Oil pan

[DKz Garage]

Running an LSA in my 70 Camaro Build with a DSE sub-frame. IS the Holley oil pan a good choice for this set up? I ran the Holley pan on my last build, 69 Camaro w/stock sub - it worked out great.

[will69camaro]

The newer design (302-2) is the way to go. The 302-1 pan JUST touched the rack in my 69 with DSE frame.

LSA should be able to use the 302-2 no problem, but check to be sure (I didn't and didn't realize it didn't clear my 427 crank). Glad I spun mine to check! :bump:

[Che70velle]

I think that the newer 302-3 pan is designed for a 4” stroke. I’m not sure about the outer dimensions, concerning fitment however.

[gnx7]

I would also check out AutoKraft as their pans have built in baffles/trap doors. That's what I'm running on my Chevelle.

[65 Drop Top]

Check out the dimensions of the Mast oil pan. Comes with a cast in baffle too.

[rickpaw]

I think that the newer 302-3 pan is designed for a 4” stroke. I’m not sure about the outer dimensions, concerning fitment however.

External dimensions on the 302-3 are identical to the 302-2 pan, other than the front corner notch to the sump to clear the mustang k-member. Besides the 4" stroke clearance, it has turbo oil drain plugs built to the sides. Those are the main differences.

More info on ls1 tech.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/conversions-hybrids/1877660-new-holley-302-3-ls-oil-pan-preview-thread.html

[DKz Garage]

The newer design (302-2) is the way to go. The 302-1 pan JUST touched the rack in my 69 with DSE frame.

LSA should be able to use the 302-2 no problem, but check to be sure (I didn't and didn't realize it didn't clear my 427 crank). Glad I spun mine to check! :bump:

I think that the newer 302-3 pan is designed for a 4” stroke. I’m not sure about the outer dimensions, concerning fitment however.

I would also check out AutoKraft as their pans have built in baffles/trap doors. That's what I'm running on my Chevelle.

Check out the dimensions of the Mast oil pan. Comes with a cast in baffle too.

External dimensions on the 302-3 are identical to the 302-2 pan, other than the front corner notch to the sump to clear the mustang k-member. Besides the 4" stroke clearance, it has turbo oil drain plugs built to the sides. Those are the main differences.

More info on ls1 tech.
https://ls1tech.com/forums/conversions-hybrids/1877660-new-holley-302-3-ls-oil-pan-preview-thread.html

Thanks for the input everyone. I was looking at the MAST 401-011, which is the one DSE mentions on their site as compatible with their Sub frame. Anyone have any experience with this pan??

[65 Drop Top]

Thanks for the input everyone. I was looking at the MAST 401-011, which is the one DSE mentions on their site as compatible with their Sub frame. Anyone have any experience with this pan??

I just bought a Mast oil pan. I'm running a different set up as you though, I have a 55 Chevy with a LS3 and an AME chassis, so I can't help you with fitment. I was looking at the Holley pans also. I went with the Mast pan mostly because it has a baffle cast into it and comes with a baffle cover. Stock windage tray also fits inside. The Holley pan you have to purchase the baffle separate for another $200 or so. It'll fit a stroker crank if ever needed also.

[65 Drop Top]

And here is a couple pictures of the Mast oil pan for reference on depth, compared to a QuickTime bell housing. The oil pan is ~ 1/2" shorter.

[DKz Garage]

And here is a couple pictures of the Mast oil pan for reference on depth, compared to a QuickTime bell housing. The oil pan is ~ 1/2" shorter.

Thanks for the pics! ..... This looks like the ticket! I am running a quicktime as well..... time to get the pan ordered!

[will69camaro]

I have the Mast oilpan in my car (69 camar0) with DSE subframe and fits no problem. I trimmed my quicktime bellhousing to not have it hanging a lip down below the pan as shown above.

William

[65 Drop Top]

I have the Mast oilpan in my car (69 camar0) with DSE subframe and fits no problem. I trimmed my quicktime bellhousing to not have it hanging a lip down below the pan as shown above.

William

I will probably trim the bell housing flush with the oil pan as well. I do want to be careful though as to not void the SFI rating. Luckily the bottom of the bellhousing still sits up higher than the frame rails so it would be pretty much impossible for it to bottom out either way.

[will69camaro]

I will probably trim the bell housing flush with the oil pan as well. I do want to be careful though as to not void the SFI rating. Luckily the bottom of the bellhousing still sits up higher than the frame rails so it would be pretty much impossible for it to bottom out either way.

Yea i wasn't as worried about the SFI rating and i'm not sure what it does for that. I know i wasn't comfortable with the idea of something snagging it and ****canning my $5k billet geared trans. I'll live with whatever SFI says about it, i'm not racing this thing professionally.

[AB69Z]

I will probably trim the bell housing flush with the oil pan as well. I do want to be careful though as to not void the SFI rating. Luckily the bottom of the bellhousing still sits up higher than the frame rails so it would be pretty much impossible for it to bottom out either way.

Bowler has a QuickTime bell housing that is only offered by them that is already flat at the bottom. Mine fit great so I didn't need to cut it like on a regular one

[DKz Garage]

The Mast and Holley are both nice pans, I see that DSE shows the GM Camaro pan # 12628771 will work. Given that you have to buy the windage tray, pick-up tube and dip stick regardless of what pan you buy, is there a reason why I would go with the Mast or Holley pan over the GM?? The GM pan is quite a bit less expensive...... Thoughts??

[65 Drop Top]

The Mast and Holley are both nice pans, I see that DSE shows the GM Camaro pan # 12628771 will work. Given that you have to buy the windage tray, pick-up tube and dip stick regardless of what pan you buy, is there a reason why I would go with the Mast or Holley pan over the GM?? The GM pan is quite a bit less expensive...... Thoughts??

The Mast pan comes with a pick up tube and uses the stock windage tray.

I don't see any reason not to use the f body oil pan, as long as it fits the chassis and allows for adequate ground clearance. You could probably find a used pan pretty cheap too.

Check out some of the build pictures on DSE's website, they usually show pictures of the bottom side of the cars. Look and see what pans they use on their sub frame.

[65 Drop Top]

DSE also says you can use Corvette pan 12624617 which is lower profile than the f body pan if you need additional ground clearance. I like how the Vette pan has cast in internal baffles.

[Che70velle]

Holley pan (302-1...maybe -2 and -3 as well) comes with pickup tube, and utilizes Oem windage tray as well. Works with Oem dipstick as well.
Regardless of what pan you go with, always check your pickup to pan clearance with modeling clay. It’s easy to do and takes maybe 5 minutes. Too much or too little clearance can cause oiling issues.

[1965_SS]

The Mast and Holley are both nice pans, I see that DSE shows the GM Camaro pan # 12628771 will work. Given that you have to buy the windage tray, pick-up tube and dip stick regardless of what pan you buy, is there a reason why I would go with the Mast or Holley pan over the GM?? The GM pan is quite a bit less expensive...... Thoughts??

IF you are looking for a 302-2, I just posted one for sale in the "for sale" area.

[jmac]

Holley makes a lot of great parts in order to swap these LS engines. I would use their oil pan but I am going to use the oil pan from MAST since it will clear the stroke on an LS7.

If you check their website, it says out of stock, but in an email I sent to them, they said they should be back in stock at the end of April.

Good luck!