Chevelle Swap and F-body pan...Can it be done?
11-01-2011, 10:33 AM
#1
Chevelle Swap and F-body pan...Can it be done? About to start a swap for a 69 Chevelle with a LS1 using the f-body pan. Did a search but cannot find much info.
Has anyone used this pan in their Chevelle? Also plan on using stainless work headers with my own mounts...
T,
Has anyone used this pan in their Chevelle? Also plan on using stainless work headers with my own mounts...
T,
11-01-2011, 10:39 AM
#2
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Longbeach, CA
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can't say for sure, but..
http://www.brphotrods.com/mm5/mercha...gory_Code=CNV4
check these guys out. The kit page says 64-67 A body, but the link says 64-72.
They're running the LH8 oil pan it looks like? (I'm not sure what that designation is honestly. 5.3 truck maybe?)
http://www.brphotrods.com/mm5/mercha...gory_Code=CNV4
check these guys out. The kit page says 64-67 A body, but the link says 64-72.
They're running the LH8 oil pan it looks like? (I'm not sure what that designation is honestly. 5.3 truck maybe?)
11-01-2011, 10:49 AM
#3
It can be done but I wouldn't.
It puts the engine back within 3/4" of the firewall, so you can't access bellhousing bolts easily.
The lh8 pan or the "GM Muscle Car" pan is from a Hummer H3 Alpha (5.3) and hangs low. I run it and the sump hangs down 1.5-2" below the crossmember making it the lowest point of the car and a magnet for rocks, curbs, roadkill, etc.
It puts the engine back within 3/4" of the firewall, so you can't access bellhousing bolts easily.
The lh8 pan or the "GM Muscle Car" pan is from a Hummer H3 Alpha (5.3) and hangs low. I run it and the sump hangs down 1.5-2" below the crossmember making it the lowest point of the car and a magnet for rocks, curbs, roadkill, etc.
11-01-2011, 10:59 AM
#4
On The Tree
I have have been researching this topic as well. There are plenty of people running this pan, and I intend to also.
One member was able to use f-body pacesetter LT's with this pan. It will probably be the route I'll go, as the pan is a little over 200 and the painted headers are 250.
One member was able to use f-body pacesetter LT's with this pan. It will probably be the route I'll go, as the pan is a little over 200 and the painted headers are 250.
11-01-2011, 11:07 AM
#5
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (7)
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Longbeach, CA
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It can be done but I wouldn't.
It puts the engine back within 3/4" of the firewall, so you can't access bellhousing bolts easily.
The lh8 pan or the "GM Muscle Car" pan is from a Hummer H3 Alpha (5.3) and hangs low. I run it and the sump hangs down 1.5-2" below the crossmember making it the lowest point of the car and a magnet for rocks, curbs, roadkill, etc.
It puts the engine back within 3/4" of the firewall, so you can't access bellhousing bolts easily.
The lh8 pan or the "GM Muscle Car" pan is from a Hummer H3 Alpha (5.3) and hangs low. I run it and the sump hangs down 1.5-2" below the crossmember making it the lowest point of the car and a magnet for rocks, curbs, roadkill, etc.
When I did the 5.3 in my c-10 I used a stock 5.3L truck oil pan. It was about flush with the crossmember. Been a long time since I've been in the crossmember of a chevelle, but I seem to recall them being shaped similar. Would that work? My dad had a 65.
11-01-2011, 11:08 AM
#6
On The Tree
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Mobile Alabama
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anything can be done. I think the clearance issue the back of the front cross member. So your choices are to push the motor further back than most people do and run into issues with firewall clearance (which can always be solved by reworking the firewall). Or you can re-engineer the crossmember. It might just take cutting out the back half of the center portion and reboxing it which a lot of people do anyhow for clearance with the other pans. Or it might take a full removal and custom making a tubular crossmember. Nothing wrong with doing it full custom if you have the skills and time. would also allow you to create some more clearance for wheel backspacing while you are at it if you want.
Here are some dimensions for you to look at
https://ls1tech.com/forums/conversio...-oil-pans.html
The point I think will be the issue again is the deep part of the pan. Note that on the F body pan it is 11.5" wide. I used the autokraft pan and with the engine where I wanted it I just barely have enough room for the 9.25" wide pan. It was close enough that even with this pan I strongly considered notching an inch or two out of my crossmember.
Here are some dimensions for you to look at
https://ls1tech.com/forums/conversio...-oil-pans.html
The point I think will be the issue again is the deep part of the pan. Note that on the F body pan it is 11.5" wide. I used the autokraft pan and with the engine where I wanted it I just barely have enough room for the 9.25" wide pan. It was close enough that even with this pan I strongly considered notching an inch or two out of my crossmember.
11-01-2011, 11:33 AM
#7
On The Tree
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Mobile Alabama
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But if you really want to use a cast alum stock style pan let me know. I have a CTS-V pan I ended up not using that has 1 inch better clearance at the crossmember I will sell.
I waffled back and forth between those two pans for a while is why I have the CTSV pan, windage tray, and dipstick sitting at the house unused.
I waffled back and forth between those two pans for a while is why I have the CTSV pan, windage tray, and dipstick sitting at the house unused.
Trending Topics
11-01-2011, 11:50 AM
#8
On The Tree
iTrader: (18)
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I found the f-body pan can fit with my setup - 70' Chevelle EL Camino. Here is what I have:
Trans dapt 1" further back engine plates
energy suspension mounts 3-1117 early style "tall and narrow"
I also moved the engine back a little further (say 1/2-3/4") for alternator/steering gear clearance and more header clearance around the rear of the engine crossmember. I also needed to do some minor grinding on the block for clearance for the plate and mounts.
Dropping the engine / t56 trans in together so the oil pan clears the rear crossmember was a pain. If you angled it for the transmission to slip in, the rear of the intake manifold would hit the firewall. If you went more straight in, the transmission bell housing would catch on the firewall with the oil pan only needing like a 1/2" to clear and slip behind. I did this dance for about an hour it seemed.
I ended up cutting more the upper firewall for clearance than I would have liked.
Hindsight I would have either removed the intake manifold or separated the engine and transmission. Drop the engine straight down from above and then bring the transmission up from below. You would need to cutout holes for the bell housing to engine bolts though.
The pan sit pretty good for profile. I may shim up the engine for a little more for 'just in case'.
Trans dapt 1" further back engine plates
energy suspension mounts 3-1117 early style "tall and narrow"
I also moved the engine back a little further (say 1/2-3/4") for alternator/steering gear clearance and more header clearance around the rear of the engine crossmember. I also needed to do some minor grinding on the block for clearance for the plate and mounts.
Dropping the engine / t56 trans in together so the oil pan clears the rear crossmember was a pain. If you angled it for the transmission to slip in, the rear of the intake manifold would hit the firewall. If you went more straight in, the transmission bell housing would catch on the firewall with the oil pan only needing like a 1/2" to clear and slip behind. I did this dance for about an hour it seemed.
I ended up cutting more the upper firewall for clearance than I would have liked. Hindsight I would have either removed the intake manifold or separated the engine and transmission. Drop the engine straight down from above and then bring the transmission up from below. You would need to cutout holes for the bell housing to engine bolts though.
The pan sit pretty good for profile. I may shim up the engine for a little more for 'just in case'.
11-01-2011, 12:10 PM
#9
I have have been researching this topic as well. There are plenty of people running this pan, and I intend to also.
One member was able to use f-body pacesetter LT's with this pan. It will probably be the route I'll go, as the pan is a little over 200 and the painted headers are 250.
One member was able to use f-body pacesetter LT's with this pan. It will probably be the route I'll go, as the pan is a little over 200 and the painted headers are 250.
11-01-2011, 12:15 PM
#10
I originally setup my Chevelle with the BRP Early style of mounting. but I didn't like the idea of having the pan so close to both the Crossmember (3/8") and the Firewall (1/2" to 3/4") of clearance. It also made dropping the engine in and out very difficult.
I ended up going to a CTS-V pan, still using the Early BRP mounting plates.
I ended up going to a CTS-V pan, still using the Early BRP mounting plates.
11-01-2011, 02:18 PM
#11
On The Tree
If you are going to pay a little over $200.00 for a F-body pan, I think I would spend a little more and get the Holley pan which will solve all of your clearance problems and it is $360.00 from Amazon with free shipping, so depending on how much over $200 the F-body pan is I think I would rather spend the additional money on the Holley pan and know for sure it will work and save myself a whole lot of aggravation and ending up having a pan sitting on my workbench that wont fit and then will either have to try and send it back or sell it. Just my opinion
11-01-2011, 03:42 PM
#12
I originally setup my Chevelle with the BRP Early style of mounting. but I didn't like the idea of having the pan so close to both the Crossmember (3/8") and the Firewall (1/2" to 3/4") of clearance. It also made dropping the engine in and out very difficult.
I ended up going to a CTS-V pan, still using the Early BRP mounting plates.
I ended up going to a CTS-V pan, still using the Early BRP mounting plates.
T,
Last edited by TomM; 11-01-2011 at 05:34 PM.
11-01-2011, 06:01 PM
#14
I ended up leaving and using the early BRP mounts/plates.. I wanted the engine as far back as I could so I left it position as it was.. but I gained room around the front of the pan and x-member for better air flow and cooling. I didn't have to cut or use a BFH on the fireway. but I did have to cut and build the top of the trans tunnel due to the size and shape of the T56.
Yes the engine is close to the fireway but that is by design for the most part..the tightest area is the passenger side head 1/2"-3/4".. other that that.. room for the rest of the engine / firewall is good.
Yes you could drop engine in without the trans. but with a F-Body pan, it was a very, very tight fit.. yes you can still get to the bell housing to engine bolt as well as the trans to bell housing bolts ok. It was so tight on trying to get the engine in with the F-Body pan, I was jumping on the engine to get it to clear the x-member and pan...if your going to use a un-mod'd F-Body pan. I hope your engine is in good shape.. cause I wouldn't like to remove it if I didn't have too...pushing, jumping, prying, etc.. to get it in and out.
If I was to do it again. I would go with MAST or Holley pans. (I am using the JZ pan which is the original design pan for Holley on my Nova, before Holley brought the rights to it.)
BC
Yes the engine is close to the fireway but that is by design for the most part..the tightest area is the passenger side head 1/2"-3/4".. other that that.. room for the rest of the engine / firewall is good.
Yes you could drop engine in without the trans. but with a F-Body pan, it was a very, very tight fit.. yes you can still get to the bell housing to engine bolt as well as the trans to bell housing bolts ok. It was so tight on trying to get the engine in with the F-Body pan, I was jumping on the engine to get it to clear the x-member and pan...if your going to use a un-mod'd F-Body pan. I hope your engine is in good shape.. cause I wouldn't like to remove it if I didn't have too...pushing, jumping, prying, etc.. to get it in and out.
If I was to do it again. I would go with MAST or Holley pans. (I am using the JZ pan which is the original design pan for Holley on my Nova, before Holley brought the rights to it.)
BC
11-01-2011, 08:44 PM
#16
Last edited by lizeec; 11-01-2011 at 10:05 PM.
11-04-2011, 12:42 PM
#17
I've got an F-body pan in my 69 GTO. Everything fits well and doesn't hang below the frame... I'm not at the exhaust part yet so I can't help with that, but using dirty dingo solid slide mounts, everything went in nicely. I'll agree about getting it in being a pain, but it eventually goes in. Nice thing about the dirtydingo mounts is you can slide the motor as far forward or back as you want
11-07-2011, 11:01 PM
#18
Teching In
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Fort Worth
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Edlebrock mounts, headers and frame stands moved 3/4 inch back. F-body pan fits great. Not alot of firewall room but all trams bolts are easy to get to from the bottom.
11-10-2011, 05:17 PM
#20
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: CANADA!
Posts: 1,347
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Camaro pan here. Wouldn't have done it any other way. I can easily access my bell housing bolts with 2 feet of extensions(seriously its not hard). Having the crossmember lower then the pan is an absolute must IMO. I have hit unexpected bumps and bottomed out.... If I had anything BUT a camaro pan, it would have been oil everywhere. BRP's first 12 customer swap kit LOL. I'm getting their newest kit as a replacement as I tore both the original swap mounts apart. They told me I will have to weld/drill new holes as this kit will not be a bolt in to my existing kit. Their kit uses the LH8 pan.
