Darth Vader 454 Project....LIVES AGAIN!!
08-17-2017, 01:22 PM
#104
10 Second Club
Depends. There's guys who just have to run a cathedral port. There's some large port cathedral heads out there that are pretty intake limited when it comes to fitting under an Fbody cowl. The msd does pretty good but I have no idea what it flows
08-17-2017, 03:06 PM
#105
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: My own internal universe
Posts: 10,446
Received 1,835 Likes
on
1,145 Posts
I like the MSD over the fast for my car, but I'm a minority I think. Most smaller cube engines likely benefit from the longer runners helping create momentum for the airflow.
But I think of a 416 with cathedral heads - that could really use a shorter runner
But I think of a 416 with cathedral heads - that could really use a shorter runner
08-17-2017, 05:50 PM
#106
LS1Tech Sponsor
Thread Starter
I also agree that pretty much any cathedral headed stroker motor (even a 383) could benefit from this intake as there is more TQ to give away with a stoker (you don't mind the 20 ft/lb loss as much downstairs) in exchange for alot more peak power and the ability to carry that power much better past peak
Here is a great shot of a 416 I built with the only swap being the intake manifold....a Mamo ported FAST versus a Mamo ported MSD....same dyno within 30 mins back to back runs (the time it took us to swap intakes)
If I owned a cathedral headed stroker motor I would be all about the MSD on there....reduce some useless tire spinning midrange torque to get a bunch more power up top and compound those gains by being able to shift it muuuch later staying in the meat of the highest part of your HP curve for maximum acceleration
Cheers,
Tony
__________________
www.mamomotorsports.com
Tony@MamoMotorsports.com
Anything worth doing is worth doing well. Build it right the first time....its alot cheaper than building it twice!!
www.mamomotorsports.com
Tony@MamoMotorsports.com
Anything worth doing is worth doing well. Build it right the first time....its alot cheaper than building it twice!!
08-17-2017, 06:44 PM
#107
A Mamo ported MSD cathedral is a very effective piece! (Just for the record these MSD cathedral intakes are really weak out of the box....its major surgery with the grinder to turn that ugly duckling into a swan!!). Darth....your 130 trap speeds in so so D/A certainly confirm that's the case and the fact that they can be effective in a higher output 346 application.
I also agree that pretty much any cathedral headed stroker motor (even a 383) could benefit from this intake as there is more TQ to give away with a stoker (you don't mind the 20 ft/lb loss as much downstairs) in exchange for alot more peak power and the ability to carry that power much better past peak
Here is a great shot of a 416 I built with the only swap being the intake manifold....a Mamo ported FAST versus a Mamo ported MSD....same dyno within 30 mins back to back runs (the time it took us to swap intakes)
If I owned a cathedral headed stroker motor I would be all about the MSD on there....reduce some useless tire spinning midrange torque to get a bunch more power up top and compound those gains by being able to shift it muuuch later staying in the meat of the highest part of your HP curve for maximum acceleration
Cheers,
Tony
I also agree that pretty much any cathedral headed stroker motor (even a 383) could benefit from this intake as there is more TQ to give away with a stoker (you don't mind the 20 ft/lb loss as much downstairs) in exchange for alot more peak power and the ability to carry that power much better past peak
Here is a great shot of a 416 I built with the only swap being the intake manifold....a Mamo ported FAST versus a Mamo ported MSD....same dyno within 30 mins back to back runs (the time it took us to swap intakes)
If I owned a cathedral headed stroker motor I would be all about the MSD on there....reduce some useless tire spinning midrange torque to get a bunch more power up top and compound those gains by being able to shift it muuuch later staying in the meat of the highest part of your HP curve for maximum acceleration
Cheers,
Tony
08-17-2017, 06:57 PM
#108
LS1Tech Sponsor
Thread Starter
That intake has more plastic carved out of it than ANY composite intake I work on....it needs major enlargement in CSA (in the right places naturally) to really come alive. It takes me 50% longer than porting a FAST 102 cathedral but the results justify the means
-Tony
__________________
www.mamomotorsports.com
Tony@MamoMotorsports.com
Anything worth doing is worth doing well. Build it right the first time....its alot cheaper than building it twice!!
www.mamomotorsports.com
Tony@MamoMotorsports.com
Anything worth doing is worth doing well. Build it right the first time....its alot cheaper than building it twice!!
08-17-2017, 07:11 PM
#109
10 Second Club
A Mamo ported MSD cathedral is a very effective piece! (Just for the record these MSD cathedral intakes are really weak out of the box....its major surgery with the grinder to turn that ugly duckling into a swan!!). Darth....your 130 trap speeds in so so D/A certainly confirm that's the case and the fact that they can be effective in a higher output 346 application.
I also agree that pretty much any cathedral headed stroker motor (even a 383) could benefit from this intake as there is more TQ to give away with a stoker (you don't mind the 20 ft/lb loss as much downstairs) in exchange for alot more peak power and the ability to carry that power much better past peak
Here is a great shot of a 416 I built with the only swap being the intake manifold....a Mamo ported FAST versus a Mamo ported MSD....same dyno within 30 mins back to back runs (the time it took us to swap intakes)
If I owned a cathedral headed stroker motor I would be all about the MSD on there....reduce some useless tire spinning midrange torque to get a bunch more power up top and compound those gains by being able to shift it muuuch later staying in the meat of the highest part of your HP curve for maximum acceleration
Cheers,
Tony
I also agree that pretty much any cathedral headed stroker motor (even a 383) could benefit from this intake as there is more TQ to give away with a stoker (you don't mind the 20 ft/lb loss as much downstairs) in exchange for alot more peak power and the ability to carry that power much better past peak
Here is a great shot of a 416 I built with the only swap being the intake manifold....a Mamo ported FAST versus a Mamo ported MSD....same dyno within 30 mins back to back runs (the time it took us to swap intakes)
If I owned a cathedral headed stroker motor I would be all about the MSD on there....reduce some useless tire spinning midrange torque to get a bunch more power up top and compound those gains by being able to shift it muuuch later staying in the meat of the highest part of your HP curve for maximum acceleration
Cheers,
Tony
08-17-2017, 07:53 PM
#110
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: My own internal universe
Posts: 10,446
Received 1,835 Likes
on
1,145 Posts
You beat me to it. It's consistent in how it runs. But iirc tony made the ports like 1/4" bigger. Kinda nuts how much there is to remove.
Edit - the fast and msd curves crossed at 6400 rpm on mine, but the fast plateaued from 6400 to 7000. The MSD continued to pull and held over 500 HP even out to 7400
Edit - the fast and msd curves crossed at 6400 rpm on mine, but the fast plateaued from 6400 to 7000. The MSD continued to pull and held over 500 HP even out to 7400
Last edited by Darth_V8r; 08-18-2017 at 08:23 AM.
08-18-2017, 08:12 AM
#112
Depending on your CAI and whatever else is upstream of the intake I bet you could see close to 100 with the manifold swap....either way its going to make alot more power and carry much better past peak with one of my ported MSD cathedrals.
That intake has more plastic carved out of it than ANY composite intake I work on....it needs major enlargement in CSA (in the right places naturally) to really come alive. It takes me 50% longer than porting a FAST 102 cathedral but the results justify the means
-Tony
That intake has more plastic carved out of it than ANY composite intake I work on....it needs major enlargement in CSA (in the right places naturally) to really come alive. It takes me 50% longer than porting a FAST 102 cathedral but the results justify the means
-Tony
I have a 4" hose to take its place but haven't tried it yet to see if it leans me out when i log a run.
On the dyno a fast toys 104 was only 2 hp difference from my slp. Not worth the fitment issues.
08-18-2017, 08:21 AM
#113
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: My own internal universe
Posts: 10,446
Received 1,835 Likes
on
1,145 Posts
I have the Slp lid and ram air kit along with a ascd ws6 hood with baffles removed. Plenty air flow .it has a 85mm maf but now tuned speed density. Only reason maf is in line is when i flash a new tune and maf is not plugged in,car takes forever to crank until it trips the maf fail code. Cos5 in efi live.
I have a 4" hose to take its place but haven't tried it yet to see if it leans me out when i log a run.
On the dyno a fast toys 104 was only 2 hp difference from my slp. Not worth the fitment issues.
I have a 4" hose to take its place but haven't tried it yet to see if it leans me out when i log a run.
On the dyno a fast toys 104 was only 2 hp difference from my slp. Not worth the fitment issues.
I had the exact same problem and it scared the crap out of me. That fixed it
The following users liked this post:
NSFW (03-07-2020)
08-18-2017, 10:23 AM
#114
Go to your maf curve. in the lowest cell, put 15 g/sec. When you write a tune, you'll get fuel for the start up as if the car was breathing 15 g/sec until the maf fails and it goes over to SD.
I had the exact same problem and it scared the crap out of me. That fixed it
I had the exact same problem and it scared the crap out of me. That fixed it
