More kilos per liter when snorkel head is turned around

[X-Dors]

I just discover after a trip through the Tankwa karoo with Mossie 89 that if I turn my snorkel head back words that my kilos per litre increase on my 3.2 Pajero sport .Before I got between 7.4 to 8.5 k on a litre and after I turned it backwards i got 8.7 to 10.5 it increased with 1.8 kilos . have this happened to any one hear before and why the better fuel economy ?

[Johan Kriel]

No, maybe the snorkel is more streamline now , less wind resistance.

The filter will even stay cleaner like that, less dirt will be sucked in at speed, as heavier particles will go pass the inlet.

[Warrior]

Die duitsers het ook toetse op snorkels gedoen vir die Amarok en dieselfde bevind.
Andre 4x4 het n Seikel snorkel op sy Amarok. Forced of Ram air werk nie op n diesel nie.

[swartvark]

Dit is darem 'n groot verskil! Ek stem saam met Seikel se snorkel ontwerp vir Amarok en die ram air storie, maar ek het regtig nie so ń groot verskil in brandstof verbruik verwag nie.

Jy weet seker nie wat die verbruik sonder snorkel was nie?

[Mud Dog]

I'm not disputing your findings, but it's not logical - well at least not to my mind - with it facing back the wind-flow will create a venturi that will result in an even greater negative pressure in the air inlet.

[Tenk]

Ja ek sal dit nie met n petrol doen nie dink hoe meer koue lug hoe beter loop hy.

[ChrisF]

I'm not disputing your findings, but it's not logical - well at least not to my mind - with it facing back the wind-flow will create a venturi that will result in an even greater negative pressure in the air inlet.

strange result to say the least ....

One could reason that facing to the back LESS air goes to the engine, thus less fuel, therefore the better fuel economy.


BUT, for such a large jump one would expect to suffer a marked decrease in power .....


On Elders I have done many trips with the snorkel to the back. Sadly never even thought of checking this against fuel consumption ...



just thinking out load - Why do we add turbo's to diesels ? To force more air into the engine ... With the snorkel turned to the back LESS air goes into the engine, marginally so, but still ....


Will admit this one has my thoughts in a twist ...

[pietpetoors]

Het dit al met myne ook gedoen en kon nie verskil agterkom nie. Ek weet wel dat wanneer ek in die Tankwa area ry verlaag my brandstofverbruik van 6.5 km/l maklik na 7.5 of selfs 8, net omdat mens op daai paaie gewoonlik so tussen 80 en 100 km/h ry.

[Mud Dog]

Pieter, this could well be the factor that explains it.

The way I see it is that the motor will suck the volume it needs in either event (perhaps almost insignificantly less if the negative pressure in the intake is less, but how dense that volume is - this is where ram air / turbo's and superchargers come into their own. That negative pressure becomes a positive pressure and the density of the same air volume is greater, therefore more oxygen and slightly upped compression. Thus resulting in more power.

[ThysdJ]

I dont think it has much to do with the snorkel head being turned around. For that tank you probably altered your driving style ever so slightly without even realising it, changed gears at lower revs, drove a little slower, probably got the wind from behind most of the time etc etc.

The engine is a pump, it will suck all the air it needs. The little bit of "vacuum" formed behind the snorkel head at low speeds is not enough to make the engine suffer because of lack of airflow.

[X-Dors]

Dit is darem 'n groot verskil! Ek stem saam met Seikel se snorkel ontwerp vir Amarok en die ram air storie, maar ek het regtig nie so ń groot verskil in brandstof verbruik verwag nie.

Jy weet seker nie wat die verbruik sonder snorkel was nie?

Tiaan my verbruik sonder die snorkel was om en by wat ek nou kry met hom omgedraai . Ek het eers die verbetering agtergekom toe ek op die teer pad ry teen n spoed van +-110 na 125 daar loop hy die beste .
het toe gister oggend Kaap toe gery en dis waar ek by die 10.5 kilos gaan draai het vanaand werk toe Stellenboch het hy tussen 9.7 en 10.2 gedraai en in die dorp oor die 11 so ek sal more aand hom terug draai en kyk wat die verskil is . Ek het met my vorige tenk se vol maak Wurth injector cleaner by gevoeg so dalk is dit ook die rede .

[ChrisF]

Kobus ons asseblief op hoogte.

AS dit die Wurth produk is gaan hulle nou die rakke leeg koop .... OF volgende week is daar n klomp Hiluxe met snorkels na agter.

grappies ter syde, sal graag wil weet hoe die eksperiment eindig !

[swartvark]

Janee....Ek volg ook die thread. Ek sal verstaan dat skoon injectors 'n verskil sal maak, maar was hulle erg vuil?

Ou Swartvark se verbruik tussen leeg en gepak vir kamp met 5 mense (met fietsrak oppie gat en hout oppie dak) verander van 7.2 km/l na 5.5km/l............maar nou dat ek daaraaan dink.........ek het 'n kleiner en ligter Flywheel ook gekry intussen. Haha....moeilik om kop te hou met 'n voertuig waarvan die specs elke nou en dan verander.

[6x4 Driver]

As far as I know, the snorkel can be turned around. I'm not sure if it is safe to do so continuously.

[ChrisF]

As far as I know, the snorkel can be turned around. I'm not sure if it is safe to do so continuously.

Absolutely no "risk" to this.

In fact many vehicles have fixed side-entry snorkels, and many trucks fixed rear-entry snorkels.


Front facing has the "emotional" benefit of thinking it has a ram-forced-intake effect ..... this effect is truly marginal ...

[louis fourie]

As far as I know, the snorkel can be turned around. I'm not sure if it is safe to do so continuously.

Absolutely no "risk" to this.

In fact many vehicles have fixed side-entry snorkels, and many trucks fixed rear-entry snorkels.


Front facing has the "emotional" benefit of thinking it has a ram-forced-intake effect ..... this effect is truly marginal ...

...and it looks cool