Mangaloranga

Hi guys

I'm new on this forum.

I youst bought a 70 Chevelle and planning on
putting a 98 Camaro LS1 with a 4L60E in it.

My question is like the title says:
Has anyone modified the stock oilpan to make the engine fit?
I'm on a tight budget...

If someone had some pictures it would be great!

Magnus

garys 68

iTrader: (1)

This thread should help. Sell the F body, buy a CTS-V, pocket the difference.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/conversio...body-swap.html

Mangaloranga

The problem is everybody has different experience in this matter...
Can i buy a new cts-v pan, or arent they manufactured anymore?

Magnus

1981TA

iTrader: (7)

Heck, I went with a corvette batwing pan, and THEN found out everyone thought they weren't supposed to fit. Oh well, it works for me, without any crazy mods (just added a second oil drain). If the F-body pan fits, I say roll with it.

Spec134

iTrader: (5)

Yes, the CTS-V pan is still in production. I believe just the p/n has been changed multiple times. The f-body pan can be used it is just more work then most a willing to commit to. If you are on a tight budget and dont mind notching the crossmember or the pan itself keep the pan you have.

Here's a link to a pic of modified pan
https://ls1tech.com/forums/conversio...ification.html

Use this link if you do decide to get the CTS-V pan it has all the p/n you will need.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/conversio...-oil-pans.html

jlcustomz

I notched the crossmember in my g-body back in 03'. Pics in my photobucket link. I heard before it's not good to reweld a pan unless it's in a jig. Street& performance charges about $200 for their service . Back when I did mine there were no other pans like there are now & honestly I didn't want to remove a non leaking pan.

garys 68

iTrader: (1)

Recheck the dozen A body stickies. The f body can fit if you push the engine back (read re-drill for frame mounts), and you wont easily fit the engine and trans in together. Or chop the front 1-2" off the f body pan.

seancarole

Notch the cross member boxed it back together. Works great motor trans go in together.

chuckd71

iTrader: (23)

Swapping a pan is a much simpler job than needlessly chopping up your frame though wouldn't you say? And why mess with spending time and money modifying a more expensive pan (the f-body) when a cheaper one (cts-v) work?

1981TA

iTrader: (7)

Don't A-Body's have roughly the same frame clearances as 2nd Gen F-Bodies?

This was put in with the TH350 in the stock position. The only mod was the addition of a second oil drain (yellow arrow).

bczee

iTrader: (12)

TA.. not sure as I have not really compared. But I think a major difference is the Firewall and trans tunnel.... On a A-Body, the Firewall might be closer to the engine which causes the Engine to be more forward and cuase the pan to crossmember problems. Also the Trans Tunnel might be smaller than your that your 2nd gen.

I have only see a one 2nd gen swap up close.. from what I recall, there was more room between the firewall and engine.... and he was using a stock F-Body pan.

TA, you maybe right as far as the front subframe area.. but Body/Firewall/Trunnel is different.

BC

garys 68

iTrader: (1)

81TA,
I have a batwing oil pan on my C3 LSx. When I measred it, it was about 1" LONGER in the sump than the f body. The CTS-V is about 1" shorter than the f body. I went with the CTS-V in my 72 442 (frame is the same as the chevelle and I'm using chevelle frame mounts, 1" setback plates) and glad I didn't use anything longer.

1981TA

iTrader: (7)

Next time I'm under the hood, I'll measure the clearance from the back of the engine to the firewall. If for nothing else, it's a "nice to know" item (with an LSx engine using a batwing pan, the sump clears the frame by X inches, while the heads/block have Y inches of space at the firewall). It would be cool to see similar numbers for CTS-V and F-Body pans in common swap recipients.

fox12303

iTrader: (7)

I'd modify the F-body pan if you already have one. Especially if you are a good welder and can TIG weld. You would have to modify the pickup tube to move it towards the rear of the pan a little. I have one on my 72 Chevelle and it fits great, has plenty of cross member clearance and steering linkage clearance. My motor has no setback so take a look at the pictures decide for yourself.

https://ls1tech.com/forums/16661747-post29.html

The following link has more pictures of the LSA or CTS-V pan. My understanding is that they are the same pan. It looks to fit pretty good too so long as you are setting your motor back at least 1".

https://ls1tech.com/forums/conversio...body-swap.html

The F-body pan does not set lower than the crossmember where the CTS-V/LSA pan does in case that is a concern. Oil capacity of a modified F pan is 4.5-5 quarts with filter.

oldgoat69

I second chuckd71, why reinvent the wheel (or pan) when there are so many good options out there, and you can sell the existing pan to offset part of the cost.

LS1 pwrd NOVA

iTrader: (2)

I have both pans, fbody and an lsa ctsv pan. They both fit my 66 chevelle without any mods to pan or frame..... Now.... They are both a tight fit but will work with a little time and mock up. I havent finished my swap at all. I started with an fbody pan, needed to make some frame mounts as someone before me put the wrong frame mounts into this car and nothing lined up until i posted a pic on the chevelle forum. Thats when i was told the frame mounts were wrong for my car. Now i bought the lsa pan and have to start all over mocking stuff up. Im going to use the stock fbody engine mounts as i dont have any frame mounts but they are easy to make out of plate steel. I say use the fbody pan as you already have it and it wont hang below the cross member, the lsa looks like it may hang below but maybe not.