What would you like in a snorkel design?
JK Freak
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 860
Likes: 0
From: Andalusia, Alabama
I like the look of the low mount and the high mount is for function and wouldh't be for looks at all. So good job.
I hope there will be some cosmetic detail changes to resemble the look of the drawing a little more but even if not I still look to purchase one of these.
I hope there will be some cosmetic detail changes to resemble the look of the drawing a little more but even if not I still look to purchase one of these.
JK Enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 494
Likes: 0
From: Abington.MA
I can't wait ( but I will ) for this thing. Keep up the good work guys. I don't have any lights, I don't like a lot of stuff hanging off the jeep as limb catchers so I like the design your going with. Saving my pennies for this.
JK Freak
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 901
Likes: 0
From: Grande Prairie, Alberta
Originally Posted by Rugged_Ridge
Well .... made you guys hold off until the end of the day... 
Gives you something to talk about over the weekend... Let us know what you think.
Please remember, there will still be changes in size and details but general layout and locations are locked in.
Gives you something to talk about over the weekend... Let us know what you think.
Please remember, there will still be changes in size and details but general layout and locations are locked in.
JK Freak
Joined: May 2010
Posts: 535
Likes: 1
From: Kingston, NY
HEY! You used my idea!! Well, there is a chance you had the idea before, but I'm taking credit. I'll be awaiting my check in mail... (Or a free snorkel)
https://www.jk-forum.com/forums/atta...3&d=1299278571
As far as the shorter design in the rain or snow being piled up infront of it I had an idea.
If the opening faced down, mounted more towards the side (as opposed to on top facing forward like a ram air hood scoop) it would prevent snow from blocking the opening.
Your "napkin drawing" showed the taller snorkel would put air through the side. If the shorter one utilized the same hole it would be possible. Even if it still faced forward but was more on the side than the hood.
Just a few ideas, not saying this is what I want. But if it works, I'm all for it.
If the opening faced down, mounted more towards the side (as opposed to on top facing forward like a ram air hood scoop) it would prevent snow from blocking the opening.
Your "napkin drawing" showed the taller snorkel would put air through the side. If the shorter one utilized the same hole it would be possible. Even if it still faced forward but was more on the side than the hood.
Just a few ideas, not saying this is what I want. But if it works, I'm all for it.
Last edited by Ario56; Mar 5, 2011 at 03:02 PM.
JK Newbie
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
From: San Antonio, Texas
I understand that the original low intake wasnt functional, but looked cool. But to me the new design looks worse. What about us guys whos tires are wider then the fenders/ no fenders? When your hit water wont it just throw it into the intake if its pointed down towards the fender like that? Good work btw still better then any setup out there. 
JK Junkie
Joined: Apr 2009
Posts: 2,124
Likes: 1
From: Ontario Canada
Originally Posted by ckatz88
I understand that the original low intake wasnt functional, but looked cool. But to me the new design looks worse. What about us guys whos tires are wider then the fenders/ no fenders? When your hit water wont it just throw it into the intake if its pointed down towards the fender like that? Good work btw still better then any setup out there.
JK Freak
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 657
Likes: 0
From: Alto,GA
First off, I like it. However, I'll agree with the others who said they wished it looked more like the original drawing. The problem is the upper intake. The lower version looks good, but the upper is missing something. Maybe the upper is not "beefy" enough or maybe it looks weird infront of the A-Pillar....I can't put my finger on it.
JK Super Freak
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,236
Likes: 0
From: Pittsburgh, PA