Doug G

Anyone have a pic of how low it hangs below crossmember in a 67-69 Camaro or 68-74 Nova ?

Rick Speed

iTrader: (55)

I don't have a picture but it's the tightest pan you can get next to the f-body pan. On my firebird its right inline with the cross frame.

newschool72

iTrader: (12)

Doug, i dont have a pic on a first gen or a nova, but i have one on my 72 camaro, and its coming off as soon as i get the time. My car is lowered 2" in the front and i only have about 3" of ground clearance. If your car isnt lowered and u mostly dragrace the pan will be fine. On my 68 i have a deepsump moroso on my smallblock and i only have about the same clearance. Cars are set-up to do different things. I plan on driving the 72 alot on longer hauls and just need the peace of mind of more clearance. PM me if u need a good deal on my pan.

newschool72

iTrader: (12)

Are we talking about the same pan? i have the GM musclecar pan. it is 2" deeper in the sump than the F-body pan.

Rick Speed

iTrader: (55)

My bad .. I was thinking about the Holley GM retro fit pan... but it's not cheap

Doug G

Yes... not spending 300+ for an oil pan

If it's about the same depth as the SBC pan on there now I'll be OK.

Rick Speed

iTrader: (55)

The Holley pan is 5.89" deep, the f-body pan is 5" deep and the h3 is 7.25"

newschool72

iTrader: (12)

yep, that sounds about right. the f-body pan will get me about flush with my crossmember. the muscle pan has me hanging down 2+".

Doug G

2"hhhmmmmmmm


Now I need to go look and measure 2" is a lot

LS1NOVA

iTrader: (12)

Dont do it. Hangs way too low. Spend the money and get a nice pan.

pairof69s

check out the Moroso pan a little cheaper than the other options at $279
i'm probably gonna go this way and modify my stock pickup tube.

newschool72

iTrader: (12)

if the moroso pan is sheetmetal, i wouldnt do it. the pan on LS motors are structural. it probably wouldnt matter on an iron block, but on an aluminum block u need the structure.

Doug G

Then add in a remote mount oil filter and you're right back up there

They got you by the short hairs any way you go

tsnow678

iTrader: (3)

I have the Moroso #20141 and it fits perfect in my 69 Camaro. It clears the steering with engine in a neutral position. The only draw backs with this pan are: 1) you may have to notch the center of your crossmember to clear the pan (I did)
2) you will need to buy an oil filter relocation mount, braided lines, and fittings
3) The stock windage tray will need to be modified to clear the Moroso pickup near the pump and where the leg supports the other end.

All in all you will not save any money using the Moroso pan over the other pans available. I like the Holley pan as it integrates the oil filter into the pan. A drawback of this pan is the center of the pan may contact the subframe at the center crossmember. I know when the company that originally made this pan (JZ Motoworks) this was a problem. I am unsure if Holley did any modifications to it before going into production. I would not use the "Muscle Car" (LH8) pan as it hangs way too low in the Camaros. You would think the engineers would have put just a little more time into designing a pan that would fit better but they didnt. Mast makes a nice pan but it too is pricey. I see alot of people using the AutoKraft pan with much success but have seen problems where the tie rods will hit on lock to lock. Another down side to the AutoKraft is the oil filter adapter is seperate from the pan, so one more place for a possible leak. I wonder to if in a few years AutoKraft goes out of business, where would you buy replacement parts? Not saying there is any fear of that but just something to think about. Overall the Moroso is a pretty good deal as long as you are ok with relocating the oil filter, modifying the subframe, modding the windage tray, and having a steel pan versus the cast aluminum counterpart.

Smo's04Gto

iTrader: (8)

here ya go 2 1/4 " below the cross member. 2 years of street driving and no issues,no different then the 7 qt deep sump pan I had.

hifi875

iTrader: (2)

same here, 69 camaro lowered 2+ in front and back. been driving it for 2yrs over speedbumps and everything, no problem. 2k + miles.

1970camaroRS

iTrader: (8)

Here is mine. Not terrible, not good. For it being a weekend toy/track car...it's not an issue. Actually doesn't hang as low as the high capacity pan I had on the BBC...and the car sat lower with that pig in there too.

newschool72

iTrader: (12)

i got the f-body pan installed yesterday on the 72 camaro. A world of difference! the crossmember is lower than the pan now, AS IN CANT EVEN SEE THE PAN when u look onder the car from the front, and i dont have a clearance issue with my tierod ends on the front of the pan anymore. For my app. the f-body pan was THE way to go. Still got the musclecar pan up for sale and it would have been just fine i think for a dragcar, just not a long range cruiser imo.

FatfreeGTO

Many years ago when I was young and dumb hit a bump in the road with a lowered car that had the stock pan. Cracked it wide open and lost all my oil in the middle of the road. Luckily for me it was in a remote area so there weren't any cops around to give me a ticket, because you know they would find some way to ticket you for dumping oil all over the road. Also lucky because I have a friend who has a flat bed who came and got me so I didn't have to pay a towing bill. Did have to replace the pan though so that was $$

All those things are reasons why I used the Mast pan on my current setup. Yeah its expensive but if you do end up losing your oil on the street and aren't so lucky to not get a ticket for it, have to pay for towing, buy a new pan, and take the time to install it that $250 dollars you saved will look pretty cheap in the end.

The Mast pan is really nice, proper baffles for oil control, cast aluminum, oil filter where it belongs, tucks up nice and tight... Just my $.02

99VetteFRC

I am going to use a truck pan on my Chevelle.