Disco 2 best air filter with a snorkel

I just fitted a southdown snorkel on my 2003 Td5 amd put a coalescent filter in the scoop to act as a mesh to stop larger particles and insects to get to the air filter.

However, I was thinking of getting a K&N filter but someone pointed out that these let through more particulates than the standard filter as they work by letting more air through by increased pore size.

Is this correct and if it is what is the best filter to use with a snorkel?

First of all a snorkel is a dedicated off-road accessory for wading and it was not conceived to be used at higher than off-road speeds, if you fitted it cos it looks nice but you are using your vehicle as a all day/family car on motorways too it can mix up the air flow bad... i made air flow mesasurements with nanocom on motorway on a friend's car who fitted one just cos it's "trendy" and the readings were different with intake pointed to forward, backward and removed at the same speed and road conditions the best readings were without it

About the air filter: the theory that K & N lets more or bigger particles can be true but IMO those are harmless cos at that dimension difference compared to a paper filter they are completely destroyed in the combustion, with the snorkel i'd stick to paper filter myself but that's not the case cos i'd never fit one to my car

sierrafery said:

First of all a snorkel is a dedicated off-road accessory for wading and it was not conceived to be used at higher than off-road speeds, if you fitted it cos it looks nice but you are using your vehicle as a all day/family car on motorways too it can mix up the air flow bad... i made air flow mesasurements with nanocom on motorway on a friend's car who fitted one just cos it's "trendy" and the readings were different with intake pointed to forward, backward and removed at the same speed and road conditions the best readings were without it

About the air filter: the theory that K & N lets more or bigger particles can be true but IMO those are harmless cos at that dimension difference compared to a paper filter they are completely destroyed in the combustion, with the snorkel i'd stick to paper filter myself but that's not the case cos i'd never fit one to my car

Click to expand...

It is hard to say what I use my Disco for, I pull a trailer with a small digger for work sometimes, I drive a lot of miles on country roads and some motorway, I drive off road for work (I am an environmental scientist so quite a bit of this) and it is our second family car (the wife has a Freelander)
However, the snorkel is an addition for my urge to off road and drive through water. Our last adventure was close as the water had entered the air filter housing!

I was a bit taken a back as I didn't think I would have gone that far! While researching the snorkel I found out there are a small hole with no valve or anything and a large hole with a one way valve at the bottom of the airbox.

But what interest me in your measurements there; forward and back wards what was the difference?

I didnt record the data but i remember that the conclusion was that above 80km/h (50mph) with intake toward front it was higher than normal and at 130km/h(80mph) uphill the reading was very close to cut-out limit(680) which was not the case without it, with intake bacwards was better but still not like without... EGT's were slightly affected as well... the gist is that there were peaks on the reading both ways so it was not stable at the same speeds and from some research i found out that with the intake backwards it sucks more dust in.... i made mesurements for my friend cos his impression was that the consumption was affected by the snorkel as it became worst...on a long run this could be due to the impact on the air flow or even due to the effect on the vehicle's aerodynamics.... my conclusion is: a snorkel is not good at motorway speeds so if you have one and you go for a long motorway drive turn it back or remove it if it's not raining....maybe those safary types with round head have less impact i dunno.

sierrafery said:

I didnt record the data but i remember that the conclusion was that above 80km/h (50mph) with intake toward front it was higher than normal and at 130km/h(80mph) uphill the reading was very close to cut-out limit(680) which was not the case without it, with intake bacwards was better but still not like without... EGT's were slightly affected as well... the gist is that there were peaks on the reading both ways so it was not stable at the same speeds and from some research i found out that with the intake backwards it sucks more dust in.... i made mesurements for my friend cos his impression was that the consumption was affected by the snorkel as it became worst...on a long run this could be due to the impact on the air flow or even due to the effect on the vehicle's aerodynamics.... my conclusion is: a snorkel is not good at motorway speeds so if you have one and you go for a long motorway drive turn it back or remove it if it's not raining....maybe those safary types with round head have less impact i dunno.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I didn't get one of those of course!

I am thinking of some kind of cover now LOL I did add an extra filter in the snorkel. I might put the nanocom on and measure.

I rarely exceed 120km/hr, I mostly drive 110km/hr on the motorway.

the guy i made measurements for haven't had any filter just the empty snorkel...it's possible that a filter in it to be a good thing....or not

sierrafery said:

the guy i made measurements for haven't had any filter just the empty snorkel...it's possible that a filter in it to be a good thing....or not

Click to expand...

Ahh new territory so!! haha. I will put the nanocom on mine. I haven't noticed any difference in driving or fuel consumption just yet but it is early days.