New Engines: 557 or 572

Reply Subscribe

Thread Tools

10-18-2006, 06:27 AM

#71

GPM

Registered

Join Date: Mar 2004

Location: Pa

Posts: 2,663

Likes: 7

Received 80 Likes on 58 Posts

Re: New Engines: 557 or 572

Quote:

Originally Posted by mikes280

the 1077 is the mls gasket i have had good luck with them, are they leaking water or are you blowing them and if so where

No water problems, just leaking between a couple of cylinders.

10-18-2006, 06:47 AM

#72

36spectre

Registered User

Join Date: Apr 2001

Location: Princeton, new jersey

Posts: 589

Likes: 0

Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Re: New Engines: 557 or 572

Quote:

Originally Posted by Strip Poker 388

I don't like a sq or over sq motors.the thrust angle and the big slug your trying to sling..

Remember back when the Nascar guys were destroking there motors making more power.

Also why do you think Sterling is running that cube, they have people spending $$$.I bet the experimented on a few costumers

I would think they figured it by now whats the best combo, again there looking at max hp in a race application and usually have a higher RPM peek hp .I would think The bigger the ci the lower the RPM.

CI cal

http://www.itpapulling.com/ci_calc.html

http://www.ajdesigner.com/phpengine/...lacement_b.php

piston speed

http://www.csgnetwork.com/pistonspeedcalc.html

http://www.thedirtforum.com/pistoncalc.htm

rod ratio
http://www.mustang123.com/calculator...Calculator.asp

ROB,

What would make you think that they are interested in low maintance intervals and overall motor longevity???????

Otto

10-18-2006, 07:04 AM

#73

mrhorsepower1

Banned

Join Date: Feb 2005

Location: Cleveland, Ohio

Posts: 1,459

Likes: 0

Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Re: New Engines: 557 or 572

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tapa11

Are the solid rollers really worth the trouble?

They are well worth it. They are no trouble if the valve adjustment is done properly.

10-18-2006, 07:08 AM

#74

mrhorsepower1

Banned

Join Date: Feb 2005

Location: Cleveland, Ohio

Posts: 1,459

Likes: 0

Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Re: New Engines: 557 or 572

Quote:

Originally Posted by 36spectre

Due to harmonics....always build a square engine...they are happier and
they will last significantly longer

I would have to disagree with this statement. A square engine verses a oversquare has nothing to do with harmonics. If your having troubles with harmonics get a new engine builder that knows how to balance! If every component is balanced correctly and accurately the engine will have ZERO vibration in it.

10-18-2006, 07:10 AM

#75

mrhorsepower1

Banned

Join Date: Feb 2005

Location: Cleveland, Ohio

Posts: 1,459

Likes: 0

Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Re: New Engines: 557 or 572

Quote:

Originally Posted by Panther

Can someone confirm or deny but I understand the 572' has a less than optimum rod-to-stroke ratio.

That depends on how long of a rod length you choose.

10-18-2006, 07:11 AM

#76

mrhorsepower1

Banned

Join Date: Feb 2005

Location: Cleveland, Ohio

Posts: 1,459

Likes: 0

Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Re: New Engines: 557 or 572

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratman

572 4.5 X 4.5

This is one way to achieve 572 cu.in. ( the most common)

10-18-2006, 08:52 AM

#77

customryder

Registered

Join Date: Aug 2004

Location: Paducah KY KY Lake

Posts: 3,812

Likes: 0

Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Re: New Engines: 557 or 572

Dean what CI are these, I forgot what you told me.

Thanks Bro excellent job!

Attached Thumbnails

New Engines: 557 or 572-engine-install-026-small-.jpg

10-18-2006, 04:16 PM

#78

GPM

Registered

Join Date: Mar 2004

Location: Pa

Posts: 2,663

Likes: 7

Received 80 Likes on 58 Posts

Re: New Engines: 557 or 572

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrhorsepower1

This is one way to achieve 572 cu.in. ( the most common)

which one would hold up better 572 or 598 both with the same rod length?

10-18-2006, 05:44 PM

#79

mrhorsepower1

Banned

Join Date: Feb 2005

Location: Cleveland, Ohio

Posts: 1,459

Likes: 0

Received 1 Like on 1 Post

Re: New Engines: 557 or 572

Quote:

Originally Posted by GPM

which one would hold up better 572 or 598 both with the same rod length?

Are we taking with a 4.5 stroke on both? If so Both packages are capable to go the same amount of hours if built right. The 572 combo will have a tad better seller between cylinders due to the smaller bore diameter.If your talking supercharged I would go with the smaller bore engine for this reason. The other objective to use a 4.500-4.530 bore diameter is to allow more rebuild life in the engine and again better head gasket seal being SC. I like to build life into the engine instead of maxing out the bore on a brand new Dart Big M or Merlin block. As far as ring seal goes between the two combos, on N/A packages both will hold up the same. SC combo ring seal may go away a tad sooner with the larger bore area 598. A ton of other factors come to play with longevity as you already know.....machining, assembly,and of course tuning!