Best fitting oil pan for 5.3 in a 67 Chevelle

[COPO-RAT]

Ok guys, I'm needing an oil pan to proceed with installing a 5.3 in my 67 Chevelle. I've done a lot of reading/searching and I think I have it narrowed down to a Mast, Autokraft, Holley or CTS-V. I don't know how low the Holley or CTS-V pan hang, but I know the Mast and Autokraft are about the same. If the other 2 are similar, I'll use the CTS-V pan due to it being the cheapest.
can anyone weigh in on this? The car will be a great handling street car with some AutoX for fun when convenient. It isn't being built to compete on a regular basis and most likely will never see a road course, so the best baffled pan isn't my first priority. I'm looking for the pan that tucks up above the crossmember the best and is easiest on the wallet (in that order).
thanks in advance!

PS: forgot to mention I'm using Hooker 'stock location' mounting plates that keep the bellhousing flange in the stock location.

[garys 68]

Not a 67, but my understanding is that your 67 is not far off from the 68-72 frames. Here's a pic of the CTS-V pan on my 72. It does hang below the crossmember, but not a problem unless you lower the car quite a bit. I'm using the 1" setback plates too.
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2013/10/DSCN0286-1.jpg (http://s18.photobucket.com/user/rdoact/media/DSCN0286.jpg.html)

[COPO-RAT]

Awesome! Thanks for the pic and the time it took to chime in garys 68!
In talking to a fabricator buddy at work he said "can't we just modify the pan that's on it?"........hmmmm, we'll I guess so......we are at least gonna get it up on the table and look at what it takes to make it match the dimensions of a Mast or Autokraft.

[COPO-RAT]

Started hackin up the oil pan!
https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2013/12/image_zps660ccbf4-1.jpg (http://s876.photobucket.com/user/copo-rat/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zps660ccbf4.jpg.html)

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2013/12/image_zps6f41deb0-1.jpg (http://s876.photobucket.com/user/copo-rat/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zps6f41deb0.jpg.html)

https://static1.pt-content.com/images/pt/2013/12/image_zpsd0bf2b6d-1.jpg (http://s876.photobucket.com/user/copo-rat/media/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zpsd0bf2b6d.jpg.html)

It clears the crossmember now.....just have to shorten the sump and weld it back together.

[andrewb70]

The new Holley pan is also an option.

Andrew

[COPO-RAT]

I was checking out the new Holley pan at the PRI show in Indy. That is most likely what I'll use if my 'home brew' version doesn't work out.
I figured I'm not out anything by trying it myself, plus it's fun. I might save myself a little money too!
Merry Christmas all,

[dhutton]

I think your tie rods will hit the front of the pan. This is a common A body issue.

[COPO-RAT]

dutton,
Thanks for the heads up on that. I had heard some grumblings from my fellow A-Body friends about that as well. I figure if I can cut a big window to clear the crossmember and shorten the sump, I can modify the front corners for tie rod clearance. I plan to drop the motor into the car (with steering installed) as opposed to my bare frame that I've been testing crossmember clearance with.

[Toddoky]

dutton,
Thanks for the heads up on that. I had heard some grumblings from my fellow A-Body friends about that as well. I figure if I can cut a big window to clear the crossmember and shorten the sump, I can modify the front corners for tie rod clearance. I plan to drop the motor into the car (with steering installed) as opposed to my bare frame that I've been testing crossmember clearance with.

The front and side profiles of the new Holley pan were whittled down to the bare possible minimum for applications such as yours. The oil pump pickup tube is what limits the profile that can be employed along the passenger side edge profile, so the driver's side was just matched to it for the sake of symmetry. Even with this minimalist approach, it improves the tie-rod clearance situation on the A-body swaps, but does not eliminate it if you are trying to achieve a standard 3 degree installed engine inclination angle without cutting the floor. The stock steering centerlink design and the low tunnel height of A-bodies conspire against any efforts to achieve optimized installed eng/trans geometry without cutting the tunnel floor. Can they be put together under the stock floor with a 4 or 5 degree engine inclination angle? Sure, but the resultant U-joint angles are not something I would be interested in ending up with on my own car and is not how any pro-built car would be put together.

[rlehto]

The fbody pan seems to work on my 70 with dingo sliders I think the new Holley pan looks like it is a cross between the fbody and cts v pan which should be great for abodys

[jamier2]

I used the Mast Motorsports pan on my 66. From what I could find the 65-67 are quite a bit different as far as crossmember clearance compared to the 68+ cars.