zz572 from gm anyone try it yet [Archive] - Chevelle Tech

: zz572 from gm anyone try it yet


Sean70SS
Aug 8th, 04, 7:00 PM
Anyone tried the new zz572 from gm? The pump gas versiion looks like a descent motor any thoughts... graemlins/beers.gif

Harold Sutton
Aug 8th, 04, 10:21 PM
I saw some mention of these new G.M. crate motors being sold as kits with all the parts and machine work for $11,500 by Pace Performance. I haven't seen anybody put one in a medium weight chevelle yet though so their performance is still a mystery. Hot Rod is supposed to put the higher compression one in an El Camino soon. Odd thing is they were figuring the times on it in a 3400 pound Nova instead of a 3800 pound '72 El Camino. I think they are in for a shock when they see the difference between the two cars and how much difference there is in adding 400 lbs. more weight, coil springs and 5" more wheelbase.

ben70
Aug 8th, 04, 11:48 PM
WAY overpriced for such mediocre performance. You could put together a lot better motor for less. For instance, Shafiroff has a 540 that will give you almost 700HP for thousands less! PLUS, they offer a 2 year warranty. It just seems like a real waste of money when you can get more power for less. :rolleyes:
But maybe it's just me? :confused:

doggy69
Aug 9th, 04, 11:25 AM
Originally posted by ben70:
WAY overpriced for such mediocre performance. You could put together a lot better motor for less. For instance, Shafiroff has a 540 that will give you almost 700HP for thousands less! PLUS, they offer a 2 year warranty. It just seems like a real waste of money when you can get more power for less. :rolleyes:
But maybe it's just me? :confused: I thought the same thing until I read the engines mag by carcraft or whoever the "race" version made over 800hp on 110 and then they retarded the timing a few degrees and used 92 still made like 790 hp for 13000 and a warranty that pretty good about the same as youll pay for one of shafiroff's ultrastreet's without the warranty.

ben70
Aug 9th, 04, 12:24 PM
Originally posted by doggy69:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by ben70:
WAY overpriced for such mediocre performance. You could put together a lot better motor for less. For instance, Shafiroff has a 540 that will give you almost 700HP for thousands less! PLUS, they offer a 2 year warranty. It just seems like a real waste of money when you can get more power for less. :rolleyes:
But maybe it's just me? :confused: I thought the same thing until I read the engines mag by carcraft or whoever the "race" version made over 800hp on 110 and then they retarded the timing a few degrees and used 92 still made like 790 hp for 13000 and a warranty that pretty good about the same as youll pay for one of shafiroff's ultrastreet's without the warranty. </font>[/QUOTE]I just took a look at the CHP article again http://www.chevyhiperformance.com/techarticles/148_0406_572/index2.html and again I'm not that impressed. They only peaked torque at 663 ft/lbs. Not much better than a 540. Horsepower was NEVER above 700 and in fact dropped to a paltry 549 HP when they swapped cams! Moreover, you have to add in the costs and time of changing cams and doing the other tweaking they did. Besides, a tall deck block has the issue of header clearance since everything is raised. Perhaps there is another article out there that I haven't seen. Overall I still think the Shafiroff motor is the better deal since it's got a 2 year warranty and makes MORE power for LESS money.
http://www.ultrastreet.net/540_675_engine.asp

I think that anyone who gets duped into buying that zz572 has fulfilled P.T. Barnum's prophecy about suckers. It just seems like throwing money away to me.

kboorman
Aug 9th, 04, 12:35 PM
Didn't CHP swap in a cam that was smaller to try to build torque at the expense of HP? I'll bet you could get more out of one with the right upgrades. I agree, not the most HP for the money, and for that price you shouldn't need upgrades, but there's the "novelty factor" to consider as well. Some will want it just because it's new and it's the biggest thing GM sells. Some might buy it because they saw it on "Trucks" (Copperhead project), or because they don't know what there options are.
Kirk

ben70
Aug 9th, 04, 12:56 PM
Originally posted by kboorman:
Didn't CHP swap in a cam that was smaller to try to build torque at the expense of HP? I'll bet you could get more out of one with the right upgrades. I agree, not the most HP for the money, and for that price you shouldn't need upgrades, but there's the "novelty factor" to consider as well. Some will want it just because it's new and it's the biggest thing GM sells. Some might buy it because they saw it on "Trucks" (Copperhead project), or because they don't know what there options are.
Kirk I think you're right. But the necessary upgrades will add more COST to the already high price tag. It will definitely appeal to the "bigger is better" crowd so they can brag or the mindless masses that don't bother to do any research. It does come from GM which can be advantageous. However, I think if you are trying to sqeeze out as much performance as possible for your dollar the zz572 is NOT the way to go. There are much better options out there.

Gary at GMPP
Aug 9th, 04, 12:59 PM
Ultrastreet engine is $11,085 when comparably equiped.Base engine is $8995 but requires over $2000 in options to be able to compare apples to apples with a 572 in terms of content.

572/620 can be had complete for about $13,000. And it makes more power. 620 is corrected to SAE, not Standard as the Ultrastreet is.

Gary

ben70
Aug 9th, 04, 1:14 PM
Originally posted by Gary at GMPP:
Ultrastreet engine is $11,085 when comparably equiped.Base engine is $8995 but requires over $2000 in options to be able to compare apples to apples with a 572 in terms of content.

572/620 can be had complete for about $13,000. And it makes more power. 620 is corrected to SAE, not Standard as the Ultrastreet is.

Gary Gary, that's still a couple thousand cheaper than the zz572 plus the Ultrastreet comes with free shipping. Could you elaborate on the power issue (SAE corrected and such)? I'm not sure what that all means. Sounds interesting. I still think for 572 cubes that motor should be making a lot more power.

Gary at GMPP
Aug 9th, 04, 3:19 PM
There are two commonly accepted correction factors used when dynamometer testing. The automotive industry uses the Society of Automotive Engineers' (SAE) standard which corrects the actual measured torque output to 77 degree air and a some baro pressure (I don't recall the number of the top of my head.) And there is the Standard correction factor which corrects to 60 degree air and a more favorable baro reading.

Aftermarket manufacturers and magazines use Standard because the reported numbers are higher.

That's why the 572's make almost 80 more horsepower when a magazine tests them, compared to our advertised power output.

three85stroker
Aug 9th, 04, 3:53 PM
The 572 probably isn't working as hard to make power either. If the 572 isn't working hard, neither are its parts, and when parts aren't working hard, you have an engine that can expect to have a long lifespan.
My $.02

72nova502
Aug 9th, 04, 4:54 PM
GARY,
How about the zz 502's, did gmpp use the same correction factor? They seem to have a harder time making the 502 rated output, although I love mine!!!!! tongue.gif

ben70
Aug 9th, 04, 11:09 PM
Originally posted by Gary at GMPP:
There are two commonly accepted correction factors used when dynamometer testing. The automotive industry uses the Society of Automotive Engineers' (SAE) standard which corrects the actual measured torque output to 77 degree air and a some baro pressure (I don't recall the number of the top of my head.) And there is the Standard correction factor which corrects to 60 degree air and a more favorable baro reading.

Aftermarket manufacturers and magazines use Standard because the reported numbers are higher.

That's why the 572's make almost 80 more horsepower when a magazine tests them, compared to our advertised power output. Gary,
That was very informative. Learn something everyday. Thanks.

Ron454
Aug 10th, 04, 2:36 AM
What I wonder is:
1. How good are the heads on that engine?
2. What happens if you replace them with something better?
3. Where does it valve float? HYD Rollers in a rat are notorious for valve float.
4. How does it run with a solid roller?

One can buy it in short block form....right?

Ron

69 Ratt Vette
Aug 10th, 04, 10:26 AM
I am another not impressed by the 572. Gary, the 572 is still 2 grand more money and you get Edelbrock (GM) heads and intake while the Ultrastreet wears Darts. What justifies the 2 grand? please do not tell me R and D. They are both very basic engines, we are not talking about pro stock technology.

As for the 572 not working as hard, the 572 has a 4.375 in. stroke while the 540 has a 4.25, so technically the 540's piston speeds are lower. Neither engine has to spin very high to make the power they make. I am sure they are both very relilable. The 572 needs MUCH better heads, carb and cam to compete with the Ultrastreet. After that they need to lower the price 2 grand. I am pretty disapointed by the General on this one.

Speaking of disapointment with GM, how about the ridiculous 20 grand for the ZL-1, that is nothing more than a 454 with with fuel injection.

E34M5
Aug 10th, 04, 10:27 AM
Does anyone know someone that have tested this engine in his/her car?

I've been thinking of mounting a zz572 in my Chevelle, so this thread is quite interesting to me :)

Does the Shafiroff engines have the same quality and driveability over time? I'm going to use my Chevelle for "daily" use... I also have been thinking of converting it to an injection engine...

I also need info on companies that makes injection intakes (fabric and custom).

If there's something better out there I'd like to know about it =)

Thanks for any tips, ideas!

ben70
Aug 10th, 04, 11:51 AM
Originally posted by E34M5:

Does the Shafiroff engines have the same quality and driveability over time? I'm going to use my Chevelle for "daily" use...That's what Shafiroff claims: http://www.ultrastreet.net/540_675_engine.asp

I'm counting on it being "streetable." My Shafiroff 540 Chevelle will be street driven entirely. Shafiroff gives you a bunch of options with their engines. You could give them a call and talk with them. They are very helpful.
graemlins/beers.gif

Harold Sutton
Aug 10th, 04, 2:20 PM
Gary at GM, I don't know where you got your 77 degree figure, SAE spec J-1349, which has been the accepted correction factor since Zora was in diapers, is (60 degrees temp, 29.92 barometer and zero humidity) which someone has apparently changed recently to suit their needs.

R. Madara
Aug 10th, 04, 5:03 PM
I believe Gary is correct. Another pitfall of a "double standard"
SAE -- The SAE standard applied is a modified version of the SAE J1349 standard of June 1990. Power is corrected to reference conditions of 29.23 InHg (99 kPa) of dry air and 77 F (25C). This SAE standard requires a correction for friction torque. Friction torque can be determined by measurements on special motoring dynamometers (which is only practical in research environments) or can be estimated. When estimates must be used, the SAE standard uses a default Mechanical Efficiency (ME) value of 85%. This is approximately correct at peak torque but not at other engine operating speeds. Some dynamometer systems use the SAE correction factor for atmospheric conditions but do not take mechanical efficiency into consideration at all (i.e. they assume a ME of 100%). SuperFlow uses a more sophisticated algorithm for calculating friction torque, based on a summary of thousands of friction power tests performed by the automotive industry. This proprietary algorithm estimates friction torque as a function of piston speed and engine displacement.
The "SAE corrected" power numbers indicated by your SuperFlow system are thus more accurate estimates of engine power output under reference conditions than what other systems using no ME correction or using a fixed ME of 85% will provide.

STP -- The STP (also called STD)or J607 standard is another power correction standard determined by the SAE. This standard has been stable for a long time and is widely used in the performance industry. Power is corrected to reference conditions of 29.92 InHg (103.3 kPa) of dry air and 60 F (15.5C). Because the reference conditions include higher pressure and cooler air than the SAE standard, these corrected power numbers will always be about 4 % higher than the SAE power numbers. Friction torque is handled in the same way as in the SAE standard. Once again, this means the STP corrected power displayed by your SuperFlow test system will be more accurate than power numbers obtained using a default Mechanical Efficiency of 100% or 85%.
Bob

TD509EFI
Aug 10th, 04, 7:30 PM
Why would they use 29.23 inHg for the SAE modified J1349 standard? This atmospheric pressure is a way too low in a real world setting. The ICAO standard of 29.92 inHg is much more realistic and as such is reflected in the SAE J607 test.

Also, is there a correction for humidity in either standard?

John

Harold Sutton
Aug 10th, 04, 10:13 PM
I looked this up some time back and all the Superflow units on the market use J1349 in its original form not the changed 77 degree one. I also think that j607 is either a marine figure or one used for emissions or diesel testing, not engine dynos.

doggy69
Aug 10th, 04, 11:50 PM
Originally posted by ben70:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by doggy69:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by ben70:
WAY overpriced for such mediocre performance. You could put together a lot better motor for less. For instance, Shafiroff has a 540 that will give you almost 700HP for thousands less! PLUS, they offer a 2 year warranty. It just seems like a real waste of money when you can get more power for less. :rolleyes:
But maybe it's just me? :confused: I thought the same thing until I read the engines mag by carcraft or whoever the "race" version made over 800hp on 110 and then they retarded the timing a few degrees and used 92 still made like 790 hp for 13000 and a warranty that pretty good about the same as youll pay for one of shafiroff's ultrastreet's without the warranty. </font>[/QUOTE]I just took a look at the CHP article again http://www.chevyhiperformance.com/techarticles/148_0406_572/index2.html and again I'm not that impressed. They only peaked torque at 663 ft/lbs. Not much better than a 540. Horsepower was NEVER above 700 and in fact dropped to a paltry 549 HP when they swapped cams! Moreover, you have to add in the costs and time of changing cams and doing the other tweaking they did. Besides, a tall deck block has the issue of header clearance since everything is raised. Perhaps there is another article out there that I haven't seen. Overall I still think the Shafiroff motor is the better deal since it's got a 2 year warranty and makes MORE power for LESS money.
http://www.ultrastreet.net/540_675_engine.asp

I think that anyone who gets duped into buying that zz572 has fulfilled P.T. Barnum's prophecy about suckers. It just seems like throwing money away to me. </font>[/QUOTE]Thats a different article and a different motor. Im not talking about the 572/620 cam swap. They took a 572/720 ran it on pump gas made like 790 hp. Im not a fan of crate engines but this might be the one that could change that

ben70
Aug 11th, 04, 12:27 AM
Originally posted by doggy69:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by ben70:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by doggy69:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by ben70:
WAY overpriced for such mediocre performance. You could put together a lot better motor for less. For instance, Shafiroff has a 540 that will give you almost 700HP for thousands less! PLUS, they offer a 2 year warranty. It just seems like a real waste of money when you can get more power for less. :rolleyes:
But maybe it's just me? :confused: I thought the same thing until I read the engines mag by carcraft or whoever the "race" version made over 800hp on 110 and then they retarded the timing a few degrees and used 92 still made like 790 hp for 13000 and a warranty that pretty good about the same as youll pay for one of shafiroff's ultrastreet's without the warranty. </font>[/QUOTE]I just took a look at the CHP article again http://www.chevyhiperformance.com/techarticles/148_0406_572/index2.html and again I'm not that impressed. They only peaked torque at 663 ft/lbs. Not much better than a 540. Horsepower was NEVER above 700 and in fact dropped to a paltry 549 HP when they swapped cams! Moreover, you have to add in the costs and time of changing cams and doing the other tweaking they did. Besides, a tall deck block has the issue of header clearance since everything is raised. Perhaps there is another article out there that I haven't seen. Overall I still think the Shafiroff motor is the better deal since it's got a 2 year warranty and makes MORE power for LESS money.
http://www.ultrastreet.net/540_675_engine.asp

I think that anyone who gets duped into buying that zz572 has fulfilled P.T. Barnum's prophecy about suckers. It just seems like throwing money away to me. </font>[/QUOTE]Thats a different article and a different motor. Im not talking about the 572/620 cam swap. They took a 572/720 ran it on pump gas made like 790 hp. Im not a fan of crate engines but this might be the one that could change that </font>[/QUOTE]I'd love to see the article if you happen to find it. There did seem to be a huge discrepancy from the numbers you mentioned and the ones in that CHP article. 800HP sounds a little more respectable for 572 inches. But I still think there are better crate motors out there for the money.

Wolfplace
Aug 11th, 04, 12:33 AM
Originally posted by TD509EFI:
Why would they use 29.23 inHg for the SAE modified J1349 standard? This atmospheric pressure is a way too low in a real world setting. The ICAO standard of 29.92 inHg is much more realistic and as such is reflected in the SAE J607 test.

Also, is there a correction for humidity in either standard?

John =
John,
The barometric number used in testing is the actual pressure not the number you see on the weather channel so the 29.23 is really not an issue.
Our actual average number here is about 28.1-28.5 at 1800 feet but what you see on TV is like 30.14 or whatever & is a corrected to sea level number & is useless for testing purposes.

The actual barometric pressure & wet & dry bulb temperatures or humidity needs to be measured & corrected for at the time of the test to end up with the 29.92 & 60deg corrected numbers or whatever numbers you care to use.
We measure both humidity & air temperature coming into the cell during a test in real time & the correction factor is constantly changing during testing assuming the incoming air is changing.

So we are measuring real time humidity & temperature along with inputting the actual barometric pressure & using it as part of the correction factor to compute the torque numbers back to the standard we use which are the std 60deg & 29.92
These are the numbers you would see on a very good day at sea level with 60deg air entering your engine. ;)

Ron454
Aug 11th, 04, 2:11 AM
I guess the bottom line here is:
If you think the 572 is a turd and overpriced, then don't buy it.
If the Shafiroff isn't...then buy it.
Personally, I think either would make a great engine....and both are overpriced for me.
And both take money away from your local high perf engine builder.
And neither allows you to be creative.
My 2 cents.
Ron

JWA
Aug 11th, 04, 4:52 AM
For the price of a 572 I opted to build a smaller motor (540) with a little power adder (BDS 8:71). Different strokes for different folks smile.gif

GRN69CHV
Aug 11th, 04, 6:34 AM
I'm hanging with Ron454 on this (didn't realize you were that lucky, did you?).

Buy a big crate and spend a lot of bucks, or do what I do and scrounge around for bargain parts in the old Hot Rod tradition. Whatever works for you have at it.

The one thing I will comment on, I saw the 572 short block listed at around 7900.00 or so, there's another 5000.00 for the heads, cam, lifters, intake and balance of assembly. As an owner of a $15 Mil. distribution business, I would guess that the dealers are probably working on 25% margin on a GM product such as this. [Maybe more - marketing is all about image ]. Other motors like the 454HO are probably down aorund 12% out the door. Give it some time and if the 572's don't move, the price will come down on the resell level until inventory dries up and the program will get dropped. All manufacturers want to have high end product that they can make a big number on.

R. Madara
Aug 11th, 04, 7:05 AM
Originally posted by Harold Sutton:
I looked this up some time back and all the Superflow units on the market use J1349 in its original form not the changed 77 degree one. I also think that j607 is either a marine figure or one used for emissions or diesel testing, not engine dynos. Harold,
The information I posted was current and directly from the Superflow site.
http://www.superflow.com/support/cycledyn-theory.html#SAE
Here is the correction factor again
http://www.dynojet.com/gmhtpmag3.shtml
Here is the math:
http://wahiduddin.net/calc/cf.htm
J607 is used primarily in the high performance aftermarket, not marine, diesel, or emissions.
Corrected Horsepower and Torque; When people talk of "corrected" values, they "should" be using the SAE correction standard J1349. SAE J1349 specifies the brake horsepower and torque be corrected to 29.23" mercury barometric pressure, 77 F air temperature, dry air (0% humidity).

Correction standard SAE J607 is more commonly used (it results in higher corrected hp and torque numbers than SAE J1349) but is considered by SAE to be obsolete and was intended to be used with engines smaller than 50 cu. in. and less than 20 horsepower.
Bob

pdq67
Aug 11th, 04, 7:22 AM
OK you guy's!! Why don't you get together and make a matrix that will convert old time motor gross power to new net motor power figures while you are at it!!

Keep up the good work....

pdq67

Harold Sutton
Aug 11th, 04, 1:51 PM
Both the "old" figures of 60,29.92& zero humidity and the Revised version, dated 1990 which uses 77 degrees, 29.23 pressure and zero humidity are SAE standards and as such are both correct however most of the aftermarket still uses the old standard. It's reletively easy to convert GMMP's power rating back to the old figure by realizing that every five degrees you move away from 60 degrees represents a 3% loss in power which means their 720 H.P.(572) makes appx. 800 when measured by the old, sea level 100% air day, now called "STD" like some VD, standard. Just realize that the measuring yardstick is different at GMMP, and maybe represents a more realistic everyday horsepower figure for most locations. For more information on corrections see Marlin Davis's article on Density Altitude in the June issue of Hot Rod Magazine on page 88. ( be advised this article also uses the original SAE-J1349 spec.) the orig. temperature was 59 degrees while i'm nitpicking.

TD509EFI
Aug 11th, 04, 2:28 PM
Okay, I think I understand it know. So they are correcting the actual air pressure to give a corrected reading at what it would be at 29.23 inches? Mike, I understand that the pressure shown on the TV is a corrected to sea level value, since all weather maps are either corrected for altitude (constant pressure)or sea level pressure. What got to me is why anyone would bother corecting it to 29.23, when the average air pressure at sea level around the globe is considered as 29.92, which is a much more realistic, everyday average pressure, and consequently, much more realistic in terms of hp/tq of an engine on the dyno.

I have no problem with the temperature and humidity corrections. The actual dyno cell temperature does make in difference in observed engine output. The humidty does too, but is a smaller correction factor. Both of these readings can vary widely form one place to the next.

John

-SS454-
Aug 11th, 04, 3:31 PM
Changing parts (intake/cam) to build torque on a 572? Should be a torque monster right from the start. graemlins/sad.gif

Harold Sutton
Aug 11th, 04, 3:46 PM
I'm also anticipating the installation of the G.M. built 572 crate motor in the Hot Rod "El Camino" to see how fast it will go and how it compares to other big crate motors in the same price range. I'm sure it will be durable as much dyno testing has been done on it. These are good times for making lots of horsepower with the great aftermarket blocks and heads and internal parts now available. I also applaude G.M. for building this big motor and making it available to the general public.

mikehartwell
Aug 11th, 04, 4:56 PM
Darn, not another one of these arguments. Okay, where do Mitchell, Shafiroff, Speed-O (pick a name) get their metallurgy R&D, rotating machinery R&D, best practices for quality and process automation, manufacturing process tuning, etc, etc, etc from? When I say "process", I'm not referring to assemblers fresh out of ITT that are thrilled to have a new set of tools and a job - I'm talking about results that come from automated, repeatable, predictable processes. There is NO comparison between the other crate providers and GM. Those other guys are nothing more than expanded, former custom build operations that now build 5-10 motors at a time and put their name on the valve covers. And why did those guys leave the "hardcore" custom build business in the first place? I'd submit that the independent shops truly committed to quality and servicing one customer at a time drove these former custom shops into the crate business. They HAD to find another business space, because their products weren't standing up to the competition.

So, they are squeezed in the middle. They can't compare to the really high profile custom shops (like Mike Lewis) and they can't compare them to GM. It is simply impossible to compare them to GM. Say all you want as one voice - maybe even two. Then compare the market share of Shaf, Mitchell, Edelbrock (pick 15 others if you like) all combined to GM's market share. All of those other installations don't make a competetive dent in GM's performance crate business. GM's business is based on repeatable, predictable results - much easier for me to trust than some diatribe in a history section on a website about all the "racing experience" these other crate builders have.

Want an example? Mitchell has stopped listing the parts suppliers for their "hardcore" engines. Why? Because they change suppliers regularly based on the best LOT PRICE - period. The specs for those parts are broad enough to let lots of suppliers play. GM, however, (because of their predictable, repeatable, automated sub-system development capabilities) sticks to specific tolerances that they have 100% control over - not components or suppliers they HOPE will fit the spec.

Let's see, Mitchell has gone from Eagle to Scat to not saying to Eagle to not saying.....all inside of two years. Hmmmmm....how can you develop a repeatable, high quality, "harcore" process by switching vendors so often? Oh, I forgot. They went and visited with CAT machinery for some ideas - and we all know how relevant the characteristics of 1700 rpm bulldozer diesel motors are to 6000rpm sbc/bbc engines - as in, not even sort of remotely comparable except for the fact that there is metal in both.

If you want a real heavy hitting, max performance, max efficiency motor, one that meets your needs EXACTLY (assuming you can adequately define your needs in terms of specific tolerance and build requirements), then you're better off calling Mike Lewis or Pat Musi or Bill K or some other single point, highly experienced, turnkey builder (not assembler, an actual builder). I don't think there is a single component or machine process that is not personally overseen and handled by Mike Lewis when he builds an engine - right down to inspection of each wrist pin or valve stem retainer. If you want the absolute max performance and a high quality build, go to Mike. I am. As soon as I sell the 434, I'll be lining up with him to build my next small block.

Now, if you want a crate motor, it seems to me you'd want one with hundreds of man-years of embedded engineering, R&D, and quality process that is actually based on predictable, repeatable results. For that, GM is the drill - and the extra $2K is well spent for the ability to tap into GM's R&D stream. If you want a smei-well-known (or has-been) name etched into your valve covers....go with one of the other crate suppliers.

Now here's the best news of my life lately. I have a 572/720 or order. I'm just plain sold on it. It is the most compelling high performance system to come along in many, many years and there is nothing truthful any of the other so-called crate engine builders could say that would change my mind. They have only their name, a line card, access to some assembly facility, and maybe some dynos. They DO NOT have hundreds of man-years of experience developing and testing the base materials that go into making up the components that go into making up the subsystems that go into creating an engine. JMO, of course, but I invite any challenge to the depth of GM's R&D. Heck, you heard it here before - even Crower buys billets for their cranks from GM. Is that because Crower wants the best deal? Don't think so. It's probably because they want the best foundation/metallurgical content for creating the Crower components that survive the highest stress points in an engine.

Best,

Mike

Ron454
Aug 11th, 04, 5:55 PM
Thanks GRN69CHV
We be hangin!
Anyway, we will never know what the gross margin on the 572 is for GM.
But it's probably safe to say....it doesn't matter to them. A mere pittance in the big GM picture. That is unless the performance division has to survive on their own.
Most real world companies need to see at least 35% to survive....more if they want to be really profitable....unless they have huge volumes. I doubt there will be huge volumes on the 572.

I still want one.........but it just isn't in the budget.....neither is the new trans or rearend that I would likely break with one.......

BTW.....Hot Rod TV put one in a Nova....how did it end up running?

Ron

doggy69
Aug 11th, 04, 8:09 PM
Sure Ben it was in the "Engines" magazine I think its made by primedia as a compilation of various carcraft stuff and a few extras. What it comes down to is underrating and different correction factors. Correct 800hp and its less, also manufacturers are underrating amid concerns of suit such as the problems with the mustang cobra that didnt quite live up to cited power numbers. I'll look around for it though.

-SS454-
Aug 11th, 04, 8:49 PM
Horsepower TV havent done a real pass on the Nova yet I thought. I recall Chuck sayin their WJ built 572 race engine made 750 hp or something. I really look forward to how fast the Nova is.

mikehartwell
Aug 11th, 04, 9:19 PM
On crate motors the liklihood of litigation over "horsepower overstatement" is extremely low. There is not enough class activity - a class action would be the only way to approach that. I bought a Hyundai Santa Fe for my mother and recieved a bunch of free service, extended warranty, and other goodies as a settlement for the 181hp claim vs. the actual 173. The class was like 9200+ people though, so Hyundai had to do something. However, if you look at the actual "value" of the settlement - real dollars is probably less than $200 per car when all is said and done.

What's really funny is now that GMPP has started a very strategic ad campaign, the other crate guys are falling right into the trap GMPP has set. The other crate guys are responding by taking out 1-2 page ads themselves and posting all kinds of tripe about their engines - particularly new, improved HP ratings and warranties out the wazoo (which are completely worthless if you actually have to use them).

GMPP has got to be doing a lot of high-fiving in their marketing meetings. The bunch of dim-bulbs that make up the so-called competitive base are already digging their own graves. It's pretty sad that the only response to a very pointed and clean GMPP ad is a larger, glitzier ad with more hokum than a snake oil wagon.
Like I said, I just love watching solid business execution.....

Best,

Mike

Harold Sutton
Aug 12th, 04, 2:03 PM
I think the parts in most of the average Shafiroff, Mitchell and other custom crate motor builders will stand up to any reasonable amount of abuse. The fact that they use a different method to rate the horsepower is use is irrelevant and all 540-572 inch motors should perform about the same when put in a car so pick the one you like the best. My son recently went to the local Dynojet with a friend of his who had built a 593 cu.in Big Block and put it in a '68 Camaro with 2 racing bucket seats, good cage, Dana 60 rear end with 4.56 gears, etc. This car made over 750 RWHP and they went to the track a few days later and it ran a best of 9.67 @ 140.90 MPH. So go figure. My sons Chevelle has a hundred less horsepower and only runs a tenth or two slower in this crappy summer air. I'd be willing to bet that the Hot Rod El Camino which will probably weigh about 3800 lbs., will only run low tens @ about 134 MPH.

1BadBu
Aug 12th, 04, 10:06 PM
I got a good chuckle while reading the rant about all the man-hours of R&D at GM vs. whomever because a little voice inside my head kept saying "can you say Vega!". I only have personal experience with one "crate motor". A friend bought a 454 GM crate engine some years back. While tempted to hurry and get that bad-boy fired up, I convinced him to at least check it. Sure enough, not one single rod bolt was torqued to the proper spec. Now I see on p.23 in the August 2004 issue of CHP that the ZZ's and many of it's siblings are assembled not by GM, but farmed-out to a place called Performance Assembly Solutions. In effect, a production line for performance engines. Somehow, seeing rows of engines being assembled by guys with air-ratchets gives me the willys and no-way am I spending $13,000 for that no matter how much R&D went into it. Of course, I'm also the guy who thinks it's a joke to have your dream car assembled by a bunch of sleep deprived volunteers trying to beat a deadline. Maybe it's just me... :rolleyes:

mikehartwell
Aug 13th, 04, 12:25 AM
Yeah, it is just you. Where do you see PAS advertising with glitzy two-page spreads? Anywhere? Notice where they are located? Right down the street from GMPP. Wow, that's sure stupid on GM's part. Former GM exec spins out to create a specialized assembly facility. Now if your logic tracked any semblance of reality, I suppose GM sent bids out to all your high-profile production engine buddies and PAS just happened to have the lowest bid, right?

Just a suggestion, but after you finish chuckling, empty out that jar full of quarters and put together some money for a few courses at the local juco - maybe an introductory ME and metallurgy course. Then take a basic econ course and maybe a finance intro course. I don't have time to help you establish a fundamental baseline, but I can help you dial in your perspective a bit better after you get the fundamentals down.

Let me see if I can give you a little motivation. Betcha like Edelbrock, right? Nice shiny stuff and all that. Last year edel put a whole 3% into R&D and 30% into G&A. They've been running that way for awhile and now they are taking the company from public back to private. Any idea why? It's up to you if you want to learn - or you can continue to lurk on message boards and make uninformed sideways comments about people. I prefer the direct approach myself.

Maybe you want to read the entire post next time before flaming someone. As you can see, I am a proponent of high quality independent shops. But GMPP will take the high ground in the crate motor industry because they have the best practices period. Everything I've written about their R&D and process practices can be proven by simple document searches for papers presented by GM over the years for SAE, ASME, etc.

I'm not even sure you had a friend, let alone one with a 454 that didn't have the bolts tightened down....

Mike

cody
Aug 13th, 04, 1:52 AM
ummmm, if GM does so much research, then why are they using edelbrock heads, if those heads only have 3% research in them? don't flame me like the mustang killer, it just seemed kinda hypocritical. graemlins/beers.gif

R. Madara
Aug 13th, 04, 9:15 AM
The engine is machined and assembled outside of Detroit by a company called P.A.S. whcih is a joint venture by Rousch Industries and the Unibore Company. The blocks are tall deck Merlin castings. The pistons are forged J&E, the rods and Cranks come from Callies and the heads are by Edelbrock. The camshaft and valvetrain are Crane parts. These engines are quality pieces,however, the R&D investment on the part of GM is somewhat overstated considering the majority of the engine is the same aftermarket parts available to all quality engine builders.

Tracy Focht
Aug 13th, 04, 9:43 AM
Originally posted by MustangKiller:
Of course, I'm also the guy who thinks it's a joke to have your dream car assembled by a bunch of sleep deprived volunteers trying to beat a deadline. Maybe it's just me... :rolleyes: is this the show you are speaking of, like Overhaulin?
If so, I can add to this since two of our top installers just did the '67 Skylark for the kid on this weeks show. We (Kicker) were asked to come and help with this particular car, and was more than happy to do so.
Of course what you see on TV, is just TV, right? So I thought until these guys got back from working more than 7 days on this project.
They said it was the most dedicated group of guys they have ever had the pleasure to work with...more than just trying to beat a deadline, but to make someones dream come true....makes me wish we all had the talents we could offer, without criticizing others for doing so.

They have already been called again on another project...and you bet they'll do the sleep deprived job again.......

PS a buddy bought the 572 shortblock, went thru it just to 'verify' everything was in order, and everything was perfectly assembled and properly set with tolerances.

prepass
Aug 13th, 04, 12:11 PM
I must respond to Mike's post about GM and man hours. I recently broke my 454 crate from gm. Prior to installation, I pulled the oil pan. I found a 3/8 nut floating in thhe oil pan. Years later (but less than 5,000 miles-may 2004) I broke the engine. I believe I spun it to hard. I will sign an affadavit that nothing other than the intake manifold, dist, and oil pan were ever dissassembled or taken apart after taking delivery at lustine chevrolet in MD. I began the autopsy and found a cracked piston in no.5 cylinder. It looked like a detonation issue (i was running 110 octane, 36 deg. total advance)
Upon further inspection, the intake valve on the no.5 cylinder appeared smaller than the 2.19's in all other cylinders. It was in fact a smaller intake valve. What's that say about GM quality? I know one should never apply the specific to the universal, but it happened to me and it hurts. On a more positive note, It's getting a healthy build at Mancini Machine in Catonsville, MD. I enjoy working with a local, reputable craftsman. I can take part in and witness the care and concern going in to building my engine. For me, it's a serious investment (for fun of course). I would never buy another crate-without being willing to part with another couple of grand to have it professionally reviewed and re-assembled. But you guys do it how you want to, I just thought I'd share my experience with my 454 crate from GM. If you want to see pics of the valve, it's obvious that it's smaller (or call Mancini) I have them, but I'm off to Romania on business tomorrow.

prepass
Aug 13th, 04, 12:16 PM
I must respond to Mike's post about GM and man hours. I recently broke my 454 crate from gm. Prior to installation, I pulled the oil pan. I found a 3/8 nut floating in thhe oil pan. Years later (but less than 5,000 miles-may 2004) I broke the engine. I believe I spun it to hard. I will sign an affadavit that nothing other than the intake manifold, dist, and oil pan were ever dissassembled or taken apart after taking delivery at lustine chevrolet in MD. I began the autopsy and found a cracked piston in no.5 cylinder. It looked like a detonation issue (i was running 110 octane, 36 deg. total advance)
Upon further inspection, the intake valve on the no.5 cylinder appeared smaller than the 2.19's in all other cylinders. It was in fact a smaller intake valve. What's that say about GM quality? I know one should never apply the specific to the universal, but it happened to me and it hurts. On a more positive note, It's getting a healthy build at Mancini Machine in Catonsville, MD. I enjoy working with a local, reputable craftsman. I can take part in and witness the care and concern going in to building my engine. For me, it's a serious investment (for fun of course). I would never buy another crate-without being willing to part with another couple of grand to have it professionally reviewed and re-assembled. But you guys do it how you want to, I just thought I'd share my experience with my 454 crate from GM. If you want to see pics of the valve, it's obvious that it's smaller (or call Mancini) I have them, but I'm off to Romania on business tomorrow.

pcs0snq
Aug 13th, 04, 9:30 PM
IMO The General and it's race part marketing braniards shot there-self in the brain 10 years ago when they killed off the GOOD deal LS-7's. Back then, the bizzilion after market suppliers did not exist and the LS-7 was the bracket BB of choice. The bizzion crate engine suppliers did not exist either. All of them took advantage of the Generals departure and took over that market. As a result us racers have made out big time. All of them dudes are fighting for our $ and it's a buyers market. Good parts are as cheap now as ever. Now the General wants to re-enter the 12:1 + cr market again with the 572 but the missed the market. It's way over priced.

pdq67
Aug 14th, 04, 10:40 AM
All I'm gonna say is that for the money, I will build my own and get to know my Machinist ahead of time and in the process I will learn a lot and if the sucker breaks it's my fault and I won't be looking to litigate!!!

It's funny how the old guy's can say, don't worry about that so and so spec. being off, b/c it's fine!!! I think it's b/c they learned it's OK the hard way, from experience.......

pdq67

PS., and I still figure I can do a 588"er myself CHEAPER!!!

BUT I WILL ADMIT it won't be a "ball's-out" race motor!! But rather something that goes good just like my old junk 301 did....

Per Gary, 572/620 can be had complete for about $13,000. And it makes more power. 620 is corrected to SAE, not Standard as the Ultrastreet is.

Let's see, 35 percent off of $13,000 = $8450!! I don't think GM is making 35 percent gross on these b/c if they are just take another 35 percent off the $8450 and that should be the Assembler Company's profit..... I figure the parts alone can't be bought for $5492.50!!!

yanniz
Aug 14th, 04, 12:31 PM
I agree on the overpriced and underpowered theory. And I also can not understand why use the Edelbrock heads, other than keeping the cost down or whatever deal GM and Edlbr. have agreed on.. I would imagine that this engine with some good AFR or Dart heads would pick up a bunch.

bored&stroked
Aug 14th, 04, 3:43 PM
I highly doubt GM is making these motors to give everyone a super value. They make it because theres so many supposed "car" people who just want to buy and drop in, and they want the GM name on it. Arguing cost vs HP on a crate engine is ridiculous to me. Build your own and you come out with more power for less money, so ALL crate motors are overpriced and underpowerd. You'll never see me buying one, but Im darn glad GM offers them.

pdq67
Aug 14th, 04, 3:50 PM
DITTO B&S for bringing this long thread back to the real WORLD!!!

pdq67

mikehartwell
Aug 14th, 04, 6:14 PM
It's hard to embed theory into idividual circumstances. What I know, personally, is that the most successful implementation of any "standard product offering", be it a crate motor or hammer, will result from predictable, repeatable results. So people can throw out all the individual bad experiences with GM motors they want. Those "defective motors" from GM as a percentage of GM's total market and the total available market will be a much, much smaller percentage than the "defective motors" from any other crate motor supplier as well as all the other crate motor suppliers combined.

Example: Harley Davidson since the late 80's has dominated the "harley" market. There have been lots of customs and lots of semi-custom builders that call their bikes "harley's". One in particular was Titan Motorcycle. They made a big splash (sort of like the at-large crate motor providers are doing) about the differentiators - bigger motors, custom billet parts, custom paint jobs, fat tires, etc. - a real live badass "harley". Titan's business planb had 2 major flaws: 1) they did not account for the fact that Harley could enter the high end/high performance market at any point they wished; 2) Harley had years and years of process, fabrication, automation, and manufacturing experience. Try as they might, Titan's quality quotient was way under 50% - meaning lots of warranty call backs. So, they cleverly offloaded the warranty stuff to a "third party insurance company". Sound familiar? Customer satsifaction plummeted as Titan continued to deliver spotty quality at best, and warranty support was nil. And what was Harley doing all this time? Watching and calculating the available market for someone that could actually execute in that market. Within a 6-month period, HD announced a new engine, lots of Harley warranted performance parts, cool paint jobs, lots of billet goodies - all available for purchase and installation from your local Harley dealer. Titan was bankrupt within a year. They simply could not compete against the success of the brand, no matter how hard they tried. In fact, all they did was validate the market opportunity for Harley.

So, all the supposed crate motor builders have performed similarly to the example above. They have provided a great service to the market by validating the fact that GM should go after the high performance crate motor market - and go after it hard to win it. That rollout has begun and it will not stop until there is a very clear line establsihed once again between crate and indpendent builder.

I agree with and will ALWAYS use an independent shop for extracting the highest performance from any chosen platform. I've said this a bazillion times - nobody, not even GM, can compete with the likes of Mike Lewis, et al when the goal is an engine for a specific performance target that will operate in the most efficient, bulletproof manner. There's no argument there.

The argument is that GM will drive all the other supposed crate motor suppliers into oblivion. It's just a matter of time. And I don't buy for one second that they're putting crap out just to gain market share. Everyone has a right to be skeptical and opinionated and all that personality-oriented stuff. But to equate a Shaf or Mitchell or Speed-o with GM? There is no comparison. It would be nice to be able to offer up immediate results where GM owns the market by the end of next week. But GM didn't get to where they are by "running down the hill and getting one". That's a much better characterization of the behavior found in the balance of the crate motor market.

I've put my deposit down on a 572/720 for two reasons: 1) I can afford it - there is no personal compromise to my finances by spending $13K on a 572 crate (no need to waste your time telling me how you could build three motors that are way better for the same money), and 2) I trust GM's dataset way more than I trust anything anyone from the etched-valve-cover crowd could tell me. I mean, just look at the bonehead attributes these guys hang their hat on - "Scotty Richardson used one of our motors to win $300K in 2000" - uh, it's 2004 - anything happen between now and then? Yes, SR doesn't use component one, let alone a complete engine from that particular crate builder anymore.

I should also point out...again...that I will be building a butt kicking small block with Mike L (I know he likes BB's but hope he will work with me on a SB) as soon as I get the body work done on the Nova. I was going to just slap the 434 in there but I'd rather sell it and start fresh. Somebody's gonna get a heckuva deal on a 434.....

Bottom line: I'm in line for a 572. Point and laugh, cuss, harrass, say whatever you want. I don't care. I'm certain I'll be MUCH happier with this motor than I was with my last "crate". At the very least, I'll be as pleased as the thousands of ZZ502 owners out there.

Best,

Mike

Wolfplace
Aug 14th, 04, 8:25 PM
Hi Mike,
Thanks for all the accolades,,, I have been reading along here & just enjoying the "friendly exchanges" :D

But you are wrong about me liking big blocks better,, I like em fine but probably 90% of what I do is small block & the majority of that is circle track.

BTW,,,
Here's what your new block should look like when you decide to do it,,,

No drooling allowed :D

http://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/19/190264/Brodix_Block_003.jpg

69 Ratt Vette
Aug 14th, 04, 9:54 PM
Mikehartwell: I have read your post and admired your ability to articulate your thoughts, however your knowledge of motors is way below your ability to write. I do not chastise you for purchasing a ZZ572, to each his own. But your opinion that these motors are better than the ones availible from Shafiroff or Mitchell is simply wrong. You seem to think that GM put a lot of R and D into these motors,I hate to disappoint you but anybody who has built a few race motors will look at the parts and conclude they are a VERY basic set up. The fact GM crippled any real power potential by putting a set of Edelbrock heads on them confirms this. The most probable reason for this snafu is due to the fact Edelbrock makes the GM signature heads, so an obvious deal was struck. I might add both the Shafiroff and Mitchael motors wear Dart heads, if you understand flow numbers and velocity as it relates to horsepower and tourque you will know the benifits of the far superiour Dart castings.

As pitiful as the 620 hp posted by the street 572 is, I am even less impressed by the 720 hp version. 12.5 to 1 and it makes 720 hp (maybe in reality close to 800) big deal. If there was 1/10,000th the vaunted GM mastermind R and D behind these motors that you think there is, the power output would be closer to 850-875 hp out of the 12.5 to 1 version. If these motors are so great why can just about anybody who has built a few motors easily surpase their performance ? The answer to this question is GM is marketing these motors to guys who do not know any better. Thier market knows and trusts the GM name, plus the number 572 sounds cool, so GM tacks on an extra 3 grand and everybody is happy. That is the true genius of GM's marketing strategy, not any of the reasons you believe.

That being said I am not impressed by a marketing sceme, you obviously are (and are probably a succesful business man). I am impressed by the bottom line, and the bottom line is I would buy a motor from Shafiroff or Mitcheal before I would buy one of the overpriced, underachieving, GM 572,s. The primary reason for this is the fact that those motors make more power, for less money, with equal to or better parts.

Doug F.
Aug 14th, 04, 11:14 PM
I don't think the arguement is raw HP, but the quality of machine work and assembly.

mikehartwell
Aug 15th, 04, 3:35 AM
Wolf: Can't wait to get that project started. I found a butternut/black vinyl 67 nova - same color scheme as the Chevelle that is going to become little brother - maybe big brother with your engine in it. Like I've been saying, I will start with a clean sheet of paper and we'll jointly spec the motor - but I'll want bulletproof performance so names like Oliver and others will probably play a role. I'm glad you've already decided on the platform - Brodix will certainly set me apart from the crowd I am now steadfastly committed to getting away from.

69: I do want a race motor for my newest project, so I'm going to have Mike Lewis spec and build it for me. When it comes to the crate debacle, you're allowed your opinion, but you are only dealing with one level of the hierarchy - implementation. The assumption that none of the process factors play a role is what is just plain wrong. So, we'll see who's left standing in 2-3 years. There's no significant economic rebound in sight. GM can play this market as they wish, for as long as they wish. They're investing big bucks, time and talent into GMPP (of which crates are only a part), and they have a strategy in play to clean up the lines and win major market share. I don't "seem to think that R&D" is an advantage. I absolutely know that the matrixed processes GM uses and will continue to perfect and grow are an advantage and will facilitate market domination. You may see that as a travesty or a "marketing scheme". I see it as "best practices" winning once again. It would be fine with me if the other crate guys went back to independent building - but their greed outstrips their sensibility by a wide margin.

I bought a 572. You, on the other hand, say you "would buy....", but don't appear to be planning on buying anything.

As I see it, the future of our economy is transitioning to what economists term "clean markets" - no gray area, no saying "uh, we can do that too...". Well, that may go on in the service markets for awhile longer, but we're going to see products, whatever they are, get real focused on core competency. There simply is no argument to support a theory that other crate builders would have more core competency than GM. They just don't, even collectively, and they never will. They may have ego's a mile wide and may have done something once or twice that make the papers. Maybe they can even squeeze a magnificent dyno run out every few engines, reliability is the key. Statistically speaking, it CAN'T be there.

GM, on the other hand, is just getting started (some say re-started). The sleeping giant has been awakened and has taken a real deep interest in the hi-perf market.

Maybe we can meet in the middle. Dart will most assuredly continue to grow and flourish, so will Brodix. Maybe Shaf and one other "crate" builder will be able to eak out enough differentiation and market share to keep a profitable business going. But there ain't gonna be 10-15 independent crate suppliers out there in 3 years. I ask the question again. Why is edelbrock taking their public company back private?

Anyway, enough of this I know more, you know more. I simply don't care and I'm certainly not stupid. You're right. When it comes to my business, I'm one of the guys to beat - and I'm real hard to beat. So that's about as arrogant as I can stand to let myself be. Your impression of my knowledge base means nothing to me. I'm not going to go into a bunch of details, but I have a lot of early experience in (heavy) rotating machinery, babbit bearing design, lubricant performance modeling, and exotic metallurgical compunds. I know the difference between a process based on repeatable quality and one based on individual experience. I'll take repeatability any day......

BTW, Mitchell uses World heads. Don't think you'll find Maskin helping Mitchell with anything after the split between World and Dart.

Bomber '67
Aug 15th, 04, 9:34 AM
Wow, wow, wow. To all who stand on the various issues presented here: "you spend your money, and you take your chances".

Good and bad can be found anywhere. Many parts of the country do not have great local builders, but they do have their local Chevy dealer. So with that they now have a local vendor selling a known product with a warranty. Forgetting the mail order giants for a moment, I would wager that a huge number of the GM crate engines are sold through local dealers to local customers. Perhaps even a majority. It only makes sense for buyers who prefer to deal with their local dealer who can help them with any issues that may occur. That is my interpretation of GM's marketing strategy in regards to the crate engine market.

Off of that for another moment - apples and oranges are being compared here. For some stupid reason few people seem to comprehend and remember that GM and the vast majority of the aftermarket rate horsepower differently. Check it out, I assure you that GM's decision on rated power is done very conservatively compared to others. This is why we race on tracks instead of dynos (except for the Engine Master's Competition which screws up that theory!). Numbers are being thrown out without much thought. Is anybody else here sick of reading how Wes**** and others always seem to get gems of factory crate engines that make well above their GM rated power right out of the crate? So if you like you can say overpriced for 720 hp - but then is it worth more when a shop tests the same engine at ~ 800 hp? No, of course not - yet some people are casting stones at this engine before anybody has actually run one.

For me, I believe in Maskin. I think his 565 Big Chief II hi-profile 11 degree headed engine will rock the Hot Rod world if it enters the crate arena. With n/a ~ 1,000 hp 800 tq (ok, ~ 900 hp using GM's conservative hp numbering), it would be a super foundation for the weekend warrior.

Thomas

doggy69
Aug 16th, 04, 6:59 PM
Sorry for the delay. The article I speak of was in the summer 2004 edition of engines magazine by hotrod and published by primedia group. pages 89-91 572/720 made 801hp with 110 and 32 degrees of timing using 91 octance and pulling back timing to 27 it made 790 hp. Im still not saying GM is amazing but for any of the big three this is easily the best crate offered ever, imo. Race builders are different and the deals struck with them are seperate but they can't produce quantity like GM can. You want the ultimate motor it'll be custom and you'll wait and pay. You want a helluva crate that'll be at your door tommorrow and comes with a warranty you can call up the general for something better than the 502. :D

mikehartwell
Aug 16th, 04, 9:21 PM
&lt;....The blocks are tall deck Merlin castings...&gt;

NOT! The blocks are the new GEN VI blocks mfg'd by GM. There were two prototypes done on Dart platforms, but Merlin (?), not even sort of. Also, as I told cody, my info tells me the ebrock heads are an interim solution - good price performance and will not get in the way of the 720hp claim (800+hp was the latest dyno result I heard about anyway).

Part of this thread kinda reminds me of the mainstream harley message board back when Titan actually thought they had a chance. Everytime HD would make a significant move towards marketing a hot bike, Titan's ceo, Frank Keery, would circulate and internal memo telling everyone at Titan to get on the message board and load it up with misinformation - no kidding - it was a lame tactic but still they did it.

I'm not saying that's the point of the misinformation on this thread - some people are probably just repeating what they heard and not checking for accuracy. Anyway, my 572 will be on its way soon. I'm thinking it's going to more fun than getting locked in the women's sauna at Taos, but I do tend to fantasize a lot.....

Best,

Ron454
Aug 17th, 04, 1:38 AM
This is better than SNL in the late 70's early 80's!
Point/Counterpoint.

Jane....you ignorant slut......

Keep it up, please. This is the best entertainment I'v had in awhile.

Ron

Harold Sutton
Aug 17th, 04, 2:51 AM
Actually the Edelbrock cast G.M. Heads aren't really that bad a starting place for a good running 572. Chapman has a version of this 24 degree head which flows near 400 CFM. John Armstrong has a S/S "B" Automatic Camaro which ran 8.89 @ 147.99 MPH and set the SSBA National Record and is limited to the Edelbrock casting by the rules. Admittedly your results may vary.

mikehartwell
Aug 17th, 04, 4:27 AM
Perzactly, Harold. A little work and they'll flow even better - or so I'm told by PAS who, by the way, does not have 52 different "crate" offerings. They don't even work with the public in general and are near exclusive to GMPP. At PAS, getting as many motors out the door is not the drill - max reliability is, which is why i'll wait.

Bomber: Good news, if you hadn't already heard it. Eaton and Reher Morrison both have turnkey 565 Big Chief offerings starting around $18K. I would imagine their target customer is a serious racer so I think their standard offerings are just put up on their sites as a starting point.

Best,
Mike H.

kboorman
Aug 17th, 04, 8:17 AM
Originally posted by Ron454:
This is better than SNL in the late 70's early 80's!
Point/Counterpoint.

Jane....you ignorant slut......


Ron Ron, you could be the only other person besides me who remembers that line. Classic :D

Anyway, my brother bought one of the first 572's (put down a deposit long before they were ready for delivery), and I originally thought he was nuts for spending that type of cash for what he was getting. I would have tried to convince him to go another route, but he had already spent the dough. Now that he's got the motor, he's happy with it (althought he hasn't run it yet http://www.cardomain.com/memberpage/465302 ). For him it was a no-hassle purchase (except for the $13K part), he didn't have to hunt down parts and listen to a bunch of guys telling him what they think he should do etc... This is probably the biggest advantage of any crate motor. For his sake, I hope it's built well and remains as hassle free in the future. I think he could have spent less and gotten more, but it's his car, his money, and he's happy with it graemlins/thumbsup.gif
Kirk

Gary at GMPP
Aug 17th, 04, 8:18 AM
Mike H., who is the dealer you placed your order with? How quickly do you want your engine? I know a guy who pull some strings....

Gary

mikehartwell
Aug 17th, 04, 8:58 AM
Gary - thanks. I don't need the engine for another 10-12 weeks. I have to finish the Nova body first and then do a bunch of parts swapping. Then I have to send the Chevelle for mini-tub, 4-link, cage, and paint (badass black). I was quoted 8-12 weeks on the engine by my old bud at Henna (bought like 20 cars from him over the years) and I'm cool with that.

One thing I would like to know is....will the Meziere 55gpm bbc electric pump work okay for this application? I'll also want to do the head cross-cooling lines (lines from two water ports on front of manifold to the two on the rear). I talked with Jones Racing and if they don't have Saginaw and alternator brackets for this engine, they can make them. Already got Lemons primed for some custom header work.

Thanks for the offer. Tell your business development guys to keep pushing hard and not give an inch - the opportunity to clean up this "crate motor" industry is real and it's now - while these other guys are already on the ropes.

Like I said, it's funny to watch you guys do a very professional single-message one-page ad and then find someone like Mitchell in the same mag with two pages of blah, blah, blah but no real specs, 24 different configurations, all on the shelf - shah, right. Do they really think investing more dollars in advertising is the solution? That's only one example of the reasons why GMPP will win this market.

Mike H.

mc71454
Aug 17th, 04, 9:11 AM
Originally posted by kboorman:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Ron454:
This is better than SNL in the late 70's early 80's!
Point/Counterpoint.

Jane....you ignorant slut......


Ron Ron, you could be the only other person besides me who remembers that line. Classic :D
Kirk </font>[/QUOTE]I will add the rest of Chevy Chase's comment...

Jane...you ignorant slut ...Every night when you go hopping around from bed to bed all your left with is some dried out scuzz that no one wants to be seen with"

Classic !!!


Seriously, I can see the arguments on both ends, I happen to prefer piecing my own motor together. based on dragstrip mph and vehicle weight and 15% loss through the drivetrain I am making about 710 at the flywheel. My motor complete from carb to pan and fuel system starter motor, etc. would cost $8500 including all machine shop fees, gaskets, absloutely everything.

kboorman
Aug 17th, 04, 12:23 PM
Tom, the link with your combo isn't working. Sounds interesting from a $ per hp standpoint.
Kirk

Gary at GMPP
Aug 17th, 04, 3:23 PM
Mike, the pump you're looking at should work OK, assuming the rest of the system is sound. Four row rad, high density fins per inch, no circle track aluminum rad!!!(FYI - Brass rejects heat better than aluminum), full shroud sealed to the rad, puller fans, air dam below the rad, 180 stat, 190-210 water temp at normal, not to exceed 230 in traffic.

Also, by the time you get your engine, GM will have a nice serpentine FEAD (Front Engine Accessory Drive) for that engine. Similar to our small block kits.

Last weekend, Larry Cumming's 1900 pound dragster ran 7.82 with a ZZ572/720, not too shabby for a crate engine.....to the nay sayers, I can only say....drive one, then drive the competition, there is a difference.

Gary

TD509EFI
Aug 17th, 04, 4:14 PM
Gary,

Is this serpentive drive the same as part #12498733 jus recently released? Is this the same one that can be used on tall decks, and the one that you're referring to?

John

mikehartwell
Aug 17th, 04, 5:02 PM
Awesome, Gary! The first time through on the Chevelle, I hurried with a bunch of things and wasn't completely happy with the end project. This time I'm marking a pace that will allow me to do "measure twice, cut once". I'll definitely take a look at the FEAD. This is gonna be one bad ride - the boys (10 and 12) and I are stoked!
That Lenco is looking more and more interesting as the days go by....

Best,

Mike H.

saturnstyl
Aug 17th, 04, 5:56 PM
Not to hijack the thread, but I HOPE AND PRAY that the Serp Setup is different than the smallblock one. I need the A/C to be outboard mount on the drivers side, over the valve cover. The Small block setup puts everything on the wrong sides, the bigblock setup I got off a '96 1-ton truck puts the A/C compressor in the area of the throttle body on the Ramjet 502 so it won't fit!!!

mikehartwell
Aug 17th, 04, 10:06 PM
Too late now, but I've got a Vintage Air FrontRunner that has it all nice and neat up front. They make one for a big block, but I don't know if it'll fit the 572. I'm going the utilitarian route anyway....power steering, alternator, electric water pump....

Best,

Mike H.

Gary at GMPP
Aug 18th, 04, 12:56 PM
The big block FEAD has the parts for standard and tall deck, there is one bracket that is not used in the standard block application. But it's all included in the kit.

Gary

quikss
Aug 18th, 04, 5:05 PM
Gary @ GMPP how does that sound to you? Is GMPP really trying to put the other crate builders out of work? Personally if it does happen, and I don't believe it will, I will lose any and all respect for GMPP. The very thought of a company trying to run out the same people that kept them going over the years, ie the racers of the 70s and 80s and early 90s, that are now building engines for a living, that used there parts for so long, is dispicable. I would like to here from someone right in GMPP what the truth is. And Mikehartwell if the general really is as powerful as you like to think, there should be no problem getting them to admit there plans, as they will just crush anyone that disagrees with them anyway. So whats the answer?

mikehartwell
Aug 18th, 04, 7:06 PM
quikss: I wrote that crate suppliers should get back to their core competency - i.e. competing in the independent build arena. The "crate engine" business has gotten real messy - companies can say and deliver whatever they want with little ramification. Wait, I'm way ahead of you. You probably think, "Well, if they aren't customer-centric, they'll go out of business." No, they won't if they actually have a CORE COMPETENCY. And who's to say some of those aren't already just about to go over the edge. It's part of what makes this country great - free market - capitalism settles the accounts eventually.

These so-called individual champions of the 60'-90's (or whatever timeline you want to put on it) industry that kept GM alive - well, I guess you all deserve a big check from GM if extend your logic all the way out to the ultimate end.

GMPP would be stupid to divulge details of short or long range business plan and it's not fair to Gary to try to put him in the middle of it - he's been here to help in the past, not give up company IP. If you read everything on this thread (maybe a few others), you'll find that Gary provides technical information only, for the most part. Sometimes we get a heads up on some new something, but he has been here to help. Harangue me all you want. I can counter any argument with solid logic.

All I've been doing is what any business 101 grad could do - watch the events and derive the cause and effect. I have no inside track to information from GM. I checked with dealers all over the state re availability for both versions of the 572. The numbers in backlog are already pretty healthy. I'm just wondering why those other crate guys are running those big ads everywhere stating they have a bazillion different versions of crate motors, all available for immediate delivery. Hmmmmm, must not have much of a backlog. As near I can tell, GMPP waited until they had a healthy backlog to start advertising and spreading the word.

GM tell all about their plans to gain market share? That's like saying, "Hey, if you REALLY have the winning number, then let's hear it....".

One more thing to think about. Lot's of posts about GM's lack of innovation, and the flaccid new 572. Theoretically, GM is already pricing themselves out of the market by asking $2-3K more for crates that supposedly provide lackluster performance. So, why the big worry?
As I've posted before, I'm a fan of solid business execution and from my limited perspective it seems they are executing a plan and doing it well.
Best,

Mike

yanniz
Aug 18th, 04, 8:25 PM
I really disagree with you in many of your points.....keep in mind that the supply and demand game can swing either way...backlog can be created from high demand or low supply....

You are right that GM has a plan, but I really do not see how you can speak of its execution without knowing what the plan is.

Also in a previous post you mentioned that GM's core competency is engine building and the independent builders competency is not??? Lost me on that one.

Bottom line FOR ME...look at the parts that the GM engines are made of, look at the performance that they put out....100 our of 100 times I would go to Reher Morrison and get hmmm, let's say a 522 that puts out 845+ HP for $12995 DELIVERED... Or maybe step up to their 540 with 855 HP for $12995 DELIVERED... I know people that have run their 522 and 555 for 300 passes prior to dissasembling the engine...

And lastly, when it comes down to core competency, are you telling me that GM's is higher than Reher Morrison's when it comes to engine building??

One more thing, definition of core competency;
A company's core competency is the one thing that it can do better than its competitors

Harold Sutton
Aug 18th, 04, 9:16 PM
I frankly don't see what a 1900 lb. dragster has in common with a 3600 Chevelle. I really would like to see the Chevelle with the ZZ572, 4.11 gears, Turbo 400 and a good converter, weighing in around 3500-3600 lbs. so we'll know how this motor is going to perform in the real world. All we know right now is that it looks good.

mikehartwell
Aug 18th, 04, 9:23 PM
I don't have to know the plan - done enough of them myself to be able to do what I said - mark the cause and effect. Just like on the yahoo stock boards, I'm not going to do your research for you. There are always challenges to theory and logic, but if you don't do your own research then it's a pretty empty challenge. Core competency in my book is a competitive edge. I did not say GM's core competency is engine building. What a bonehead statement that would be. GM, a multi-tiered, global market enterprise is best at building....engines....yeah, right, that's exactly what I said. You have to go back and read the thread. You'll find my representation of GM's core competency includes a strong R&D program which produces:
-industry leading designs for both components and systems
-unique metallurgical compounds
-unique manfacturing techniques
-predictable, repeatable results founded in hundreds of years of process engineering
This is only some of the IP from which GM has to draw from as they form and advance GMPP.

Go to the GM website and read an annual report. That will give you and idea of depth and breadth of knowledge they have to draw from. As you do your own research and read my posts, you will also find that I put RM in the indpendent race engine category - they have posted a spec of what they will build out of the box. If you are a serious enough racer to pick RM, wouldn't you probably tweak here and there? See, RM is a great example of someone with a track record (pardon the pun). GM is not after RM's market. No, GM is likely after the 540-5XX? never-quite-know-what-your-getting market, save for the etched valve covers. You wanna put 'em all in one big pile, be my guest. I have very clearly separated indpendent builders from crate builders. GM is after the crate market. What? Is that the big secret? And in my opinion, they will be successful, wildly successful at that. No, they won't drive RM out of business, nor Pat Musi, nor Mike Lewis, nor Joe Gonzales, nor &lt;insert favorite race engine builder&gt;. The guys that are going to have it real tough are the ones that have no core competency, save for better pricing on offshore parts.

I have no desire to gain respect in this venue or change anyone's mind. It's your money - spend it as you wish. I did - I bought a 572. I could have bought a Big Chief 565 from RM just up the road, but I chose not to. I could have bought a 632 from Bill Mitchell - chose not to. And those are two extremes of the market. I mean, you really wouldn't put RM in the same competency grouping with mitchell would you?

So the premise is that MY deal is done and nobody can change my mind about that decision - free will and all that. I have just contributed to the market outcome.

But if you're just fantasizing about maybe spending some money on a big motor some day, then your arguments are not relevant. You are not part of the target market.

Best,

Mike

Ralph67
Aug 18th, 04, 10:16 PM
Mike why can't you clean up ( shorten ) your responses the amount of verbal crap you are saying is irritating to say the least! We know what you think, how about the real reason for this thread, how does a 572 run in a real world car!

yanniz
Aug 18th, 04, 10:21 PM
Mike, no one is trying to change your mind...just point out that you made a big mistake smile.gif

There simply is no argument to support a theory that other crate builders would have more core competency than GM. They just don't, even collectively, and they never will. This is your quote, and explain to me why you would "categorize" Shafiroff diferentl than RM!!

As far as GM, I have a few shares in my portfolios, so I have read their anual report more than I would want to....

But if you're just fantasizing about maybe spending some money on a big motor some day, then your arguments are not relevant. You are not part of the target market And lastly, not fantasizing about anything...I have a 555 BBC that is build from parts purchased from RM and Shafiroff....it just has some upgrades to what the RM 555 had (Shaft rockers, Canton pushrods, Crower rods, et cetera.) I was about ready to just buy the RM 555 last October, but I decided to buid the engine myself with help from friends....

P.S. Big Chief engine for your car, would have been even worst choise than the GM 572... smile.gif

mikehartwell
Aug 18th, 04, 10:57 PM
Don't know that yet Ralph, don't have the engine so can't comment on performance. I don't understand your frustration - you JUST showed up. But thanks for setting me straight - I'll pay real close attention to any thread you post in - 'course I guess I'll have to look somewhere towards the last 2-3 posts to find out what ideas you've ripped off from the upstream discussion.

Yanniz - my quote supports exactly what I've been saying. Nobody in the crate business can match GM's matrix of R&D - not just automotive R&D - I look at the whole company because those are the resources GM has to draw from. The reason I put Shaf in what I call the "etched-valve-cover" group, is because they advertise in every single rag on that stands. I have a little more respect for the companies that stick to drag racing, even more for those that have developed a long-standing customer base by word of mouth. In my experience (business is business), heavy advertising in a market like this points to lack of core differentiation. Maybe I'm wrong about one particular vendor - Shaf - but I'm not giving an inch on the idea that the crate market will be leveled within 3 years - sooner if the economy continues to bounce.

Big Chief was just an example. My money, my mistake. Could say the same thing about your portfolio, but I don't know what your investing style is - I've been 100% cash for almost 3 years now; and debt free. Another stupid move on my part I suppose....

Best,

Mike

Bomber '67
Aug 18th, 04, 11:26 PM
Wow, the entertainment never ends - bench racing has never been so fun!

RM has no warranty on their 565 Big Chief.

If we all really try, maybe we can make this topic last until someone actually runs a 572/720 down the 1/4 in a Chevelle :D

Pile it on guys, there will be winners and losers...

Thomas

Ralph67
Aug 18th, 04, 11:29 PM
Mike your an incredible big mouth! I just stopped by because i couldn't stand your reams of crap any longer! Just checking, did anyone here ask for your "opinion" on which motor to buy? I think not, as far as you looking for my posts, don't bother i'm not interested in 6 paragraph's of YOUR opinion. Seems you remind me of another somebody around here who needed to hear himself talk so he could believe how incredible he truly is...Mike your a legend in your own mind get over it! Thanks, Ralph.

yanniz
Aug 18th, 04, 11:45 PM
that's cool Mike,
good luck with the engine, I am sure it is a nice piece and you will enjoy it.

P.S. 50% cash, 50% bonds, CDs, et cetera in the recent past. After the last 2 days, I am thinking that it might be time to keep a closer look on the indices in the next few weeks, just in case we get a good bounce in the fall (been shorting minimaly lately with decent success.)

mikehartwell
Aug 19th, 04, 1:40 AM
Yanniz, thanks - I think I'll like it. Won't know until I get it in the car and down the track. If I blow it to smithereens or it shoots oil and water out of every gasket I will post the pic's and admit my defeat. Eventhough this thread has been mostly about the 572/720, I'm just as stoked about the small block I'll be building with Mike Lewis. I travel to the bay area all the time so I will actually get to spend time at his shop and see the engine come together - it's for a Nova.

I was done 3 years ago so that's why I went liquid - don't need much more than a 4% return now. I still keep a separate fund for investing in one startup at a time - usually on a 2-3 year run with acquisition as the exit strategy. Keeps life somewhat interesting, but not near as interesting as this forum.

Ralph, what can I say? Your punishment is just being who you are....see you in another 6 months.

Best,

Mike

Ralph67
Aug 19th, 04, 7:07 AM
Thanks Mike i like me! I guess everything is bigger in Tex.....egos and braggert's too.

mikehartwell
Aug 19th, 04, 8:04 AM
You forgot success and happiness, Ralph - easy for someone like you carrying that big bag of negativity to forget the important things though.

Best,

Mike

GRN69CHV
Aug 19th, 04, 8:22 AM
Keep writing Mike. In addition to the one line responses, I also enjoy a conversation with a more prolific style.

I have been watching this thread and the change of discussion from differing point of view to inclusion of obscure interjections and unrelated statements.

I totally understand your position on utilizing a crate such as the 572. To those who are on a very tight budget, or those that prefer to tinker with their own combos, a crate such as this is not desireable. The question each of us has address is really - "Can I afford the price of entry?". I personally fall into the tinkerer category. My old school HotRodder ideology will not permit me to write one check. Instead, I write numerous checks over a period of time, changing parts and direction until I eventually either achieve what I set out for or move on to something else. In the end, I probably spend a comparable amount.

Anyway, good luck. We (at least some of us) look forward to hearing how the 572 runs.

ML67
Aug 19th, 04, 12:34 PM
Been lurking for a while here. Gotta say I've enjoyed the lively discussion on the GM 572/720.

Personally I'm glad GM has increased their level of crate engine participation and think the 572 family of engines can only benefit the customer. Competition is a good thing.

Hard to argue w/ the knowledge and resources GM brings to the table.

On a somewhat related note, does anyone know what GM recommends for oil in the 572 engines? What oil was used in the dyno tests? Do they recommend dino or synthetic?

Take care,

Mark

Wolfplace
Aug 19th, 04, 1:02 PM
Hey Mike,,
Keep on keepin on. graemlins/thumbsup.gif
I too enjoy the prolific posting from a different prospective.

While I may not agree completely with everything you say regarding some of the builders I remember your first hand experience with one & know of a few other people that are not exactly ecstatic with their experiences either.

Don't know your "friend" here but I suppose everyone is entitled to an opinion,,
Kinda like TV though,, if you don't like the program change the channel smile.gif

Lookin forward to meeting you when you get this way.

Doug F.
Aug 19th, 04, 1:26 PM
After working as an Engineer in the aftermarket performance industry and being involved in racing, I don't think many people understand that "part's ain't just parts".

There are many differences in a lot of parts as far as quality. 90% of people don't know much about this. I learn more and more every day. Anyone that thinks they know a LOT about a LOT, doesn't have a clue. There is just way too much to know.

You don't just "throw" an engine together either. Labor costs are also something most people don't comprehend and don't want to pay for.

That is why I do everything I can myself. I may mess it up, but at least I didn't pay to have it messed up, and I take 5-10x the time checking and assembling most people do.

Most companies are lucky most are ignorant to a lot of the junk that is out there. No offense meant.

But unfortunately cost is still the primary driver in what people buy.

Ralph67
Aug 19th, 04, 3:49 PM
Mike no negativity here, until someone just deserves a little nudge back to reality! The reality is i to will be buying a crate of one sort or another and my back-round ( building racecars for 20 years,millwright,mechanical engineering grad )would suggest other-wise but we just can't build one up here for those prices. The problem i have is you went completly into left field, the question was, has anyone tried a 572 not why would or would not, or who has better quality. We all have our preferences and when someone asks why/who should i buy from your info would be great but that was not the question. I have heard there are a few zz572's hittin Woodward maybe one of those fella's will answer this seemingly impossible question. Ralph

mikehartwell
Aug 19th, 04, 4:25 PM
I'm just psyched that GM is got their monster block program into play and that it seems to be doing well so quickly.

Mike L, the 434 comes out this weekend. The Nova I bought has a Heidt front clip and all the goodies, been tubbed and lots of good al sheet metal work, but still pretty rough - lots of interior work. I'm stuck here in Austin for the next week, but hope to be back in San Jose the week after. If I get clear, I'll call before I drive up. Maybe we can get started on the small block soon - brodix, callies, oliver, venolia - heck, I don't know why - I guess if I'm gonna take the time and trouble to get a bulletproof engine built, why scrimp on parts? I know you have some specific opinions on what works, what doesn't - so I'll pay attention, boss, no arguments from me on this one....

Best,

Mike H.

cody
Aug 20th, 04, 12:18 AM
Mike, what i don't get is that you are raving about GM's business moves, and how they are "taking" over the crate motor market, and that they have this big grand scheme, but GM has been making crate motors for awhile now, the whole "ZZ" line is pretty old now, and now that one single BB comes out, they are suddenly TAKING OVER!!! I think you are getting ahead of yourself with your "guesses" on what GM is doing, THey probably just saw that their was a market for BIg inch BBC's which isn't like big news now, people have been builidng big inch BBC's for awhile now. So they said, hey we could probably profit from this, and since we already have a crate motor line lets add this to the program, not HAHA HA WE TAKE OVER CRATE MOTOR MARKET AND CRUSH ALL!!!!! I think you are over excited about getting this expensive engine and since you got burned last time you are Hyping this up to make yourself feel better. Personally i can see why someone would buy this engine, some people just don't know better, or it is easiest for them, convenience for some people is high priority. Personally would never spend that kind of money on a tall deck BB when i could build a way better standard deck BB for less money. Sorry to go all Dr. Phill on you, just tired of hearing all of these "guesses" about GM and its marketing, i mean after all they are just a guess. hope i didn't step on your tulips smile.gif graemlins/beers.gif

mikehartwell
Aug 20th, 04, 7:15 AM
I know you can build a better, cheaper motor - lots of people can and have said so on this thread. This is really gonna torque Ralph off, because I am not compelled to keep it short.

I reaquainted myself with the high perf market (paid part of my way through college racing at EPND, but that was 25 years ago) by coming up with a homeschooling shop class for our boys - rebuilding the Chevelle. The further we got into the rebuild, studied the market, selected differnet options, the more I realized that a sizeble number of vendors (not service providers like independent shops) seem to bound themselves by the last lie they got away with. Companies advertise whatever they wish and deliver whatever they wish regardless of whether or not it bears any resemblance to earlier claims. The parts part of the industry seems to be advertising centric, not repeat customer. The indpenedent builders base their business on customer service. The crate builders are vendors, not service providers. The buy pre-assembled subsystems and slap em together.

There are a number of indicators that make this market ripe for a change - particularly someone to take some long-term high ground. Edelbrock, for example, decided that emulation of the dot.com boom looked pretty good so they bought up a bunch of companies and did nothing to integrate the IP (they did have a heckuva lot of fun with shareholder money though). Now it appears they are going private so they can clean things up (anyone at edel feeling particularly stable these days?).

The inflection points for GMPP in their long-term crate plan are easy enough to derive - the zz350 and zz502 - sales of which dwarf total numbers of "crates" supplied from others. Then there are test points in the plan - ZZ430 and the RamJet series - that explore differentiation in the customer base. For the past two years it's been all about cubes and there doesn't seem to be an end in sight for that. So, yeah, if the market was healthy, nobody was cutting corners and there wasn't all this frantic shotgun advertising, I'd say GM was happy just plodding along taking slow market share admist the superiority of the "expert" crate-building competitors. Only a company like GM could take advantage of this opportunity and make something of it. I think they are a little more strategic than "we'll crush them all." Their introduction of two solid big inch, high hp platforms couldn't be timed better. They know not everyone will be able to afford them at first, but they can get competitive any time. I have had one discussion with a GM exec. I came away from that discussion with the data that the GMPP program is profitable; it's based on a long-term business plan; it will be a cornerstone group within GM for years to come. Fortunately, I have the skills to be able to discern the veracity of his statements and I believe them to be true.

At the risk of torquing everyone off, compare AMD and Intel for a sec. Whether they like it or not, AMD exists somewhat at Intel's pleasure. Intel just finished and shelved a 7ghz processor - decided not to build it yet. The program inside AMD to track that Intel project? Dead. So once the big guy gets a hold of the market, they can lead it however they wish. Sometimes a competitor will break out, but who wants 100% market share? That's no fun. It's much more fun to influence the success or failure of your competition over time.

So, you didn't go Doctor Phil on me. I paid $7900 for that "hardcore" badboy; got back $3160 within a year and another $3786 in May. It wasn't easy - but I consider a $954 loss an exceptional investment in education. I've got $4K stacked up in different brake experiements, which reminds me - gotta get those into the classifieds.

I did learn a number of valuable lessons about the so-called crate industry. For crate motors, buy from the company that has best practices for system design and delivery. For maximizing a target motor's potential, go to a highly regarded independent. I'm doing both - bought the 572 for the Chevelle and will be working with Mike Lewis on a small block for a new Nova project. I'm going to spend lots of time with Mike on that motor such that my boys and I will be able to build our own motor for car #3, whatever that becomes (Jake wants a 66 mustang GT :rolleyes: ).

Best,

Mike H.

Ralph67
Aug 20th, 04, 8:40 AM
Good god Mike your starting to sound like some of my profs' in college, i can see you now, peering over your glasses shakin a finger at me, Ralph why don't you listen to my rants? Well sir, your just too damn long winded and you sound like you want to work for the General, your not an ad. exec or something are you Mike? Oh well off to vacation for 10-12 days hope this is all here when i get back it's been a hoot:) See-ya Ralph

GRN69CHV
Aug 20th, 04, 9:04 AM
Gentlmen,

Forgetting about and setting aside sheer HP/dollar spent, one of the big issues driving the crate business is perceived value of the completed project. Whether or not an individual purchases a crate to repower a classis or to install into a performance oriented vehicle, there exists a perceived value of using a GM, Ford or Mopar powerplant as a replacement in a "classic" car.

For the purpose of this discussion that is what drives the price setting from GM and the demand. Everything else is either rebuilt or a copy. Neither of these options is non-favorable for a lot of people and certainly not the driving force of the all out performance enthusiast, but for quite a few who indulge in the sport of automobilia, OE still carries preference over aftermarket.

yanniz
Aug 20th, 04, 9:25 AM
Whether or not an individual purchases a crate to repower a classis or to install into a performance oriented vehicle, there exists a perceived value of using a GM, Ford or Mopar powerplant as a replacement in a "classic" car. Not sure I agree with you. If I had 2 cars in front of me, identical to each other, except one has a GM 572R in it and the other has a Reher Morrison 540, or 555....I would go for the one with the RM engine....same for Steve Schmidt engines, same for Huntsville Perf. engines, et cetera, et cetera.....when I think of GM, race engine does NOT come to mind.

Ralph67
Aug 20th, 04, 9:28 AM
Okay quick before i go, my appraiser told me the same thing as above, the "factory crate" will add the full value at appraisal time, the others will be at the discretion of the appraiser when the car is evaluated. Ok now i'm going...have fun!

mikehartwell
Aug 20th, 04, 9:38 AM
Ralphie-boy, I wouldn't work for GM - too big, too many politics. I'm a start-up guy, plain and simple. That's why it's been so easy for me to dissect what's going on with this market.

I have a sphere of business friends that are constantly coming up with new ideas for the market I specialize in. That market is broadly described as algorithm-based software technology. Every few years, one or two ideas generally bubble up to the top and we'll pick one and put a company around it. Usually takes 2-3 years to get it rolling, profitable, and self-sustaining. At that point, whether the company gets acquired, goes public or continues as a private entity, I move on. If they do well, so do I. If they auger into the concrete, then shame on me. I like to cut through the crud and get down to execution of a plan. When any company I'm with reaches the $50-100M, my job as a start-up guy is done.

You don't have to pay attention, Ralph. I was giving you a hall pass so as to avoid another little trip to the wood shed. Enjoy your vacation.


Yanniz: Because of your particular knowledge base, you might just pick one of the others, but not without a LOT of inspection. The public at large would pick the GM-based unit. The RM and Huntsvilles (which I REALLY LIKE by the way) would say to the prospective client, "I've been hammered more times than a roofing nail. Better hope I can hang together through your fun as well." The GM crate gives them an impression of stability and steady value. We've all seen the $20K custom builds that didn't hang together so well and later get sold on ebay for $5K.

Best,

Mike

E34M5
Aug 20th, 04, 3:18 PM
Many posts in this thread says that the zz572 is way too expensive, and that other engine builders builds better engines with more hp than GM for a much better price... (Which might be correct).

But...

1. I think there are two different kinds of people discussing this thread, some that want a racing engine for their 1/4 strip car, and some that want a high-performance street engine for their daily used car.

I'm one of those wanting a high-performance street engine that is nice to drive, and no hazzle.

If I want a racing engine, GM would not be my choice. I would have asked someone like Shafiroff or my local engine builder that specialize in racing engines. (Builds engines for the specific use)

I choose GM because of quality and durability

2. It comes to my mind that GM takes less hp out of a 572cui than other builders would do. You can get 620hp out of a smaller engine with no probs.

Why does GM only take out 620hp? Well, I think GM want's their engine to last. 620hp out of a 572cui is very little, therefor I think that GM's 572 will last for years. Some people say that you should not take no more than 100hp per 61cui on a NON-TURBO engine, GM is way under...

I bet GM could build an engine with 620hp out of a 350, 396, or whatever, but would it last as long as the zz572?

quikss
Aug 20th, 04, 4:24 PM
Really besides price what is the diffrence between the gm motor and say a shafiroff or likewise motor? I don't think (could be wrong)that GM is producing their own parts, their just buying parts off the shelf just like the other guys and bolting it together. I agree if you are wanting to race the zz572 is not the way to go, unless your a bracket racer and not worried about going as fast as you can. But for the street the zz572 is probably going to be a decent motor, not unlike you any other motor you could buy from any other crate builder. In the end, they all, GM and the "crate Builders" are just bolting parts together that you and I could buy and put together as well, its purely a matter of how much work you want to do, and how much pride you want to take in having a motor you do yourself or right a check for. To each his own, many times I've wished I would've just wrote a check and been done with it.
By the way does anyone know yet how a zz572 runs, this thread has gone long enough for a couple of guys to have gotten them and installed em. Jeff

mikehartwell
Aug 20th, 04, 6:09 PM
The 720hp unit I just ordered has a 10 week lead time. No problem, though, as I have lot's to do to get the car ready for this beast. I don't know of any GM dealers that have 572's in stock yet - all orders are on backlog.

Best,

Mike H.

pdq67
Aug 20th, 04, 9:54 PM
All I'm gonna say is, Mike, I wished you got as much enjoyment outta wrenching as you do stating your case..

AND please don't take me wrong here b/c I AM glad for you that life has been fortunate to you so you can..

I for one like to work on mine when I finally get around to it and love b/s'ing about, "I did it myself", and "I know it isn't a "balls-out" race motor", but it runs good enough for me to brag a little and **** off my big headed Brother-in-Law...

I will say that if I wanted a "balls-out" race motor, I would spend the money AND buy the checking tools AND then get anal making sure everything was "dead-nuts on" and do one myself with the help of my old local Machinist..

AND I know too well that nothing beats cubic inches except CUBIC MONEY!!!

pdq67

mikehartwell
Aug 20th, 04, 10:09 PM
You da man. I'm pretty sure that if that big EMF bomb hits some day (the one that's supposed to scramble everything electrical), you'll be able to get everyone running again with a pocket knife and some Scotch33.

Hey, I'll get back to building - in small steps though. In fact, the 434 is almost out of the Chevelle. I have to replace the rear main - leaking like crazy. Hey, are you familiar with the Vintage Air Front Runner serpentine system? Need one for a small block? I'm not gonna use it on the Nova - gonna go with the new March system. You can have this one if you pay shipping. It was like $2K new.....

Jake (my 12 yr old) still has to decide what he wants to build. That's the car we'll do top to bottom (Lord, please don't let him pick a ford...). I'll be spending lots of time with Mike L once we spec that motor. I need to watch and learn. I think that means I get to sweep the shop....

Best,

Mike H.

TD509EFI
Aug 20th, 04, 10:33 PM
Well MIke, if somebody drops an EMP bomb, even your 572 won't be running. More likely to get an EM pulse from the next big solar flare than from one of those "clean" bombs.

Good luck on the 572, it'll be great to hear how it runs. I'm sure a neck brace is optional. graemlins/thumbsup.gif

John

dirty_dawg
Aug 20th, 04, 10:35 PM
http://www.badasscars.com/techtips.html#Anchor23

pdq67
Aug 21st, 04, 5:29 PM
No, but I figure my old points distributor triggered motors will be running unless that kinda bomb can fry my old oil filled coil or old condenser!!!

AND you are right b/c if one does go off, we ALL will be amazed at just what doesn't work anymore that we may have to do without just like before the stuff was invented..

pdq67 is now down and reading along and on the side...

mikehartwell
Aug 21st, 04, 6:31 PM
So you didn't tell me if you can use the FrontRunner. Here's a link - can't remember if you're running a bbc or sbc. Anyway, it's yours if you want it - only about 500 miles on it total. It's the gunmetal gray coated one, not the polished unit.

http://www.vintageair.com/frontrunner.asp

Lemme know....I just want to get it into the hands of someone that will use it. If you can't maybe Austin Joe can.

Mike

TD509EFI
Aug 21st, 04, 7:40 PM
Mike,

I'm not sure if you're if the response was concerning the Frontrunner was meant for me. If not, I appoligize.

I'm using a tall deck BB with a crank trigger so I'll be unable to use you SBC one; wish I could though!. The VA unit (as well as the March and Billet Specialties) mount off the block/water pump studs, so deck height isn't an issue. My crank trigger will require me to use spacers and longer studs to keep the alignment correct, not a big deal.

Thanks again,

John

cody
Aug 22nd, 04, 1:17 PM
Hey, i could use that system, on the small block i am building for my 71 chevelle. nice system, ver generous of you to offer it to a member. give me an email if you want to dump it
codybouc@yahoo.com
if not, no prob!

Harold Sutton
Aug 22nd, 04, 3:44 PM
I'm still dying to see the new ZZ 572 motor run in a medium sized Chevelle. By the time they hit the streets and tracks here they will not have enough power to get through the first round of our shootouts. Maybe G.M. will build an all out ZZ 632, with 14-1 compression and more of everything at about 1000 H.P. R/S winner was a 400 SB powered Nova with lots of juice that beat a Mustang with a Procharger+ N2O also. (9.11 to 9.05 holeshot win). Lots of mid 9 second second runs. New 10.0 class just started which looks promising for guys who don't like to push their machinery so hard.

mikehartwell
Aug 22nd, 04, 6:35 PM
The FrontRunner is going to pdq67. I just gotta get it all cleaned up and boxed - it really is almost new - even has a Mullins polished remote p/s reservior. Sorry, cody. But if you were interested in the FrontRunner in particular, I think I remember Clint44 trying to get a team purchase together - really good price. He may still be working on it.

I just don't do well selling my extra parts - I try to hang onto a bare minimum of extra parts and the rest hopefully goes into a buddy's car where it can get used. Can't stand playing pack rat - rather play Santa Clause....

Mike

pdq67
Aug 23rd, 04, 9:03 PM
Guy's,

I'm overwhelmed at Mike's generosity!!

And thanks again, Mike..

pdq67

Ralph67
Aug 30th, 04, 10:19 AM
Mike Vacation was great and well needed, guys i am hearing comments like everyone just bolts parts together and voila you have a motor. well to side with Mike (just for a minute smile.gif ...)anyone who has built a decent mill tell you buying the parts is easy putting them together properly with matched components and then getting respectable power and life out of one is another story. Anyone can put together a motor with the best of parts and still have a dog that lasts 1/4 of its normal life span! Mike for your sake i hope your son deceides on the bowtie, although maybe a nice AMX or Mopar could catch his eye.......HEHEHEHE! Ralph

70mousejob
Aug 30th, 04, 10:47 AM
I didn't go thru and read this entire thread, maybe I will tonight. I'm just posting that we fired up one of these on the test stand at work the other day. It was the milder 9.6:1 motor, but man what a thing of beauty inside, attention to detail was good, small windage tray in place, and the rods were beefy as all hell. The thing idled nicely at about 850rpm and rapped up super quick to 6000. I couldn't believe how mild it sounded, I was actually kind of dissappointed and waiting to hear something gnarlier! I know they arn't the best bang for your buck, and if it were my money I would probably spend it elsewhere, but you have to admit that something that size from the General is pretty cool. The customer wants it purely for novelty. :rolleyes: Must be nice!