L-88 air cleaner base

[VintageMusclecar]

Does anyone offer a reproduction L-88 base that will clear the secondary accelerator pump lever on a double pumper Holley?

Thanks.

[VintageMusclecar]

Anyone??? <<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/dunno.gif

Hammer and a socket to make room for clearance. The ones I've had (even those claiming to be L88 bases) needed massaging.

And btw...it is possible to do a pretty nice job.....if you're careful. <<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/wink.gif


Wayne

[VintageMusclecar]

Thank you Wayne.

[Tracker1]

the original GM piece put on my car in 1972 has no base-to-valve cover tube so it wasn't an issue....
http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/pics/usergals/2014/07/full-3497-13565-photo_1.jpg
http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/pics/usergals/2014/07/full-3497-13566-photo_3.jpg


the re-pop (cuz I wanted the tube) has 'ever-so-slight' contact as seen by the mark here on the tube. I will have to give the tube a few hammer knocks to clear...

http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/pics/usergals/2014/07/full-3497-13567-photo_4.jpg
http://www.yenko.net/ubbthreads/pics/usergals/2014/07/full-3497-13568-tube.jpg

[VintageMusclecar]

Tracker1;

Excellent pics, thanks.

Your carb appears to have a 30 c.c. pump on the rear, the 850 I'm using has a 50 c.c. pump which utilizes a significantly larger accelerator pump lever &amp; spring assembly. Short of mangling it, I'm not sure I'm going to get the base to fit at all.

With a REO kit, I'd be tempted to get a base from a Moroso 14-inch air cleaner and paint it black. They don't have the tube and they're close to the same drop as the OEM Chevy. Fit the Chevy top on it, use a push in breather on the valve cover and you're done <<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/grin.gif

Wayne

[VintageMusclecar]

Wayne;

That's the basic design I just tried and it cost ~15 HP and 10 lb.ft.

Here's what I'm looking at now: http://www.r2cperformance.com/

That does look promising. Can you keep me in the loop if you dyno test it?

Wayne

[VintageMusclecar]

Unfortunately I won't be able to get one here in time for the next round of testing on my 496 next week. However, I do want to pick one up and test it whenever it's feasible, and I do have another project coming up that will be more than suitable to do so. I'll cover that one in a new thread in my forum once I get it on the dyno.

[Tracker1]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: VintageMusclecar</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wayne;

That's the basic design I just tried and it cost ~15 HP and 10 lb.ft.

Here's what I'm looking at now: http://www.r2cperformance.com/ </div></div>

Wow. Eric please explain to my clueless brain how/why this is the case...thanks in advance.

[VintageMusclecar]

Just wanted to wrap this thread up:

As I was unable to source a repop L88 air cleaner base, I decided to modify my repop standard open element unit.

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d73/VMCP777/001_zpscaf17738.jpg (http://s33.photobucket.com/user/VMCP777/media/001_zpscaf17738.jpg.html)

The primary source of interference was the fresh air tube which was trying to occupy the same space as the secondary 50 c.c. accelerator pump arm. As physics dictates, two things can not occupy the same space at the same time, so one of `em had ta go. Since omitting the accelerator pump lever sort'a negated the whole &quot;double pumper&quot; concept, the air tube got the axe...or the die grinder in this instance.

Removal was as simple as using my mini cut-off wheel to grind off the four tiny spot welds that held the tube in the base.

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d73/VMCP777/002_zps184fba64.jpg (http://s33.photobucket.com/user/VMCP777/media/002_zps184fba64.jpg.html)

A rubber body plug sealed the open hole. Naturally, I forgot to snap a pic of it.

As mentioned in the dyno thread, the engine is currently running a HP style carb main body. These bodies have a full-circle air cleaner ring base, and the locating notches on the air cleaner base prevented the base from sitting flat on the carb. Simply bending the tabs up 90° allowed the base to rest fully on the carb.

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d73/VMCP777/003_zps8b881142.jpg (http://s33.photobucket.com/user/VMCP777/media/003_zps8b881142.jpg.html)

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d73/VMCP777/004_zps579f9f99.jpg (http://s33.photobucket.com/user/VMCP777/media/004_zps579f9f99.jpg.html)

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d73/VMCP777/005_zpsb3269723.jpg (http://s33.photobucket.com/user/VMCP777/media/005_zpsb3269723.jpg.html)

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d73/VMCP777/006_zps44b67698.jpg (http://s33.photobucket.com/user/VMCP777/media/006_zps44b67698.jpg.html)

The final modification was to open up the air cleaner stud hole on the air cleaner lid. Where original style carbs use a 1/4&quot; stud, the HP based main bodies use a larger 5/16&quot; stud.

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d73/VMCP777/007_zps6f098b2c.jpg (http://s33.photobucket.com/user/VMCP777/media/007_zps6f098b2c.jpg.html)

A 5/16&quot; nut and flat washer secures the lid.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tracker1</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: VintageMusclecar</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wayne;

That's the basic design I just tried and it cost ~15 HP and 10 lb.ft.

Here's what I'm looking at now: http://www.r2cperformance.com/ </div></div>

Wow. Eric please explain to my clueless brain how/why this is the case...thanks in advance. </div></div>

There were two factors at work during the air cleaner test on the dyno;

1) The carb was already running a bit rich as it was, and the installation of the air cleaner caused a slight restriction which served to richen the mixture even more.

2) The air cleaner base I had on-hand was a garden variety generic base that wasn't contoured as the OEM bases are, it only had the two reliefs stamped in to clear the needle &amp; seat adjusters. The OEM bases are well-known to be some of the best flowing components available, so I'm sure overall air flow was even more restricted by the generic base.

FWIW, I sure can't feel any butt-dyno power loss with the modified OEM air cleaner in place, and since the car already has <span style="font-style: italic">way</span> more power than it can use, the air cleaner will remain in place.

[Tracker1]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: VintageMusclecar</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Just wanted to wrap this thread up:

As I was unable to source a repop L88 air cleaner base, I decided to modify my repop standard open element unit.

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d73/VMCP777/001_zpscaf17738.jpg (http://s33.photobucket.com/user/VMCP777/media/001_zpscaf17738.jpg.html)

The primary source of interference was the fresh air tube which was trying to occupy the same space as the secondary 50 c.c. accelerator pump arm. As physics dictates, two things can not occupy the same space at the same time, so one of `em had ta go. Since omitting the accelerator pump lever sort'a negated the whole &quot;double pumper&quot; concept, the air tube got the axe...or the die grinder in this instance.

Removal was as simple as using my mini cut-off wheel to grind off the four tiny spot welds that held the tube in the base.

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d73/VMCP777/002_zps184fba64.jpg (http://s33.photobucket.com/user/VMCP777/media/002_zps184fba64.jpg.html)

A rubber body plug sealed the open hole. Naturally, I forgot to snap a pic of it.

As mentioned in the dyno thread, the engine is currently running a HP style carb main body. These bodies have a full-circle air cleaner ring base, and the locating notches on the air cleaner base prevented the base from sitting flat on the carb. Simply bending the tabs up 90° allowed the base to rest fully on the carb.

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d73/VMCP777/003_zps8b881142.jpg (http://s33.photobucket.com/user/VMCP777/media/003_zps8b881142.jpg.html)

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d73/VMCP777/004_zps579f9f99.jpg (http://s33.photobucket.com/user/VMCP777/media/004_zps579f9f99.jpg.html)

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d73/VMCP777/005_zpsb3269723.jpg (http://s33.photobucket.com/user/VMCP777/media/005_zpsb3269723.jpg.html)

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d73/VMCP777/006_zps44b67698.jpg (http://s33.photobucket.com/user/VMCP777/media/006_zps44b67698.jpg.html)

The final modification was to open up the air cleaner stud hole on the air cleaner lid. Where original style carbs use a 1/4&quot; stud, the HP based main bodies use a larger 5/16&quot; stud.

http://i33.photobucket.com/albums/d73/VMCP777/007_zps6f098b2c.jpg (http://s33.photobucket.com/user/VMCP777/media/007_zps6f098b2c.jpg.html)

A 5/16&quot; nut and flat washer secures the lid.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Tracker1</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: VintageMusclecar</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Wayne;

That's the basic design I just tried and it cost ~15 HP and 10 lb.ft.

Here's what I'm looking at now: http://www.r2cperformance.com/ </div></div>

Wow. Eric please explain to my clueless brain how/why this is the case...thanks in advance. </div></div>

There were two factors at work during the air cleaner test on the dyno;

1) The carb was already running a bit rich as it was, and the installation of the air cleaner caused a slight restriction which served to richen the mixture even more.

2) The air cleaner base I had on-hand was a garden variety generic base that wasn't contoured as the OEM bases are, it only had the two reliefs stamped in to clear the needle &amp; seat adjusters. The OEM bases are well-known to be some of the best flowing components available, so I'm sure overall air flow was even more restricted by the generic base.

FWIW, I sure can't feel any butt-dyno power loss with the modified OEM air cleaner in place, and since the car already has <span style="font-style: italic">way</span> more power than it can use, the air cleaner will remain in place. </div></div>

Jeez, I'd never have dreamed that would cause such a power loss on the dyno. Thanks.
Glad to see you got a work-around. <<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/biggthumpup.gif

[Xplantdad]

Looks great-as usual! <<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/headbang.gif

[VintageMusclecar]

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Hotrodsled</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That does look promising. Can you keep me in the loop if you dyno test it?

Wayne </div></div>

Bumping this for you.

Spun base air cleaner test results (http://speedtalk.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&amp;t=41719)

Someone else has tested this.

[WILMASBOYL78]

This is an interesting thread [no surprise since Mr. Jackson is involved]..we have an &quot;Eric prepared&quot; Holley DP on our 68 BB Nova...factory style drop base air cleaner..I never even considered the issue of clearance with the rear pump <<GRAEMLIN_URL>>/dunno.gif Will check it out this weekend...wilma