Is this one of you lot pulling an Audi out of a ford?

wrote:

The problem we have is obviously different in that we are hills and dales which naturally focuses water runoff into fairly predictable places. That the graduate community then allocate these areas to housing or roads is beyond help. That this also often eradicates woodland etc is super beneficial too. I accept that moving my problems down stream onto the lower reaches of the Wharfe and Ouse is selfish but so is building on flood plains. Much like deliberately driving an inappropriate vehicle in an inappropriate manner through indeterminately deep water and expecting someone else to save you.

From my own experiences of pulling and pushing drivers out of  flooded roads, most had a bemused look on their faces that indicated limited understanding of why they were there. To most it would seem that the desire to get home or to the office  confused them into the belief that this water was a minor irritant. I don't believe it was deliberate arrogance, more like stupidity and yes, this turned to desperation very quickly and then, laughably the desire to hide the truth from family and friends. The ultimate problem was those who went in far to deep and paid the ultimate price.

Roger
 

Looks like a John Deere is the weapon of choice for Fording and crawling over concrete barriers!

Personally, a Challenger tank would have been my vehicle of choice.
Plus those concrete blocks may have damaged the trailers tyres.

Roger

wrote:

Personally, a Challenger tank would have been my vehicle of choice.
Plus those concrete blocks may have damaged the trailers tyres.

Roger

 

I'd have a go in someone else's Unimog, they'll deep wade to 4 feet, I'd risk it with the tailgate down so it could sink.
Actually pretty much anything that is someone else's that would keep my feet dry and the engine running would do if it could drive over the blocks.

A few years back the old surplus dealer at Fradley had a few M520 Goers that would have done nicely- I wonder what happened to them, I never saw them anywhere.
Anyone remember that Gamma Goat that used to do the rounds of the play days? they took it across a lake once, I was sure it would sink, the pumps were going like fury and it only had about 2" of freeboard when it got to the other side.

 Alvis Stalwart for me.

wrote:

The gearbox breather is at about 450mm. Axle breathers are slightly lower. I think Suzuki just choose the lower kingpin bearings as the thing they wanted to keep dry when deciding the wedding depth. There is some merit to that as it's the part that suffers most frequently from water ingress.
 

If the wadding depth is restricted by the gearbox/axle breathers on a standard jimny does this mean there is no point in fitting a snorkle unless you do the breathers as well?  I am gussing the air inlet is higher than 450mm on a standard car?

Robin

wrote:

If the wadding depth is restricted by the gearbox/axle breathers on a standard jimny does this mean there is no point in fitting a snorkle unless you do the breathers as well?  I am gussing the air inlet is higher than 450mm on a standard car?

Robin

There is a point, but it is more complex. A raised air intake has advantages in sandy and dusty environments too. So it isn't always about water wading.

Also, if you drive sensibly through water you should create a bow wave, which will significantly lower the water level over some components. But depending on where you air intake is, it could still be vulnerable if you dip the entire nose under the water when entering it, such as going down a slope.

For water wading there may well be other things to consider aside from a raised air intake too, such as if the airbox is sealed and other items like wading plugs in the bell housing.

However, at the end of the day. If you end up going through some water that is deeper than planned, a raised intake is only going to be a good thing. You can always flush the diff oil at a later date. But hyrolocking your engine could wreck it in short order.

Bow wave, note how much lower the water level is behind the front wheels.

Now here’s a good question. I would say that snorkel head is facing the wrong way for a dusty environment and should be facing backwards so the dust doesn’t go into it.

jlines wrote: ow here’s a good question. I would say that snorkel head is facing the wrong way for a dusty environment and should be facing backwards so the dust doesn’t go into it.

I would tend to agree. Although for really dusty environments you can run a different heads that will prevent more dust ingress. But maybe at a cost of air flow.



I believe in places like Oz they also sell snorkel socks for dusty conditions.

The subject of snorkels for use in dusty conditions came up when a friend in Australia was speccing up a new ute to use on his sheep station. Roo bar? Check. Tray back? Check. Steel wheels and skinny tyres? Check. Snorkel?... 
There's no deep water on the station. A river runs through the middle of it, but it only flows for a week or 2 a year and you'd never attempt to drive through it. The rest of the time its dry sand.
Dust? I put it to him that the only time you drive in a cloud of dust is when following another vehicle, and in this situation the whole car is in dust, from top to bottom. When you drive solo the whole front of the car is travelling in clean air. So the height of the intake has little to no affect on the ingestion of dust. You're either driving in dust or your not. I persuaded him not to put a snorkel on his ute. That was 14 years ago, he still has the ute and still doesn't have a snorkel on it.
The Jimny draws air in behind the headlights. This area always seems to stay fairly clean, as do the air filters. But being near the front of the car does put it more at risk of submersion.

The question I tend to ask is would you buy a second hand vehicle with a raised air intake and be happy to believe the previous owner was keeping up the additional maintenance required from dunking the car eg all fluids inspected and replaced, seals and bearings inspected and replaced because I know I wouldn't. I do all required maintenance but I don't enjoy doing it especially laid on my back. I also believe most people are not even that diligent most will just drive through the water, be happy it didn't die and carry on.