3rd Gen Camaro Question, Bottom or Front breather stock? Options

[GlennCMC70]

where does the cooling air for the rad come from on 82-92 Camaros as delivered from the factory - front or bottom?

[roadracerwhite]

Both, they get air from the bottom and from the front grill next to the license plate.

[GlennCMC70]

i'm trying to identify cars that have a factory ram air set-up. do any 3rd gens has something that would be considered "ram air"?

[trackbird]

i'm trying to identify cars that have a factory ram air set-up. do any 3rd gens has something that would be considered "ram air"?

No. The 1985 HO 305 had a dual snorkel air cleaner but it was under the hood and therefore blocked (mostly). I've heard rumors of early TA's with a "flapper" valve on the hood (1982-ish), but I havent seen one.

[axoid]

The 82 and 83 Crossfire injected Z-28s has cold air flapper setup in the center of the hood, but it wasn't a ram air setup per say.

[mitchntx]

The 82 and 83 Crossfire injected Z-28s has cold air flapper setup in the center of the hood, but it wasn't a ram air setup per say.

Removing the left front blinker housing from a 4th gen Camaro was deemed "ram-air" at Nationals in 07.

Ask supermac ...

[roadracerwhite]

I don't believe there are any ram air set ups. There are flapper style set ups that I have seen on the old carbed cars.

pictured here

http://www.tacreationsusa.com/air_cleaners.htm

[NJSPEEDER]

The closest to any kind of "Ram Air" any 3rd gen ever came with was the dual snorkel intake that appeared on the L69, 305HO, equiped cars. It was a junk set up. The cold air flaps also never showed any improvement in performance.

-Tim

[GlennCMC70]

The 82 and 83 Crossfire injected Z-28s has cold air flapper setup in the center of the hood, but it wasn't a ram air setup per say.

Removing the left front blinker housing from a 4th gen Camaro was deemed "ram-air" at Nationals in 07.

Ask supermac ...

as much as Covini hates it, none of the other directors are upholding his interpretation.

[1meanZ]

mostly good info, and some mis-info here. Here is the exact facts.

Camaros:
82-83 Z28s with the LU5 engine option (crossfire injection) came with a composite hood with functional air induction scoops at the end of each hood vent. These opened under WOT just like the old cowl induction chevelles. The scoops feed directly into a square hole in the air cleaner housing between the throttle bodies. When the scoops are open outside air can rush directly into and come in contact with the filter elements themselves. I would call this about as close to ram air as it gets from the factory, but thats my opinion. here is a pic.
(IMG:http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w178/1meanz/crossfirepics.jpg)

There were 84-87 Z28s and IROCs equipped with the L69 (305 HO 190hp) dual snorkel air cleaner ducting. This consists of a normal round air filter housing with a snorkel feeding each side. The snorkels mount to the core support and draw from above the headlights. Some people say this is junk, others insist otherwise. GM offered this complete setup as a performance improvement with the ZZ4 crate engine they offered as a direct replacement for the HO 305, so apparently GM thought it improved performance. I'm sure its 3980457x better than the open element hot air suckers most guys use on carburated or TBI engines. Here is a pic of said dual snorkel setup. The mid 80s carb'd Mustang GTs had something similar...
(IMG:http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w178/1meanz/camaroengine.jpg)



Firebirds:
The Pontiacs are much eaiser to describe. TAs came with what some guys call the 'power bulge' hood. It is the asymmetric bulge off to one side of the hood. This was on TAs from 82-84, and on Formulas until 92. On the LU5 (crossfire injection) and L69 (305 HO) had a functional scoop at the back of the bulge. This opened at WOT and fed the square hole on the LU5 just like the camaro. The L69 powered TAs have a round hole in the lid of the air cleaner that meets the hood for fresh air. This would be more of a cowl induction instead of a ram air, but it is fresh air none-the-less. here is a pic.
(IMG:http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w178/1meanz/TAramair.jpg)

This post has been edited by 1meanZ: Nov 5 2008, 01:36 AM

[trackbird]

Firebirds:
The Pontiacs are much eaiser to describe. TAs came with what some guys call the 'power bulge' hood. It is the asymmetric bulge off to one side of the hood. This was on TAs from 82-84, and on Formulas until 92. On the LU5 (crossfire injection) and L69 (305 HO) had a functional scoop at the back of the bulge. This opened at WOT and fed the square hole on the LU5 just like the camaro. The L69 powered TAs have a round hole in the lid of the air cleaner that meets the hood for fresh air. This would be more of a cowl induction instead of a ram air, but it is fresh air none-the-less. here is a pic.
(IMG:http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w178/1meanz/TAramair.jpg)

That's the one I was thinking of.

[Doug Phillips]

There were 84-87 Z28s and IROCs equipped with the L69 (305 HO 190hp) dual snorkel air cleaner ducting. This consists of a normal round air filter housing with a snorkel feeding each side. The snorkels mount to the core support and draw from above the headlights. Some people say this is junk, others insist otherwise. GM offered this complete setup as a performance improvement with the ZZ4 crate engine they offered as a direct replacement for the HO 305, so apparently GM thought it improved performance. I'm sure its 3980457x better than the open element hot air suckers most guys use on carburated or TBI engines. Here is a pic of said dual snorkel setup. The mid 80s carb'd Mustang GTs had something similar...
(IMG:http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w178/1meanz/camaroengine.jpg)

I have a 1985 IROC race car that originally had the L69 motor. It now has a 383 with the dual snorkel. The previous owner has removed the headlights and installed sheet metal over the headlight area to attempt to improve aero at the track.

I have wondered if the dual snorkel was any better than just an open element, especialy considering that with the sheet metal and hood closed most of the headlight area that would have allowed air into the inlets is now closed off.

What do you think?

[Todd]

I have a 1985 IROC race car that originally had the L69 motor. It now has a 383 with the dual snorkel. The previous owner has removed the headlights and installed sheet metal over the headlight area to attempt to improve aero at the track.

I have wondered if the dual snorkel was any better than just an open element, especialy considering that with the sheet metal and hood closed most of the headlight area that would have allowed air into the inlets is now closed off.

What do you think?

the common issue with the dual snorkel setup...and any carbed setup on a third gen is getting enough fresh air in. I saw a test "back in the day" of the 305HO car showing how cfm limited the OE dual snorkel setup was. With the short air filter/cleaner required for the low hood clearance, you can't really get enough air through to make power. I made a 30HP difference on the dyno going from my single snorkel setup to an open element. This was in my 82 Z28 T-10 that was swapped to a 350, made ~275RWHP with open element, wouldn't break 250RWHP with the single snorkel even with a "flipped lid".

[RVachon]

I have a 1985 IROC race car that originally had the L69 motor. It now has a 383 with the dual snorkel. The previous owner has removed the headlights and installed sheet metal over the headlight area to attempt to improve aero at the track.

I have wondered if the dual snorkel was any better than just an open element, especialy considering that with the sheet metal and hood closed most of the headlight area that would have allowed air into the inlets is now closed off.

What do you think?

the common issue with the dual snorkel setup...and any carbed setup on a third gen is getting enough fresh air in. I saw a test "back in the day" of the 305HO car showing how cfm limited the OE dual snorkel setup was. With the short air filter/cleaner required for the low hood clearance, you can't really get enough air through to make power. I made a 30HP difference on the dyno going from my single snorkel setup to an open element. This was in my 82 Z28 T-10 that was swapped to a 350, made ~275RWHP with open element, wouldn't break 250RWHP with the single snorkel even with a "flipped lid".

My experience wasn't that drastic. My 86 Camaro with a 355 roller motor made 310 RWHP with the dual snorkel setup....when I removed the air cleaner totally (open carb), it made an extra 12 RWHP. I also thought it would have made more of a difference, but was surprised by the results.

[1meanZ]

the common issue with the dual snorkel setup...and any carbed setup on a third gen is getting enough fresh air in. I saw a test "back in the day" of the 305HO car showing how cfm limited the OE dual snorkel setup was. With the short air filter/cleaner required for the low hood clearance, you can't really get enough air through to make power. I made a 30HP difference on the dyno going from my single snorkel setup to an open element. This was in my 82 Z28 T-10 that was swapped to a 350, made ~275RWHP with open element, wouldn't break 250RWHP with the single snorkel even with a "flipped lid".

You said the dual snorkel setup is CFM limited, but then you are comparing an open element to a SINGLE snorkel setup. Can you explain further here? Are you sure the base and lid are the same between the dual and single snorkel setups?

My experience wasn't that drastic. My 86 Camaro with a 355 roller motor made 310 RWHP with the dual snorkel setup....when I removed the air cleaner totally (open carb), it made an extra 12 RWHP. I also thought it would have made more of a difference, but was surprised by the results.

This is much more of the result I would expect. The dual snorkel intake setup was also offered by GM Performance Parts as part of the 350HO crate engine package. I have to assume from this that GM thought the intake was worth it or they woudn't have offered it, nor would they have spent the time and money in R&D and tooling to make a separate dual snorkel intake setup.

...and while you guys may show a gain with an open element air filter on the dyno, how much power do you lose sucking hot air from the engine bay all the time while driving...

[Todd]

the common issue with the dual snorkel setup...and any carbed setup on a third gen is getting enough fresh air in. I saw a test "back in the day" of the 305HO car showing how cfm limited the OE dual snorkel setup was. With the short air filter/cleaner required for the low hood clearance, you can't really get enough air through to make power. I made a 30HP difference on the dyno going from my single snorkel setup to an open element. This was in my 82 Z28 T-10 that was swapped to a 350, made ~275RWHP with open element, wouldn't break 250RWHP with the single snorkel even with a "flipped lid".

You said the dual snorkel setup is CFM limited, but then you are comparing an open element to a SINGLE snorkel setup. Can you explain further here? Are you sure the base and lid are the same between the dual and single snorkel setups?

The only dyno tests I had were between the single snorkel and the open element. I took it to the dyno with the single on it...and when it didn't make the power we wanted, we borrowed an open element to see what difference it would make. I eventually made my own dual snorkel from pieces of two singles... but the biggest difference was that the open element air cleaner was taller. They use the same filter on all 4bbl and TBI air cleaners. I do believe that the base is exactly the same. When I ran an open element on the street, it ran like a dog with all the hot air coming in.

[RVachon]

For the record, the single & dual snorkel are CFM limited to about 535cfm, but only because of the filter element size. So unless you're motor is running at 6000 RPM all the time, the 535cfm isn't a big issue except for the very top end.

[StanIROCZ]

For the record, the single & dual snorkel are CFM limited to about 535cfm, but only because of the filter element size. So unless you're motor is running at 6000 RPM all the time, the 535cfm isn't a big issue except for the very top end.

Whats the filter element size? I'm using a paper 14x2" on my car now.

[RVachon]

I just found some notes when I did the testing and rechecked the air flow of the stock filter.

The stock filter size for the factory dual snorkel is a 12" x 2.5", which has enough surface area to flow 565 cfm. Removing the lid on the dual snorkel on the dyno added only 10 RWHP at the top, but everything up to 5000 RPM was identical. If I could post a pic on here, I have the 2 dyno runs with and without the lid.