Tony @ Mamo Motorsports

Guys,

I have been touting recently that I was confident my new Mamo Motorsports LS7 heads combined with a mild cam and one of my ported MSD intakes would be able to lay down 600 RWHP in a really drivable easy to live with combination (a number usually exclusive to very aggressive combinations and all the negative trade-offs usually associated with that type of build). I have some independent dyno feedback to share that might prove that figure not only possible but potentially a tad on the conservative side!

Awhile back (previous to designing my new LS7 program in the aftermarket LS7 castings), I helped a customer with ported OEM LS7 heads. Now keep in mind I have seen quite a few ported OEM castings from various shops on my bench over the years.....most flow in the 390 - 400 CFM range on the intake....245-255 on the exhaust. My program for the OEM stuff consists of a full CNC port job first with extensive hand finishing of the chambers, bowls, and short turns which is very time consuming, but this additional process optimizes and perfects all the critical areas gains are to be found in airflow (my aftermarket TFS castings I offer now are treated to exactly the same process....CNC and hand finished).

My ported OEM castings are very good.....405 CFM on the intake in a smallish runner (275 cc) and 265 ish on the exhaust. The dyno and independent feedback Im sharing with you guys today utilized my OEM ported heads, not my latest and greatest design in the aftermarket castings that flow almost 10 CFM more in a port 10 cc's smaller (killer combination right there!), so keep that in mind.

Like alot of you, this particular customer wanted the have your cake and eat it to combination and wanted something that would punch a decent number but retain stock like driving manners....and in the case of this particular customer I mean really stock like manners so I designed a custom cam for this extremely mild build with 231 degrees of intake duration....243 degrees on the exhaust, and a fairly wide 114 LSA to smooth things out even more reducing overlap and improving low speed manners and drivability. In fact you can tell how mild the cam is by looking at where this combo peaks which is in the low 6000's but carry's well to 7K

Another thing most of you will find interesting in these results is the baseline run today was actually with the ported 102 FAST I helped my customer with at the time as well. Our original goals with this package was to hopefully clear 550 RWHP in a combination that truly had stock like driving manners. Turns out we cleared that goal by 20 RWHP or so and we were both very pleased with those results.

Fast forward to today....looking to extract a little more from the combo Joe just installed one of my ported MSD intakes after I encouraged him it would be worth the time and money based on a few other customers I have helped that did the same. Joe's combo was handicapped a little by the fact his cam timing was light (taking less advantage of the better intake) but none the less we still picked up a solid 20 RWHP gain over the ported FAST I did for him a year or two ago. Another documented solid independent result of my ported MSD intake over a ported FAST that I actually handled personally (not a different shop). Clearly the ported MSD intakes I offer right now are the best bang for the buck going if you own an LS7 (and it only takes half an afternoon to install). A baseline utilizing a stock LS7 intake and 90mm TB would have made the gains from the ported MSD look twice as good as you see below which is crazy but true!

Check out this comparison....note this is where they finished off after backing the fuel off and the timing back to 25' to keep everything super safe (Joe is very conservative). They made 590 in a previous run before softening the tune to the results you see below (comparing the ported FAST and MSD....keep in mind guys, both combo's already had the benefit of the same 102mm TB so the gains depicted below with a small cam is only the improvements from my ported MSD!).




Close to 600 RWHP in a package that comes on really early...no need to really twist it to experience the big thrust.....really usable serious power in a combination with stock like manners. If the tuner would have leaned the car to a more optimal 12.8-13.0 at peak power and put 27-28 degrees of timing in it, with a cool hero run at the end of the day if it didn't hit 600 it would have missed by a pony of two. Here is a couple of direct quotes from the owner I got today via text:

Keep in mind this car drives like glass (no ********) in 4th gear at 40 MPH!!! One bad *** setup!!

Safe AFR'S and 25 degrees of timing... No hero runs here.. The intake WORKS!!! We definitely could have pushed it a little more, but no reason to... Car is a monster, just made a highway pull, no traction till about 80mph..👍

In wrapping up there are a couple of very key points to keep in mind. First off this thread covers two important topics....the first reinforces how good the new MSD program I have alot of time invested in truly is, and the second my trying to highlight the potential of my newer even more efficient LS7 head program (in the aftermarket TFS castings) which would have made notably more power and torque. They offer higher velocity for better cylinder fill and more peak airflow....a win-win for the entire shape of both the torque and the power curves. The last key point to consider is this particular package features a cam choice that is beyond mild....you could easily add 4 degrees to both sides and still have a cam most would agree is still mild and we would have picked up another 6-8 ponies from that small bump in cam timing.

The potential of the newer stuff I have been working on is clearly exciting and I think my personal car which will be a highly detailed/optimized build will approach 625 RWHP in a really nice driving combination....not quite this mild but mild enough to still drive every day if I wanted to (intake duration in the mid/high 230's).

Sorry for the long post guys....I don't post alot but when I do I like to be as thorough as possible....saves time answering a bunch of questions later and hopefully makes the post easier to grasp/comprehend only reading it once!



Cheers,
Tony

NW94Z

Very cool Tony! I love the fact that there are more ways today to make very respectable power that required aggressive builds and less than ideal driving habits up until not to long ago with less extreme parts and great drivability. Your helping lead that charge.

I started my H/C/I project first and foremost to address the factory heads and add reliability and longevity to my motor. I never wanted to sacrifice drivability in the process so as I added parts I tried very hard to not to go to big. I managed to keep my ego under control for the most part and not go big but I have kept adding parts to the build to get the most out of the package.

Initially my goal was 550-560 rwhp but as I added parts I increased my expectations. I'm trying to find a balance of value + performance so I'm giving up a few ponies here and a few ponies there but with the recent addition of your ported MSD intake I'm hoping to be closer to 600 rwhp than 550 rwhp.

Kohle gets to do all the work at AHP and in about 3 weeks I should know where the car lands.

Great work on the heads and great work on the manifolds. Glad to be a customer of yours.

Whis9

As always
Awesome job

southspeed

Awesome. What do you think the torque number would have done with your tfs heads? Would the peaks move lower in the rpm or higher?

Tony @ Mamo Motorsports

The whole entire curve would just move higher by "X" amount of ft/lbs. Seeing as we have gained not only airspeed but also more peak CFM with the TFS castings (which is a large factor in potential peak power), I would guess the curve would move up almost evenly everywhere but due to the fact you start getting a higher multiplier of power per ft/lb gained past 5250, it would have had a larger gap towards the top (1 ft/lb of torque at say 6800 RPM gets you an additional 1.3 HP!).

I could draw it pretty good on a napkin.....LOL, but I think you get my drift. The entire curve simply shifts higher with a slightly larger gap up top and it carrying even better past 6500.

In fact it may have also started slightly wider with the added efficiency of the head....narrowed a bit.....and then started widening with RPM like I described above.

Hope this helps....

-Tony

Tony @ Mamo Motorsports

Here....I did better than a napkin!

I exaggerated what might have been the gains slightly just so they were easier to see, but based on countless cylinder head dyno tests I have conducted for myself and AFR over the years I could tell you the trend you see below in the hypothetical "blue pen" would probably be very close to reality with a higher flowing head utilizing a smaller port.

Keep in mind that is counter-intuitive in some respects and difficult to achieve that winning combination for somewhat obvious reasons (easier to get more air thru a larger hole!!). The design of the port, valvejob, and chamber has to be vastly improved and it can only happen due to more air speed being created in the smaller runner due to the more efficient final shape and design....a huge win-win for most street strip engines at the RPM levels anyone reading this would be concerned about. I hyper focus on this kind of thing when I take on any cylinder head design project and its been a proven formula with big results no matter what brand (Ford, Chevy, etc.) or type of head we are discussing.



Cool stuff....



Regards,
Tony

double06

As I had mentioned in another one of your post Tony everybody focusses on Mr Intake port while Mr Exhaust port is left at the curb. Which at some point is a mistake if can't get the air out. Though with your 265 cfm exhaust number (I presume that is with a tube on it) that is pretty good. I know the LS7 has to make the loss up in way extra exhaust duration. How are the TFS exhaust ports compared to LS7?

Bad_AX

Tony,

Can you tell us about the other supporting modifications for this engine, CAI, exhaust, lifters, rocker arms, etc.

Thanks for posting!

starchedup

Tony,

You designed the porting program for the MSD intake manifold is that correct?

I've heard that the MSD will pickup more PEAK hp but lose tq compared to a ported Fast 102. I'm wondering is this correct? I was considering replacing my Fast 102 with a ported MSD (that "Air Force" crap would have to be sanded OFF though).

It would be going on my 454 stroker... Been told the intake is holding me back but I don't want to cut my hood for a Holley high rise and I don't want to lose tq with a sheet metal intake. So the only options was ITB which is majorly expensive or a ported MSD. Need your opinion if its worth it to go with your ported MSD over my ported Fast from a cost benefit analysis.

Thank you

southspeed

I think you will gain torque. Most people on here have.

briannutter1

I've been friends with Joe the owner for several years now and this is one of my favorite engines. It is very mild sounding...an idle clip would be good. Torque is extra impressive. I guess what I like best about it is it's everything a LS7 could have been straight from the dealer.....the driveability is that perfect. I also believe it's the engine that should have been in the C7 Z06.

Funkybird

After getting big power from one of your msd intakes, I'm pretty curious how one of your head/cam packages would size up to my current setup. I'm tired of the big cam behavior and low part throttle timing due to Milled heads on 91octane making it feel soft and mushy.

DoodadZ06

+1 since my 06 Z06 is completely stock and I'm looking at options to increase reliability longevity and power while maintaining streetability.

Tony @ Mamo Motorsports

The exhaust port on both my LS7 programs are excellent (OEM and my TFS aftermarket casting)....killer low/midlift flow and excellent peak numbers. You can have two exhaust ports with similar peak numbers and there may be a 20 CFM difference at .400 lift which is huge. I spend alot of time on the exhaust side of all the heads I design but went the needed extra mile on both of my LS7 programs (OEM and aftermarket). When comparing the two however, the largest differences lie on the intake side (which I get into more detail below) with the aftermarket casting LS7 program being more efficient because I have more creative freedom in the smaller port of the aftermarket casting I start with (that program flows 412 CFM and finishes at 265 cc where an unported stock head starts at 270 cc and only flows 372 CFM!). The only way to make an LS7 OEM head better is by enlarging the port even further and that effects the overall efficiency and airspeed of the final product.

So while I already answered in detail (in the other thread) your question/concerns about the exhaust flow situation when you initially posed it, I will copy and paste my reply for the benefit of others who may not have seen it....its good information to share. I also will repost your question so its easier for everyone else to follow

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


In a word.....YES....but its easier said than done. The LS7 designers focused there bias so much on the intake with the size and positioning of the valve that the exhaust was almost an afterthought.....LOL

While the large 2.205 intake valve is completely unshrouded from the chamber wall, that feature means just the opposite for the smaller 1.615 exhaust and it's "shrouded" pushed against the wall of the head which reduces the effective area of the valve being so close to the wall. Its just not ideal

I have invested alot of time on the exhaust side in an effort to better balance the flow relationship and my exhaust port flows about 265 CFM which is pretty solid on my bench (especially for an SBC head)....very solid in fact considering the geometry of the LS7 architecture which doesn't favor the exhaust port at all.

That said I do have to share that motors naturally aspirated respond more to gains in flow on the intake than they do on the exhaust and its interesting how low a percentage (exhaust to intake relationship) you can get away with cammed properly and still make alot of power. Pro Stock engines are perhaps the pinnacle of that example as the intake valves keep getting larger as the exhaust valves keep getting smaller....LOL Apples and oranges in some respects but relative to this conversation in others.

I would add I am working on an even larger exhaust port for my LS7 program but I am a long ways from completing it and confirming I can even pull it off without compromising the integrity of the casting (aka a port wall that's too thin that could effect reliability). I mention this only to further validate that I would love to have a higher flowing exhaust with a 415 CFM high velocity intake port, but my hands were tied a long time ago by the original designers of the head and their clear bias of "lets build a raised runner 12' head with a really kick azz intake port".

Btw on my flow equipment a stock LS7 flows about 372 CFM on the intake and 215 CFM on the exhaust. My new program using the TFS LS7 casting bumps that intake output by 12% or so (a significant gain with such a high baseline), and the exhaust by almost double that (23%), so the head Im offering does have a much better E to I relationship and requires less crutch with the exhaust cam timing than a stock head would require for optimal results.

Thankfully we have the cubes to offset some of the loss in torque the additional exhaust duration brings to the table....I suspect the designers of the LS7 recognized that and the fact intake flow plays a larger role in power output than exhaust flow

Good stuff!

Regards,
Tony

Tony @ Mamo Motorsports

Good question....working on your answers....I helped him with the (baseline) of this package two years ago. Will update ASAP


The results featured in this thread (the info you seek) clearly shows no loss of power.....only significant gains upstairs where its always most welcome. Here is another good read with back to back results of a ported FAST to my ported MSD and solid gains here as well in two other independent documented comparisons.

https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...msd-gains.html


Lets make it happen....you will love it. The more efficient and better the cylinder heads are the less cam you need to make big power. This thread is the living proof of that but it's something I have known and focused on for a long time. My C5 for instance.....in 2004 with the new AFR 205 heads I designed....I ran a 224/228 cam which most would agree is very mild (car still got 28 MPG on the freeway).....I put down 475 RWHP in that combination and it ran 125 MPH trap speed in my C5 Coupe (3400 lbs....not a lightweight Z06). Car drove like stock....anyone that took a drive with me swore it was a stroker with a small cam cause how could a mild idle and a 346 apply that kind of thrust. Efficiency and an optimized complete package is the answer and applying all these same principles to this platform (the LS7 C6Z)....the potential is incredible here....its really an amazing platform to build on.

Few cars, no matter what the cost, can achieve trap speed approaching 140 MPH in normally aspirated combinations still civil enough to drive on the street (that's a big number for exotics and forced induction). The new stuff I have coming out is going to set the bar alot higher for the LS7 community, Im confident of that....now if I can only find the time to finish my chassis dyno cell and actually work on my own car life would be good!



Regards,
Tony

PS.....FunkyBird....hit me up via email.....lets talk about your set-up. Im confident I can design a package for you that would make a bunch more low/midrange grunt....be waaaay more responsive....and make the same if not slightly more peak power than your making now. The car will be a blast to drive and you can enjoy it all over again.....too many people get lured in by focusing on dyno numbers and big cams which can really negatively impact the overall enjoyment of the car long term. Focusing on 5% of the cars use (WOT) and sacrificing/hurting 95% of its performance (anything not WOT) is silly.....you have to strive for the have your cake and eat it to package unless the car is strictly a track oriented vehicle. The only negative of that is the "magic cake" can get expensive.....better parts and a more optimized complete combination always cost a little more but the upside experience is more than worth the price of admission. I had a ton of time and money in my C5 but it was awesome and worth every dollar and hour spent

Tony @ Mamo Motorsports

OK....finally got the info to complete the picture here (which IMO leaves room for even more upside potential with better lifters and aftermarket roller rockers that dont scrub the guides as much).

Joe is running stock LS7 lifters, stock LS7 rockers (with the trunion upgrade), ARH 1.875 headers, and a Halltech 107mm CAI

Hope this helps!

-Tony

RenoC6Z06

Tony my car put down 606whp with tsp ported heads Ls7r cam 102TB MSD intake and 2in primary headers. I'm really interested in your heads but I'm wondering if my cam would work good with them?

Tony @ Mamo Motorsports

You would certainly see a nice gain with just a head swap but you really should consider a better cam to really hit it out of the park when you do the swap. You could compound the gains of the heads and lets face it at this point finding another 20-30 HP is very costly (your paying to do a H/C twice) so you really should allow me to maximize the gains from the swap and design a cam for you at the same time. For the price of the camshaft it just makes sense

Take this to PM or better yet email if you want to discuss it in more detail with me

mamomotorsports@yahoo.com

Regards,
Tony

olddragger

Ever

Buddy A

You're killing me Tony. Patience isn't my strong suit...
Awesome results