LSX oil pans
#461
On The Tree
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
So what pan would the dealer have that would fit a first gen? Everything I have seen that will "fit" has the sump hanging below the crossmember.
#462
Teching In
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Paso Robles, CA
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I had three different hooker plates, stock 1/2" forward and 1.25" forward I believe. The Stock mount might have worked but the engine was almost touching the firewall and the alternator wasn't even close to fitting. I also have hooker headers and the stock and 1/2" forward plates were the only ones that would provide enough clearance for the stock power steering box. I even tried flipping the mounts upside down. The 1.25" forward plates are identical to the car shop/ATS/street and performance mounts that share the one common bolt hole between the motor mount and bracket. The Holley pan hit because it is deeper than the stock and about 3/4" deeper than the Autokraft At the front sump. I used short and wide mounts, if I would have moved the engine more forward the fit got worse and the headers hit the pitman arm. As it is I had to notch the frame to clear the alternator but everything fits great. If i used the stock location motor mount plates I don't think I would have gotten the correct driveshaft angle. I emailed pics to Holley and they took back the oil pan
#464
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
talked to Mark @ S&P yesterday and he said they are a little over a week behind on their new cast pans. They have their own designs for cast pans for a-body, 1st Gen Camaro, 58-63 impala, & I think the last one is for G body. He said they will have measurements & pics on their site soon as soon as the first castings are complete.
I am hoping this pan addresses the inner tie rod interference.
I am hoping this pan addresses the inner tie rod interference.
#465
Moderator
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
That's the first time I heard anyone say the Holley pan wasn't made well. I assumed, from the lack of complaints, that is was good pan. It is expensive, though.
So what pan would the dealer have that would fit a first gen? Everything I have seen that will "fit" has the sump hanging below the crossmember.
So what pan would the dealer have that would fit a first gen? Everything I have seen that will "fit" has the sump hanging below the crossmember.
#466
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I had three different hooker plates, stock 1/2" forward and 1.25" forward I believe. The Stock mount might have worked but the engine was almost touching the firewall and the alternator wasn't even close to fitting. I also have hooker headers and the stock and 1/2" forward plates were the only ones that would provide enough clearance for the stock power steering box. I even tried flipping the mounts upside down. The 1.25" forward plates are identical to the car shop/ATS/street and performance mounts that share the one common bolt hole between the motor mount and bracket. The Holley pan hit because it is deeper than the stock and about 3/4" deeper than the Autokraft At the front sump. I used short and wide mounts, if I would have moved the engine more forward the fit got worse and the headers hit the pitman arm. As it is I had to notch the frame to clear the alternator but everything fits great. If i used the stock location motor mount plates I don't think I would have gotten the correct driveshaft angle. I emailed pics to Holley and they took back the oil pan
I am installing a LS in my 70 Chevelle. Just trying to come up with a game plan. That was 24 pages of awesome information!! I have a truck pan, looks like it is going to hang too low though. Really curious on which Hooker adapter plate to use.
NOS327---How did your install finish up?? What plates worked for you??
Thanks for all the info & pics!!
Dave
#467
Teching In
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Paso Robles, CA
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I ordered three sets so I could try the motor in different spots. The ones I used were 1/2" forward from the stock location part number 12624. Stock location hooker plates put the motor against the firewall. Even with the 1/2" forward plates it is difficult to plug in the sensors at the back of the block. Hookers 1.25" forward plates are identical to the car shop/s&p/Ats plates where one bolt is shared between the motor mount and adapter plate but with hooker headers the number 7 tube is very close to the pitman arm.
I do have the hooker headers I welded on a normal 3 bolt collector flange I dont like the slip fit collectors they came with. I am not sure if the moroso mount would have helped. You can go on holleys website and get the dimensions for their pan and compare them to the measurements on autokrafts website. The autokraft pan gave me tons of room. You can do like I did and order three different hooker plates and return the ones you don't use. I did have to noth the frame using the low mount alternator but that would have been with all three plates. Sometimes it is just trial and error. If you put the motor too far back you could run into problems with driveshaft angle. The trans could hit the floorboard just behind the bell housing. The more forward the motor goes the more room to adjust for driveline angle. I was able to get the engine and trans at a 3.70 degree down angle.
I was able to save mony by modifying my gas tank for the in tank pump, building my crossmember and cold air intake. I also welded on a fitting to run the steam line from the heads to my aluminum radiator. I just measured and with the 1/2" forward plates the passenger cylinder head to firewall gap is 13/16" with no heater core. With hooker stock plates the gap would be 5/16". With stock location plates I could not get the engine trans back far enough to sit on the motor mounts they would have to be installed separately.
I hope this helps
I do have the hooker headers I welded on a normal 3 bolt collector flange I dont like the slip fit collectors they came with. I am not sure if the moroso mount would have helped. You can go on holleys website and get the dimensions for their pan and compare them to the measurements on autokrafts website. The autokraft pan gave me tons of room. You can do like I did and order three different hooker plates and return the ones you don't use. I did have to noth the frame using the low mount alternator but that would have been with all three plates. Sometimes it is just trial and error. If you put the motor too far back you could run into problems with driveshaft angle. The trans could hit the floorboard just behind the bell housing. The more forward the motor goes the more room to adjust for driveline angle. I was able to get the engine and trans at a 3.70 degree down angle.
I was able to save mony by modifying my gas tank for the in tank pump, building my crossmember and cold air intake. I also welded on a fitting to run the steam line from the heads to my aluminum radiator. I just measured and with the 1/2" forward plates the passenger cylinder head to firewall gap is 13/16" with no heater core. With hooker stock plates the gap would be 5/16". With stock location plates I could not get the engine trans back far enough to sit on the motor mounts they would have to be installed separately.
I hope this helps
#468
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I ordered three sets so I could try the motor in different spots. The ones I used were 1/2" forward from the stock location part number 12624. Stock location hooker plates put the motor against the firewall. Even with the 1/2" forward plates it is difficult to plug in the sensors at the back of the block. Hookers 1.25" forward plates are identical to the car shop/s&p/Ats plates where one bolt is shared between the motor mount and adapter plate but with hooker headers the number 7 tube is very close to the pitman arm.
I do have the hooker headers I welded on a normal 3 bolt collector flange I dont like the slip fit collectors they came with. I am not sure if the moroso mount would have helped. You can go on holleys website and get the dimensions for their pan and compare them to the measurements on autokrafts website. The autokraft pan gave me tons of room. You can do like I did and order three different hooker plates and return the ones you don't use. I did have to noth the frame using the low mount alternator but that would have been with all three plates. Sometimes it is just trial and error. If you put the motor too far back you could run into problems with driveshaft angle. The trans could hit the floorboard just behind the bell housing. The more forward the motor goes the more room to adjust for driveline angle. I was able to get the engine and trans at a 3.70 degree down angle.
I was able to save mony by modifying my gas tank for the in tank pump, building my crossmember and cold air intake. I also welded on a fitting to run the steam line from the heads to my aluminum radiator. I just measured and with the 1/2" forward plates the passenger cylinder head to firewall gap is 13/16" with no heater core. With hooker stock plates the gap would be 5/16". With stock location plates I could not get the engine trans back far enough to sit on the motor mounts they would have to be installed separately.
I hope this helps
I do have the hooker headers I welded on a normal 3 bolt collector flange I dont like the slip fit collectors they came with. I am not sure if the moroso mount would have helped. You can go on holleys website and get the dimensions for their pan and compare them to the measurements on autokrafts website. The autokraft pan gave me tons of room. You can do like I did and order three different hooker plates and return the ones you don't use. I did have to noth the frame using the low mount alternator but that would have been with all three plates. Sometimes it is just trial and error. If you put the motor too far back you could run into problems with driveshaft angle. The trans could hit the floorboard just behind the bell housing. The more forward the motor goes the more room to adjust for driveline angle. I was able to get the engine and trans at a 3.70 degree down angle.
I was able to save mony by modifying my gas tank for the in tank pump, building my crossmember and cold air intake. I also welded on a fitting to run the steam line from the heads to my aluminum radiator. I just measured and with the 1/2" forward plates the passenger cylinder head to firewall gap is 13/16" with no heater core. With hooker stock plates the gap would be 5/16". With stock location plates I could not get the engine trans back far enough to sit on the motor mounts they would have to be installed separately.
I hope this helps
#469
Staging Lane
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Hollywood / Hayward, Ca
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Assuming you are talking about a '67 Camaro, the closest I could find was this link on Nastyz28:
http://www.nastyz28.com/forum/showthread.php?t=229812
Post #5 is: "correct me if im wrong, but so far the LS3 has only been available in the vette and the 5th gen camaro. the vette pan wont work without cutting the crossmember on a second gen f body. i have no clue how the 5th gen pan is configured . as far as bolting up, yes it will, but u will most likely have to have the windage tray , pick-up tube , and dip-stick off the donor cars pan to work."
That's all I have - I have not seen a definite answer to your question.
http://www.nastyz28.com/forum/showthread.php?t=229812
Post #5 is: "correct me if im wrong, but so far the LS3 has only been available in the vette and the 5th gen camaro. the vette pan wont work without cutting the crossmember on a second gen f body. i have no clue how the 5th gen pan is configured . as far as bolting up, yes it will, but u will most likely have to have the windage tray , pick-up tube , and dip-stick off the donor cars pan to work."
That's all I have - I have not seen a definite answer to your question.
#471
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I have an F-body pan and I bought an autozone pickup. I believe it's hitting the front part of the pan on the inside. Anyone else had this problem? Will I have to buy the chevy specific part number that is listed in the beginning of this thread?
#473
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (26)
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Milledgeville, GA
Posts: 1,909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
The CTSV pan (PN 12605814) has been superseded by PN 12631828 according to one GM parts website.
#475
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I ran a Champ on my 302 in my XP autocrosser and never had a problem. My Daytona pulls 1.5+ G's on race slicks and peaks around 1.8 G's.
All of Champs sumps and baffles are the same no matter the application.
![Name: Select_Colouring1.jpg
Views: 978
Size: 56.2 KB](https://ls1tech.com/forums/attachments/conversions-swaps/614271d1501336024-lsx-oil-pans-select_colouring1.jpg)
#476
8 Second Club
iTrader: (30)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
![Name: LS2inforgood.jpg
Views: 1009
Size: 100.6 KB](https://ls1tech.com/forums/attachments/conversions-swaps/614106d1501335734-lsx-oil-pans-ls2inforgood.jpg)
![Name: Kmemberandsteeringclearance.jpg
Views: 965
Size: 87.1 KB](https://ls1tech.com/forums/attachments/conversions-swaps/614107d1501335734-lsx-oil-pans-kmemberandsteeringclearance.jpg)
![Name: Kmemberrearclearance.jpg
Views: 1983
Size: 64.8 KB](https://ls1tech.com/forums/attachments/conversions-swaps/614108d1501335734-lsx-oil-pans-kmemberrearclearance.jpg)
#477
11 Second Club
iTrader: (1)
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
IMO, yes that is the best pan to use for a 2nd gen Camaro/Firebird.
However, unless you absolutely need to connect the engine to a stock TH350 in its stock position, I would highly recommend 0" setback mounts and not the 1" setback. With 1" setback the engine is so close to the firewall (within millimeters) that the rear wiring, fuel lines, etc. become a real pain.
Here is a good picture showing how close even 0" setback is (See post #7):
http://www.nastyz28.com/forum/showthread.php?t=222162
See my post #4 on this link:
http://www.nastyz28.com/forum/showthread.php?t=217897
You do not need any setback for teh CTS-V oil pan; it clears the crossmember with plenty room to spare. Also the front of the CTS-V oil pan is shallow enough to keep the steering linkage from hitting it.
However, unless you absolutely need to connect the engine to a stock TH350 in its stock position, I would highly recommend 0" setback mounts and not the 1" setback. With 1" setback the engine is so close to the firewall (within millimeters) that the rear wiring, fuel lines, etc. become a real pain.
Here is a good picture showing how close even 0" setback is (See post #7):
http://www.nastyz28.com/forum/showthread.php?t=222162
See my post #4 on this link:
http://www.nastyz28.com/forum/showthread.php?t=217897
You do not need any setback for teh CTS-V oil pan; it clears the crossmember with plenty room to spare. Also the front of the CTS-V oil pan is shallow enough to keep the steering linkage from hitting it.
I also need to get some engine swap mounts, I'm thinking the car shop mounts 0"?
Thanks in advance,
Eric
#478
Moderator
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Do NOT consider the GM muscle car pan kit. It might work with a Chevelle or a truck, but will sit much too low below the frame in your F-body. As I have pointed out, even the CTS-V pan sits a little below the frame, but has great capacity. The F-body pan is the safest. (Not sure, but it might require the 1"-back mounts too.)
The CTS-V will work with 0" or 1"-back mount and has lots of frame clearance and just enough steering clearance.
While I "push" the 0" setback mounts, not everyone agrees. I would recommend having both 0" and 1"-back mounts for your own experimentation. I recently saw mounts that had multiple hole patterns for 0" or 1" back.
If you haven't already, you should join the Nastyz28 forum as there is lots of LSx swapping going on there.
The CTS-V will work with 0" or 1"-back mount and has lots of frame clearance and just enough steering clearance.
While I "push" the 0" setback mounts, not everyone agrees. I would recommend having both 0" and 1"-back mounts for your own experimentation. I recently saw mounts that had multiple hole patterns for 0" or 1" back.
If you haven't already, you should join the Nastyz28 forum as there is lots of LSx swapping going on there.
#479
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I've read many build threads here on LS1Tech. Every time I read them, it brings up more questions than answers. The decision of the pan affects every aspect of the LS swap. Transmission locations, accessory drives (alt and a/c), header issues, and front suspension to name a few.
I'm ready to start. I purchased a 2004 LM7. I have a 70 Chevelle with the chassis/frame finished.
Here is my pan dilemma:
Can I use the GM Performance 19212593 - GM Performance Parts LS Muscle Car Oil Pan and the Trans Dapt 4592K - Trans Dapt Performance Products Engine Swap Motor Mount Kit together?
I have 1999 Camaro exhaust manifolds and radiator, but no accessory brackets.
I will use the TH350 for the next year (and to speed up this install).
What about: ground clearance. Raise engine needed?, Modify tranny tunnel?
I'm ready to start. I purchased a 2004 LM7. I have a 70 Chevelle with the chassis/frame finished.
Here is my pan dilemma:
Can I use the GM Performance 19212593 - GM Performance Parts LS Muscle Car Oil Pan and the Trans Dapt 4592K - Trans Dapt Performance Products Engine Swap Motor Mount Kit together?
I have 1999 Camaro exhaust manifolds and radiator, but no accessory brackets.
I will use the TH350 for the next year (and to speed up this install).
What about: ground clearance. Raise engine needed?, Modify tranny tunnel?
#480
Moderator
![Default](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
I've read many build threads here on LS1Tech. Every time I read them, it brings up more questions than answers. The decision of the pan affects every aspect of the LS swap. Transmission locations, accessory drives (alt and a/c), header issues, and front suspension to name a few.
I'm ready to start. I purchased a 2004 LM7. I have a 70 Chevelle with the chassis/frame finished....
I'm ready to start. I purchased a 2004 LM7. I have a 70 Chevelle with the chassis/frame finished....
![Happy](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_stretch.gif)
Just concentrate on the Chevelle related posts. Look at #477 above from NOS327. Isn't that a Chevelle? While I have knocked the Holley pan, NOS327 is very happy with it because of its excellent fit. If you like what he or another Chevelle swapper has done, just duplicate it.
Looking at #477 and having measured the GM Muscle car and Holley pans, I think the GM pan would sit a bit below your crossmember and be vulnerable to damage.
BTW - My first car as a 18Y old in 1973 was a 1970 Chevelle SS454. Fun car for a teenager.
![Happy](https://ls1tech.com/forums/images/smilies/LS1Tech/gr_stretch.gif)