Air intake and snorkel - Jeep Wrangler Forum
Jeep Wrangler Forum

Go Back   Jeep Wrangler Forum > JK Jeep Wrangler Forum > JK General Discussion Forum

Join Wrangler Forum Today


Reply
 
Thread Tools

Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them on WranglerForum.com
Old 06-13-2013, 11:44 PM   #1
Jeeper
 
Tball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Flint TX
Posts: 139
Air intake and snorkel

The performance air intake kits are advertised to provide more horsepower and better mpg, is this true??

Can you put a snorkel in a performance air intake??

Thanks

Tball is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-14-2013, 04:50 AM   #2
Jeeper
 
Jeep757's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 479
Some say yes, some say no. Mods like this I think driving habits play a big part of the out come (may be right, may be wrong). I know vorlant has a CAI setup that works with there snorkel.

Jeep757 is online now   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-14-2013, 05:23 AM   #3
MallCrawler

WF Supporting Member
::WF Moderator::
 
kjeeper10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 35,272
For the money you're half way to regearing the axles.
__________________
2007 Rubicon/Rock Krawler triple rate 2.5" coils/RK rear TB w/ a teraflex raised bracket/Rancho 9000 31/32XL shocks/Synergy flipped draglink,ball joints,tie rod /Hankook MT 315-75-16 on Level 8 ZX's/Rancho geo brackets/Ruff stuff uppers/Fox ATS stabilizer/Adams front DS/Artec front armor w/ Currie upper bushings/Rancho cat back exhaust.

Lifting your JK? Read this!!



Click HERE to become a WranglerForum Supporting Member!
kjeeper10 is online now   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-14-2013, 08:58 AM   #4
Jeeper
 
ahsumtoy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Northern Arizona
Posts: 541
Don't Buy One in My Opinion

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tball View Post
The performance air intake kits are advertised to provide more horsepower and better mpg, is this true??

Can you put a snorkel in a performance air intake??

Thanks
I know someone that runs a parts store. I was able to run an AEM cold air intake system and test it out. I drove 300 miles. My test included going to the same place and back, driving as close to the same mph, and mostly highway driving. I ran both the normal air cleaner one week and the AEM cold air intake system the next. The temperature outside was about the same. I did not notice any difference in HP or better mileage. I have a 2013 JKU. I immediately gave the cold air intake system back and installed a lifetime AEM air cleaner filter. Others may have different experiences with them or different makers of the cold air intake systems but this one test was enough for me since the cost is significant.
ahsumtoy is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-14-2013, 09:05 AM   #5
MTH
Jeeper
 
MTH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 8,553
Quote:
Originally Posted by kjeeper10 View Post
For the money you're half way to regearing the axles.
^^^ding ding ding ding ding^^^

There you have it. Don't fall for the snake oil.

Regearing or a supercharger are the only practical ways to get a significant boost in hp out of the 3.8 engine.

For lower cost (and more modest results), a superchip or a sprint booster are worth considering.

Save your money on the air/exhaust mods unless you're going to forced induction.
__________________
Mike
2010 JKU "Mountain" Edition
TeraFlex 2.5" Coil Lift : Old Man Emu Nitrocharger Shocks : 33x12.5R15 Goodyear DuraTracs : 15x8 Black Rock 909s : Other Stuff . . .
MTH is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-14-2013, 09:58 AM   #6
Jeeper
 
Jeep757's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 479
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTH View Post

^^^ding ding ding ding ding^^^

There you have it. Don't fall for the snake oil.

Regearing or a supercharger are the only practical ways to get a significant boost in hp out of the 3.8 engine.

For lower cost (and more modest results), a superchip or a sprint booster are worth considering.

Save your money on the air/exhaust mods unless you're going to forced induction.
By superchip, ypur refering to something lije the flashpaq right? I'm considering one for my 3.8 manual with 3.21. Just wonder what it'll do for it since its a manual vs an auto
Jeep757 is online now   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-14-2013, 10:10 AM   #7
MallCrawler

WF Supporting Member
::WF Moderator::
 
kjeeper10's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 35,272
Some say not much. I run both the SC and Sprint booster MTH mentioned. Still .,,, $600 towards a regear. I have 4:10's, not as bad as 3:21's
__________________
2007 Rubicon/Rock Krawler triple rate 2.5" coils/RK rear TB w/ a teraflex raised bracket/Rancho 9000 31/32XL shocks/Synergy flipped draglink,ball joints,tie rod /Hankook MT 315-75-16 on Level 8 ZX's/Rancho geo brackets/Ruff stuff uppers/Fox ATS stabilizer/Adams front DS/Artec front armor w/ Currie upper bushings/Rancho cat back exhaust.

Lifting your JK? Read this!!



Click HERE to become a WranglerForum Supporting Member!
kjeeper10 is online now   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-14-2013, 10:45 AM   #8
Race Car Dave

WF Supporting Member
 
NFRs2000NYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 6,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tball View Post
The performance air intake kits are advertised to provide more horsepower and better mpg, is this true??

Can you put a snorkel in a performance air intake??

Thanks
Not really. The s2000 has an airbox very similar to the Wrangler (filter inside a plastic box with a cover.)

A lot of guys used to remove the cover because they liked the noise, but since the box is located under the hood, the engine would heatsoak and they actually LOST power (dyno proven.) Having a current market cold air intake on a wrangler would negate any power gains, since the air is still sucked from under the hood, and is extremely hot. A cold air intake needs just that to work...cold air. On a wrangler, you would have two options....have the intake really low, or really high. Obviously really low would be a really bad idea on a Wrangler, so you are left with one choice...really high...and that would be a snorkel. That would be the only true cold air intake for a JK. Now, some argue that the extra distance the air must travel with sap power, but coupled with the cooler air the power should be even. Many report a 1-2 MPG increase with a snorkel (cold air is more dense than hot air) which means they actually gained a few ponies. From everything I have seen over the years with intakes, race cars, etc, I would say that the snorkel would be the best bet for a tiny power increase (or none) and no power loss, plus the benefits of protection.


Some food for thought (since there aren't too many dyno's for JK mods...) The s2000 OEM instake is much like the wrangler...probably 1' or so of piping to the throttle body. The aftermarket cold air intakes (real cold air intakes that snake all the way into the bumper to a vent) are 3-5' in total piping, including all the bends. There is definitely an INCREASE in power (dyno proven, although not a ton)....this proves the theory that longer travel+cold air is still superior (power wise) to shorter travel+hot air.
NFRs2000NYC is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-14-2013, 11:21 AM   #9
MTH
Jeeper
 
MTH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 8,553
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFRs2000NYC View Post
Not really. The s2000 has an airbox very similar to the Wrangler (filter inside a plastic box with a cover.)

A lot of guys used to remove the cover because they liked the noise, but since the box is located under the hood, the engine would heatsoak and they actually LOST power (dyno proven.) Having a current market cold air intake on a wrangler would negate any power gains, since the air is still sucked from under the hood, and is extremely hot. A cold air intake needs just that to work...cold air. On a wrangler, you would have two options....have the intake really low, or really high. Obviously really low would be a really bad idea on a Wrangler, so you are left with one choice...really high...and that would be a snorkel. That would be the only true cold air intake for a JK. Now, some argue that the extra distance the air must travel with sap power, but coupled with the cooler air the power should be even. Many report a 1-2 MPG increase with a snorkel (cold air is more dense than hot air) which means they actually gained a few ponies. From everything I have seen over the years with intakes, race cars, etc, I would say that the snorkel would be the best bet for a tiny power increase (or none) and no power loss, plus the benefits of protection.


Some food for thought (since there aren't too many dyno's for JK mods...) The s2000 OEM instake is much like the wrangler...probably 1' or so of piping to the throttle body. The aftermarket cold air intakes (real cold air intakes that snake all the way into the bumper to a vent) are 3-5' in total piping, including all the bends. There is definitely an INCREASE in power (dyno proven, although not a ton)....this proves the theory that longer travel+cold air is still superior (power wise) to shorter travel+hot air.
Have you seen Ripp's snorkel option?

My recollection is they offer a snorkel kit that dovetails with their supercharger, but the interesting thing is that dyno runs show the snorkel actually reduces the power gained from the supercharger. The net effect is still a large boost of course, but basically the horsepower goes: "Stock" < "SC + Snorkel" < "SC".

So in light of that, is it that forced induction changes the analysis you laid out above, or are Ripp's results simply contrary to your experience?
__________________
Mike
2010 JKU "Mountain" Edition
TeraFlex 2.5" Coil Lift : Old Man Emu Nitrocharger Shocks : 33x12.5R15 Goodyear DuraTracs : 15x8 Black Rock 909s : Other Stuff . . .
MTH is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-14-2013, 11:33 AM   #10
Race Car Dave

WF Supporting Member
 
NFRs2000NYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 6,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTH View Post
Have you seen Ripp's snorkel option?

My recollection is they offer a snorkel kit that dovetails with their supercharger, but the interesting thing is that dyno runs show the snorkel actually reduces the power gained from the supercharger. The net effect is still a large boost of course, but basically the horsepower goes: "Stock" < "SC + Snorkel" < "SC".

So in light of that, is it that forced induction changes the analysis you laid out above, or are Ripp's results simply contrary to your experience?
Those results are skewed (not on purpose I think, just a gross oversight.) First of all, the jeep is sitting parked inside a garage. The fan is aimed at the radiator rather than the intake. It is not getting cold air, and it isn't getting cold air under force. The supercharger also exponentially shows losses. 20hp with a blower can be a 1hp loss without one. Overall, to someone like me, it is a meaningless test that I wouldn't put much stock into. I know you are not trying to post it as evidence but rather something for people to consider, I just think it's important for people to understand what it is they are looking at.

As for their option....I think its a decent way to do it, but I probably would have made a low mount for daily driving and then connect to snorkel for offroading. I would love to see a dyno with a 50mph gust of air being blown directly into the snorkel and see the results of that.
NFRs2000NYC is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-14-2013, 11:47 AM   #11
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 771
I read somewhere awhile ago, that at speed, the downdraft, or whatever the effect is under the jeep, sucks out the hot air, and also the front air dam is there to increase that and suck down the hood as well. Either way, is it correct at speed, there are forces sucking out the hot air from underneath the engine bay? Any vehicle?
positrak is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-14-2013, 11:51 AM   #12
Race Car Dave

WF Supporting Member
 
NFRs2000NYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 6,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by positrak View Post
I read somewhere awhile ago, that at speed, the downdraft, or whatever the effect is under the jeep, sucks out the hot air, and also the front air dam is there to increase that and suck down the hood as well. Either way, is it correct at speed, there are forces sucking out the hot air from underneath the engine bay? Any vehicle?
Partially true, but the air is still very hot under there. If there was no downdraft, the air would be A LOT hotter, but thanks to the downdraft, it's just "hot." However, it is still probably 2x the temp outside the vehicle.
NFRs2000NYC is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-14-2013, 12:00 PM   #13
MTH
Jeeper
 
MTH's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 8,553
Quote:
Originally Posted by NFRs2000NYC View Post
I know you are not trying to post it as evidence but rather something for people to consider, I just think it's important for people to understand what it is they are looking at.
Right--I lack the expertise to really have any opinion on who's right or wrong. I'm just tossing it out there to see what folks' thoughts are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NFRs2000NYC View Post
I would love to see a dyno with a 50mph gust of air being blown directly into the snorkel and see the results of that.
That's an interesting observation. That's a significant difference between the stock intake and a snorkel that I presume was unaccounted for.

The stock intake isn't a "ram air" type of set up. It sucks air in basically the same way if it's idling in a parking lot as it does on the highway. That's not true for a forward facing snorkel.

On the other hand, a snorkel gets most of its "real use" at just a few miles per hour on a trail. So the argument could be made that if you really want to know what kind of power you'll net with the snorkel attached, you should do it without expecting a lot of air gushing into the snorkel.
__________________
Mike
2010 JKU "Mountain" Edition
TeraFlex 2.5" Coil Lift : Old Man Emu Nitrocharger Shocks : 33x12.5R15 Goodyear DuraTracs : 15x8 Black Rock 909s : Other Stuff . . .
MTH is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-14-2013, 12:48 PM   #14
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 62
My 2 cents is this: colder air is denser air, and therefore needs more fuel to keep the mixture stoiciometric (the right mixture). At low speeds this should slightly reduce mileage, since increased power isn't needed to turn the wheels. The slight gain in engine vacuum due to more power usually won't offset the extra fuel that is being added to compensate for extra oxygen in the "thicker" air. Additionally, the colder air mixes with fuel less effectively. (In a fuel injected vehicle this is less noticeable, compared to carburetors of days gone by.)

Ram air usually requires traveling at quite high speeds to be effective/noticeable. Certainly above 50 mph. And again colder, denser air means more fuel added to compensate, which is almost always bad for mileage, except in very specific circumstances. (IE: need 4 more HP or ft/lbs of torque to keep from lugging/downshifting at a specific highway speed). Not to mention that air buffeting from poorly designed ram air set-ups causes erratic air density conditions that the computer will have a hard time with, resulting in lean-rich surges that are not only bad for mileage, but for the catalytic convertor, plugs, EGR, ect., also. Large air boxes, well-designed filters, and ducting are required to stabilize that air for a daily driver.

It takes a lot of work and testing to make a functioning cold/ram air system that makes more improvements than "un-improvements". Most of these air intake mods are racing-bred mods that have little to offer the average street or light trail-driven vehicle.

I just pulled off the little snout on the factory (2011) airbox so the air cleaner has more access to air that isn't directly off the base of the hood, where it is likely the hottest. It sounds slightly better....
ModernProspector is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-14-2013, 01:39 PM   #15
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 62
I should also add that I think a high quality snorkel system may keep the air filter cleaner longer if it is above the majority of dust created around the Jeep. A snorkel collects generally cooler air, and somewhat stabilizes the incoming air by virtue of its length, which may offer some mild improvement in specific cases.

I have no suggestions as to which snorkel system might qualify as a high quality one, however.

MP
ModernProspector is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-14-2013, 01:56 PM   #16
Race Car Dave

WF Supporting Member
 
NFRs2000NYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 6,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTH View Post
Right--I lack the expertise to really have any opinion on who's right or wrong. I'm just tossing it out there to see what folks' thoughts are.



That's an interesting observation. That's a significant difference between the stock intake and a snorkel that I presume was unaccounted for.

The stock intake isn't a "ram air" type of set up. It sucks air in basically the same way if it's idling in a parking lot as it does on the highway. That's not true for a forward facing snorkel.

On the other hand, a snorkel gets most of its "real use" at just a few miles per hour on a trail. So the argument could be made that if you really want to know what kind of power you'll net with the snorkel attached, you should do it without expecting a lot of air gushing into the snorkel.
I believe the snorkel used in RIPPs dyno was an AEV, which is forward facing, and will have a minor "ram air" effect. Having the vehicle standing still during a dyno run wouldn't be an accurate representation. Your other point certainly holds water. On the trail, you are doing a few MPH, so there is no "gushing" air...but, the air is still 1/2 the temp (or even less) than under the hood. It can be 100F under the hood and 24F at snorkel...that is a BIIIIIIG difference. Remember, on their dyno, it lost 20hp at peak....on the trail, you aren't hitting peak anything...so IF there was a power loss, it would be negligible.
NFRs2000NYC is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-14-2013, 02:06 PM   #17
Race Car Dave

WF Supporting Member
 
NFRs2000NYC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: NYC
Posts: 6,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by ModernProspector View Post
My 2 cents is this: colder air is denser air, and therefore needs more fuel to keep the mixture stoiciometric (the right mixture). At low speeds this should slightly reduce mileage, since increased power isn't needed to turn the wheels. The slight gain in engine vacuum due to more power usually won't offset the extra fuel that is being added to compensate for extra oxygen in the "thicker" air. Additionally, the colder air mixes with fuel less effectively. (In a fuel injected vehicle this is less noticeable, compared to carburetors of days gone by.)

Ram air usually requires traveling at quite high speeds to be effective/noticeable. Certainly above 50 mph. And again colder, denser air means more fuel added to compensate, which is almost always bad for mileage, except in very specific circumstances. (IE: need 4 more HP or ft/lbs of torque to keep from lugging/downshifting at a specific highway speed). Not to mention that air buffeting from poorly designed ram air set-ups causes erratic air density conditions that the computer will have a hard time with, resulting in lean-rich surges that are not only bad for mileage, but for the catalytic convertor, plugs, EGR, ect., also. Large air boxes, well-designed filters, and ducting are required to stabilize that air for a daily driver.

It takes a lot of work and testing to make a functioning cold/ram air system that makes more improvements than "un-improvements". Most of these air intake mods are racing-bred mods that have little to offer the average street or light trail-driven vehicle.

I just pulled off the little snout on the factory (2011) airbox so the air cleaner has more access to air that isn't directly off the base of the hood, where it is likely the hottest. It sounds slightly better....
You left out one CRITICAL point....denser air means more oxygen. More oxygen=a more efficient burn of fuel, resulting in better gas mileage. Oftentimes, the OEM computers will actually back off the fuel a bit because it senses it's achieving optimal burn with less.

Obviously the above is for OEM systems, not 1100HP modded monsters.
NFRs2000NYC is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-14-2013, 02:44 PM   #18
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 62
Respectfully, the trick is putting that extra power due to increased oxygen (and therefore extra fuel to compensate) in the power range where it actually helps something. Otherwise it results in worse mileage. True, if the engine becomes more efficient, then the throttle opening will be less at a given speed, which may result in improved mileage, but often will have no effect, since the same volume of air and fuel are required to make the same amount of horsepower required to move a vehicle at a given speed. You will push the gas pedal slightly less, but the same volume of air and fuel will be used to maintain a constant speed. Since the intake manifold is under a vacuum at normal driving conditions, ram air and cold air have little effect. Only at wide open throttle does denser air or colder air have a real, measurable effect, since this is when additional cylinder filling will actually occur.
ModernProspector is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Old 06-16-2013, 12:38 AM   #19
Jeeper
 
Tball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Flint TX
Posts: 139
Alright, so far I'm getting that a performance air filter is basically useless but a snorkel will overall be beneficial. I'm understand all the tall about power and what not so that's a good sign

Thanks y'all

Tball is offline   Quote Quick Reply
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Jeep Wrangler Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off




» Featured Product

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:27 PM.



Jeep®, Wrangler, Liberty, Wagoneer, Cherokee, and Grand Cherokee are copyrighted and trademarked to Chrysler Motors LLC.
Wranglerforum.com is not in any way associated with the Chrysler Motors LLC