Fast 90 with 224 cam... too much?
04-08-2005, 11:18 AM
#1
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fast 90 with 224 cam... too much? I'm looking at getting a Fast intake, and i'm wondering if the fast 90 would be a step in the right direction or overkill.
My setup is: stock 346 bottom end, TR 224 cam (114lsa), TEA 5.3 stg. 1.5 heads, an ls6 intake, ported tb, MAC mid lengths w/ory, PT4000, stock 4l60e, 3.73's.
I'm still new to this efi stuff, i'm used to carbs. I know it's very easy to over carb a motor, so i imagine it would be just as easy to over TB it as well.
A few more questions;
will the fast 90 intake work with a smaller tb? (i assume not, since there would be no point in having two manifolds if they did).
Will my stock injectors/pump be able to keep up with a 90mm tb?
I'm sure this has all been covered before, but i tried searching and didn't come up with much, thanks for the help.
Eric
My setup is: stock 346 bottom end, TR 224 cam (114lsa), TEA 5.3 stg. 1.5 heads, an ls6 intake, ported tb, MAC mid lengths w/ory, PT4000, stock 4l60e, 3.73's.
I'm still new to this efi stuff, i'm used to carbs. I know it's very easy to over carb a motor, so i imagine it would be just as easy to over TB it as well.
A few more questions;
will the fast 90 intake work with a smaller tb? (i assume not, since there would be no point in having two manifolds if they did).
Will my stock injectors/pump be able to keep up with a 90mm tb?
I'm sure this has all been covered before, but i tried searching and didn't come up with much, thanks for the help.
Eric
04-08-2005, 11:23 AM
#2
I don't think it would be overkill at all... heads/cam packages find a pretty decent benefit from a 90/90 setup once the tune is tweaked to account for it. If you have the money to spend, go ahead and get it. 
04-08-2005, 11:44 AM
#3
You can't "over TB" a fuel injected vehicle....Its not relying on carb signal and airspeed to meter and correctly atomize fuel....that task is handled much more efficiently by your fuel injectors. The TB is simply an "air valve" and it will only allow whatever the engine is capable of drawing thru it. Too small a TB can hurt you, but there is almost no such thing as too big. The FAST 90 even on a mild H/C car is worth a solid 15 RWHP all else being equal. As someone else said, if you have the money, go for it....it offers a sizable power gain without hurting low speed torque production (like installing a larger cam to see the same "peak" gains the FAST 90 set-up will provide).
Every dyno test I have personally been involved in has liked the FAST set-up....even a bone stock LS1 gained 10-12 HP with no other changes (and that was a 78 mm test).
Go for it....
Tony M.
Every dyno test I have personally been involved in has liked the FAST set-up....even a bone stock LS1 gained 10-12 HP with no other changes (and that was a 78 mm test).
Go for it....
Tony M.
04-08-2005, 01:46 PM
#5
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Red Stick, LA
Posts: 659
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Tony Mamo @ AFR
You can't "over TB" a fuel injected vehicle....Its not relying on carb signal and airspeed to meter and correctly atomize fuel....that task is handled much more efficiently by your fuel injectors. The TB is simply an "air valve" and it will only allow whatever the engine is capable of drawing thru it. Too small a TB can hurt you, but there is almost no such thing as too big. The FAST 90 even on a mild H/C car is worth a solid 15 RWHP all else being equal. As someone else said, if you have the money, go for it....it offers a sizable power gain without hurting low speed torque production (like installing a larger cam to see the same "peak" gains the FAST 90 set-up will provide).
Every dyno test I have personally been involved in has liked the FAST set-up....even a bone stock LS1 gained 10-12 HP with no other changes (and that was a 78 mm test).
Go for it....
Tony M.
Every dyno test I have personally been involved in has liked the FAST set-up....even a bone stock LS1 gained 10-12 HP with no other changes (and that was a 78 mm test).
Go for it....
Tony M.
Even over the LS6 intake LS1's?
Trending Topics
04-08-2005, 09:17 PM
#8
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BoneSS
That is what I would like to know:
Mild h/c
LS6/Ported TB
vs
90/90 setup
Mild h/c
LS6/Ported TB
vs
90/90 setup
Eric
04-09-2005, 12:09 AM
#11
On The Tree
iTrader: (-1)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Carrollton,Tx
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you wanted to see a real boost...I would suggest a larger cam to complement the FAST intake.....maybe some thing around 230/230 .598/.598 112 lsa....still would be streetable....but would move the rev's farther up...and use that larger intake. ENJOY!
04-09-2005, 04:35 AM
#12
TECH Fanatic
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: MI
Posts: 1,060
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok I run a small cam B1 221/221- >559/.559 and stage 2 heads and I gained 27rwhp & 13rwtq over my LS6 intake and ported TB with my 90mm FAST intake & TPIS 90mm TB. Both Dyno's were done on the same Mustang Dyno.
04-09-2005, 05:22 AM
#13
Staging Lane
Thread Starter
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 98darkbird
If you wanted to see a real boost...I would suggest a larger cam to complement the FAST intake.....maybe some thing around 230/230 .598/.598 112 lsa....still would be streetable....but would move the rev's farther up...and use that larger intake. ENJOY!
I drive this car no less than 80 miles a day, and i love mildness of my 224 cam. i'm sure it would still be streetable with a 230/230, but i see no point in changing something i'm happy with. Right now i see the intake as my bottleneck. On top of all that, TEA told me to stay below at or below a 228/228 cam with these heads.
Eric
