Ls7 Fast 102 vs MSD airforce comparison




as long as it is dry LOL,

That being said in all seriousness I like the Looks of the VRX INTAKE!
especially when you imagine the air path as it moves through it.

FAST102 has better clearance. I'm not worried about 10hp.
Vararam- what do you got?
I have an AllPro single plane intake that is going to poke thru my hood with a 4500 series TB on it. Not the best for aero, visibility, or low/mid range power

700rwhp n/a should make me forget about those issues though
Personal speculation only, but I'd imagine the MSD intake to actually lose torque throughout the range in a smaller less radical setup (eg. 34x-40x engines). At that point, I'd still go with a FAST.
But I'll leave this last point as just that, speculation, until someone actually does a similar comparison on an LS1 2 or 3.
Personal speculation only, but I'd imagine the MSD intake to actually lose torque throughout the range in a smaller less radical setup (eg. 34x-40x engines). At that point, I'd still go with a FAST.
But I'll leave this last point as just that, speculation, until someone actually does a similar comparison on an LS1 2 or 3.
It's not all about peak like you mention.... I like to have a strong average number too!!
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
Personal speculation only, but I'd imagine the MSD intake to actually lose torque throughout the range in a smaller less radical setup (eg. 34x-40x engines). At that point, I'd still go with a FAST.
But I'll leave this last point as just that, speculation, until someone actually does a similar comparison on an LS1 2 or 3.
Same for the power, 411.039 vs. 410.506...that's half a hp on average accross the range.
I don't think anyone's going to tell the difference between half a hp.
I'm not trying to dog the intake, seems like it's a very nice piece. However I question how much better or faster a car can be with an extra 9hp at the top of the RPM range (and again that's only on those 100% high speed racing types).
For me personally I would never use that cam.....not even with the fast. I don't want a cam that does not extend my rpm range.....especially in a ls7. All the goods are there to spin it harder.
With that said put a real cam in it and run that bitch to 7500.
I think for the cathedral people and largely for the rectangular guys the jury is still out they simply mirror each other too well. I want to see more tests on milder setups which is what people people run, rather than really radical stuff like this. Also I feel the cathedral heads may be different since they like different intake variations and dont have the intake head flow the ls3 and ls7 heads do. If 2 same cars raced i'd flip a coin for the winner, they're that close.
What I'm not so sure of and this is purely conjecture so dont put any claim in it but when you look at the fast92 compared to the 102 and then say an ls6 to a fast 92 you'll notice that even though the runners are different the intakes are alll designed to be better all around than stock just like the msd is. However when you look at all those curves the 102 will make 8-9 hp continuously from the beginning of the pulll all the way up and the same for the fast 92 over an ls6.....Point being is that the msd is close enough in design where I find it odd that for the whole curve they're the same but right at the last few hundred rpm it pulls away a hair. i just have never seen an intake do that. Usually you gain the whole curve like with a fast over an ls6 or 102 over a 92 up. With hi rise intakes the trade off is down low tq (pretty decent loss) for a curve that starts to pull away from 4500 or so and with truck style intakes you make tq and power low but it falls off fast up top, not the case here however. I would just like to see more testing on various setups.
Last edited by redbird555; Apr 9, 2015 at 11:53 AM.
Are you stoned? Do you know what horsepower is? It's a mathematical derivative of torque.
Tq pulls trailers and gets you off the line which is why people like low end tq. You ever hear people saying "Ya that cams sucks down low but up top it makes killer torque?" Hp at higher rpm ranges is more important to keep the momentum going. 10ft lbs of torque at 6k is much less important than it is at low rpm.
Tq pulls trailers and gets you off the line which is why people like low end tq. You ever hear people saying "Ya that cams sucks down low but up top it makes killer torque?" Hp at higher rpm ranges is more important to keep the momentum going. 10ft lbs of torque at 6k is much less important than it is at low rpm.







