LocostUSA.com

Learning how to build Lotus Seven replicas...together!
It is currently November 13, 2019, 2:11 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: May 18, 2016, 3:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: July 20, 2010, 7:56 pm
Posts: 428
Location: Warrenton, Virginia
Does anyone know of an oil pan, that would fit a 1999 Mustang 3.8L V6, that is shallower than the stock pan?
It looks like the stock pan hangs below the bell housing and I would like to know if there is one that would be at least even with it at least even with it.
Ron

_________________
"Age is an issue of mind over matter. If you don't mind, it doesn't matter." - Mark Twain


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: May 18, 2016, 5:44 pm 
Offline
Automotive Encyclopedia
User avatar

Joined: December 22, 2006, 2:05 pm
Posts: 5563
Around 95 and earlier 3.8 in fwd config has a steel pan that should save a little space plus it is easier to mod. Also cheap new or used.

_________________
MV8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Om3C1Ep ... D3E18BB447


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: May 18, 2016, 6:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: July 20, 2010, 7:56 pm
Posts: 428
Location: Warrenton, Virginia
Thank you Sir! I'll be looking into those.
Ron

_________________
"Age is an issue of mind over matter. If you don't mind, it doesn't matter." - Mark Twain


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: May 20, 2016, 5:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: October 24, 2008, 2:13 pm
Posts: 2815
Location: Carlsbad, California, USA
STranger 7 wrote:
Does anyone know of an oil pan, that would fit a 1999 Mustang 3.8L V6, that is shallower than the stock pan?
It looks like the stock pan hangs below the bell housing and I would like to know if there is one that would be at least even with it at least even with it.
Ron


If you find a solution, can you post it here, hopefully with photos? I'm using the cast aluminum pan from my '94 Mustang donor and I wouldn't mind getting another inch or two of clearance if the FWD steel one works out.

There is a company in the NYC/New Jersey area that makes custom pans, but the cost is in the hundreds and they're only made to order. That didn't work for me.

Cheers,

_________________
Damn! That front slip angle is way too large and the Ackerman is just a muddle.

Build Log: viewtopic.php?f=35&t=5886


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: May 21, 2016, 6:44 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: July 20, 2010, 7:56 pm
Posts: 428
Location: Warrenton, Virginia
Lonnie,
I'll post what ever I find. If the solution is to modify a steel pan my self, pictures will be included. :)
Ron

_________________
"Age is an issue of mind over matter. If you don't mind, it doesn't matter." - Mark Twain


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: May 21, 2016, 9:30 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: July 20, 2010, 7:56 pm
Posts: 428
Location: Warrenton, Virginia
Hey Lonnie, not finding anything shallower than the Taurus / Windstar pans. They are 7.7 inches deep compared to the 8 1/4 " for the cast Aluminum. So... A couple quick questions. Do you know, or can you measure how far the cast pan extends below the bell housing? If the answer is to take a slice out and then add capacity by extending the bottom out,
Attachment:
plus01.jpg
plus01.jpg [ 123.11 KiB | Viewed 421 times ]

how much in each direction could be added and still fit inside your frame? Mine may be going onto a MG so if it fits yours it will work for me.
Ron

_________________
"Age is an issue of mind over matter. If you don't mind, it doesn't matter." - Mark Twain


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: May 21, 2016, 6:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: October 24, 2008, 2:13 pm
Posts: 2815
Location: Carlsbad, California, USA
Ron,

I think the gain in either case (cut and re-weld or use FWD pan) the result would be marginal. Attached are photos of my 3.8L with cast aluminum pan. The actual low spot of the pan is a cylindrical bung, that angles down from the sump on the passenger side and contains the sump drain plug. It doesn't show in the photos below. I went out into the garage and eye-balled the distance it hangs down below the bell housing. Using 5/8" as a figure would be pretty darned close.
Attachment:
File comment: Pan/Bell Housing relationship
Pan-Question-1.jpg
Pan-Question-1.jpg [ 110.45 KiB | Viewed 411 times ]

Attachment:
File comment: Close up of above.
Pan-Question-2.jpg
Pan-Question-2.jpg [ 351.79 KiB | Viewed 411 times ]


Would it be worth the effort to get 5/8" by cutting off the sump and taking off a slice and then re-welding? Looking at it, I'd say, "No, it isn't worth it." You'd probably be better off raising the engine up in the chassis, which would take everything up 5/8". I can take a precise measurement or photo tomorrow when there's light coming in under the car, but I'd say 5/8" is pretty good to work with.

I set my ride height at 6" whereas most guys are running 4"-5" as my means of coping with the deep pan.

Cheers,

_________________
Damn! That front slip angle is way too large and the Ackerman is just a muddle.

Build Log: viewtopic.php?f=35&t=5886


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: May 22, 2016, 8:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: July 20, 2010, 7:56 pm
Posts: 428
Location: Warrenton, Virginia
Lonnie,
Thanks! That changes things.
I haven't mated the bell housing and trans to the engine yet. Actually, the engines are still in the pickup's bed waiting for a break in the weather. I was using information from a posting where the author did state that "1 inch or more" was just a guess.
You know, I also read through a discussion where it was suggested that the design of the aluminum pan adds strength / rigidity to the bottom end. From what I have read,( and I quote), "one of the weak points on the 3.8L is the 2 bolt main cap. Once you exceed 300 hp the caps tend to move around, causing reliability issues."
Not that either of us are aiming to be that aggressive, but it does make wonder if the thinking was that those vehicles with manual transmissions would benefit from extra stability offered by the aluminum pans design. I'm just guessing as I haven't researched the FWDs to see if they were all only offered with automatics, and engines with steel pans. Sometimes my inquiring mind leaves me with more questions than answers. :)
Anyway, as you wrote, either "raise the engine", add a skid plate, or be very careful.
I would be willing to bet that, for the most part, the owners of these gems don't go blasting down back country roads on dark rainy nights.
Attachment:
caterham-7sm.jpg
caterham-7sm.jpg [ 124.59 KiB | Viewed 396 times ]

Again, thanks!
Ron

_________________
"Age is an issue of mind over matter. If you don't mind, it doesn't matter." - Mark Twain


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: May 22, 2016, 11:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: October 24, 2008, 2:13 pm
Posts: 2815
Location: Carlsbad, California, USA
You're welcome, Ron.

Adding to your argument about the strength of the aluminum pan, the bottom bolt on each side of the bell housing actually bolts into the oil pan. If that sounds strange, go look at the pan where the bolts go through. It is a structure, not a pan. Maybe the engineers used the pan as a way of overcoming the issue you mentioned, at least at the rear main?

I'll see if I can find a photo and I'll add it to this post in an edit if I do find one.

Cheers,

EDIT: Yup, here's a shot of the 2000 3.8L, dual port, engine I have. The passenger side flange is circled in green. The driver's side has a similar one.
Attachment:
File comment: Aluminum pan/flange structure for Ford Mustang 3.8L V6.
Pan-Flange.jpg
Pan-Flange.jpg [ 132.6 KiB | Viewed 383 times ]

_________________
Damn! That front slip angle is way too large and the Ackerman is just a muddle.

Build Log: viewtopic.php?f=35&t=5886


Last edited by Lonnie-S on May 22, 2016, 11:36 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: May 22, 2016, 11:20 am 
Offline
Automotive Encyclopedia
User avatar

Joined: December 22, 2006, 2:05 pm
Posts: 5563
It is to better support the transmission since the bottom of the bell is open with no block down there to bolt to and to lower NVH.

MFGs of trucks with manuals used to add all sort of braces between the transmission and the block.

_________________
MV8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Om3C1Ep ... D3E18BB447


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: May 22, 2016, 2:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: July 20, 2010, 7:56 pm
Posts: 428
Location: Warrenton, Virginia
I'm guessing that arrangement does both. My bell housing and trans came from one source and the engine from another, so the flanges were still a mystery until now. :D
Thank you gentlemen!

_________________
"Age is an issue of mind over matter. If you don't mind, it doesn't matter." - Mark Twain


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
POWERED_BY