1966 chevelle oil pan issues hitting the drag link
05-23-2018, 09:26 PM
#1
Teching In
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1966 chevelle oil pan issues hitting the drag link I have a 66 chevelle with a 6.0 , I did a search and seems I have the right pan , im running a humer pan which fits nice but the drag link hits the oil pan. Im running stock small block mounts with a set of adaptor plates seems like the motor needs to me raised about 1" anybody with 66 67 chevelle give me a little in site don't really want to buy a $400 holley pan
05-23-2018, 10:31 PM
#2
I have a 66 chevelle with a 6.0 , I did a search and seems I have the right pan , im running a humer pan which fits nice but the drag link hits the oil pan. Im running stock small block mounts with a set of adaptor plates seems like the motor needs to me raised about 1" anybody with 66 67 chevelle give me a little in site don't really want to buy a $400 holley pan
05-24-2018, 06:37 AM
#3
You need a Holley 302-2 pan...……...
05-24-2018, 07:58 AM
#5
The front of the sump area needs to be cut back and welded back up to clear the crossmember. Do a search for modified f body pan and I'm sure you will see some pictures.
Here's a link regarding the F body pan in A body cars.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/lsx-parts...p-oil-pan.html
Here's a link regarding the F body pan in A body cars.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/lsx-parts...p-oil-pan.html
Last edited by 1964SS; 05-24-2018 at 08:13 AM.
Trending Topics
06-10-2018, 02:50 PM
#8
Do it the "Correct" way...…...Holley 302-2 pan...…..end of story !!!!!!!
06-12-2018, 02:18 PM
#9
I have the Autokraft pan which is very slim at the front(1,75'' vs 1.35 for the 302-2), but I still contact due to dropping the engine about 1/2'' from the 'member. IMO, it's better to deal with the known issue, then to pay ~400$ for a solution that is not guaranteed (not hating on the holley pan, just trying to point out that modifying the hummer pan should be much cheaper and addresses the only current issue).
06-13-2018, 08:44 AM
#11
DirtyDingo has all the measurements for the oil pan options. The 302-2 looks like it should clear the issue, but the sump looks longer than the hummer pan which may contact your crossmember. I just want to make sure you don't trade one problem for a more expensive one.
I have the Autokraft pan which is very slim at the front(1,75'' vs 1.35 for the 302-2), but I still contact due to dropping the engine about 1/2'' from the 'member. IMO, it's better to deal with the known issue, then to pay ~400$ for a solution that is not guaranteed (not hating on the holley pan, just trying to point out that modifying the hummer pan should be much cheaper and addresses the only current issue).
I have the Autokraft pan which is very slim at the front(1,75'' vs 1.35 for the 302-2), but I still contact due to dropping the engine about 1/2'' from the 'member. IMO, it's better to deal with the known issue, then to pay ~400$ for a solution that is not guaranteed (not hating on the holley pan, just trying to point out that modifying the hummer pan should be much cheaper and addresses the only current issue).
06-13-2018, 09:57 AM
#12
TECH Apprentice
I have a modified F-body pan and pickup tube in my 67 A-body, only because when I did the conversion there was no Holley pan. I wouldn't mess around, purchase the Holley unit and be done. My modified pan fits great now, but I can still get the oil pressure flight to flicker under hard braking followed by hard acceleration. Purchase the oil trap from Holley as well. The next time I have my engine out for any reason I will be installing the Holley kit and my F-body stuff will be for sale.
06-14-2018, 07:01 AM
#13
i have a modified f-body pan and pickup tube in my 67 a-body, only because when i did the conversion there was no holley pan. I wouldn't mess around, purchase the holley unit and be done. My modified pan fits great now, but i can still get the oil pressure flight to flicker under hard braking followed by hard acceleration. Purchase the oil trap from holley as well. The next time i have my engine out for any reason i will be installing the holley kit and my f-body stuff will be for sale.
06-14-2018, 07:16 PM
#15
As a fellow 66-67 A body owner, is there a reason to choose the Holley 302-2 pan over the 302-3 pan? I was under the impression the newer 302-3 would provide more tie rod clearance in our cars. Sorry for the hijack but I thought this info might help the OP as well.
06-14-2018, 07:43 PM
#16
The tie rod clearance in the A-body applications is the same with either pan. However, the 302-3 pan will provide more clearance for the engine crossmember on 64-67 A-bodies when using the Hooker forward bias engine mounting brackets. It also has greater crank stroke clearance and turbo drain-back ports.