Armando's or Aviaid Oil Pan?

[cycleguy55]

I'm going to go with a pan from either Armando's or Aviaid, and I'm not installing an Accusump or other accumulator. $$ are the same, but there are some differences:

Armando's: The #415 "460 Ford Cobra Factory V" pan has a sump that's 7" deep, 11" wide, 20" long with a capacity of 10 quarts. Full flexibility as to fittings (e.g. dipstick & puke tank connections). Road race oil pan

Aviaid: #155-55435 "BBF 460 COBRA" pan has a sump that's 7 1/2" deep, 13" wide and 18" long, capacity is 9 quarts. I can't see any need for customization, so this would be fine 'out of the box'. Wet Sump Road Race Oil Pans (BBF/FE) at Aviaid

My bell housing measures 8 1/4" below the bottom of the current pan rails, so the Avaiad would sit 3/4" above that, with Armando's pan another 1/2" higher

FWIW, the capacities don't make sense to me - Armando says his 7" deep pan has a capacity of 10 quarts, but although the sump is 2" longer than the Aviaid it's 1/2" shallower and 2" narrower than the Aviaid - which has a capacity of 9 quarts. It seems to me the Aviaid, with it's greater depth and width should have more capacity.

Both Armando and Aviaid have good reputations about their products, so that seems pretty much equal.

Thoughts? Recommendations?

[vector1]

I've seen and used bout 3 of the Armando's. Think he used to make pans for aviaid. No complaints on the Armando, would consider it very good quality, he will make whatever you want in the way of depth, length, or width from my experience. Wouldn't hesitate to use him again. He has made mine after the order was placed so be patient, oil pickup should be included with pan from my experience.

[1985 CCX]

I use an Armando unit

[RodKnock]

Originally Posted by cycleguy55

FWIW, the capacities don't make sense to me - Armando says his 7" deep pan has a capacity of 10 quarts, but although the sump is 2" longer than the Aviaid it's 1/2" shallower and 2" narrower than the Aviaid - which has a capacity of 9 quarts. It seems to me the Aviaid, with it's greater depth and width should have more capacity.

Both Armando and Aviaid have good reputations about their products, so that seems pretty much equal.

Thoughts? Recommendations?

There's a very old thread about how the Aviaid's capacity is calculated. Someone from Aviaid actually chimes in to explain it.

Also, my Aviaid had a leak at a corner weld, which fortunately was discovered on the dyno before the engine was installed. Aviaid replaced it. I know of a couple others on CC who have posted in the past that had leaks at the welds. But we're also talking 5-10 years ago.

I haven't checked lately, but Armando's have always been cheaper, but similar look and construction to the Aviaid. Personally, I think it's "six of one, half dozen of the other."

[cycleguy55]

Originally Posted by RodKnock

There's a very old thread about how the Aviaid's capacity is calculated. Someone from Aviaid actually chimes in to explain it.

I haven't checked lately, but Armando's have always been cheaper, but similar look and construction to the Aviaid. Personally, I think it's "six of one, half dozen of the other."

I found this at 10 quart oil pan - Topic

quote:
To settle it for all of you that have bought an Armando pan, when AVIAID designed that pan the static oil capacity of the pan was set at 9qt. That fills the pan to the underside of the hard tray that is bolted in on top of the pickup box assembly in the pan. Our instructions for actual capacity determination are to fill an empty pan, installed on the engine in a car sitting on flat ground, with 8qts. of oil. Mark your dipstick. Add one additional quart, and mark the stick again. This is full. The first mark is the low mark. This should be only about 3/8" given the sump area of the pan.

Start the engine, letting oil circulate and fill the engine, filter and any cooler or lines that may be part of the system. Shut the engine off, and add back to the top mark. This will be system capacity.

Depending on engine and operating conditions the ideal level can vary. Ideal oil level is a point between fluctuating oil pressure and excess carry over of oil out of the engine venting system. If the engine tends to trap oil up in the engine, it will like an extra 1/2 quart. If the engine returns oil well, it might like 1/2 quart low. Experience will tell.

John Schwarz
AVIAID Oil Systems

That's great information for calibrating the dipstick markings, but doesn't help me in deciding which pan to go with. Perhaps this is a different thread than the one you were referring to.

BTW, current pricing on Armando's pan is $520, while the Aviaid is $524.60 - so Armando's pricing has caught up to Aviaid's.

[Dimis]

When it was my turn to buy, I considered both options above.

Both scream "60's COBRA ENGINE", but I personally opted for something else altogether, as I heard (many) similar stories to RodKnock about leaks.

Being on the other side of the globe from Aviaid or Armando, I erred on the side of caution and went for a Moroso race pan. Coincidentally, a few weeks after we made the call, I remember reading a post (on fordfe.com) by Barry R that most his engines and those of fellow racers (at the time) were using, or going to Moroso pans. Its silly, but I admit, in my tiny mind, it help vindicate the choice, and get over the fact it wasn't an Armando or Aviaid pan.

PS: Last I checked it was cheaper than both of the above too.

[cycleguy55]

Originally Posted by Dimis

When it was my turn to buy, I considered both options above.

Both scream "60's COBRA ENGINE", but I personally opted for something else altogether, as I heard (many) similar stories to RodKnock about leaks.

Being on the other side of the globe from Aviaid or Armando, I erred on the side of caution and went for a Moroso race pan. Coincidentally, a few weeks after we made the call, I remember reading a post (on fordfe.com) by Barry R that most his engines and those of fellow racers (at the time) were using, or going to Moroso pans. Its silly, but I admit, in my tiny mind, it help vindicate the choice, and get over the fact it wasn't an Armando or Aviaid pan.

PS: Last I checked it was cheaper than both of the above too.

Is your Moroso pan on a 429/460? If so, what is the depth and oil capacity?

I have been through the catalogs of Moroso, Milodon, Canton and others and landed on Aviaid and Armando's for two primary reasons: 1) depth of pan and ground clearance issues; and 2) oil control under acceleration and cornering. As to the former, I have 8.25" from my pan rails to the bottom of the bell housing and want my pan to be at least 0.5" above that, preferably a bit more. As to the latter, I haven't found any consistent information which would point to other pans being able to provide the level of oil control offered by Armando's and Aviaid's pans.

[Dimis]

it's not for 460 ford, but 427 series. 8qrts front memory, but once you add things like remote filter mount, plus cooling & lines I need to buy oil by the barrel. Lol
The bonus was once installed it didn't hang below the chassis rails like I had noticed on other Cobras. So that was a win that I didn't expect to have, but glad I did.

[blykins]

I thought that it was Anthony's Moroso pan that leaked, but now I'm second guessing myself...(maybe I just changed gaskets???) I have had one Moroso pan leak before, but I use a ton of them, so the chances are very slim.

I have had *several* of the others leak...

[cycleguy55]

Originally Posted by Dimis

The bonus was once installed it didn't hang below the chassis rails like I had noticed on other Cobras. So that was a win that I didn't expect to have, but glad I did.

I double checked my dimensions yesterday, and the distance from the current pan rail to the bottom of the frame is 8.75" (front) and 7.25" rear. Armando's 7" depth will keep it slightly over 1/4" above the frame rails (20" long sump ends a few inches short of the bell housing), while Aviaid's 7.5" depth means it would be slightly below the frame rails, even with the sump being 2" shorter (front to back).

The only bogie I see right now is Armando's drain plug is at the front of the pan, so I'm going to need that installed at the back of the pan. That will make draining it a bit of a PITA, given the short space between the back of the sump and the bell housing.

Alternatively, I could have the pan built with a sump horizontal to the frame, meaning it would be deeper at the front than the rear by an inch or more, but that would compensate for the installed angle of the engine.

[cycleguy55]

Originally Posted by Dimis

it's not for 460 ford, but 427 series. 8qrts front memory, but once you add things like remote filter mount, plus cooling & lines I need to buy oil by the barrel.

The bad news is there is certainly a greater selection of pans appropriate for Cobra use for FE engines than for 385 engines. The good news is that, while the selection is limited, there are good pans available for the 385.

I'm sure nobody figures out which pans will work best BEFORE selecting their engine. It's pick the engine first and deal with issues like this later. C'est la vie.

[cycleguy55]

Armando Rodriguez and I have been exchanging emails (he's been good to deal with and responsive) and I'm about ready to pull the trigger and order the pan. Here's what I have:

- Sump depth (1/4" above the bottom of my frame rails): Front - 8 5/8", Rear - 7"
- 20" long sump
- Drain plugs: 1 at front, 1 on the side of the sump, as far back on the driver's side as possible
- 1/2" NPT bung at front for oil temperature sender
- 3/8" dipstick tube on passenger side
- No puke tank fitting

I have a front timing cover with dipstick provision for my existing front sump pan. It seems to me I could use the one in the timing cover and simplify the pan by leaving off the side dipstick tube, as well as eliminating one more potential point of leakage.

Thoughts?

[fordracing65]

Did you get the pan. How did it work out.

[cycleguy55]

Got the pan. Great pan, well built as noted above. Pan capacity is about 11 quarts. The only thing I'd change would be heavier pan rails, but I'm not sure anyone builds them heavier. Regardless, they have not been a source of leakage. Photos of the pan at https://goo.gl/photos/LV32eSaJ4uwCyRWY9

BTW, I went with the dipstick fitting in the pan and capped the one on the timing cover with a push on vinyl cap.