Hot Rod Forum banner
1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I am building a first gen. small block Dry sump stoker for my 70 Chevelle and I’m at the point where I need to be concerned about figment. It is being stroked out to 4 inches and I know there is not a whole lot of room above the cross member. I’m sure someone out there has been through this process. Can anyone point me in the right direction? I’m looking for the correct oil pan and is it possible to drop it in without cutting the chassis?
Thanks in advance
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,296 Posts
I'm not familiar with dry sump systems. If you have a part number of the pan you are considering, that would help.
Also, which block are you putting a 4 inch crank in? They do require a special pan, but the outside dimensions are the same. Only inside up near the pan rails is wider to accommodate the rotating assembly afaik.
I could be wrong on that, but I do know you are going to have fun putting that crank in a stock block.
This is all I can give you. But others have far more knowledge than me, and the will be asking for alot more details.

And I want to see your car! Thanks.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Thanks for your input ExcellenceAuto, so far I have looked at every company that makes an oil pan. None of them guarantee any pan will fit. They all want dimensions. This is a larger "rotating" assembly which means the pan will have to be deeper as well as wider. That is where I start to worry a little that I might run out of room. I took the original engine out to store it and put in a replacement engine so I know there is not much room between the oil pan and the crossmember. The stroke is 1/4" larger that the original stroke so in theory the oil pan should be 1/4" deeper and that should put the cross member really close ... or touching. I'm trying to not cut the chassis. I want to exhaust every avenue first. I would rather slide this engine backwards or lift it, if that will work, rather than cut the cross member. I am also fine with ordering a custom built oil pan which is what Moroso tells me I will have to do. But they will not tell me that their custom pan will not hit the cross member. So I'm hoping someone out there has put a first gen. 400 small block stroked to a 427 in a 70-72 Chevelle and what they had to do to get there.
Thanks again.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,881 Posts
Grab a cheap steel oil pan. Cut it about a inch from the top leaving you with the flange. Bolt the flange on with 6 bolts. Now you can take the bottom part and move it up/down/rotate/cut. To find where it fits and how. Once you have the thing perfect you can tack it (if deeper you tack a extention) so the thing is rigid enough to hold a shape.

Now remove the pan and you have a refrence to find a pan that will be a perfect fit.

If the old bottom wont work I have bent up thin steel to find the shape. All your after is a refrence. You can make the actual part thicker with whatever notches or sump location needed.

Yes this needs to be done in car with transmission and mounts installed. Your going to need to lift/lower the engine/trans a few times. But it is worth it to get that refrence with no questions about the fit or wasted money on "bolt in" stuff that doesn't.
 

·
Race it, Don't rice it!
Joined
·
8,395 Posts
I’d pull a string from a point on the motor mount of the frame, say the bottom most bolt hole or other easy reference point. Note the distance from the string to the K member.
Transfer this to the block on the engine stand and the difference between the two nets you the maximum depth. I think it’s right at 8” by memory.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,704 Posts
If you’re not going to modify the cross member to lower the engine and make room for a dry sump pan of any reasonable depth beyond 4.5 inches you‘re probably just as well off to use a modified stock configuration rear sump pan and a partial windage tray over the shallow front portion.

One of the advantages of a dry sump is to get the oil physically away from the crankshaft, a shallow dry sump really fails at that.

A standard configuration pan with a forward windage tray will get some isolation of oil from crank and will provide drainage to the deep sump. You can make some bung attachments welded low on the sump for AN fittings that route the drain back to hoses to the recovery pump. If your running a conventional counter clockwise round track then put the return fittings on the right side of the sump. If this is a road course car then a fitting or 2 on each side of the sump. If drag racing at the rear on either or both sides toward the rear.

Sometimes you have to think outside the rectangular pan.

Bogie
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
WOW! Thanks to all of you for all this information. I can solve this dilemma. I didn't say I will not notch the cross member it's just that I would rather not. I believe a dry sump pan will fit but it will have to be custom and if it turns out that I have to do some cutting, I will. I will let all of you know how it turns out. Thank you so much for all this advice!!
 

·
Race it, Don't rice it!
Joined
·
8,395 Posts
If you decide to get out the saw, AFCO has been restamping the 68-72 clips for a while and they sell them in pieces so you could get a K member and modify it to suit and then replace the whole thing or if you really mess it up and want to start over you have that option too although you’ll likely need someway of jigging the frame.
AFCO builds in locating tabs to easy assembly but the GM frames don’t.
Stefs and Hamburger are better companies to deal with for custom applications.
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top