What I remember seeing was it was more for dust than water - getting it up higher was trying to eliminate sucking in some of the dust when going off road - not really for getting it above water - I think the Ranger was rated to go thru 30" of water? That seems a little high though. I do remember seeing a video a while ago where they talked about how deep of water you can go thru. It was deeper than I expected but certainly isn't military grade.Why would snorkel intake not be pointed toward back of car? In the rain this would be a water catcher.
Also with out other water proofing forging high water is not good for engine correct. Not like Ford built the Ranger to Army grade.
Hi Folks,What I remember seeing was it was more for dust than water - getting it up higher was trying to eliminate sucking in some of the dust when going off road - not really for getting it above water - I think the Ranger was rated to go thru 30" of water? That seems a little high though. I do remember seeing a video a while ago where they talked about how deep of water you can go thru. It was deeper than I expected but certainly isn't military grade.
That is the video I was thinking of. That is impressive... I know it is a marketing video, but it is still impressive. And leaving it running in the 31.5" of water with a ton of payload for two hours! Amazing.....
800mm of water or 31.5"...best in class
Struggling.without arguing all your points about direction, consider this....air is essential for combustion.
do you want the engine to struggle for it, or not?
and it looks better facing forward. that alone solves the conundrum.