thanks again for all your help to get my ride to a beautiful spot will send picks when complete should be this summer.
You do some purty work.Just snug the pan bolts ever so lightly, wait 12 hours and do the final torqueing using a 1/4" ratchet, one handed and just snug them.
View attachment 935649 View attachment 935650 View attachment 935651
Reinstall the center link and you're good to go. Don't forget to tighten the drain plug and add your oil!
I have 11/16" clearance on the center link to pan now
View attachment 935652
Excellent Tutorial Kid! I have been sweating out whether or not the pan I have on my 440 is going to work or not in my 65 Belvedere, which I understand is also a bit finicky with pan to centerlink clearance. Years back I bought the Moroso (971 imprinted) deep sump 8 quart pan, which I'm going to assume is the same as what you found except for the deeper sump capacity. I also relieved the K frame to provide a bit more clearance for the sump. I'm hoping to sleep better now that I think I'm in the clear. Hoping to Drop it in soon once spring really shows up. Am I correct that 62 thru 65's share this oil pan issue?You do some purty work.
Am I correct that 62 thru 65's share this oil pan issue?
Kid,... Your measurement is quite helpful. I will go out in the morning and see what mine is. I'll let you know.From the couple that I've talked to it is an issue. Some went with the racing oil pans that have a low rear section. The pan that I had on there measured 2 5/8" tall where the center link passed under it. The 971 measures 2 1/8" in that area. That's a 1/2" difference.
There's several good threads on here as to what people have used, thing is a lot of those pans are hard to find. The 971 was used on 1973 to 1978 B bodies and you would think there would be plenty out there. Not the case.
Stop playing with that Chevy and get that Bell together!
Thanks for the info KK. For comparison here are pictures of a stock 62-65 pan. Very shallow ends, not much room for a windage tray. Obviously this pan will accommodate a 3.75” stroke crank, does anybody know if there would be any interference with a longer stroke, say 3.9” or even 4.125” ?
View attachment 935917 View attachment 935918
In comparison to KK's new Moroso 971 standard sump replacement oil pan, and the measurement of 2 1/8" down in the rear area,...my deep sump 8 quart 971 , from Moroso ,(from years ago) measures 1 3/4 at the very back, and 2", where it meets the sump. Since it is less than KK's pan, and, I am running a windage tray, I should theoretically have close to the same amount of center link clearance with my 65, that KK has with the 62.I'm not sure about those strokes. If you had a windage tray for those specs. and drop it in the pan it would show how much room is there. But would it be effective?
I pondered about using a windage tray and came to the conclusion that for mostly street driving and they say it's a five hp gain using one, is it worth the effort and expense? Would there be any other advantages that I'm missing?
Could start a thread
Missed your post somehow Matthon. I ran across that NAPA number once before and couldn't confirm if it was the right seal or not. Now we know. I'll have to get a couple to have on hand. I tried to cross that number at the parts house that I work for and had no luck. At least we know it's the same seal as the newer transmission's inner/smaller seal that they use. Thanks Ma for not changing it.Did my seal recently, NAPA ATP 13308.