He He He ... Got Snorkel?

DarbyWalters · **Posted:** Thu Jul 27, 2006 10:36 am

oldnavy wrote:

DarbyWalters wrote:

Problem might be room in the CRD

Should be room enough to come out the bottom of the airbox (would require new box bottom) the just take it out the side of the fender. I bet they make the top of the snorkle movable so as to be turned 90* or 180* from the front, probably just a simple pull up and turn 180* and probably in 2 different hights with maybe an extra cost optinal exstension tube.

What is the projected cost to us US buyers? Shipping and duties will be a real slap up side the head and probably add $65 to $70 to the cost.

The "space" problem will be the "pass thru" on the passenger fender...there are alot of "things" along the area of the passenger fender in the engine bay. I am sure it can be done but it will be a tight fit in a CRD.

Goglio704 · **Posted:** Thu Jul 27, 2006 6:59 pm

SethX9 wrote:

Quote:

I'd say that is the difference between a snorkel done for looks, and a snorkel done for a purpose. I've never run throuh water much deeper than the floorboard in anything, but if you need a snorkel, aren't you going to need a drain plug in the floorboard too?

Another person who thinks snorkels are only for fording water... :roll:

Cooler dust-free air is what we in the desert will most need a snorkel for. Of course the water thing's a bonus...

Another gasser driver who thinks a cold air intake is the only way to make power. :roll:

I work a lot in rock quarries. When you make big rocks into little ones for profit, a lot of dust is a byproduct. Have yet to see a snorkel on any of that equipment. What I do see is a lot of multistage air filtration that includes a cyclonic section to centrifuge the solids out of the air. That would be what I would want if I were going to start hanging air induction equipment on the outside of a vehicle.

Fouros · **Posted:** Thu Jul 27, 2006 9:11 pm

thats what the donaldson filter is for it replaces the stock airbox

Goglio704 · **Posted:** Thu Jul 27, 2006 9:31 pm

Fouros wrote:

thats what the donaldson filter is for it replaces the stock airbox

Hmmm... would like to know more about that - without the snorkel.

Fouros · **Posted:** Thu Jul 27, 2006 9:35 pm

http://www.donaldsonfilters.com.au/prod ... ?intT1ID=1

here you go

Goglio704 · **Posted:** Thu Jul 27, 2006 9:46 pm

Thanks, lot of info to digest in there. Most of the specs are in CFM. Anybody know a rule of thumb about CFM per HP on a turbodiesel?

SethX9 · **Posted:** Thu Jul 27, 2006 11:07 pm

Quote:

Another gasser driver who thinks a cold air intake is the only way to make power.

Cute....However that's a terrible analogy as neither my KJ nor the KJ of anyone (AFIK) else is continuously in the conditions found in a working quarry.

It's not about power. Look at the positioning of the air intake of expedition vehicles that are outfitted for desert driving. It is very common to see them outfitted with snorkels because the air 7' off the ground is cooler and cleaner, especially in convoy situations.

Fouros · **Posted:** Thu Jul 27, 2006 11:13 pm

thats the object of the idea

when we are in convoy with say 7 other jeeps and were on a dusty and dirty track the amount of crap you get into the airbox and filter is amazing , i want a snorkle to protect my motor from the fine dust that gets kicked up on these type of trips

SethX9 · **Posted:** Thu Jul 27, 2006 11:27 pm

Quote:

Anybody know a rule of thumb about CFM per HP on a turbodiesel

Cubic feet per minute doesn't translate to horsepower. Horsepower is a measurement of work over time (commonly called power) while CFM is a measurement of volume over time.

In an engine, CFM is a measurement of of how much air that engine is pumping. Remember, the engine in a vehicle is just a big air pump. That said....

You can get a good estimate of an engine's airflow by figuring the product of the displacement and rpms divided by two ( (c.u.*rpms)/2 ). You divide by two because only half the engine's capacity is being displaced per stroke so to figure CFM you need to divide both sides of the engine's airflow equation by 1728...that's the number of cubic inches in a cubic foot...so the equation for figuring CFM is: (RPM * Displacement) / 3456

Clear as mud?

Goglio704 · **Posted:** Fri Jul 28, 2006 8:05 am

SethX9 wrote:

Quote:

Anybody know a rule of thumb about CFM per HP on a turbodiesel

Cubic feet per minute doesn't translate to horsepower. Horsepower is a measurement of work over time (commonly called power) while CFM is a measurement of volume over time.

In an engine, CFM is a measurement of of how much air that engine is pumping. Remember, the engine in a vehicle is just a big air pump. That said....

You can get a good estimate of an engine's airflow by figuring the product of the displacement and rpms divided by two ( (c.u.*rpms)/2 ). You divide by two because only half the engine's capacity is being displaced per stroke so to figure CFM you need to divide both sides of the engine's airflow equation by 1728...that's the number of cubic inches in a cubic foot...so the equation for figuring CFM is: (RPM * Displacement) / 3456

Clear as mud?

You forgot to include the turbo. You got the math for that? Not so simple anymore is it? CFM is related to HP on a turbodiesel. For what it is worth, I didn't know that a snorkle was of any benefit for desert driving. I guess I could see it when running in a group. Problem is just because you see something in a picture, doesn't mean it accomplishes anything. So much stuff done just for looks. Never claimed to be all-knowing. My eye rolling comment was in response to your eye rolling comment, which I also found cute.

oldnavy · **Posted:** Fri Jul 28, 2006 8:14 am

Goglio704 wrote:

SethX9 wrote:

Quote:

Anybody know a rule of thumb about CFM per HP on a turbodiesel

Cubic feet per minute doesn't translate to horsepower. Horsepower is a measurement of work over time (commonly called power) while CFM is a measurement of volume over time.

In an engine, CFM is a measurement of of how much air that engine is pumping. Remember, the engine in a vehicle is just a big air pump. That said....

You can get a good estimate of an engine's airflow by figuring the product of the displacement and rpms divided by two ( (c.u.*rpms)/2 ). You divide by two because only half the engine's capacity is being displaced per stroke so to figure CFM you need to divide both sides of the engine's airflow equation by 1728...that's the number of cubic inches in a cubic foot...so the equation for figuring CFM is: (RPM * Displacement) / 3456

Clear as mud?

You forgot to include the turbo. You got the math for that? Not so simple anymore is it? CFM is related to HP on a turbodiesel.

That's trickie math on a Variable Vane Turbo like ours. :wink:

Goglio704 · **Posted:** Fri Jul 28, 2006 8:37 am

oldnavy wrote:

Goglio704 wrote:

SethX9 wrote:

Quote:

Anybody know a rule of thumb about CFM per HP on a turbodiesel

Cubic feet per minute doesn't translate to horsepower. Horsepower is a measurement of work over time (commonly called power) while CFM is a measurement of volume over time.

In an engine, CFM is a measurement of of how much air that engine is pumping. Remember, the engine in a vehicle is just a big air pump. That said....

You can get a good estimate of an engine's airflow by figuring the product of the displacement and rpms divided by two ( (c.u.*rpms)/2 ). You divide by two because only half the engine's capacity is being displaced per stroke so to figure CFM you need to divide both sides of the engine's airflow equation by 1728...that's the number of cubic inches in a cubic foot...so the equation for figuring CFM is: (RPM * Displacement) / 3456

Clear as mud?

You forgot to include the turbo. You got the math for that? Not so simple anymore is it? CFM is related to HP on a turbodiesel.

That's trickie math on a Variable Vane Turbo like ours. :wink:

Not enough crayons in the box for me to attempt it. Somebody with dual pocket protectors has done it I'm sure. :lol:

DarbyWalters · **Posted:** Fri Jul 28, 2006 9:39 am

SethX9 wrote:

Quote:

Anybody know a rule of thumb about CFM per HP on a turbodiesel

Cubic feet per minute doesn't translate to horsepower. Horsepower is a measurement of work over time (commonly called power) while CFM is a measurement of volume over time.

Clear as mud?

Why are you being so nit-picky and condescending...?

It was obvious he was asking what filter would give him the CFM necessary for his 2,8CRD. So yea, they are tied together when you are trying to find out the CFM needed to gain the most efficiency from a certain size engine.

SethX9 · **Posted:** Fri Jul 28, 2006 9:57 am

Quote:

You forgot to include the turbo. You got the math for that? Not so simple anymore is it?

Didn't forget anything. Turbochargers make torque not horsepower. Sorry if I came off as being "nit-picky and condescending". It wasn't as obvious to me as it was to DarbyWalters what exactly you were asking. Of course HP and CFM are related. The question I heard being asked was "what's the math to translate CFM into HP" and to that question I answer "It doesn't". I apologize if that wasn't the question being asked.

oldnavy · **Posted:** Fri Jul 28, 2006 10:10 am

SethX9 wrote:

Quote:

You forgot to include the turbo. You got the math for that? Not so simple anymore is it?

Didn't forget anything. Turbochargers make torque not horsepower. Sorry if I came off as being "nit-picky and condescending". It wasn't as obvious to me as it was to DarbyWalters what exactly you were asking. Of course HP and CFM are related. The question I heard being asked was "what's the math to translate CFM into HP" and to that question I answer "It doesn't". I apologize if that wasn't the question being asked.

Sometimes I wonder if English is my first lamguage as I misread or don't type quite what I am thinking.

But someone else pointed out the possibility I was suffering from CRS and nothing more. :roll:

DarbyWalters · **Posted:** Fri Jul 28, 2006 10:28 am

WOW, Turbo Chargers do not increase Horsepower...???

Anyway, you have to figure Volume Efficiency of an engine to calculate CFM. The Turbo will be a big factor in that calculation. Normal street vehicles range from 65%-85% VE. A race prepared vehicle can achieve 100% and a little more.

CFM=(CIxRPMxVE%)/3456

Liter to Cubic Inch conversion is Literx61.02=Cubic Inches

2.8Lx61.02=170.86

VE% is probably in the range of 105% (Forced Induction usually achieves higher than 100%)

CFM=(170.86x4000x105%)/3456

CFM=207.65
If you add exhaust/diesel module/ect the VE% will increase.

A 3.7L needs close to 284CFM . RPM and CI was a big difference. From these calculations and the fact that our air filter and box are equal to the 3.7L...I think we have plenty of filter...just a guess.

Jeger · **Posted:** Fri Jul 28, 2006 4:53 pm

Maybe someone can just ask this Gibson RM company which donaldson filter they are going to use. Fouros, got any contact info for us. I remember reading a phone number on a link to another forum but I'm not even sure how to call Australia. An email address would be great.

NEVERMIND is this the right company?

http://www.gibsonrm.com.au/

Reggie · **Posted:** Fri Jul 28, 2006 6:58 pm

DarbyWalters wrote:

WOW, Turbo Chargers do not increase Horsepower...???

Anyway, you have to figure Volume Efficiency of an engine to calculate CFM. The Turbo will be a big factor in that calculation. Normal street vehicles range from 65%-85% VE. A race prepared vehicle can achieve 100% and a little more.

CFM=(CIxRPMxVE%)/3456

Liter to Cubic Inch conversion is Literx61.02=Cubic Inches

2.8Lx61.02=170.86

VE% is probably in the range of 105% (Forced Induction usually achieves higher than 100%)

CFM=(170.86x4000x105%)/3456

Guys, I could be wrong on this but the calculation looks like one from a gasser where the air fuel ratio is held within a fairly tight window. Turbo diesels push a lot more air and run at a lot higher A/F ratios so this formula may not be all that accurate. I reserve the right to be proven 100% wrong on this so take it with a grain of salt

CFM=207.65
If you add exhaust/diesel module/ect the VE% will increase.

A 3.7L needs close to 284CFM . RPM and CI was a big difference. From these calculations and the fact that our air filter and box are equal to the 3.7L...I think we have plenty of filter...just a guess.

Fouros · **Posted:** Fri Jul 28, 2006 7:30 pm

Manufacturing Details: Gibson RM PTY LTD
Telephone: +61 3 59873733
Postal Address: P.O BOX 3170, East Doncaster, Victoria, Australia 3109.
Email: info@gibsonrm.com.au

ask for Michael Kirk-Williams

SethX9 · **Posted:** Sat Jul 29, 2006 12:11 pm

Quote:

WOW, Turbo Chargers do not increase Horsepower...???

Well since we're back to picking nits (so much for honest apologies).......The turbocharger is increasing torque and therefore horsepower is as a consequence increased but the turbo (or any other forced air induction system) is making torque. Just because torque is tied in an algebraic relation to horsepower doesn't mean something that creates one (torque) creates the other (horsepower). The increase in horsepower is simply a calculated byproduct or function of how much torque there is available at a given RPM.

Okay, my nits have all been picked this morning....I'm off to enjoy a beautiful day.

He He He ... Got Snorkel?

Who is online