Ram Head vs Backward Snorkels including Snorkel Install 

Nope, always had it the correct way around (forwards).

@@julietteremfrey Same. I'm a mechanic and have always argued for fitting snorkel heads forwards. Airflow properties clearly support empirical results shown in this vid. I also have a turbo charged diesel engine and have run it with snorkel head facing to the rear (didn't fit gauges or anything, simply my professional interpretation of how the vehicle drove) and the results spoke for themselves - I run with the snorkel head forward.

No! But it’s giving me what I was looking for to confirm what I thought. Awesome job thnx mate.

@@mattieb3152 did you notice any change in fuel economy?

@@tonycook2347 To be honest I don't remember - snorkel was fitted a long time ago! I do remember it didn't feel quite as responsive with snorkel head backwards.

Exactly!

Thanks!

Cheers!

I might have to change the outtro!

Thanks!

They've already started on FB! :)

Glad to help!

Cheers mate

Glad to help!

Thanks!

I was just doing exactly that this afternoon, with a Donaldson Cyclonic vs in snorkel sock vs ram head cover. Those cyclonic heads sound like a jet turbine under full throttle!

Thanks!

Thanks!

Haha!

Thanks!

Cheers!

Thanks mate!

Thanks!

Thanks!

Cheers! I was really surprised by the results of the snorkel sock.

@@LockyourHubs4WDing Great, do you have any idea when you will be posting it?

Thanks for the input, unfortunately I don't think the flow into either will be particularly laminar, especially the rear facing inlet. Without a pitot tube manometer, smoke machine and a wind tunnel! I would hazard a guess that the inefficiency drop we're seeing is a combination of the turbulent flow at the inlet (epecially the rear facing) the inefficiency of the reverse inlets design and lack of velocity pressure in the reverse facing inlet combined.

Lock your Hubs 4WDing maybe just do the test again without the white elbow. For curiosities sake. Ideally you need to turn the ram head around to face backwards. But since you can’t do that the solution is so obvious - just face the white elbow forward. I will bet you two cartons the difference between forward white elbow and backward white elbow will be less than 4” of water, and the performance will be within 1%.

The ram head can face any which way, and the elbow, as I had to slot it, went into the bin. Though I might try the ram head both ways! Where do I pick up the cartons? :)

Lock your Hubs 4WDing I will just get them sent from Dans straight to ya 😀

@@mickloney9826 Hey Mick, thanks for the awesome comment and explanation regarding the 90 degree elbow vs the proper inlet. I learned something this evening so thanks for that!

Thanks!

Thanks mate!

I think the temps would have stabilised on the drive out to the testing location. And the two snorkel runs had an intake temp very similar. Though there could be something in it.

@@LockyourHubs4WDing OK, fair enough, and thanks for replying. The results speak for themselves. Manufacturers make quite an effort to port air from the front grille, but given the difference between stock and properly installed snorkel you'd think they would try and egg out that extra bit by designing the intake air to take air from elsewhere.

Only the air box entry was too small. I fixed this by using the original rubber seal to the air box and cutting a 50mm long section of the original plastic inlet tube to mate the two (up to the sharp bend)

I've had a mains powered 125mm Makita angle grinder for many year, when brushless became a thing, I bought 1 Makita tool and as you know, once your locked into the battery system....

Mine runs the HIDs standard and didn't have any clearance issues.

@@LockyourHubs4WDing thanks!

I've been thinking about cyclonic separation myself. I think they would flow worse, but I don't thing that's the idea of them. I would have to test the dust separation capability of each.

No worries mate!

I would think the backward would do better, though I've been wrong before... Keep an eye out for part 3 of our pre-filter testing, where we'll be testing just that!

I've seen a lot of guys cap their stainless snorkels when not running for this reason.... Or they've cut an almost "sunvisor" type pvc hat for them! Yup, they look cool.... But I'm not convinced the pro's outweigh the cons as yet!

I usually do three tests and average the result. Many smaller manufacturers don't have an R&D budget, so very little testing is done unfortunately.

When I did similar testing on a 1VD turbo diesel, the results were almost the same.

Unfortunately, only what's in the video.

@@LockyourHubs4WDing thanks!! Have a nice video!! ;-)

In Oz, I think it's just following the trend in the "winch truck" scene.

Great idea, I been thinking about getting one of those.

@@LockyourHubs4WDing I think they may also work at highway speeds as the stock snorkel Toyota VDJ79R I took off my Landcruiser works on a similar cyclonic principal except without the bowl.

There's one coming out Sunday!

Yes, in the direction of travel.

What's a golf tee-head?

@@LockyourHubs4WDing standard mushroom snorkel head.

The ram heads are allegedly designed to eject water and dust at the back of the ram head, something like how cylonic seperators work separating heavier particle in the air steam like dust and water from the clean air. Though I haven't tested it ( It's in the works!)

@@LockyourHubs4WDing ok, cool, yeah, that's why I thought it'd be better to test at the air box/filter rather than my seat of the pants wild deduction, thanks for the interesting info and keep up the good work!

I silicon them up in both of my 4WDs.

Yes, the shortest length of tube to the airbox.

I agree that the gentler the bend the better the flow, however this test isn't designed to assess the vitability or otherwise of the snorkel body, just the ram head vs backward stainless style entry. To make the assesment fair, you would either have to put a stainless backward snorkel and and have some way of installing a ram head, or a conventional snorkel and emulate the stainless snorkel's entry.

Backwards creates negative pressure 4 " or not. Half the manufacturers go and weld their logo over the inlet as well which would cause a heap of restriction as well.

110%

make a bit of difference to the wind drag on a ship?

@@tonycook2347 are you serious? Drag in water for example in comparison??

@@R00RAL calm down! bit of a difference between water and air but I get the point. I was a probs after a bit more of an informative answer about how much but I see you've hit the rum. at ease sailor.

@@tonycook2347 all good mate .. big night for the family our end.. take care

inH2O is the pressure restriction measurement.

Lock your Hubs 4WDing when you say 19.80 inh2o compárate with 25 inh2o. 25 inh2o have a restricción 19.80 is better for my car?

Yes, the less restriction, the better.

Sure do!

I drove for 2 hours in reasonably heavy rain at freeway speeds. I checked the airbox when I got to my destination, there was probably only a couple of teaspoons of water in the bottom of the airbox, nothing that would cause any issues at all. That was with the Ram head facing forward.

@@LockyourHubs4WDing thank you so much for your answer - so it is just a matter of checking every once in a while

The result would be compounded with a turbocharged engine. Turbochagers operate at a pressure ratio for a given amount of exhaust flow through the turbine, not a set amount of boost. So if the intial pressure is higher you'll get a compounded benifet from the outlet of the turbo charger, in the same manner that compound turbochaging works.

@@LockyourHubs4WDing No!! Modern electronically controlled turbochargers with a wastegate (basically all of them) are controlled by the ECM to give a certain manifold absolute pressure (MAP) -you have heard of a MAP sensor havent you??? If you occlude the turbocharger inlet the ECM will close the wastegate and increase turbocharger RPM, increasing boost and overcoming the inlet blockage. It will do this up to the point that the wastegate is fully closed and then the MAP will decrease and the ECM will throw a warning code - you will get a check engine light. This is why turbocharged engines are better at high altitudes - the ECM keeps the MAP constant by increasing boost (in gauge pressure terms).

@@mickloney9826 Still yes, if you're limiting the boost using a wastegate (either external or internal, you'll see the boost slightly earlier in the rev range from less restriction in the inlet. So, seeing the boost slightly earlier in the rev range will increase driveability and decrease lag.

Instinctively you would think so, though I haven't tested it, so don't know for sure.

That would depend on the cut out on the fender/guard. Though you could cut and weld a vertical section to a backward facing stainless snorkel and run a conventional ram head.

Only if you fill the airbox with water! It stops water from rising up through the hole if you're in deep water.

Seal the hole. No use having a nicely sealed high intake tract with a hole in it to suck moisture.

@@mattieb3152 ok, but what happens if rainwater enters?

@@ruloooo7889 When sitting static, you're not going to get any in. When driving, yes, you will get some entering, but it generally won't be much. I've never encountered any issues with mine on my old 60 series Landcruiser, but the air cleaner housing is a vortex type that has a small removable cup at the bottom where any stuff collects anyway. In the case of something more modern where you don't have this then it's purely a maintenance thing - lift your bonnet, remove the air cleaner and inspect it and the housing for any rainwater ingress from driving in a downpour. You have a four wheel drive, there are basic maintenance checks and inspections you should be doing.

@@mattieb3152 ok, thanks for the comment

The drone in the ear is subjective, some love it and others can't stand it. The older I get, the less I can tolerate it! #oldmanyellingatclouds

The Grand Vitara has a 3.2L NA auto petrol. Though the results are as applicable to NA as they would be positive displacement supercharger or a turbocharger. The results would actually be more pronounced on a forced induction engine. I've done similar testing before on a 1VD in a LC76 (V8 turbo diesel) only manometer readings not performance testing, with similar results.

@@LockyourHubs4WDing wondering how relevant for diesel, as diesel operates with an excess of air.

Yes it is.

@@HardstylePete Completely relevant for diesel as well - NA and forced induction.

The conclusion, use a ram head!

ram head meaning the head of snorkel must foward?

@@faiz4875 best if it faces forward yes, but the shape is the most important part.

@@LockyourHubs4WDing i see.. Thanks a lot bro..

There has been a couple of requests to do that, I didn't think many people ran them backwards for dust. I think I might!

@@LockyourHubs4WDing The Safari ram air head has bulged area's in the neck that trap & slot's that eject dust & water. The incoming dust & water hit the rear wall of the ram air head & slide down & out, theoretically. Further to my comment, The theory is, dust and water is heavier than air. The Safari ARMAX snorkel head works, how well I don't know but well enough that what dust gets past the head to the filter is not that bad and despite everyday dirt K's & city driving the filter still appears clean, I do replace it anyway every 25,000K's regardless & I do a fuel kilometer test every tank full of diesel, about 12L per 100K's, then I know everything is still in spec. I remove & clean the ARMAX snorkel head every 5000k's, there is dust & grit trapped in the bulges and around the snorkel neck & I can see where rain water has been ejected down the back & fine dust out the slots. I check the air filter & box too and there is no evidence of rainwater pooling or tracking in the upgraded 4" Safari ARMAX intake tract that mates to stock Landcruiser airbox despite the vehicle being driven in rain including very heavy rain. I suspect if any rainwater that makes it into the snorkel must be minimal & disperses on the snorkels inner walls & evaporates due to airflow over it. I remove the airfilter & block the intake with a clean towel & blow dead bugs & fine dust out the airbox with compressed air then wipe it out with a damp cloth and lightly blow off the dirty side of the filter, there is some fine dust but not a lot, certainly none on the clean side of the intake tract after the airfilter that could lead to dusting an engine, I also clean & rubber grease the airfilter seal & visually inspect it to make sure it's not leaking past that seal on the upper lid. Moisture in the air/fuel mix is a non-issue, water mist injection kits for performance & to boost compression have been around for decades and by the time the moisture laden intake air gets filtered past my RYCO Fireguardian paper filter & gets to my hot turbo vanes & pushed through the warm intercooler it's ready to mix with diesel and combust. In heavy rain my exhaust gas temperature are down about 100 degrees to 200 degrees and that could be because of the cooling effect of rainwater flicked up by the tyres from the roadway on the 3" dump pipe where the E.G.T is taken or slower road speeds in the rain.

theoretically in there brochure when selling it. Front facing probably is better for air flow but it’s shithouse for dust in a convoy and when there’s heavy water being thrown up of the road from a car in front. They are a cause of a lot of limp mode problems in new vehicles.

@@dale8535Bullshit.... I've never had ANY problems with my Safari ARMAX forward facing snorkel intake head in real life on my 2013 Landcruiser. Any vehicle in convoy is going to load up the air filter, fit a filter sock in such situations or cyclonic separator as discussed.

They're a great little car, you'll love it!

@@LockyourHubs4WDing Hey did you have any trouble getting the air entry hose on the airbox? I found the rubber pipe was too small, even lubed up there was no way in hell that was going on.

I ended up cutting a short adaptor of the original inlet pipe to the airbox and connected the safari hose to that.

@@LockyourHubs4WDing Good idea 👍

Though I didn't test it, I would think that because of the larger cross sectional area of the ram head opening would be a worse performer backwards. I've always sealed the bottom of the airboxes as soon as the snorkel was installed.

@@LockyourHubs4WDing yeah I have always sealed mine , its just some say you shouldn't , I have a Y62 Patrol but haven't had a fitted snorkel yet , with all the electronic crap this Patrol has I'm going to avoid water / river crossing as much as possible , deep ones anyway . Keep the videos coming they are really good

@@jackofjr I do love the sound of the Y62s on song! I've also heard there might be an issue with the TJM low profile snorkel heads on the Y62, collecting water off of the windscreen in heavy rain at freeway speeds, filling up the airboxes.

That's the plan, eventually. And water as well.

It's an on going joke here at Lock your Hubs 4WDing. Welcome to the clan!

doot doo dododoo! Mina mina!

Haha!

I would think so, something I want to look at into the future.

Only if you're fully sick ...... :)

Haha!

What this testing differentiates is primarily the inlet of the snokel. The test could also be done the other way, using a SS body and a forward facing ram head, vs backward facing entry. You need the body (either SS or traditional plastic) to remain the same in both test to work out where exactly the flow restriction is.

@@LockyourHubs4WDing That would be great to see. I think that the forward facing SS would perform the best followed by Rear facing SS followed by the Plastic snorkels as tested. Would be interesting to be proven wrong.

@@zackbeaven8810 going by this testing, if I was a betting man, I would pick stainless body with ram head first (As long as the diameter of the snokel was retained right through to the airbox) then tradtional plastic snorkel and finally the rearward facing stainless.

Haha!

You actually get a compounded benifet with forced induction. The inlet compressor works on a pressure ratio for a given amount of exhaust flow, not a fixed amount of boost. So if you put an extra 5% in, you might get an extra 10% out.

The turbo doesn't pull it, the atmosphere pushes it in. We wind tunnel tested this and backwards means your turbo has 23% less air pressure available at 100 kph.

@@blairknight7793 seems simple physics - the air flowing past the backwards facing inlet would create a low air pressure pocket at the inlet - depending on the speed travelled - that would mean the faster you go the harder it will be to get enough air in. Picture someone would create a 4 inch stainless system with all it advantages but make the intake a forward facing ram intake...

@@tomschannel5380 absolutely. I went to a lot of trouble to make exact models with precise snorkels to test in the wind tunnel, when you install that backward facing snorkel the negative pressure is instantly obvious from 30km onwards, at 60km its making a difference, at 100 it's about 23% negative pressure on the inlet. It's a ridiculous notion to face it backwards.

@@blairknight7793 great info. I recently knocked my high flow top off the snorkel. I left the snorkel open at the top for a couple of tanks while I waited for my new setup to arrive. i didn't notice any power difference but my fuel economy dropped from 14.5 to 13.5L/100km. diesel with turbo. I didn't expect that. did you do any studies on fuel?

Haha! I wish!

It's measuring the amount of restriction in inches of water in the inlet tract to the clean side of the airbox

Vacuum compared to the cabin.

@@1magnit you're right, the reference used is atmospheric, just like a boost gauge or a tyre pressure gauge. You can also measure absolute, which uses a full vacuum as the reference, though it's easy enough to convert between the two at sea level, just add 1 bar or about 14.7psi to the result.

@@LockyourHubs4WDing You'd get more meaningful results if you took measurements at steady state cruise at say 100K and went from cruise throttle to full throttle to no throttle and back to cruise. That way the cabin pressure is constant, at closed throttle you'll see the effectiveness of the mouth, at full throttle you'll see the effectiveness and restriction of the extra pipes.

To truly compare stainless vs conventional, considering the body of the snorkel and not just the inlet as was done here, you would need to compare something like the safari armax to a backward facing stainless. Based on my testing in this video, I'm sure the armax would be the better performer.

@@LockyourHubs4WDing Wouldn't disagree with that, Armax are great snorkels. Either way its good watching real comparisons.

Thanks mate!

Cheers!