worried after driving thru flood water

Nodding_Donkey

Strider590 wrote: »

The objective is:

a) to stop the water entering the exhaust.
b) to carry enough momentum to get most of the way through, regardless of whether you stall.

The actual speed is entirely dependent on other factors, it's a judgement call, one that needs to be based on some logical thinking and not on "OMG it's a puddle, PANIC!!!!".

BUT you want to make sure your the only one in the water when you enter it, following some numpty into the water is suicidal.

Fromm the AA website

Driving fast through standing water is dangerous; tyres lose contact with the road and you lose steering control in what's known as 'aquaplaning'. If you do experience aquaplaning, hold the steering wheel lightly and lift off the throttle until the tyres regain grip.

Driving fast through standing water is inconsiderate. Driving through water at speeds above a slow crawl can result in water being thrown onto pavements, soaking pedestrians or cyclists. You could face a hefty fine and between three and nine penalty points if the police believe you were driving without reasonable consideration for other road users.

Driving fast through standing water can cause expensive damage. The air intake on many cars is low down at the front of the engine bay and it only takes a small quantity of water sucked into the engine to cause serious damage. All engines are affected but turbo-charged and diesel engines are most vulnerable.

20-25mph is not slow.

Strider590

Nodding_Donkey wrote: »

Fromm the AA website

Driving fast through standing water is dangerous; tyres lose contact with the road and you lose steering control in what's known as 'aquaplaning'. If you do experience aquaplaning, hold the steering wheel lightly and lift off the throttle until the tyres regain grip.

Driving fast through standing water is inconsiderate. Driving through water at speeds above a slow crawl can result in water being thrown onto pavements, soaking pedestrians or cyclists. You could face a hefty fine and between three and nine penalty points if the police believe you were driving without reasonable consideration for other road users.

Driving fast through standing water can cause expensive damage. The air intake on many cars is low down at the front of the engine bay and it only takes a small quantity of water sucked into the engine to cause serious damage. All engines are affected but turbo-charged and diesel engines are most vulnerable.

If there are pedestrians and a footpath, then it's not flood water, it's a f*cking puddle......... Seriously, how high is an average kerb stone?

Nodding_Donkey wrote: »

20-25mph is not slow.

Read my post again........

Nodding_Donkey

No thanks, I've read enough rubbish for one day

alastairq

Nodding_Donkey wrote: »

Er no, low speed low revs would be the way to do it.

A bow wave can actually help you get through deeper water in some vehicles


Definitely.

High revs [for the speed] will ensure no water gets up the exhaust into the engine [ This is advice for a normal car.....and is advice even given by Land-Rover]..hence, 1st gear. [low speed, higher revs]

The bow wave is definitely not useful for a normal car.There are many items under the bonnet that don't get on well with water. Creating a bow wave might result in that wave entering the engine bay. Not everyone is an expert driver, so advice needs to be tempered to suit.

Creating a bow wave is also very inconsiderate behaviour towards other road users........especially those going the opposite way.

For vehicles designed for off-road [non-waterproof surfaces]....then consideration needs to be given towards manufacturer's stated fording [or wading] depths...which should not be exceeded.

So, if one is really going to 'do a proper job', one should, before entering a flooded area, get out of the vehicle and conducted a recce on foot , then follow precisely, the recce'd path.

Getting stuck, or drowning one's vehicle out, is hardly the objective here?


But, I don't think the average lurker on here wants to get their trousers & high heels wet, hence the wording of my advice?

Advice given freely, as normally, HM Gov't has to pay me for it.

Gloomendoom

alastairq wrote: »

The bow wave is definitely not useful for a normal car.There are many items under the bonnet that don't get on well with water. Creating a bow wave might result in that wave entering the engine bay. Not everyone is an expert driver, so advice needs to be tempered to suit.

The reason that it is recommended that a bow wave is created is because doing so lowers the level of water directly behind the wave and thus reduces the chance of flooding the engine bay...



That said, this advice is aimed at people fording rivers, not driving along urban streets.
.
.
.
.
.

Lum

Also worth noting that that bow wave is a lot smaller than the one I suspect a lot of people were envisioning after reading Strider's post.

Quick straw poll. Who here actually knows where the air intake (not the filter) is on their car? I do on the Cefiro, but haven't found it (or looked for it) on the Mondeo.

Nodding_Donkey

I suspect Strider's bow wave is a tad larger than that at the speeds he admits to driving through water at.

And yes I know where the air intakes are on my cars. On the Landrover it is higher than the windscreen, along with the crankcase, transfer box and axle breathers

Lum

Ahh, your Landy has a snorkel then. Always pleases me to see one of those as it's a very visible sign that the owner of that particular 4x4 likely actually uses it for its intended purpose.

Mine was originally a wide, but not very tall pipe just above the passenger side headlight that fed into the airbox, it's since been replaced with one of those cone filter things, so a small bow wave like above should keep it nicely dry. Too fast and water will squirt in over the top of the headlight I imagine.

Not actually tried it but my partner's 200SX has pretty much the same engine bay design (and same aftermarket filter) and she's managed 2 feet of water just fine when Newbury flooded 7 or so years ago.

I should actually go and look for how the Mondeo's setup works, problem is there's that much covering plastic in the engine bay you can't find anything and being a company car you're discouraged from tinkering, or caring.

Gloomendoom

I wouldn't be surprised if a car would float in two feet of water.

Stoke

vaio wrote: »

The big danger is you suck in water and hydrolock the engine but you'd have noticed that already so my vote goes to "don't worry, no damage done"

I think you should look up the term 'water injection' and you'll realize why you have to suck a HUGE amount of water up before you hydrolock an engine.