Printable View
Looking for opinions and expertise on oil pans. I'm using the AME GT Sport front clip in a 69 Camaro and installing a 2013 ZL1 LSA. Stock oil pan definitely isn't going to fit and my question is between the Chevrolet performance pan and the Holley variants is there any issues with the GM pan? It is $100 cheaper than the Holley ones. Is it worth spending the extra Benjamin on the Holley?
The GM swap pan is great if you prefer the oil pan to be the first part of your car that drags on the ground.
lol...Quote:
Originally Posted by dontlifttoshift
That is a good point...I suppose I'm going to need to remove the pan and set the motor in place to determine the max depth the pan can be before extending past the crossmember....Quote:
Originally Posted by dontlifttoshift
Four words...Mast Motorsports oil pan.
More ground clearance then Holley.
Care to back that up? With actual measurements?
Attachment 168373
https://static1.pt-content.com/image...g?v=1560974278
There are some things that the Mast pan does better but I prefer the Holley pan with the bellhousing mounts built in and the ability to use the Earls thermostat for the oil cooler.
Does the stock ZL1 LSA oil cooler work with the Holley pan?
No, I don’t mind backing that up at all...and btw, the Mast pan also has oil cooler provisions built in. Attachment 168397Quote:
Originally Posted by dontlifttoshift
That pan is even more expensive than the Holley...what makes it worth a $100 more?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gmachine1911
Not sure why this didn't post before. But 5.75" is more than 5.69" It is entirely possible that someone fibbed on their dimensions but I would say they are close enough to be a wash. I am aware of the provisions for the oil cooler on the Mast pan but that doesn't address the thermostat.
https://static1.pt-content.com/image...g?v=1560974278
Attachment 168418Quote:
Originally Posted by dontlifttoshift
And it looks like they're just comparing Mast to the Holley 302-1. But the 302-2 has more ground clearance by 0.29". Whether or not that matters, I don't know.
What pan does AME recommend with their front clip? Shouldn't they know what works best?
Andrew
From AME installation instructions:Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewb70
Oil Pan Selection
The engine oil pan design is critical for proper performance as well as trouble-
free installation. The location of the steering rack only allows the use of oil pans
that replicate the stock profile under the number one and two cylinders. The use
of fabricated aluminum or a highly modified pan may cause interference and
require notching for proper fit.
The F-Body LS oil pan has been tested and approved for sufficient clearance;
GTO, Corvette and truck pans utilize similar front profiles but should be test-fitted
prior to final installation. C5 “batwing” pans should be avoided as they will
interfere with headers.
They mention the F-body LS pan but I'm not sure which pan specifically they are referring to????
typically the "F body ls pan" refers to gen 4 LS pan 98-02
I would agree with the above statement. The Holley 302-2 and 302-3 pans offer even more clearance in the rack area than a 4th gen F-body pan and have a slightly shorter (lengthwise) sump, so they should work very well for you. The Holley 302-3 offers clearance for a stroker crank and also has two, cast ports for turbo drains, in case that is something of a consideration for the future.Quote:
Originally Posted by silo84
Andrew
Thanks everyone for your help...I am leaning towards the Holley 302-1 because the sump is much more rearward and my initial fitment of the motor appears that the 302-2 profile will hit the crossmember. I will definitely be posting pictures of it for future reference once I get it installed. I do want to look into that F-body pan as well to compare the profiles.
So after comparing all the LS oil pan options available from Holley, Mast and GM I discovered that the LSA engine I the Cadillac CTS-V has a profile very close to the F-body pan plus it has the mounting provisions for the oil cooler which make this an obvious winner for my application. Also it is much cheaper than the Holley ones. I can order the pan, dipstick and tube, pickup tube, and gasket for less than just the Holley pan. I am ordering this now and will post pictures of the fitment as soon as I get it installed.Attachment 168715
It's deeper than the f body pan. Ten bucks says it will hang below the front cross member. I wouldn't be comfortable with that.
Andrew
It is 1" deeper and I think I can live with that. It's the oil cooler mounting that is the main reason to go with this pan. Most LS engines don't have the engine mounted oil cooler which is only on LS3 & LSA engines.
Will the oil cooler fit in the chassis and with the headers you're using?
I have the holley pan in my stock subframed 2nd gen with their mounts.
The boss for the drain plug is ground flat from dragging the pavement on occasion, it just barely hangs below the crossmember.
Have you talked to Morrison to see what pan they reccomend?
I used the CTS-V pan with my Art Morrison subframe. I vaguely recall massaging things a little but some of that was due to the alternator on the stock accessory drive. Pretty sure the pan hit the rack lines that cross over.
Don
Ok I got the CTS-V pan installed and it fits in there with plenty of room all around and only hangs 1/2-3/4" below the crossmember. I can live with that plus it eliminated the DOD pressure bypass valve in the pan allowing for more oil pressure and provisions for mounting the LSA/LS3 oil cooler. I will most likely be building a windage tray that will protect everything under there anyway and provide less wind drag. Tried to take pictures and failed...poor lighting. I will try again next time I'm home.
A little late, but the Mast includes a baffle kit. Holley you have to buy it separately (and they're pretty expensive - $200+).Quote:
Originally Posted by Snowcatter