Monday, Mar 14, 2005 at 16:46
My bet is they use the same basic
snorkel set up, install their first one, take it for a drive and if it seems to have a flat spot or a harmonic then they fit a restricter plate (and I'm sure they don't call them that) or alter tubing sizes/shape etc and try again. It seems to be a bit hit and miss as some vehicles have them and some don't.
If they had the equipment they would set the vehicle up on the dyno and graph air flow and pressure across the rev range and compare power and torque figures before and after
snorkel fitment. Analysing the after figures would show up harmonic problems as rate of air flow would not increase in line with engine rpm or air pressure at the air filter would drop and a 'flat' spot would be apparent on the power or torque graph.
Then you would alter the volume/size/shape of the tubing that comprises the
snorkel to tune it differently to eliminate the problem.
Remember every tubular system has a resonant frequency be it intake, exhaust, manifolds etc. Any engine tuner will tell you that if the resonant frequency of the exhaust or inlet manifold is wrong the resultant standing wave (or harmonic) can spike the backpressure on the exhaust side or increase resistance on the inlet side resulting in a momentary loss of power that can vary from almost un-noticeable to a very noticeable flat spot.
That's what all those computer modelling programs are for. Comparatively,
Snorkel design is fairly crude. fit it to the car and see how it goes. Of course they all follow certain rules relating to size of piping, sharpness of bends and inlet area, but without access to the engine design data they are a bit behind the eight ball so to speak.
In many, if not most cases, the fitting of a
snorkel does not cause a harmonic or noise issue. But sometimes it would. Given the sheer number of vehicle variations, as you alluded to, Turbo, non, engine size and different air intake systems when the same engine is fitted to different vehicles it would prove to be very expensive to undertake a full computerised design process, followed by rigourous real world testing given the relatively small number of snorkels they sell.
Safari, who also design and manufacture the dtronic, have obviously done just this with the dtronic which partly explains the high price. Given the developmen costs, it took 6-12 months to design and
test the unit for the DiD Pajero, the research cost per unit sold would be significant. And they have to recoup that.
Naturally they will sell more snorkels for a particular model than Dtronic's but people are not going to want to spend $1000 for a few pieces of plastic tube and a ram, which could
well be the all up cost for a computer designed/modelled and tested unit.
Peter
FollowupID:
360131