[Z06] Fast 102 vs MSD airforce comparison.
04-07-2015, 09:00 AM
#41
With the FAST, you can't run the LS7 fuel rail, no matter what spacers or injectors you use. You have to either run a LS2 fuel rail, or aftermarket fuel rails. And regardless of rails used, you need to either use spacers, or go with taller, LS2 style injectors. In that regards, the MSD makes it a simpler, less costly swap out from the OEM intake.
04-07-2015, 10:44 AM
#44
Melting Slicks
Fast will not work with Ls7 rails.
You need LS2 rails and injector spacers.
You need LS2 rails and injector spacers.
04-07-2015, 11:27 AM
#46
Drifting
Thanks for posting this! Seems like going from OEM intake to MSD is the clear choice for me. Being the skeptic I am, I'll prob wait to see some results from stock to MSD before pulling the trigger. I was told with my H/C setup I'd see 25 from the fast, so if that's 30-35 with MSD I'd be very happy!
04-07-2015, 12:14 PM
#47
If you take a look at the front of the LS2 and LS7 intakes, all this will become clearer. The LS7 intake (OEM) does not have the same profile as the LS2. The LS7 is flatter. The FAST intake was originally designed for the LS2, and when they started making the LS7 intake, they did not completely redesign their product, but simply modified their LS2 intake to fit the LS7 cylinder heads. Well, that and some mild runner changes.
04-07-2015, 12:22 PM
#48
Instructor
![[Cerberus]'s Avatar](https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums/images/avatars/66.jpg)
Well you should probably just call them and ask to verify…. But, I believe the LS7 OE rail they sell for this intake is actually an OEM LS2 rail that they buy from GM, then just give it a new name. But even with the LS2 rail, the shorty LS7 style injectors will still need spacers. Or, get taller LS2 style injectors.
If you take a look at the front of the LS2 and LS7 intakes, all this will become clearer. The LS7 intake (OEM) does not have the same profile as the LS2. The LS7 is flatter. The FAST intake was originally designed for the LS2, and when they started making the LS7 intake, they did not completely redesign their product, but simply modified their LS2 intake to fit the LS7 cylinder heads. Well, that and some mild runner changes.
If you take a look at the front of the LS2 and LS7 intakes, all this will become clearer. The LS7 intake (OEM) does not have the same profile as the LS2. The LS7 is flatter. The FAST intake was originally designed for the LS2, and when they started making the LS7 intake, they did not completely redesign their product, but simply modified their LS2 intake to fit the LS7 cylinder heads. Well, that and some mild runner changes.
04-07-2015, 02:54 PM
#52
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Jan 2013
Location: what ain't no country I ever heard of
Posts: 2,220
Received 324 Likes
on
247 Posts
04-07-2015, 07:58 PM
#55
Drifting
Ryne is right.... leaner will not yield anymore power anyways... 9whp is what i actually expected.... i would put it in.. maybe in the porting there is an additional 5.
If the fast was ported before, the gains are awesome.
If the fast was ported before, the gains are awesome.
04-08-2015, 07:23 AM
#56
Burning Brakes
Way to hijack the thread with this fuel rail discussion.
04-08-2015, 02:04 PM
#57
Why are people thinking they're going to bolt this on an see 10hp over a fast 102 instantly? Look at the build and the graph; it gained for 500 rpm and was only making 8hp from that for a tiny window towards the end.
The ls7 in this build is likely easily exceeding 600-675 hp. If it took all that to see a gain of 8hp do you really think that you'll see that with a bolt on ls7 or even one with stock heads? I see CMS corrected the fueling concern but still how do you lose .5 afr reading at the tail? If they were the same at the header then they should be pretty close at the tail pipe seeing as its the same car.
I have neither intake but some people here get so absorbed in the tiny improvement it had for 300 rpm on a serious build like this, that its unrealistic. If you have a mild build there's no downside for either intake both will likely make the same power.
The ls7 in this build is likely easily exceeding 600-675 hp. If it took all that to see a gain of 8hp do you really think that you'll see that with a bolt on ls7 or even one with stock heads? I see CMS corrected the fueling concern but still how do you lose .5 afr reading at the tail? If they were the same at the header then they should be pretty close at the tail pipe seeing as its the same car.
I have neither intake but some people here get so absorbed in the tiny improvement it had for 300 rpm on a serious build like this, that its unrealistic. If you have a mild build there's no downside for either intake both will likely make the same power.
04-08-2015, 02:11 PM
#58
Why are people thinking they're going to bolt this on an see 10hp over a fast 102 instantly? Look at the build and the graph; it gained for 500 rpm and was only making 8hp from that for a tiny window towards the end.
The ls7 in this build is likely easily exceeding 600-675 hp. If it took all that to see a gain of 8hp do you really think that you'll see that with a bolt on ls7 or even one with stock heads? I see CMS corrected the fueling concern but still how do you lose .5 afr reading at the tail? If they were the same at the header then they should be pretty close at the tail pipe seeing as its the same car.
I have neither intake but some people here get so absorbed in the tiny improvement it had for 300 rpm on a serious build like this, that its unrealistic. If you have a mild build there's no downside for either intake both will likely make the same power.
The ls7 in this build is likely easily exceeding 600-675 hp. If it took all that to see a gain of 8hp do you really think that you'll see that with a bolt on ls7 or even one with stock heads? I see CMS corrected the fueling concern but still how do you lose .5 afr reading at the tail? If they were the same at the header then they should be pretty close at the tail pipe seeing as its the same car.
I have neither intake but some people here get so absorbed in the tiny improvement it had for 300 rpm on a serious build like this, that its unrealistic. If you have a mild build there's no downside for either intake both will likely make the same power.
Last edited by C6Z06C6; 04-08-2015 at 08:39 PM.
04-08-2015, 02:52 PM
#59
04-11-2015, 09:57 AM
#60
Former Vendor
Member Since: Nov 2002
Location: Toronto Ontario
Posts: 4,003
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes
on
11 Posts
Thanks for posting this! Seems like going from OEM intake to MSD is the clear choice for me. Being the skeptic I am, I'll prob wait to see some results from stock to MSD before pulling the trigger. I was told with my H/C setup I'd see 25 from the fast, so if that's 30-35 with MSD I'd be very happy!