GordonD said:
Don't remove it. It improves low to mid range torque. Renault's engineers wouldn't have added the cost of it to the car if it didn't do anything.
What happens is that you get the best power at the top end if air can flow into the airbox with the least restriction. Ie, you want big air intake pipes. But if you have big intakes pipes at lower speeds when there's less air needed you get low air speeds. And when you factor in the pressure pulses that bounce back and forth in the intake system as the vales open and close you get flow reversals. The speeds up, stops, goes backwards, stops, goes forwards again. That produces less airflow that a smaller pipe that has a fast enough air speed in it that the pulses don't reverse the air flow. So what Renault engineers did was to have to pipes, both open at high speed for the least restriction, and one closed at low speeds for better torque.
Also if you open up that other pipe at lower speeds you get more noise. When they're on full throttle you don't mind noise. But when you're sitting on the motorway at lower revs and part throttle most grownups find intake drone tiresome. Closing the big pipe cuts the noise in those conditions.
The car will sound faster by making more noise if you remove the acoustic valve or lock it open. But it will actually be slower.
That is one theory, but again it is flawed.
The basic of variable length inlet system is nice, and the use of a smaller intake diameter at slow rpm is also nice. BUT, they cannot occur in the manner you speak sadly.
1) The issue with intake velocity is that the valve is upstream of the air filter. This air filter will destroy andy difference in velocity upstream from it, i.e. the filter laminitaes the flow as it passes through it. An engine consuming 1000ltrs of air a second constant will lead to differing velocities through one 50mm pipe or 2. BUT, when that velocity meets the airfilter it has to pass through it at the same rate as 2 supply ducts would, its laminated (laminar flow generated) and enters a constant volume intake system where velocity will not change irrespective of what you do pre air filter. Velocity changes only really take effect post throttle body, mainly the intake runners, ports and valve bowls/seats.
2) the notion of changed the tuned lenths is also flawed for the same reason. The paper type air filter does not allow accurate and constant passing of intake pulses, especially as they change all the time passing through a plenum, depending on throttle angle and RPM. If renault were actually concered with such phenomenons in a greater manner than the fixed induction system, they would be running a helmholtz resonator or similar.
So that is why i say none of the theories present me as true.