R3 Airbox

[1963r2]

Hello All

Is it true that if you install an R3 airbox that you need to remove the hood brace so the hood closes or atleast doesn't rub ?

Thanks

Peter

[brad]

R3's were installed in 64 only, They didn't have the hood brace. Also they used thinner motor mounts, AND shimmed the body higher for hood clearance!

So the quick answer is yes, it will hit.

[1963r2]

Thanks Brad.

I guess I should have said it was a 63 Avanti. I'm sure there are a few who have fit these onto R2 motors, I was hoping there may be way around the problem without removing the brace.

I will have to do some thinking by the sounds of it.

pb

Edited October 19, 2014 by 1963r2

[mfg]

Not necessarily, a friend of mine owned a '63 Studebaker Avanti R2. He replaced the carb bonnet with an aftermarket R3 air box. The box cleared the reinforcement brace. He did, however, install the R3 type 'thin' front engine mounts.

[1963r2]

I did try the thin mounts when I dropped the engine in however there was some clearance issues so I reverted to the normal mounts.

The body is currently off the chassis so I have time to think about things.

I haven't had a good look at the brace but I have thought about shaving down the middle section so that the brace remains in place, albeit thinner in the affected area, or even sliding the brace forward away from the box .I guess I will find out when I drop the body on.

pb

[silverstude]

You can shave 3/16" off the mating surfaces of the airbox to achieve a 3/8" shorter height and it won't affect the operation. However after having done this, I'd say it was a pretty expensive way to achieve very little.....

[mfg]

On 10/23/2014 at 10:33 PM, silverstude said:

You can shave 3/16" off the mating surfaces of the airbox to achieve a 3/8" shorter height and it won't affect the operation. However after having done this, I'd say it was a pretty expensive way to achieve very little.....

3/16" can mean a lot when it comes to hood/engine clearance.....Good tip!

Edited February 23, 2020 by mfg

[JavierB]

On 10/18/2014 at 11:56 PM, 1963r2 said:

 

Can anyone on this thread elaborate on the benefit of swapping out the R2 airbox for the R3 one?  What does it do to performance, fuel economy, etc if everything else stays the same?  I have a lead on buying a car that has this conversion and was a bit perplexed if it was even a good idea.

Edited May 25, 2020 by JavierB
forgot to check "notify of replies"

[JavierB]

just want to check 'notify of replies'

[1963r2]

I did it so as to not worry about having to seal the carby.

But it also looks different, good, etc.

Not sure of any performance gain although I guess there must be otherwise they would not have used it.

pb

[mfg]

21 hours ago, 1963r2 said:

I did it so as to not worry about having to seal the carby.

But it also looks different, good, etc.

Not sure of any performance gain although I guess there must be otherwise they would not have used it.

pb

When the Studebaker Avanti was first introduced it was touted for its many safety features....All true!.....However, I've always thought the engineers really blew it when they decided to use a 'sealed' carb on their R2 engine....especially after successfully using a carb enclosed in an air box on the '57-'58 Golden Hawks.

For what it's worth, I believe a huge gain in safety was achieved when Studebaker decided to enclose the carb inside an air box on its R3 model.

( Ask the man who had the carb accelerator pump seal fail, (under supercharger pressure), on the highway in his R2, which resulted in a gasoline soaked engine compartment!....ME!!)