Stuck at Cape York

[RY-Journeyman]

Turbo engines and diesels especially will break catastrophically with water added and it does not take much, about half a cup full for a BMW X5. (My Grenadier was anticipated to have 2 bent con-rods, but the turbos were consider scrap).

A low revving petrol engine with a lower compression ratio is more likely to survive, (and much easier to fix).

Is non turbo diesel better than non turbo petrol? Not sure but history would suggest that as both the Willys and Land Rover series 1 were petrol and survived the Second World War that petrol is king in the most challenging of circumstances. Good call.

 

[landmannnn]

Turbo engines and diesels especially will break catastrophically with water added and it does not take much, about half a cup full for a BMW X5. (My Grenadier was anticipated to have 2 bent con-rods, but the turbos were consider scrap).

A low revving petrol engine with a lower compression ratio is more likely to survive, (and much easier to fix).

I've repaired a couple of older land-rover engines with water ingress, one just flattened a big end bearing, the other bent a conrod as well. So both fixed in a few hours for a few pounds.

WW2 jeeps would be even easier being sidevalve (flathead)

Not that those engines were comparable to modern engines.

 

[Jeremy996]

Is non turbo diesel better than non turbo petrol? Not sure but history would suggest that as both the Willys and Land Rover series 1 were petrol and survived the Second World War that petrol is king in the most challenging of circumstances. Good call.

As a diesel engine has a much higher compression ratio, the damage to the con-rods or piston is more likely to be catastrophic/serious. Conversly, diesel engines are usually more robustly made.

Fishing drowned LR109 Series IIIs from deep water as a TA soldier in the early '80s, we did not have to do much more than take the plugs out, expel the water and change the oil, unless someone had driven in at full noise and fury!

 

[Tazzieman]

B57 Cr 16:1 ; B58 = 11:1

 

[Shopkeep]

B57 Cr 16:1 ; B58 = 11:1

Willys Go Devil L134 7:1

 

[Tazzieman]

Willys Go Devil L134 7:1

Same as early Land Rovers. The tractor that takes you to the pigsty and pub.

 

[Shopkeep]

Same as early Land Rovers. The tractor that takes you to the pigsty and pub.

And no steering pump noise to bitch about. Very effective HVAC, as long as you want the same temp as outside.

 

[Blackwolf]

Is non turbo diesel better than non turbo petrol? Not sure but history would suggest that as both the Willys and Land Rover series 1 were petrol and survived the Second World War that petrol is king in the most challenging of circumstances. Good call.

I've yet to meet a SI Land-Rover that survived WW2 (I know one appears in the film 633 Squadron but that's an anachronism)!

 

[Happyoldgit]

I've yet to meet a SI Land-Rover that survived WW2 (I know one appears in the film 633 Squadron but that's an anachronism)!

Don't forget the Series that appeared at the end of Ice Cold In Alex...

 

[skinny_tom]

What I remember from the original Canny video was that the vehicle in question had made it through the river. IIRC the air intake point on the fenders of each vehicle shown were often dipping below the water line. Ineos has stated that the RAI components are not watertight so I thought everything looked sketchy and evidenced bad judgement but I don't know anything about water crossings. After the crossing the party then camped for the night a very short distance further down the road. In the morning when the engine was started the vehicle made a racket, died, and leaked oil.

Here is my immediate thought at the time:

Overnight the water ingested during the day before - highly aerated and in small amounts at the time of the crossing - settled or pooled into the lowest portions of the intake system. When the vehicle was started next morning there was just enough air volume in the intercooler ahead of the where the water collected to fire up the engine for a brief moment - possibly just a single revolution or two - and then the water "plug" was stuffed into a couple of cylinders en masse resulting in an hydrolocked motor.

Or it was a sham like @Zimm said.

I saw the original video of the car in question before it was pulled. I remember cringing when I saw the area of the air intake on the fender go below the water line. I don't recall that it stalled. In fact I believe I saw the car leave the water under it's own power... so, if it's any consolation- I'm pretty sure your account is accurate.

Could it be possible that at low RPMs there was enough room in the intercooler to provide the volume of air necessary and only when a high rev event came along that the water was introduced?

 

[Blackwolf]

I saw the original video of the car in question before it was pulled. I remember cringing when I saw the area of the air intake on the fender go below the water line. I don't recall that it stalled. In fact I believe I saw the car leave the water under it's own power... so, if it's any consolation- I'm pretty sure your account is accurate.

Could it be possible that at low RPMs there was enough room in the intercooler to provide the volume of air necessary and only when a high rev event came along that the water was introduced?

I didn't think that footage of the car that failed crossing the river was every posted publicly, only the cars with RAIs. All the cars which were shown dipped the wing air intake panel underwater frequently and for significant periods so it is inevitable that the failed car did too.

Personally I think it is more likely that the engine sustained damage (a bent conrod) during the crossing and the damaged conrod finally 'let go' and punched out of the block later. Water damage and bent rods seem quite easy to achieve on both the B57 and B58 motors but do not necessarily stop the engine from running.

The three lessons to learn from this incident seem to me to be (1) don't take chances with river crossings and (2) don't mislead the social-media-following public whether intentionally or unintentionally - the court of public opinion is a harsh court, and (3) if you are too dim to understand the risks associated with what you are doing, then don't do it.

I still have trouble understanding why anyone would attempt that crossing without a sealed RAI and the fact that one vehicle without any RAI and three with unsealed RAIs did so to my mind raises questions about the competence and intelligence of all involved. I guess they have all learned a hard lesson.

 

[Mountain4x4]

Has anyone attempted to simply seal the RAI up? Seems to silly to replace it if you can just seal it up.

 

[ECrider]

Has anyone attempted to simply seal the RAI up? Seems to silly to replace it if you can just seal it up.

Those that have looked were of the opinion too many joins/joints to get anywhere close to being resistant let alone proof. That and the air box itself.

 

[Tazzieman]

Has anyone attempted to simply seal the RAI up? Seems to silly to replace it if you can just seal it up.

A cheap and cheerful "fix"?
You might get away with a puncture repair on an F1 car for a lap or two. Expecting Sikaflex to last the stresses of offroading is a big ask.

 

[NQ94]

A cheap and cheerful "fix"?
You might get away with a puncture repair on an F1 car for a lap or two. Expecting Sikaflex to last the stresses of offroading is a big ask.

No one has reported glass falling out of their cars yet. Use the right automotive Sikaflex product and there will be no trouble.

 

[Tazzieman]

No one has reported glass falling out of their cars yet. Use the right automotive Sikaflex product and there will be no trouble.

So are you snugging up your airbox or just avoiding deep water?