bczee

iTrader: (12)

Todd, I might be interested in a 2nd Gen setup.. can you provide all of the part numbers for the components. I will provide them to friend that is considering doing his early 2nd gen.

Thanks.

user 4737373

Yes Ron, you can throw the frame stands and early style mounts completely out the window when using the new Hooker swap parts for your 1st-gen. ALl the fixtures are done except for the headers, which will be completed while I'm at the SEMA show next week and then will he hauled down to our production facility in Mississippi to get in line for the first production run.

user 4737373

Sure bczee, tell me some specifics about the swap and I'll set you up with a list of appropriate part numbers. Specifically, what year model is the car and what transmssion is going to be going in it. Also, do you want to run the Hooker cast iron manifolds, mid-length headers or long-tube headers. If you want headers, they can both be ordered with 1-3/4" or 1-7/8" diameter primaries. Lastly, what material/finish do you want on the headers? Black paint, silver ceramic or black ceramic is available on both the mid-lengths and long-tubes and there is also the premium stainless steel option on the long-tubes with premium components like investment cast flanges and collector spears and one-piece formed merge collectors. Let me know and I'll help you out.

69-chvl

iTrader: (11)

I tried the original/current Holley pan in my 69 Chevelle/6.0 swap and the pan interfered with the center link - couldnt use it at all. The new pan looks very a-body friendly!

user 4737373

We had a 71 Chevelle in here while we were designing the new Holley pan on the 1st-gen F-body and did a quick mock-up on the Chevelle to see how things looked and I can tell you there is a big fitment improvement over the current Holley pan on those particular cars.

Briou

iTrader: (1)

So I am guessing this second gen oil pan will not work with a 454cid ls3, having a 1.25" stroke? I have the first retrofit oil pan going into a 70 chevelle and am having clearance issues with the tie rod ends...not a shock...But I am trying to figure out the best option to make the tie rods clear the oil pan....I am thinking I will have to raise the motor a bit and maybe shave some of the pan away....any other ideas out there??

user 4737373

As the front end profile of the new pan is modeled closely to the same profile of the 4th-gen F-body pan, you can expect the same degree of internal crankshaft/connecting rod clearance. It was designed to address the extreme external clearance issues inherent in some of these GM muscle car LS swaps and the trade-off that comes with that is the same crankshaft and windage tray limitations that the 4th-gen pans have.

RonSSNova

iTrader: (3)

I'll be turbocharged Todd, so won't need headers!
Ron

user 4737373

That will certainly raise the fun level even higher Ron, what are you using to plump the hot side of your set-up, stock manifolds or custom turbo manifolds?

RonSSNova

iTrader: (3)

Hi Todd,
Truck manifold on the drivers side and an LS4 FWD manifold on the pass side. Not reinventing the wheel here, it's been done before. I will be using Corvette C5 accessory brackets and water pump.
I have all the parts. Finishing up the 5.3 L33 now.
Then remove the 498 and have at it.
Ron

stacy moore

I checked out the oil pan set-ups from both hooker & mass motorsports and while the hooker oil pan is awesome in many ways the Mass oil pan still gives more clearance at both the cross-member and steering linkage. also the hooker oil pan is going to be mid $400ish and the mass pan price dropped to $399. the other parts from hooker / Todd are going to be a hit tho for the ease of just drop in and go.

it was great to BS with both camps and compare products and putting a face to the names on the forum.

But Mass Motorsports need to take a lessen from Hooker and hire some smoking hot chicks to hang in the booth.

Thanks guys
Stacy

user 4737373

Thanks for your report and thumbs up for the Hooker girls Stacy. I'm a little confused about one of the dimensional characteristics you compared between the two oil pans as I don't know much about the Mast pan; when you stated that the Mast pan provides more clearance on both ends of the crossmember were you comparing this to the Holley pan installed on the subframe display? If so, then you would be correct since that is the existing Holley pan and not the new pan which is coming out soon. I'll have to make my way over to check out the Mast pan to be clear on my comparison of the two pans. Thanks

RonSSNova

iTrader: (3)

Mast really has their pan for $399? It is a very nice piece. The web site says $499.
I need a pan by next weekend.

How stiff are the hooker mounts Todd? With the turbo fixed to the chassis, stiff mounts are highly desireable. Solid may be better.

user 4737373

The Hooker engine brackets are solid as a rock and will allow you to use stock rubber clamshell mounts or aftermarket poly or solid replacement mounts with them.

RonSSNova

iTrader: (3)

Are you speaking of the new f body mounts? Are they available yet?

LS1Silverado98

iTrader: (8)

Hey Todd, any possible release date updates on the Hooker pan yet? I've got an LS motor just sitting lonely next to a 69 Camaro. She really wants to go to her home!!

stacy moore

[QUOTE=RonSSNova;17807802]Mast really has their pan for $399? It is a very nice piece. The web site says $499.
I need a pan by next weekend.

YES I talked to Chris Durrett while in the Mass booth and they also had a sign display that price also. I also checked the Mass website and seen it was still $499. but just call them.

RonSSNova

iTrader: (3)

[QUOTE=stacy moore;17809530]Nobody home there today, I'll try again on Monday
Thanks

RonSSNova

iTrader: (3)

Mast pan on the way. $399
They called me!
Awesome.
Thanks Stacey

Ron

stacy moore

I have to call them and order one also. glad to help.

Stacy