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.
On the track, once I launch I won't see below 5,000 RPM....Shifting between 7000 - 7500 would put me back down to 5000+ after the shift. I am holding out hope for the mid length runners as they fit my RPM range perfectly. Guess I will see how well they hold up on a boosted car lol.
apparently the new runners are now available and in stock at a few places....roughly $350 a set....wonder when the manifolds will be available with them....I would really rather not get the intake and the runners separately....
Says the runners are for LSXr and rt. Cool, I have the rt. Says LS3 port only. Not cool. But, I'm confused since the rt manifold only comes in Cathedral port.
I am planing on picking one up, but probably not until fall. To even use it I will need to change out all my direct port nozzles....Plus I need new seats, 5pt harnesses, a cage, and 'chute first haha
Well, the LS3 guys NEED a manifold alternative to the OEM manifold. The only real alternative is a Super Vic as the regular FAST 102 is not an upgrade.....
Originally Posted by Hardcoresoldier
but the standard runners start to die off at 6000 and are done by 6200ish. Many of us want to spin to 7000 - 7500.......
FYI, just received a FAST 102 configured with the "High HP(mid-length)" runners. So the thing exists to buy as an assembly without having to spend extra on separate parts.
Ideally, to take advantage of those shorter runners, I think you really need to be spinning the motor north of 7000, maybe even 7500. I think this would be a hot ticket with a destroked 6.0l motor that could spin to 8000rpm.
Steve Morris tested them, and I think it wasn't until about 6000 that they made more power than the longer runners (don't remember the exact rpm).
I'm planning to spin a 6.0 bottom end with CNS LS9s and a medium-ish solid roller about 7500. I think this(mid-length runners) will work well but we'll see in the next 30-ish days.
The medium length runners make perfect sense to me, especially if there is no loss in lower RPM power. Why not take advantage of them and make some more steam up top.
The medium length runners make perfect sense to me, especially if there is no loss in lower RPM power. Why not take advantage of them and make some more steam up top.
It really does come down to the combo. On the test, Steve Morris, it showed a definite lower rpm power loss. I think it was anything below like 5700rpm was down from the long runners. This was also on a boosted motor.
I got a case of frowny-face when I saw he was testing high-RPM runners on a 6000-6300RPM setup. I know that boost changes the dynamics quite a bit but he makes note of needing more cam through the video. I guess this seemingly unbiased attempt at a test is better than nothing or FAST's test that didn't even include the standard/long runners.
But to cut the runner length in half and not change the cam or tune? Waiting patiently for more folks to get their hands on these..and me to get my grubby hands on my spinning bits from the machine shop.
05-30-2016 | 02:26 PM
