When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
So how different will the new "302-3" pan be? I'm guessing at the name...
Will it put the transition from the front of the pan to the sump back further than the 302-2? I got the 302-2 to work, but my engine is about 3" behind where the 5.0 would have been, and I cannot weld the motor mount bolts to the mounts, otherwise I can't drop the engine onto the k-member, because the T56 jams into the tunnel or the heads hit the firewall. Not really a big deal putting a wrench on a bolt head.
If a "302-3" can let me keep the engine where it is, or move it down, while simultaneously moving the steering rack upwards for better bump steer / ackerman, then I would probably buy it (eventually).
The new pan will be a revised version of the Holley 302-2 pan and will have the needed changes to it in the general vicinity you described, which is at the forward edge of the transition slope between the front of the pan and the sump; the front wall of the sump will remain in the same location, but the front corners of it will also be chamfered slightly to aid in clearing the stock K-member.
I don't know if the revised geometry will benefit you or not, as is sounds as though you are using an aftermarket K-member and a different style of engine bracket/mount set-up than what I've devised for this application. You'll probably be able to make a better determination of the value of the revised geometry to you once I post images of the engine mount set-up next week when I get back to the project.
I'm not sure why your doing all this when theres a bunch of companies already doing this....Theres also a few different companies making conversion headers and trans cross members.....also i would say 99% of the guys switch to manual rack.....also F-body Ls-1 oil pan fits perfect with tubular k-members and is cheaper ($159) then the Holly pan....Theres also companies already making Ls motor mounts so you can use the stock k-member and the same company makes headers to fit......But most guys are going to switch to a tubular k-member because its lighter..
I'm not sure why your doing all this when theres a bunch of companies already doing this....Theres also a few different companies making conversion headers and trans cross members.....also i would say 99% of the guys switch to manual rack.....also F-body Ls-1 oil pan fits perfect with tubular k-members and is cheaper ($159) then the Holly pan....Theres also companies already making Ls motor mounts so you can use the stock k-member and the same company makes headers to fit......But most guys are going to switch to a tubular k-member because its lighter..
There are multiple companies offering Fox body swap components for sure, but nobody yet has done it by our formula, which is to locate the engine for optimized vehicle functionality (i.e optimized U-joint operating angles) and transmission fitment (most fit the engine in a location to be able to use a specific oil pan or a set of existing headers on the market) and then develop components that allow it to be installed in that location.
We also provide header and transmission compatibility with more transmissions (Powerglide, TH350, TH400, 2004R, 4L60-4L70, 4L80, T56, T56 Magnum and TKO in this application) than anyone else and are the only company that developes complete bolt-in exhaust systems as part of our efforts.
In the case of the existing engine mounts that are available to use the stock K-member, they position the crank centerline far higher than the stock 5.0/302 crank centerline location, which equates to non-optimized U-joint working angles and reduced hood clearance...they also offer no headers or transmission crossmember that will allow installation of a 4L80, which has been sought after in the market for a while.
OK guys, I'm back on the Fox Body LS swap project and moving forward. Since I'm loading the engine back into the car again, I thought it would be a good opportunity to give you guys a first-hand look at the engine bracket/mount set-up. Here's the frame brackets mounted to the factory K-member and I'll post a photo of the engine mounts resting in them after I install the engine back into the car.
nice.. do the engine sit high in the engine bay ???
The crankshaft centerline height/inclination angle replicates that of the stock 302/5.0L engine, which took a revision to the Holley 302-2 oil pan to make possible. I will report about hood clearance with various accessory drive set-ups later in the project once I test fit them.
Good stuff to report on the Fox-body swap project...the revised oil pan design work has been completed and validated on the development vehicle to provided the intended clearance geometry around the PS rack. Along with the rack clearance, the new pan will also provide stroker crank clearance and a boss for a turbo drainback line hole to be drilled/tapped, if needed. Here's a couple of shots of a 3D printed sample of the changed section of the pan installed on the mock-up engine.
....Along with the rack clearance, the new pan will also provide stroker crank clearance and a boss for a turbo drainback line hole to be drilled/tapped, if needed. ....
I think you guys would really benefit from developing a complete hot side/ exhaust for certain applications. That's the main draw back of turbos, not everybody can weld.
I think you guys would really benefit from developing a complete hot side/ exhaust for certain applications. That's the main draw back of turbos, not everybody can weld.
I think you've got a good sense of foresight as to where we're ultimately going with this jimmyg...
I think you've got a good sense of foresight as to where we're ultimately going with this jimmyg...
I was telling Shane this back in 2004. Only took 12 years...lol
I also had talks with the folks from Laminova at the 2004 PRI show, because I wanted to develop an intake using the Laminova cores. I hope something like this will happen as well.
11-10-2016, 11:58 PM
