kawijames

iTrader: (2)

Getting geared up for the swap on the Monte but have a few questions.

1. has anyone tried the corvette oil pans for clearance?

2. what about building mount pedestals (welded in) instead of using the plates?

3. have any of you just routed the factory harness and pcm and used after market gauges instead of re doing the harness?

I'm not thrilled with the thought of a cut up K member, and using the set back plates wont work as I wont have clearance for the down pipes later. No big deal to change drive shaft length and move a cross member forward an inch.

I've been trying to figure out why so many of these swaps always seem so difficult on the older cars and for the life of me can't figure out why.
I'm using EFI live for the pcm side of life to make life much simpler.

Am I missing something here?

jlcustomz

There is a 77 trans am on pro-touring that says to have the batwing pan. Similar to g-body.

I did my ls1 t-56 swap back in 2002 before there were many swap options. I did the cut & rebox the crossmember method to use the f-body pan, notched to use the low mount ac. Made my own mount setup. Modded the factory harness & used aftermarket gauges. Some pics in my photobucket link.

Basically with any swap like these, you have several different options for most issues. Many come down to more labor to save money or just buying something.

bigmandengo

iTrader: (21)

In my opinion, the best mount and oil pan combo is the spohn mounts with a CTS pan. No notching anywhere. Even fits the air box with truck coils with the rear stud on the valve cover trimmed.

bigmandengo

iTrader: (21)

Oh. And also, a truck low mount compressor fits with no mods.

kawijames

iTrader: (2)

Thanks for the input guys! I'll be starting a new thread in the next few days on the swap.

I'm a welder for a living so luckily the fab work is so damn easy for me it's not funny. Been looking at the vette pans as I have lots of connections from my C4 LQ4/LS3 hybrid swap.

I'm thinking about just building some perches to be able to just use the new mount style vs the old clamshells.

Motor, harness and ecu (4.8) arrive in the am,most likely either C5 or C6 oil pan and pick up, rad, fans and condenser arrive later this week, exhaust is care of Z06, keeping the 200R4 for now.

llorracs93s10

iTrader: (5)

Autokraft pan will fit with either set back or non set back plates. Does not hang lowere than the cradle either. That's what I am using and so is my buddy.

01cherryreds10

iTrader: (9)

I used BRP mounts and a GMPP pan. If you are a welder you could cut the GMPP one down an inch and the pan would be flush with the crossmember. The best part is the GM one is half the cost of any other aftermarket ones

kawijames

iTrader: (2)

Looked at the Autokraft pan, for 400 I'm definitely not impressed.

kawijames

iTrader: (2)

read your build llorracs, very clean finished product!

Swap and running is my first order of business, mods will come later on.
The body work, paint and interior changes will come later on.

cherp22

iTrader: (1)

I used my existing moroso solid motor mounts from my big block and the transdapt 1" set back plates went right in. I used the gm muscle car pan no problems what so ever.

llorracs93s10

iTrader: (5)

Thanks, wish the car was running right....having wiring issues. But what do you mean abiut the pan not being impressive for 400 bux?

By all means it's a lot of money, but it is perfect for no hanging below cradle, cradle clearance and I have read 0 issues with the pan. The holley 400 dollar one has had many mounting issues. So if you were to spend the money, I'd steer clear of the holley pan.

Fry_

As a welder I think cheapest and best fitting option for you would be to just notch the k member and use a f body pan.

kawijames

iTrader: (2)

Vette pan and custom mounts are the way I'm going, Its the same cost as an F body pan but no notching required. Also the F body pan as well as the AutoKraft are dangerously close to the centerlink. The Vette and the CTSV pan are both shorter on the front.

I don't like the way the AutoKrafts are built. for 400 I expect a little slope on the front of the pan for helping drain back and better baffling on the sump. As far as the baffles go, It may help on oil control during cornering but does absolutely nothing for nucleation of the oil. The bungs for a TT setup are nice but it definitely has a lot of room for improvement.

Toddoky

Hey llorracs, I'd like to hear more about the "mounting issues" the new Holley pan has as I've used quite a few of them over the last year and a half and never encountered any but a trouble-free installation.

It's obvious that every product manufactured on earth is going to have a percentage of non-spec parts get out the door and Holley's tech department has worked proactively to remedy any such situations if the customer takes the time to put a call in for assistance.

The 302-2 pan is installable in applications that no other pan is (without cutting) and provides the GM engineered structural tie-in to the trans bellhousing to maintain the intended NVH characteristics of the LS engine...no steel pan does that. It also features a sloped front profile to enhance oil drain back and has an available bolt-in trap door baffle for those who need it.

You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but I think readers should be aware that there are many of us who have installed Holley pans without a single issue and enjoyed taking advantage of their fitment features/attributes.

N20zuki

I agree 100% on this, I am one of the people also running the Holley oil pan with zero issues. I would love to hear about these problems with the pan, Since I have never heard of any what so ever.

Fry_

I think you have you dimensions for different oil pans mixed up. Unless you plan to build 3 or 4 inch setback mounts and cut the firewall up to clear the engine the Corvette pan isn't going to clear without a sizable k member notch. Also the f body pan is shorter at the front than any other stock pan, the only pan that I know of that has more front clearance is the Holley 302-2 oil pan. The only thing I don't like about the Holley 302-2 pan is it wont clear a 4 inch stroke crank without modifications, I'd rather cut and weld a steel k member than an aluminum oil pan if I ever build a stroker motor.

https://ls1tech.com/forums/conversio...-oil-pans.html

Toddoky

Glad to hear that you've had the same experience with the pan as I have N20zuki. In all fairness, there have been a few pans exchanged for manufacturing issues that got out the door unnoticed, but the number is quite small compared to the number of pans that have been shipped.

As long as you are buying from a reputable company who stands behind their products then these types of things are usually remedied quickly.

Dealing with product design issues brings far more frustration to a project than dealing with a manufacturing issue as you merely have to make a few phone calls to resolve the later.

llorracs93s10

iTrader: (5)

I went with a autokraft pan after reading some threads on the holley pan mounting service not seating perfectly.

And a buddy of mine has had a leak front the pan and cannot find out where om the pan it's leaking from.

I agree 100% every company/part has a off part here and there. I just went with what I have heard and buddy's experience. My harness for my car is crap even though many have used them including me before and had 9 issues.

Toddoky

I encourage your friend to nail down the cause of the leak and if it is indeed related to the Holley pan then please call Holley Tech Service and have it taken care of. I've received defective parts myself in the past from various companies and working through the warranty process is part of the game sometimes with this hot rodding stuff.

Toddoky

If the leak your buddy has is indeed caused by a defect in the Holley pan, then I encourage him to call Holley Tech Service and get it taken care of before to much time passes. We've all received defective parts and have to work through the warranty process to get a remedy...the go-fast hobby is not immune to this annoyance unfortunately.