[Andrew]

Alfetta pan is narrower but deep. Takes a different pump. 101 pan, same story, and has a curved-in part for the oil filter.
Andrew

 

[PocketAce]

Thank you, Andrew. Is the Alfetta pan much deeper than the batwing pan? I’m trying to avoid running a dry sump pan, and instead running a smaller sump pan with an accusump.

Cutting up one of the “wings” of the batwing and modifying a standard pan is also an option.

 

[vintagemilano]

164 pan? Looks a lot like an alfetta pan but the fins are going the other way.

Or 155, from google pictures it looks like some of the early twin sparks were still chain driven so I’m assuming the oil pump would still be at the front. I’m just guessing, know zilch about twin sparks.

 

[Alfar7]

Have an Alfetta pan sectioned and welded to whatever depth you want. The oil pump pick up can be shortened as well.
To use a dry sump pan requires a complete dry sump system.

Here`s pics of an Alfetta pan & pump pickup I made to fit a 2 liter that sits 12" farther back in my Pinninfarina Coupe than stock.
It would have worked, but I decided to use a complete dry sump system.

 

[PocketAce]

Have an Alfetta pan sectioned and welded to whatever depth you want. The oil pump pick up can be shortened as well.
To use a dry sump pan requires a complete dry sump system.

Here`s pics of an Alfetta pan & pump pickup I made to fit a 2 liter that sits 12" farther back in my Pinninfarina Coupe than stock.
It would have worked, but I decided to use a complete dry sump system.

View attachment 1759585

Well then, I think we have a solution! I am trying to avoid using a complete dry sump system.

@Alfar7 - The clearance issue is on the passenger side "batwing" than on the pan height, do you see any issues with sectioning and trimming that side of the "batwing" pan? A diagonal, lateral trim?