?
It fell off on its own.
greenpony says:
12:06 PM, 01/10/10
Agreed. No clamps = fell off on its own.
karjunkie says:
01:29 PM, 01/10/10
Shoddy manufacturing if you ask me! I've never seen an air snorkle that didn't have clamps to hold it in place!
firstwagon says:
02:45 PM, 01/10/10
"You know, I no longer see the failure to lift the hood once in awhile as a character defect. There's nothing good to look at anymore on most new cars--unless you like plastic--and not much to do. "
You can check for parts that have fallen off .... like an air intake.
Also with todays long intervals it even more important to check the oil level. Just reading about the long term fleet it's easy to see many cars will require oil added between changes.
7driver says:
08:22 PM, 01/10/10
Firstwagon,
I can envision electronic dipsticks (e.g. BMW) becoming more pervasive. Combine that with Ford's Sync, Kia's UVO or GM's Onstar and the car will probably txt you when the oil gets below a certain level.
For that matter, the 'zuk could have popped a check engine light when it sensed a MAF sensor temp higher than ambient. I guess the engineers didn't think of this?
actualsize says:
07:28 AM, 01/11/10
I'm not buying "natural causes" in this case based on the strain relief the shape has built into it and the internal ridges that span in place when it is fully seated. And if it did come off on its own, the 90 degree bend makes me think we'd see one end loose, not both. Clamps or no, I still believe someone took it off and forgot to put it back.
Dan Edmunds
cr_driver says:
09:43 AM, 01/11/10
Sherlock, come to the rescue.
desmolicious says:
02:05 PM, 01/11/10
Maybe you should check other Suzukis like this (local dealership perhaps) to see if it is meant to have clamps.
fundango says:
03:13 PM, 01/11/10
I could be wrong, but I doubt someone took it off in order to gain access to the dipstick and simply forgot to re-attach it. That would mean that the person physically removed the pipe and placed it off to the side, checked the dipstick, and then picked the pipe back up and "accidentally" put the pipe back where it belonged without reinstalling it. A person would have to be extremely absent-minded to make that kind of an oversight.
Given: a) how much slack motor mounts allow these days, b) the kind of performance testing done by Edmunds, and c) the design of that snorkel, I'd wager that it fell off due to "natural causes." The right side of the snorkel is effectively attached to the chassis while the other end of it is attached to the suspended motor, and I would think with enough rocking of the motor under acceleration/braking and even turning, that piece would be ripe to fall off.
actualsize says:
08:22 AM, 01/13/10
I can't say you're wrong, but I have a hard time accepting that Suzuki didn't account for the full range of possible engine movement within the mounts when they designed this part. And they do performance testing at their proving grounds, too. If your theory is correct (and it may well be), something like this would have happened to one of their engineers.
That said, it does look it could stand to be longer. Maybe this is what you get when you reduce the number of physical prototypes tested and do more virtual development and computer modelling. I'm not saying modelling couldn't have predicted this. Every carmaker has been going further down that path over the last decade or so.
Dan Edmunds