![]() | Home > Puma (Tdci) > Safari Snorkal |
![]() ![]() |
|
|
midmaik Member Since: 11 May 2010 Location: Orlando, FL Posts: 34 ![]() ![]() |
Yes it fits !
|
||
![]() |
|
Zagato Site Supporter Member Since: 08 Jan 2011 Location: Billingshurst West Sussex Posts: 5026 ![]() ![]() |
Yes nothing has changed their...
|
||
![]() |
|
boxer Member Since: 12 Jun 2011 Location: north yorkshire Posts: 48 ![]() ![]() ![]() |
zagato have you noticed any differance in your fuel consumption since fitting the snorkel?
|
||
![]() |
|
robharvey Member Since: 14 Dec 2009 Location: Durban Posts: 86 ![]() ![]() ![]() |
In theory it should be worse, in reality not much.
|
||
![]() |
|
BigRuss Member Since: 15 May 2010 Location: Norfolk Posts: 2785 ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Not really as it is designed to force air in rather than the conventional system of sucking in what passes the vent on the side of the wing
![]() 2011MY 110 XS USW Black |
||
![]() |
|
Zagato Site Supporter Member Since: 08 Jan 2011 Location: Billingshurst West Sussex Posts: 5026 ![]() ![]() |
|
||
![]() |
|
Zagato Site Supporter Member Since: 08 Jan 2011 Location: Billingshurst West Sussex Posts: 5026 ![]() ![]() |
I'm afraid I'm not much of a fuel gauger, I tend to put in £50 per month in each of our cars and rarely fill them to the brim! I did it when it had 400 miles on the clock and haven't done it since ![]() I can't see why a snorkel of this type would increase the MPG, it doesn't restrict air flow if that is the cause! ![]() |
||
![]() |
|
BigRuss Member Since: 15 May 2010 Location: Norfolk Posts: 2785 ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Where talking decrease ![]() 2011MY 110 XS USW Black |
||
![]() |
|
Zagato Site Supporter Member Since: 08 Jan 2011 Location: Billingshurst West Sussex Posts: 5026 ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
||
![]() |
|
bpman Member Since: 21 May 2008 Location: Oslo Posts: 8069 ![]() ![]() |
surely the turbo sucks the air into the engine? the airflow meter monitors the air so it should not make any difference ? |
||
![]() |
|
Zagato Site Supporter Member Since: 08 Jan 2011 Location: Billingshurst West Sussex Posts: 5026 ![]() ![]() |
Oi! Stop swearing with that Avatar... this is a DC100 FREE site
![]() |
||
![]() |
|
bpman Member Since: 21 May 2008 Location: Oslo Posts: 8069 ![]() ![]() |
s'nice - putting my name down for one ![]() |
||
![]() |
|
BigRuss Member Since: 15 May 2010 Location: Norfolk Posts: 2785 ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Trading the ICE in already ![]() ![]() 2011MY 110 XS USW Black |
||
![]() |
|
robharvey Member Since: 14 Dec 2009 Location: Durban Posts: 86 ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Correct, air is sucked into the engine. A snorkel cannot provide a ram effect as the Defenders (and all other 4x4's) can't go fast enough. The bumpf that cooler air is provided by a snorkel is also just that, bumpf. There is not an appreciable difference in air temperature between the side-vent and snorkel intake. I've also found that a snorkel makes very little difference driving in dusty conditions, it may be marginally better than driving without one, but it's still advisable to clean out your air filter regularly. A snorkel's main job is to provide protection against water entering the air intake. It's up to each owner to make sure how sealed that unit is, though. My Mantec, for example, is more splash-proof than water-proof. I could make it waterproof, but in water that deep you've got a whole host of other issues to worry about. Your fuel consumption should increase because you've got a lump of plastic stuck onto your vehicle creating extra drag. But a brick is a brick is a brick, that's why the real world consumption increase is barely noticeable. |
||
![]() |
|
![]() ![]() |
|
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
< Previous Topic | Next Topic > |
Posting Rules
|
Site Copyright © 2006-2025 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis
