Altered Truck Oil Pan Capacity
06-06-2012, 10:14 PM
#1
Altered Truck Oil Pan Capacity Looking for a little input on my oil system. I am dropping a 2001 5.3 into my 73' Nova, and I am working on a TIGHT budget. I would like to use a purpose made conversion pan, but I can not afford the $300 to $400 so I will be removing the bottom of the stock truck pan. The yard stick indicates the height of the front crossmember. I would like to have the oil pan no more then 1/2" below the crossmember as I do not think an aluminum pan makes a good skid plate.
This evening I removed the pan and checked what how much capacity I would lose. Turns out there is about 1.5qt to the line. That would leave the system at approximately 4.5qts. I am on the fence about this capacity.
Bczee brought up that is may be OK with frequent oil changes, but that I may run into starvation issues under prolonged high RPM (I would never do TTTHHHAAATTT
)
I am also considering adding an oil cooler simply for the added capacity (1.5qt to 2qt).
I would appriceate all thoughts on both oil system capacity AND oil pan height. Thanks guys!
P.S. If anyone has a Holley or Moroso conversion pan they are willing to sell for $100ish I wouldn't say no!
This evening I removed the pan and checked what how much capacity I would lose. Turns out there is about 1.5qt to the line. That would leave the system at approximately 4.5qts. I am on the fence about this capacity.
Bczee brought up that is may be OK with frequent oil changes, but that I may run into starvation issues under prolonged high RPM (I would never do TTTHHHAAATTT
)I am also considering adding an oil cooler simply for the added capacity (1.5qt to 2qt).
I would appriceate all thoughts on both oil system capacity AND oil pan height. Thanks guys!
P.S. If anyone has a Holley or Moroso conversion pan they are willing to sell for $100ish I wouldn't say no!
06-07-2012, 05:55 AM
#3
Good point, I was not thinking about the additional oil capacity of the filter...Hey, I can even check that! I just did an oil change on my 03' yukon and still have the old filter. That may add another 1/4 qt! Do you have any pictures to confirm his altered pan? Is he a member on here? The family that builds together...
Thanks G-body.
Thanks G-body.
06-07-2012, 07:41 AM
#4
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,004
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I did the same pan mod for my 80 Z28. I think we removed 2.75 inches from the bottom. Up here in Canada we use litres for measurement and i used about 5.25L to get to full which is about the same as a Gen1 small block. I am pretty sure it is plenty but i have also considered a oil cooler also for added capacity and i will be running a turbo too.
06-07-2012, 08:21 AM
#5
Canadian Oil SSZ, that is good to hear! Using this really handy online conversion tool:
http://www.onlineconversion.com/
It looks like 1 liter = 1.05 quarts. Good news! Here is another pic of a tape measure with the pan showing about 2.5" to the line. When I was determining engine placement and designing the engine mounts I purposely mounted the engine a little high to give me more pan clearance.
Thanks for the input SSZ!
http://www.onlineconversion.com/
It looks like 1 liter = 1.05 quarts. Good news! Here is another pic of a tape measure with the pan showing about 2.5" to the line. When I was determining engine placement and designing the engine mounts I purposely mounted the engine a little high to give me more pan clearance.
Thanks for the input SSZ!
06-07-2012, 08:33 AM
#6
If that's anything like my CTS-V pan, there's baffling at the floor of the pan. If you cut the bottom off the pan, you loose the baffling.
Looking at the picture, there are some other stock LS oil pans that might fit. Could you use (or at least start with) a pan from a CTS-V, LS2 Corvette, or 1998-2002 Camaro? That way, at least you would not have to cut the floor and loose the baffling. Instead, you would notch the side, which in my opinion, will not effect oil control nearly as much as cutting the bottom off.
Looking at the picture, there are some other stock LS oil pans that might fit. Could you use (or at least start with) a pan from a CTS-V, LS2 Corvette, or 1998-2002 Camaro? That way, at least you would not have to cut the floor and loose the baffling. Instead, you would notch the side, which in my opinion, will not effect oil control nearly as much as cutting the bottom off.
06-07-2012, 12:39 PM
#7
On The Tree
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It does look like you have plenty of room for a factory f-body pan there. You should be able to pick those up for really cheap. If you are really interested, shoot me a PM as I have one that needs a home.
If you check out my build thread, there are some photos of my comparison between the H3 pan, f-body, and Champ pan. That might give you an idea if it will fit.
Troy
If you check out my build thread, there are some photos of my comparison between the H3 pan, f-body, and Champ pan. That might give you an idea if it will fit.
Troy
Trending Topics
06-07-2012, 03:04 PM
#10
The depth in sump are as follows for other OEM pans (as measure from top of pan rail to bottom of sump).
F-body/LS2 vette = 5"
CTS-V = 6 3/4"
LH8/H3 = 7.5"
Truck = 8 1/4"
Even with a LH8/H3/Muscle pan you might have some pan hanging below the Cross Member, many have stated that It is still too much. But depending on how high you mount your engine, it could be just a bit below the cross member.
I am using a CTS-V on my Chevelle and it hangs about 1" below the cross member. I have had to scrape off road asphalt from bottom of the pan due to speed bumps and other things hitting and scraping on.
BC
F-body/LS2 vette = 5"
CTS-V = 6 3/4"
LH8/H3 = 7.5"
Truck = 8 1/4"
Even with a LH8/H3/Muscle pan you might have some pan hanging below the Cross Member, many have stated that It is still too much. But depending on how high you mount your engine, it could be just a bit below the cross member.
I am using a CTS-V on my Chevelle and it hangs about 1" below the cross member. I have had to scrape off road asphalt from bottom of the pan due to speed bumps and other things hitting and scraping on.
BC
06-07-2012, 03:05 PM
#11
On The Tree
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Smyrna, TN
Posts: 152
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe the pan used in that link is the pan found on the H3 Alpha. It is a bit deeper than the car pan, but not as deep as the truck pan. I could be mistaken though. I don't have a pan here to compare to.
bczee beat me to it. Thanks for the explanation. That clears things up quite a bit.
James
bczee beat me to it. Thanks for the explanation. That clears things up quite a bit.
James
06-07-2012, 04:31 PM
#12
TECH Fanatic
Look at my thread pics.... CTS-V LSA pan from ebay $195+shipping. Came with gasket, dipstick and windage. I was a pulloff of a brand new crate motor and fits my Chevelle like it was meant to be there.
06-07-2012, 08:18 PM
#14
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,004
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Someone mentioned about a baffle in the bottom of the pan and it is good that they mentioned that but the truck pan does not have that baffle they are referring too. The F-body and maybe the cts-v pan are also good options provided they clear the crossmember. For myself, i have a friend who could weld aluminum. What i did was buy a small piece of 1/4" plate and then cut the bottom off the pan. Prep the plate to form like the bottom of the pan as close as you can. Then have the welder, or yourself if you can do it weld the plate to the bottom of the pan. Also, buy a bung for the drain plug and i would recommend mounting the bung on the side or back of the pan then plug it and there is your drain plug. Obviously at the bottom of the pan. I put my bung on the bottom and guess what......... it is actually a bit lower then the bottom of the crossmember by a hair so that is why i say the sides. I had to put some elbow grease in for prep but it was cheap and works as intended. While i performed that mod i also installed a drain fitting for my turbo in the pan also. Worked out great. Doesnt leak a drop either. Perfect and cheap and i used the stock dipstick. Its an option for you.
06-07-2012, 10:51 PM
#15
I guess the truck pan doesn't need baffling because it is so deep, or maybe because the sump is so narrow? Anyway, if you take that pan and make it shallower, you might create a design that does need some baffling afterall, especially if you plan on driving it hard.
06-08-2012, 08:18 AM
#17
Lots of great idea here! I am sure that a stock CTS-V or F-body pan would fit and not hang below the cross member, but the issue is that the 3rd gen Novas (and 1st gen camaro) had the steering linkage behind the crossmember, so either pan would require some fab work to make clearance. So $200 for the pan/pickup/windage tray and $100 for the fab work...gets pricey in a hurry!
The LH8 pan, or GM's hot rod kit would fit, but still hang below the crossmember by over 1", and I am just not comfortable with that.
On a frustrated side tangent, GM obviously realizes that LS swaps are becoming a popular option. So instead of offering an off the shelf pan and calling it a "hot rod pan", why don't they throw thier manufacturing muscle behind a dedicated cast pan to compete with the Holley offering?!?! If they can sell the H3 pan fit for $150, why not a REAL low profile, high capacity hot rod pan?! Rant complete.
OK, here is wat I am thinking. Stick with the truck pan, cut 2.75" off the bottom (an extra .25" to make up for plate thickness), incorporate a drain AND maybe look into welding a couple verticle walls inside the pan to help baffle and ensure oil feed to the pick up. To make up for the lost capacity add a cheap oil cooler. I will tap the stock oil cooler ports with NPT thread so I can run hose or hardline. Maybe I will try and find one of the stock 6.0 2500HD oil cooler pick up blocks...that would be slick. It may not be the best solution, but it fits my design, fabrication and finacial means.
Thoughts?
BTW, whatever route I choose I will post up my progress in here for for enjoy of all.
The LH8 pan, or GM's hot rod kit would fit, but still hang below the crossmember by over 1", and I am just not comfortable with that.
On a frustrated side tangent, GM obviously realizes that LS swaps are becoming a popular option. So instead of offering an off the shelf pan and calling it a "hot rod pan", why don't they throw thier manufacturing muscle behind a dedicated cast pan to compete with the Holley offering?!?! If they can sell the H3 pan fit for $150, why not a REAL low profile, high capacity hot rod pan?! Rant complete.
OK, here is wat I am thinking. Stick with the truck pan, cut 2.75" off the bottom (an extra .25" to make up for plate thickness), incorporate a drain AND maybe look into welding a couple verticle walls inside the pan to help baffle and ensure oil feed to the pick up. To make up for the lost capacity add a cheap oil cooler. I will tap the stock oil cooler ports with NPT thread so I can run hose or hardline. Maybe I will try and find one of the stock 6.0 2500HD oil cooler pick up blocks...that would be slick. It may not be the best solution, but it fits my design, fabrication and finacial means.
Thoughts?
BTW, whatever route I choose I will post up my progress in here for for enjoy of all.
06-08-2012, 08:20 AM
#18
The truck pan does have a baffle. It's just a flat plate that's bolted up where the upper flat portion of the pan transitions.
There are enough pans out there that will work. For me, modifying the pan and pickup were not worth the effort or potential problems.
There are enough pans out there that will work. For me, modifying the pan and pickup were not worth the effort or potential problems.
