When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Installed my msd intake yesterday. Definitely a lot of hoops to jump through but fitment was great. Modded the fast 102 throttle body a bit before hand, idles great.
Bump for a couple questions on those who've installed an MSD in an FBody. I have an LS7 version I'll be putting on a motor build this winter, and read through this thread about 5 different times to prepare. Have LS7 fuel rails and injectors to go along with it.
1. Particularly with a Gen4 valley cover, are there any clearance issues with the LS1 (ie tall) oil pressure sending unit and the intake? I take it now one must be even more careful getting the brake booster hose over the sender.
2. Is there any reason not to relocate the MAP to the front (besides buying an extender) - I see alchemist had his in the top rear location? Just for ease of access was my thought. Anything in the way from a clearance standpoint there? I had a Fast 90/90 on the old setup and the MAP in the rear, but it was tight to the firewall.
Bump for a couple questions on those who've installed an MSD in an FBody. I have an LS7 version I'll be putting on a motor build this winter, and read through this thread about 5 different times to prepare. Have LS7 fuel rails and injectors to go along with it.
1. Particularly with a Gen4 valley cover, are there any clearance issues with the LS1 (ie tall) oil pressure sending unit and the intake? I take it now one must be even more careful getting the brake booster hose over the sender.
2. Is there any reason not to relocate the MAP to the front (besides buying an extender) - I see alchemist had his in the top rear location? Just for ease of access was my thought. Anything in the way from a clearance standpoint there? I had a Fast 90/90 on the old setup and the MAP in the rear, but it was tight to the firewall.
3. Any other tips or hints?
Thanks.
I had zero issues with anything being in the way of the oil pressure sensor.
I also mounted my MAP in the rear with plenty of room between sensor and firewall. I thought about mounting it up front but hear it's much more accurate towards the back. (I don't tune)
I had zero issues with anything being in the way of the oil pressure sensor.
I also mounted my MAP in the rear with plenty of room between sensor and firewall. I thought about mounting it up front but hear it's much more accurate towards the back. (I don't tune)
Did you use the top rear, or the one near the vacuum ports on the side of the intake? If the top, did you need a harness extension, or was the factory long enough?
Thanks for letting me pick your brain! - asked ya a w/p question in the other thread.
Did you use the top rear, or the one near the vacuum ports on the side of the intake? If the top, did you need a harness extension, or was the factory long enough?
Thanks for letting me pick your brain! - asked ya a w/p question in the other thread.
I used the one the one by the vacuum port in the rear showed by the green arrow in the picture below.
You will need a extension if you go with the one on top.
I had a broken wire a few years back in my MAP harness so I just soldered in and used heat shrink with a new harness which gave me about another 18". About $7 at Oriellys.
Off the top of my head, using the top one may be tight or have clearance issues with the cowl. My car is in storage at a different location otherwise I would get a picture for ya. If it helps I may be able to get ya one in a few days....
Thanks for the offer, but nah don't go through the trouble I'll likely use the back side location then too and not have to worry about a harness extension. I had thought about cowl clearance being an issue on the top location too.
I installed the LS7 version on my Fbody this weekend. Granted it's not running yet so remains to be seen if there's any issues there. But it went pretty smoothly, fitament was good. A few notes:
1. As mentioned it has a ton of casting flash out of the box. I spent some time with a dremel just cleaning it up ahead of time. Wouldn't call it porting as I'm no porter.
2. If your front steam tube crossover has studs instead of bolts, it will interfere on the passenger's side. You either need to use a bolt or cut the stud down.
3. So if you're used to a stock intake or Fast, you expect that the rear bolts under the cowl have to be installed before sliding the manifold under and held up. I did this with the MSD and about went crazy trying to keep the bolts from falling down while sliding it back into place to avoid gouging my new heads. Come to find out the bolts are short enough to install after the intake has already been seated under the cowl. Would've made life easier knowing that ahead of time.
I run the LS6 crossover. The rears are blocked off. It's not the LS1 spider crossover.
Originally Posted by samerickson89
I had to run a 2 port to make it fit. There's not enough clearance underneath.
Just thought I would update this statement. I did end up going back in and doing the ERL steam vent to -4AN fittings and running AN lines back to the radiator.
One thing to ask @NHRATA01 -- On the passenger side, how tight is the fit between the coil packs and the AC box? My headers are pretty close to the strut tower, but cleared fine and the motor went right in, but it feels tighter on the passenger side vs the ls1.
Darth, I hadn't hit the point of installing the coils yet, but you made me curious so I just checked. They (stock LS1 coils) fit fine although it is a little tight on that side to the HVAC box. But nothing due to the intake. Is it tighter with this motor than the stock LS1 was, that I can't remember lol.
Darth, I hadn't hit the point of installing the coils yet, but you made me curious so I just checked. They (stock LS1 coils) fit fine although it is a little tight on that side to the HVAC box. But nothing due to the intake. Is it tighter with this motor than the stock LS1 was, that I can't remember lol.
Yeah, that's what I was asking. it's tighter on mine. I thought maybe mine shifted to the right some, but your pics look identical to mine. Thanks for checking and sorry to sidetrack the thread.
Back from the deads. I'm looking to do a Ls2 swap in a my camaro. The plan is to use a set of PRC 2.5 243 castings ,cam,stall and supporting mods in the factory ls2. Now I have been researching between Fast 102 and MSD Intake. This is the threat that have the most information about the topic that i found.
I'm basically clear with installation and hiccups that I can find in the process. The information of back to back dyno testing is very limited and the amount of people using MSD in 4th gens are very few for a intake that have been in the market for 4 years. I like the look of the MSD intake but I'm more concerned about performance.
I have to choose one anyways.
What you guys suggest between the 2 intakes Fast 102 or MSD Intake for my combo?
Post #458 has details on MSD intake ported by Tony Mamo. Tony also comments later etc.
Darth_V8r did a fantastic stock block end LS1 build that made 520+ whp with the ported MSD manifold in the flow test. He was kind enough to allow me to test his MSD. I'd do a search and read up on Darth_V8r combo for details on how to get the best results with the MSD.
My impression for what it's worth is the MSD has better potential than either of the Fast 102 LSXRT or LSXR for higher rpm performance with cathedral heads. The heads and cam package needs to be selected and built around the MSD intake with the intention of spinning to 7,000 + rpms to get the most benefit. Had a chance to look over another MSD that disassembled but wasn't ported. I would definitely want the MSD ported by an experienced porter. The unported MSD that I saw definitely needed some clean up for best results.
Last edited by 99 Black Bird T/A; 12-30-2018 at 05:43 AM.
Applications looking for strong midrange do better with the fast. The msd did not overtake until 6400 rpm. So if you are planning to shift around 6500-6800 the fast is better. If you are a little more bold and plan to run some rpm, the msd will be better.
But rpm is hp. I dont worry too much about losing a few lb-ft of torque, because higher rpm means more gear which will multiply torque and more than make up the difference.
If I was in a situation where I needed the explosive midrange, I would swap on the fast. Or an ITB but that is a whole different story
Ive seen no significant gains on larger engines from fast vs msd up to 6800 and better mid range and bottom end (3k) on the FAST. this is on cathedral of course because they dont make an ls3. And on numerous head combos. plus ive seen a considerable amount gained from porting the fast102 and i dont just mean a 3 inch port job like i have seen in the past.
Agreed. The token porting that is typically done should not count. I do think out of the box fast 102 will walk the msd and steal its lunch money.
Tony sent me a pic when he posted mine of over 100 grams of plastic shavings to open up the msd. He also sent me a pic from him touching up a competitor port job on a msd and he still cut like 90 grams out of it.
For the record my test was both Mamo ported fast 102 and msd. I know people like to focus on the 6400 thing but when you see the past peak power just carry, it is unrivaled.
When I dynod the fast, I still remember the dyno operator laughing about the whole thing. You could hear the tone of the engine change and everything. It hit a wall at 511 hp and would not pull higher. Dyno operator told me I needed a bigger plenum and shorter runners. My response was and I quote - dude its a ported fast 102. His response - I know and I really dont know what to say I have never seen a 5.7 do this but from the curve the data and everything you need a bigger plenum and a shorter runner. He was laughing while we were talking.
So I called Tony to ask if he had anything and he mentioned the msd and away we went.
Still convinced certain valve events work better with one runner length over the other. But anyway, I know it is only one data point but for me it was first hand.
Post #458 has details on MSD intake ported by Tony Mamo. Tony also comments later etc.
Darth_V8r did a fantastic stock block end LS1 build that made 520+ whp with the ported MSD manifold in the flow test. He was kind enough to allow me to test his MSD. I'd do a search and read up on Darth_V8r combo for details on how to get the best results with the MSD.
My impression for what it's worth is the MSD has better potential than either of the Fast 102 LSXRT or LSXR for higher rpm performance with cathedral heads. The heads and cam package needs to be selected and built around the MSD intake with the intention of spinning to 7,000 + rpms to get the most benefit. Had a chance to look over another MSD that disassembled but wasn't ported. I would definitely want the MSD ported by an experienced porter. The unported MSD that I saw definitely needed some clean up for best results.
This is a very good information. The plan for my car is run the full bracket season in 2 different classes. With that been said my plan is not to spin the motor over 6800 rpm to be easier on the motor because it going to be a fully rebuild ls2 but with factory internals.This car is more in the budget side as a father and son project. I need a strong midrange and make the car as consistent as possible. I think base in this information that my best option is the the Fast 102 to maintein a good power band power from 3500 to 6800 rpms.
Originally Posted by Darth_V8r
Applications looking for strong midrange do better with the fast. The msd did not overtake until 6400 rpm. So if you are planning to shift around 6500-6800 the fast is better. If you are a little more bold and plan to run some rpm, the msd will be better.
But rpm is hp. I dont worry too much about losing a few lb-ft of torque, because higher rpm means more gear which will multiply torque and more than make up the difference.
If I was in a situation where I needed the explosive midrange, I would swap on the fast. Or an ITB but that is a whole different story
This piece of information make my decision easier in what intake to choose.
Originally Posted by tech@WS6store
Ive seen no significant gains on larger engines from fast vs msd up to 6800 and better mid range and bottom end (3k) on the FAST. this is on cathedral of course because they dont make an ls3. And on numerous head combos. plus ive seen a considerable amount gained from porting the fast102 and i dont just mean a 3 inch port job like i have seen in the past.
That is a great piece of information.
Originally Posted by Darth_V8r
Agreed. The token porting that is typically done should not count. I do think out of the box fast 102 will walk the msd and steal its lunch money.
Tony sent me a pic when he posted mine of over 100 grams of plastic shavings to open up the msd. He also sent me a pic from him touching up a competitor port job on a msd and he still cut like 90 grams out of it.
For the record my test was both Mamo ported fast 102 and msd. I know people like to focus on the 6400 thing but when you see the past peak power just carry, it is unrivaled.
When I dynod the fast, I still remember the dyno operator laughing about the whole thing. You could hear the tone of the engine change and everything. It hit a wall at 511 hp and would not pull higher. Dyno operator told me I needed a bigger plenum and shorter runners. My response was and I quote - dude its a ported fast 102. His response - I know and I really dont know what to say I have never seen a 5.7 do this but from the curve the data and everything you need a bigger plenum and a shorter runner. He was laughing while we were talking.
So I called Tony to ask if he had anything and he mentioned the msd and away we went.
Still convinced certain valve events work better with one runner length over the other. But anyway, I know it is only one data point but for me it was first hand.
Wow, I'm very impressed with your results in a 5.7. Is the 5.7 making the more HP I have seen.
I'm looking to be in the neighborhood of 480-500 hp with a Ls2 motor and be is the 7.2 -7.0 sec. zone at about 95-96 miles in the 1/8 or like 11.2-10.9 in at like 121-123 miles in the 1/4 in pump gas.
The setup that I have planned is:
Ls2 std bore factory pistons and rods.
PRC 2.5 CNC heads
Custom build cam around the combo ( need to decide first what intake to use to them design the cam.)
FTI or Yank like 4400 to 5k stall in a Performabuild 4l60e
1 7/8 TSP headers with a mufflex 4" catback
8.8 real end with 3.73 gears
Bogarts D10s with MT 26x10 Bracket Radials
60 lbs injectors with Racetronix 255 pump and hotwire
Now probably I going to go with Fast 102 and TB.
Car wight 3400 with my son inside
This is a very good information. The plan for my car is run the full bracket season in 2 different classes. With that been said my plan is not to spin the motor over 6800 rpm to be easier on the motor because it going to be a fully rebuild ls2 but with factory internals.This car is more in the budget side as a father and son project. I need a strong midrange and make the car as consistent as possible. I think base in this information that my best option is the the Fast 102 to maintein a good power band power from 3500 to 6800 rpms.
This piece of information make my decision easier in what intake to choose.
That is a great piece of information.
Wow, I'm very impressed with your results in a 5.7. Is the 5.7 making the more HP I have seen.
I'm looking to be in the neighborhood of 480-500 hp with a Ls2 motor and be is the 7.2 -7.0 sec. zone at about 95-96 miles in the 1/8 or like 11.2-10.9 in at like 121-123 miles in the 1/4 in pump gas.
The setup that I have planned is:
Ls2 std bore factory pistons and rods.
PRC 2.5 CNC heads
Custom build cam around the combo ( need to decide first what intake to use to them design the cam.)
FTI or Yank like 4400 to 5k stall in a Performabuild 4l60e
1 7/8 TSP headers with a mufflex 4" catback
8.8 real end with 3.73 gears
Bogarts D10s with MT 26x10 Bracket Radials
60 lbs injectors with Racetronix 255 pump and hotwire
Now probably I going to go with Fast 102 and TB.
Car wight 3400 with my son inside
What you guys think?
I will take a swing at this.....LOL
And btw.....Happy New Year guys!!
You really need a dialed in valvetrain and excellent flowing heads all which add up to an engine that will want to turn close to 7500 RPM's to make the MSD a better choice over the MSD
I think with the overview you have laid out, your car would simply be faster with a properly ported FAST and a 7K ish redline. Darth's engine left no stones unturned and that's why the MSD was a better choice for his build
COMBINATION is the key.....what works for your buddy's car or another car on the Internet may not work well in your application and visa versa
This is a really good thread discussing and showing the difference between a ported FAST and a ported MSD......its well worth the 10-15 minutes you might spend reading it twice to grasp everything Im saying.
The abridged answer....the FAST is probably better in 90% of the applications you might stumble across on this forum.....the MSD is a much more purpose built choice but review this thread for a more detailed explanation
This is a very good information. The plan for my car is run the full bracket season in 2 different classes. With that been said my plan is not to spin the motor over 6800 rpm to be easier on the motor because it going to be a fully rebuild ls2 but with factory internals.This car is more in the budget side as a father and son project. I need a strong midrange and make the car as consistent as possible. I think base in this information that my best option is the the Fast 102 to maintein a good power band power from 3500 to 6800 rpms.
This piece of information make my decision easier in what intake to choose.
That is a great piece of information.
Wow, I'm very impressed with your results in a 5.7. Is the 5.7 making the more HP I have seen.
I'm looking to be in the neighborhood of 480-500 hp with a Ls2 motor and be is the 7.2 -7.0 sec. zone at about 95-96 miles in the 1/8 or like 11.2-10.9 in at like 121-123 miles in the 1/4 in pump gas.
The setup that I have planned is:
Ls2 std bore factory pistons and rods.
PRC 2.5 CNC heads
Custom build cam around the combo ( need to decide first what intake to use to them design the cam.)
FTI or Yank like 4400 to 5k stall in a Performabuild 4l60e
1 7/8 TSP headers with a mufflex 4" catback
8.8 real end with 3.73 gears
Bogarts D10s with MT 26x10 Bracket Radials
60 lbs injectors with Racetronix 255 pump and hotwire
Now probably I going to go with Fast 102 and TB.
Car wight 3400 with my son inside
7.0-7.2 and bottom 11s could and really should be reached with a bolt on ls2 @3400rw. Really....if you dot your i's and cross your t's it could run 10s. Idk why erryone thinks you have to have a h/c ls to run the numbers you're looking for.
Now i will say a ls2 is lacking a bit in the cam department. So i would consider higher ratio rockers on it and the spring change to accommodate them.
You really need a dialed in valvetrain and excellent flowing heads all which add up to an engine that will want to turn close to 7500 RPM's to make the MSD a better choice over the MSD
I think with the overview you have laid out, your car would simply be faster with a properly ported FAST and a 7K ish redline. Darth's engine left no stones unturned and that's why the MSD was a better choice for his build
COMBINATION is the key.....what works for your buddy's car or another car on the Internet may not work well in your application and visa versa
This is a really good thread discussing and showing the difference between a ported FAST and a ported MSD......its well worth the 10-15 minutes you might spend reading it twice to grasp everything Im saying.
The abridged answer....the FAST is probably better in 90% of the applications you might stumble across on this forum.....the MSD is a much more purpose built choice but review this thread for a more detailed explanation
Thanks so much all this information guys. I think this thread is one of the most informative and educational that I have seen in years.
Originally Posted by HioSSilver
7.0-7.2 and bottom 11s could and really should be reached with a bolt on ls2 @3400rw. Really....if you dot your i's and cross your t's it could run 10s. Idk why erryone thinks you have to have a h/c ls to run the numbers you're looking for.
Now i will say a ls2 is lacking a bit in the cam department. So i would consider higher ratio rockers on it and the spring change to accommodate them.
Yes , I know the potential of the Ls1s but my engine with 208k miles decided to give up. I went down to 12.2s @ 112 miles with factory ls1 motor just bolts ons in Las Vegas with 3500' above sea. What happened was, I came across a good deal in a Ls2 motor and that is why decided to jump on it.This is a budget build to have fun with my son and make a good Sport man and Pro bracket car.
05-09-2016, 12:20 PM
