A.I.R. for '72 - NCRS Discussion Boards

A.I.R. for '72

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Tom Freeman

    A.I.R. for '72

    This was brought up on another board, so thought I would come to the experts. The Corvette Black Book shows an RPO code of K19 for the Air Injection Reactor with a total number of 3,912. But according to a previous post here by Joe L. all 72's had A.I.R. except the CKW and CKX coded L48. Another interesting number is 3,913 for the number of LS5 produced for 72. Could it be that the K19 RPO was for use on the LS5? For some odd reason the A.I.R. for the big block was a seperate, but required, option for '72?

    Thoughts?

    tom...


    The '73 Spot
  • Pat Bush #35083

    #2
    Re: A.I.R. for '72

    Tom -

    I think the issue is emissions on the AIR required option. BB's always had a tough time with emissions. The AIR system really helped. It was probably required on the 72 because of the more stringent EPA emissions at that time. Other motors did not have these as required at that stage because they could probably get by. But this is just a guess on my part.

    Joe Lucia or Duke can probably elaborate further on this. I found it odd that most all the 1968-70 BB's EXCEPT my LS-5 came stock with AIR. Who knows what lurks in the mind of a GM engineer????

    Pat

    Comment

    • Pat Bush #35083

      #3
      Re: A.I.R. for '72

      Tom -

      I think the issue is emissions on the AIR required option. BB's always had a tough time with emissions. The AIR system really helped. It was probably required on the 72 because of the more stringent EPA emissions at that time. Other motors did not have these as required at that stage because they could probably get by. But this is just a guess on my part.

      Joe Lucia or Duke can probably elaborate further on this. I found it odd that most all the 1968-70 BB's EXCEPT my LS-5 came stock with AIR. Who knows what lurks in the mind of a GM engineer????

      Pat

      Comment

      • Tom Freeman

        #4
        Re: A.I.R. for '72

        Pat,
        What I found odd was the almost exact match of A.I.R and LS5 numbers. But what about the small block. Per Joe L. all them had A.I.R. except for two L48 codes, so all the LT1s and two L48 codes had A.I.R. but without an RPO. ???

        tom...

        Comment

        • Tom Freeman

          #5
          Re: A.I.R. for '72

          Pat,
          What I found odd was the almost exact match of A.I.R and LS5 numbers. But what about the small block. Per Joe L. all them had A.I.R. except for two L48 codes, so all the LT1s and two L48 codes had A.I.R. but without an RPO. ???

          tom...

          Comment

          • Terry M.
            Beyond Control Poster
            • September 30, 1980
            • 15573

            #6
            Re: A.I.R. for '72 *TL*

            Tom welcome to Chevrolet's byzantine option accounting practices. Quick take: there is no rhyme or reason to the K19 listing.
            Long story: K19 was not an option in 1972. In 1972 if you got any engine but the two that Joe mentioned, you got the pump. In 1970 and 1971 the LT1 had the AIR pump (LS6 in 1971 also), but neither year has a listing for the number of K19s produced. So you say AIR pump was not K19 in 1970 and 1971, and was a part of the engine option. But in 1972 you didn't get to check an option code box for K19 if you ordered the LS5, so where did the K19 option come from in 1972?
            Ah - you say we are back to the question you asked originally.
            Terry


            Terry

            Comment

            • Terry M.
              Beyond Control Poster
              • September 30, 1980
              • 15573

              #7
              Re: A.I.R. for '72 *TL*

              Tom welcome to Chevrolet's byzantine option accounting practices. Quick take: there is no rhyme or reason to the K19 listing.
              Long story: K19 was not an option in 1972. In 1972 if you got any engine but the two that Joe mentioned, you got the pump. In 1970 and 1971 the LT1 had the AIR pump (LS6 in 1971 also), but neither year has a listing for the number of K19s produced. So you say AIR pump was not K19 in 1970 and 1971, and was a part of the engine option. But in 1972 you didn't get to check an option code box for K19 if you ordered the LS5, so where did the K19 option come from in 1972?
              Ah - you say we are back to the question you asked originally.
              Terry


              Terry

              Comment

              • Joe L.
                Beyond Control Poster
                • February 1, 1988
                • 43193

                #8
                Re: A.I.R. for '72

                Pat-----

                For 68-69, ALL Corvette engines were AIR-equipped. For other 68-69 Chevrolet models, though, generally those with manual transmission had AIR and those with auto trans had the CCS emissions control system. But, Corvettes during 68-69 ALL had AIR.

                For 1970, things changed. All Corvette engines, EXCEPT LT-1, used the CCS emissions control system. The LT-1 was the only Corvette engine for 1970 that used AIR. The same held true for 1971.
                In Appreciation of John Hinckley

                Comment

                • Joe L.
                  Beyond Control Poster
                  • February 1, 1988
                  • 43193

                  #9
                  Re: A.I.R. for '72

                  Pat-----

                  For 68-69, ALL Corvette engines were AIR-equipped. For other 68-69 Chevrolet models, though, generally those with manual transmission had AIR and those with auto trans had the CCS emissions control system. But, Corvettes during 68-69 ALL had AIR.

                  For 1970, things changed. All Corvette engines, EXCEPT LT-1, used the CCS emissions control system. The LT-1 was the only Corvette engine for 1970 that used AIR. The same held true for 1971.
                  In Appreciation of John Hinckley

                  Comment

                  • John H.
                    Beyond Control Poster
                    • December 1, 1997
                    • 16513

                    #10
                    Re: A.I.R. for '72

                    It would appear that where A.I.R. was part of the standard Federal emissions package, it was part of the base engine specs, and the A.I.R. system was not shown as a separate K-19 option. Where a non-A.I.R. Federally-certified engine package was not acceptable for California, the unique California-certified package that required A.I.R. to meet California regulations carried the K-19 RPO description to differentiate it from the base Federal package and to trigger the pricing and detail engine specifications differences (heads, carb, distributor, manifolds, pump system, etc.). The LS5 454 was not available in California in 1972 - it was a Federal-only option.

                    Comment

                    • John H.
                      Beyond Control Poster
                      • December 1, 1997
                      • 16513

                      #11
                      Re: A.I.R. for '72

                      It would appear that where A.I.R. was part of the standard Federal emissions package, it was part of the base engine specs, and the A.I.R. system was not shown as a separate K-19 option. Where a non-A.I.R. Federally-certified engine package was not acceptable for California, the unique California-certified package that required A.I.R. to meet California regulations carried the K-19 RPO description to differentiate it from the base Federal package and to trigger the pricing and detail engine specifications differences (heads, carb, distributor, manifolds, pump system, etc.). The LS5 454 was not available in California in 1972 - it was a Federal-only option.

                      Comment

                      Working...

                      Debug Information

                      Searching...Please wait.
                      An unexpected error was returned: 'Your submission could not be processed because you have logged in since the previous page was loaded.

                      Please push the back button and reload the previous window.'
                      An unexpected error was returned: 'Your submission could not be processed because the token has expired.

                      Please push the back button and reload the previous window.'
                      An internal error has occurred and the module cannot be displayed.
                      There are no results that meet this criteria.
                      Search Result for "|||"