jpndave

Are these new pans as shallow at the very front as the F body pan?

67Skylark

Has anybody had the Mast Motorsports pan next to the F-body(99-02 Camero) its hard to tell by the dimentions in the first part of this thread, 1.71 on the mast but it looks like that may not be where the tierods would rub. I would rather purchase mast pan but clearance is more important.

mrvedit

Here is picture of the CTS-V pan on my '81 Camaro. It barely, but completely, clears the tie-rods.



I recall reading that the Holley pan is rumored to be the same casting as the Mast pan. (See my previous pics.) The Holley and CTS-V pans are both very shallow in the front, with the CTS-V perhaps a bit shallower.

EDIT on 02/09/2012 - See post #451. It appears the Holley pan is based on the older RetroLSX pan, not the Mast pan. Sorry for the mistake.

Chrome_Rust

iTrader: (4)

I just bought the GM hotrod pan kit for 145.99. Its the H3 pan, came with bolts, windage tray, pickup, gaskets, and dipstick. Jegs has them in stock. Didnt have it shipped cause I live an hour and a half from them.

mrvedit

That will sit very low - more than 1 inch lower than the CTS-V pan in my picture above. I also bought that and sent it back after measuring and comparing it to the truck pan. It will be fine in a truck or SUV application, but IMHO, should not be used for a car swap.

hemiqc2003

Ok so after reading 22 pages of info, I think the 19212593 Ls Muscle Car Oil Pan Kit
for $153 to my door is my option. It is going into a 66 Chevelle that will be stock height with proboably 17 or 18 in wheels so I don't think ground clearance will be a problem, now I just need ot figure out the mounts. Any suggestions? Thanks.

mrvedit

While you probably will be alright with stock height, its not the wheel size that determines your height, but your tire diameter. You probably will be running 26-27" diameter tires even with 18" wheels; the original '66 tires where probably 25-26".

It is safest if your oilpan does not extend below the frame crossmember at all. I think this forum had the story of someone running either ther CTS-V or the Muscle-car pan and hitting a raised man hole cover in a construction zone.

I mostly know Camaros (although my first car as a teenager was a 3-year old '70 Chevelle SS 454). As far as I know, all Chevys that took a SBC or BBC have similar engine mount geometry. Transdapt makes conversion mounts that will work for you. You can pick "stock" position or "1 inch" back. They sell one kit with only the conversion brackets and one kit with older-style (not clamshell) engine mounts. I prefer the safer clamshells, but those might not fit your car without new mounting holes.

I don't know if the Chevelle forum has extensive swapping info, but the 2nd gen Camaro forum certainly does. Most everything would apply to your car too. The forum is here:

http://www.nastyz28.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=49

Otherwise, I would suggest starting a new thread here to ask non-oil pan related swapping questions.

hemiqc2003

Thanks, I think I will have to spend the money for the Holley pan.

67Skylark

I just ordered the mast oil pan $400 from Pace, after reading the post, I think the Holley pan causes the engine to set high (64-67 A-body)due to tie rod clearance causing transmission(4L85E) to have clearance problems. Just guessing as I have not tried it yet, still looks like the F body pan may have more clearance up front but really want to bolt it up and go, I'm not a welder.

hemiqc2003

I just ordered the Holley for $379 from jeg's. Guess I will have to see what clearance issues arise.

mrvedit

If I had known I would be trying to answer detailed oil pan questions, I would have bought the F body pan too for measurements and comparisons.

As I mentioned earlier, I suspect the Mast and Holley are made from the same casting. Best that I can estimate (again sorry I'm not sure), this casting is very similar to the F-body in terms of height and front clearance issues. The Holley/Mast is a safe choice to ensure that unexpected road debris doesn't destroy your engine.

EDIT on 02/09/2012 - See post #451. It appears the Holley pan is based on the older RetroLSX pan, not the Mast pan. Sorry for the mistake.

67Skylark

Still no mast pan, backordered with no ETA givin, this sucks!

jojomanx

I bought a holley oil pan and what a dissapointment.
Rear corner had a small lip on the seal surface that was cause by their machining.
I checked out the same oil pan at sema this year and gues what?!...it also has the same lip when it should be a flat surface.

Holly pn 302-1

as you all know that could cause a leak and oil pans are part of the structural integrity of the engine.

I complained about the poor machine work and after about 2 weeks of emails, they said
"engineering dept has had no leak issues and you can return it to where you bought it from"

a $400 oil pan should be perfect
gto oil pan at $265, truck pan from the junk yard and f body pil pans i've used all had a perfect seal surface.

Beware!

mrvedit

I don't like to slam products because I don't have enough experience to be sure of my opinions, but I also returned the Holley pan for various reasons. As I mentioned, one was I wanted more oil capacity. But yes, the casting is far inferior to any OEM pan. It also annoyed me that the Holley did not include a gasket, which costs $25 at the dealer. And it does not have provision for an oil level sensor.
In the old Chevy days, GM made the cheapest, always-leaking, stamped sheet metal oil pans and just about every aftermarket pan was better. Now its the opposite - GM makes quality cast aluminum, structurally strong pans with a gasket design that rarely leaks, while every aftermarket pan (so far) is inferior. Personally I would never consider the non-structural LS pans that Milodon and Morosso are selling.

Agreed, I would suggest avoiding the Holley LS oil pan.

ricky levins

What are the dimensions of the ls3 pan? I didnt see where it said on the first page. Compared to the truck pan would this fit in a second gen camaro?

mrvedit

This shows a picture of the 2010 Camaro LS3 oilpan (scroll down quite a bit):

http://www.camarohomepage.com/ls3/

It doesn't look like it would come close to fitting a 2nd gen.
I'm very active on the nastyz28 forum, and know that several people there have had success with the '98 - '02 Camaro LS1 F-Body pan.

3pedals

iTrader: (3)

The GM pans are NOT structural parts of the engine, they are thick cast in order to satisfy NVH requirements. There are VERY GOOD reasons to seriously consider the fabricated sheet metal pans built by moroso, canton, autocraft, champ, etc

pdlightning

iTrader: (1)

GM # 11515758 12ea.

redneckerson

I just recently put an LSX in my wifes 1967 Camaro and used the Holley LSX retro-fit oil pan. The pan fit pefectly, plently of room between the factory drag link (steering) and the oil pan. The pan hangs maybe 3/4 of an inch below the engine crossmember.
The only pain involved was the instructions says the pan uses your existing factory oil filter. I had to do a lot of searching to finally get the correct filter. It uses the newer LS engine oil filters, not the ones from the from the late 90's early 2000's.

Hope this helps!

RallySol

Hey gang, need some help. Picked up what apparently is an LS2 GTO pan as it has a pressure relief valve. I'm bolting it to a 4.8 from a '00 Silverado. Do I need to do something about the relief valve?

Thanks!