Vararam Composite Intake Manifold For LS3 Based Engines
08-02-2015, 10:50 PM
#83
08-04-2015, 01:41 PM
#85
Patrick G. recommended that to me in November 2013, and I happened to get one Rick had in stock the same week from someone who backed out on it. Looking at my old calibrations, my WOT VE went up anywhere from 3-8% at WOT, and my MAF readings went up between 6-20g/s at the same Hz. Those tables were within 2% error before the intake, and within 2% after being recalibrated via wideband lambda.
Below is the only before/after graph I can find on the RCR intake, comparing to a Fast 102.
http://www.g8board.com/forums/showpo...86&postcount=1
Below is the only before/after graph I can find on the RCR intake, comparing to a Fast 102.
http://www.g8board.com/forums/showpo...86&postcount=1
08-04-2015, 10:06 PM
#86
Patrick G. recommended that to me in November 2013, and I happened to get one Rick had in stock the same week from someone who backed out on it. Looking at my old calibrations, my WOT VE went up anywhere from 3-8% at WOT, and my MAF readings went up between 6-20g/s at the same Hz. Those tables were within 2% error before the intake, and within 2% after being recalibrated via wideband lambda.
Below is the only before/after graph I can find on the RCR intake, comparing to a Fast 102.
http://www.g8board.com/forums/showpo...86&postcount=1
Below is the only before/after graph I can find on the RCR intake, comparing to a Fast 102.
http://www.g8board.com/forums/showpo...86&postcount=1
08-05-2015, 06:44 AM
#87
thats the first ive heard of that happening. i run the gpi intake but its the same deal with the rods. the maf should be able to compensate for the small amount of increased air to keep the afr in line. the maf may read higher but afr should be the same as you havent done anything to change the cailbration curve for the maf. maybe it has something to do with the 98 pcm
50-62MPH RCR was .14s quicker
62-71 "" .015s
71-80 "" .157s
80-91 "" .187s
91-102 (5600-6400RPM) "" .452s
No before/after dyno sessions, but that's only a tuning tool anyway.
08-05-2015, 11:59 PM
#88
New intake manifold shootout posted, Vararam wasn't included though 
Edit: Crap, these are only cathedral ports.
http://www.hotrod.com/features/1507-...ifolds-tested/
Edit: Crap, these are only cathedral ports.http://www.hotrod.com/features/1507-...ifolds-tested/
08-06-2015, 04:39 AM
#89
Not sure. I have a spreadsheet calculating elapsed times between speeds before and after the RCR intake. I can send it to you if you desire.
50-62MPH RCR was .14s quicker
62-71 "" .015s
71-80 "" .157s
80-91 "" .187s
91-102 (5600-6400RPM) "" .452s
No before/after dyno sessions, but that's only a tuning tool anyway.
50-62MPH RCR was .14s quicker
62-71 "" .015s
71-80 "" .157s
80-91 "" .187s
91-102 (5600-6400RPM) "" .452s
No before/after dyno sessions, but that's only a tuning tool anyway.
08-06-2015, 11:21 AM
#90
Kinda surprised by the fact that the weiand and BBK SSI manifolds arent more widely used as substitutes for FAST manifolds given they are half the cost.
08-06-2015, 01:32 PM
#91
Well, seeing as how the LS6 manifold made 557 hp at 7,000 rpm, and the Speedmaster made 561 hp at 7,000 rpm, i would say that assessment is wrong. Not to mention it made consistently better torque and power under 4000rpm, id say that pretty much dispels the myths about it being "****". Might not be as good as the other options but for roughly 200 bucks, if your coming from a lesser manifold like a LS1 or LS4 like what I have, its a far better purchase then a 600 dollar LS6 or a 1200 dollar fast. Seeing as how the vast majority of this forum consists of FAST sackriders and doesnt understand the hp per dollar arguement, makes sense that no one would see any other way except the single most expensive manifold on the market.
08-07-2015, 10:11 AM
#92
Well, seeing as how the LS6 manifold made 557 hp at 7,000 rpm, and the Speedmaster made 561 hp at 7,000 rpm, i would say that assessment is wrong. Not to mention it made consistently better torque and power under 4000rpm, id say that pretty much dispels the myths about it being "****". Might not be as good as the other options but for roughly 200 bucks, if your coming from a lesser manifold like a LS1 or LS4 like what I have, its a far better purchase then a 600 dollar LS6 or a 1200 dollar fast. Seeing as how the vast majority of this forum consists of FAST sackriders and doesnt understand the hp per dollar arguement, makes sense that no one would see any other way except the single most expensive manifold on the market.
LS6 manifold can be purchased used for $300, not $600.
The FAST manifold can be purchased new for under $900, not $1200. The FAST beat your beloved piece of **** by nearly 40hp. How's that power per dollar argument falling in your favor? The FAST is popular and expensive for a reason: until the MSD nobody else has been able to touch it. The MSD is priced the same.
08-07-2015, 10:35 AM
#93
LS6 made more average power and torque throughout the entire testing range.
LS6 manifold can be purchased used for $300, not $600.
The FAST manifold can be purchased new for under $900, not $1200. The FAST beat your beloved piece of **** by nearly 40hp. How's that power per dollar argument falling in your favor? The FAST is popular and expensive for a reason: until the MSD nobody else has been able to touch it. The MSD is priced the same.
LS6 manifold can be purchased used for $300, not $600.
The FAST manifold can be purchased new for under $900, not $1200. The FAST beat your beloved piece of **** by nearly 40hp. How's that power per dollar argument falling in your favor? The FAST is popular and expensive for a reason: until the MSD nobody else has been able to touch it. The MSD is priced the same.
BTW since your so hard up on those average numbers they posted, the average torque produced was .5 less then the LS6 manifold, and 1.8 less horsepower. Again, do the math, even at your supposed "$300" dollar price tag for the LS6, the speedmaster manifold is still a better deal even if you bought it new.
