Found another oil pan while searching for more info on the Milodon pan. This Canton pan looks similar (shape wise), but is aluminum. List for $500 on their site, but they can be had for $400 on ebay. Anybody tried this one?

David

 

WTF, I hope you are kidding. Typically steels have about 3 times the modulus of Al. Steel is ALOT "stronger" and more "rigid" than any alloy of Al.

The Milodon piece looks really nice.

 

Is steel stronger than aluminum by weight or size? I think if steel was stronger than aluminum by weight, they would use it on airplanes?

 

Not sure what modulus you are talking about. The modulus of elasticity doesn't really apply with this argument maybe the shear modulus? However steel does have a much higher UTS. I am with you the milodon looks like a very nice piece and if it in fact cheaper than the canton pan above it is a great deal.

 

By "size".

There is a reason that rollcages, bolts, crankshafts, axles etc are made of steel.

If alum is strong enough for the application then there is a weight advantage. It's really a matter of what tensile strength is required for the particular part.

An I-beam made of alum would have to be about 3x larger in cross sectional area to provide similar strength as a steel beam. Making it much bulkier and much more expensive and in many circumstances not practical.

Airplanes have been made of wood and fabric too but I dont think anyone would argue that they are stronger than steel. Its a size, weight and strength compromise. Wings are large and have relatively low psi loads. They need surface area. The spar that runs down the center of the wing and under the fuselage is what needs the strength bc it takes all that wing lift and picks the plane up with it. Those are often made of steel. Also, the motor mounts are tubular steel.

The aluminum pan from GM was probably a good production call for them bc it is a pretty complicated part with a integral filter mount etc. That would be complicated and heavy to make in steel but perfect for an Al casting.

 

Young's modulus or modulus of elasticity is the measure of a material's stiffness. (Y=tensile stress/tensile strain)... I would think that a part's stiffness would heavily affect it's ability to be "rigid" and "structural" as the guy put it. Yes, UTS is much higher also.

 

Alright I gotcha now.

 

This is interesting... so is the argument that the two steel pans offered above are more of a structural component than the stock aluminum pans offered by GM? I always thought the rigidity added by the aluminum pans involved linking the engine with the bell housing... maybe I overlooked something there. If that's the case, judging from the picture, maybe Canton overlooked some tapped holes?

By weight, aluminum is going to be stronger than steel. I think there is more of an effort in the automotive industry to cut down on weight than there is size. Making parts out of cast aluminum that were more commonly steel (suspension arms, crossmembers, etc) supports this. I wonder if there is a material amount of deflection in these commonly used cast aluminum load bearing parts?

 

The LS engines use cast aluminum pans simply to control Noise, Vibration, and Harmonics ( NVH ). This is also why the bellhousing is bolted to the oil pan. I'm sure the cast aluminum pans add some measure of strength to the block assembly but are not a critical component of the structure.
Ken

 

Exactly!

Andrew

 

The worry isn't busting a hole (though I did end up with a cracked pan...trust me, you'll want to check that before you get everything buttoned down, the pan to crossmember clearance in my truck is just BARELY too close to get the Camaro pan out without lifting the engine or pulling the transmission). The concern is the fact that the pan actually does serve to add stiffness to the block itself, and that's where I'd worry about this one as well.

 

How much do you need to worry about the block flexing with an iron block?