Dynamometer Results & Comparisons - FAST102/92 vs LS6 on Cam Only LS1

I decided to pick up a FAST102 intake for our Formula to use as R&D so we did some back to back testing to see exactly how good this intake was compared to the factory LS6 intake on the car. I'll just tease you a little and say it was an unexpected gain in power everywhere! We used an eBay Godspeed 92mm throttle body on the intake.

First here are some pictures. I started off the day swapping stock rockers back on from the Yella Terra roller rockers that were on it. I was curious to see if the tick at idle would go away and see if the power would change any. The car has fresh Patriot Extremes on it. The power didn't change any from previous run's.
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f49/IntegraVTEC/Formula/d54e1869.jpg
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f49/IntegraVTEC/Formula/9ad6edf6.jpg
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f49/IntegraVTEC/Formula/dec2f50c.jpg

I did a couple baseline pulls to make sure we didn't have any fluke pulls. First pull was 395.3, the next pull was 394 and some change so I called it 395rwhp. This is within 1hp of what it layed down back in September also with no changes.

Got to swapping the FAST intake over and ran into a blue million issues. I had the rails setup with factory 5.3L Flex fuel injectors which are rated at 35.4#/hr which should be plenty of fuel for my needs. Got the intake on and had issues with the braided feed line from the stock hardline to the billet rails. I hooked the stock line back up to a extra fitting I had to limp it on the dyno. Went to crank the car up and nothing... wideband still showed free air so it was getting no fuel. Also the fitting started leaking I had just put in... Pulled all the injectors back out and ran a +/- to each of the injectors to see if they would open and nothing... they were stuck. By this time I was out of time so I went home for the night. The next morning I got my 60# out of my Camaro some fittings and braided line to fix the feed line and went back to work today. After some more fuel leak issues with the rails and injectors I finally got to do some tuning. Did a WOT pull at first and it was right at 20rwhp gain but was really rich so I started doing my normal routine for dialing the car in with parital throttle and idle etc. I did some pulls in SD and SD/MAF modes and they all came in pretty close to one another. 430.9rwhp was the final number!

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f49/IntegraVTEC/Formula/1c34bf37.jpg
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f49/IntegraVTEC/Formula/b6b129f2.jpg
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f49/IntegraVTEC/Formula/56cb9585.jpg
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f49/IntegraVTEC/Formula/3dfcc21d.jpg
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f49/IntegraVTEC/Formula/062cd28a.jpg
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f49/IntegraVTEC/Formula/4e801103.jpg
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f49/IntegraVTEC/Formula/d876dcf0.jpg
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f49/IntegraVTEC/Formula/51cad014.jpg
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f49/IntegraVTEC/Formula/a85952e4.jpg

Both graphs are the same just each show different max power for one another.

Red line FAST102/92
Blue line stock LS6
*****DYNO GRAPHS BEING UPDATED*****


EDIT**** 3/5/2012
I had some ARH 1-7/8 Headers left off of my Camaro when it had a 403 in it and I am going turbo on it so the headers and Y-pipe were sitting in storage and I wasn't about to take half my money back out of them to sell so I figured I'd put them to good use on my Formula. The car had 1-3/4 pacesetter LT's and TSP off-road Y-pipe when I purchased the car and honestly the fitment was horrible on the Y-pipe so it was a win/win by swapping to the much nicer stainless ARH headers and Y-pipe. While I was swapping parts I also had a big FTP air Lid I had been running on my Camaro also that is over 100mm in size so I swapped that on as well and ditched the 85mm MAF for a straight piece of aluminum piping. The car did need a few tweaks to fueling on the VE table to get lambda back to within a 1% of commanded. Once I got the fueling lined out I did some pulls to see how we picked up. At first I was kinda dissappointed because it only picked up 8.3hp peak which put me up to 439.2rwhp. Then I overlayed the old graph and thats when I was shocked! Lets just say this debunks all the people that say 1-7/8 headers are too much for a 346 cube engine! After talking with Brian Tooley about this, he said that the stock small exhaust valve likes larger tube headers and that he had seen similar results on the engine dyno! Here is the before and after along with just the new run by itself:

*****DYNO GRAPHS BEING UPDATED*****

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f49/IntegraVTEC/Formula/2582337f.jpg
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f49/IntegraVTEC/Formula/d690f0c8.jpg
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f49/IntegraVTEC/Formula/2e172319.jpg
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f49/IntegraVTEC/Formula/f2c840be.jpg
http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f49/IntegraVTEC/Formula/b768fb95.jpg

Suspension is minimal on this car....
UMI non-adj LCA's
UMI non-adj Panhard
UMI bolt-on LCA relocation brackets (on lowest hole)
STOCK TORQUE ARM!
Eibach Pro-Kit springs all around
Air-bags set on 20psi in the rear (to clear the 275/60's... need 275/50's!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJhe9c-7Glc&hd=1


EDIT*****

Added TEA St2 CNC 799 Heads and am up to 418rwhp Dyno Dynamics numbers and 11.13@123.6 @ 1400' DA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhtwSVnNA3Q&hd=1

http://sphotos-b.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc6/246662_498476850165637_1827244270_n.jpg

What is the cam specs?

235/243 112lsa
LSL lobes

Impressing now i want a 102/102

Any port work done to the fast?

Holy smokes! Maybe I'll be picking one of these up before I get afr's. My car has already broken 400rwhp cam only, might be interesting to see how much I would gain...

did you use the vmax ring? or no... heard people were having some sort of tuning problem without them so i went ahead and scooped one up, no idea if it does what it states but i have one.

Intake is stock out of box. I looked at each runner and everything matched up really well inside with no excess protrusions. I didn't use any rings... Bolted the TB right on. I did have to clearance the bottom flange of the TB to clear the water pump though.

I did multiple pulls and all was within a few hp of 430rwhp! I'm starting to wonder if the LS6 intake was oil sludged from the PCV and caused low numbers. This car turned over 100k miles during this test. I bypassed all the PCV and vented it to atmosphere so the new intake doesn't sludge up.

Awesome results. Just a little to expensive for my tastes.

That is ridiculous. I've seen some decent gains with the intake but I think this is the first time I've seen such a high gain.

More impressive to me is that the gain was at the same RPM as the baseline rather than at a higher RPM. Please update this thread with some track results if you can! Congrats!

Awesome results. Just a little to expensive for my tastes.

Exactly.

If his results are correct he just got gains similar to adding ported heads with much less work. While not topping the bang/buck chart, it wasn't a bad investment for his car.

Heads generally run ~$1000, plus gaskets, bolts, fluids, etc. 35rwhp is significant.

I can say that the butt dyno approves as well. The quickest the car has been with the LS6 intake was 11.7@115.6 with 3.73 gears. The car now has 3.42 gears and this intake. I plan on getting back to the track when it opens back up here in KY.

I'm going to put the car back on the dyno here in a few weeks to do a few more tweaks and testing in the tune to see if I can get that 6500+ rpm area from falling off so hard. I'm thinking I have a little too much timing ramping in at that point.

Stock head car? Curious why power is dropping off at 6300 with such a large duration cam. Curve is strong tho

If his results are correct he just got gains similar to adding ported heads with much less work. While not topping the bang/buck chart, it wasn't a bad investment for his car.

Heads generally run ~$1000, plus gaskets, bolts, fluids, etc. 35rwhp is significant.

Never looked at it this way. very true!
:thumb:

What would this mod be worth with 9lbs of boost knocking at the door???

Wow I love it, its satisfying for me to see this after hearing people say you will lose low end. Love it

Honestly I didn't care about low low end because this car has a 4000 stall and was spec'd for 3.73 gears but with the 3.42 it acts a tad looser and flashes to 4100 on launch. So no low end is really needed.

BTW these numbers are all with the convertor locked to help keep driveline loss a constant.

Other supporting mods are pacesetter LT's, TSP ORY, cutout in I-pipe to a stock catback. SLP lid and 85mm MAF, 160* stat. Also I made sure to keep ECT at a constant as well to keep from any false data. Air at the time of pulls was in the mid low 60's in the shop. The atmosphere correction on the pulls was 0.947.

Just to add some more data for you fellas to look at. I have nothing to hide or gain in this test, I had just seen alot of different results on here and I wanted to see for myself how it would do.

I think if you have a bigger cam that likes to breath like the op does your going to see big gains going to a fast set up opposed to some one running a 226/230 cam.

What would this mod be worth with 9lbs of boost knocking at the door???

I would also like to see the results of this...

That is a very impressive gain for just and intake mani. Very good to see the results and looks like its gaining power everywhere. Looks like picking up a used fast intake would most certainly b worth the money.

If this was a GTO or a C5 where the intakes are easier to get too I would entertain someone sending me another type of intake to try just for comparison sake. But the pain in the butt it is to pull this intake off, it wont be coming off again until I do some TEA CNC 799 heads.

I will be doing some ARH 1-7/8 headers with ARH Y-pipe to compare to the Pacesetter 1-3/4 and TSP ORY thats on it now.

If his results are correct he just got gains similar to adding ported heads with much less work. While not topping the bang/buck chart, it wasn't a bad investment for his car.

Heads generally run ~$1000, plus gaskets, bolts, fluids, etc. 35rwhp is significant.

Price the intake, matching TB, and the billet rails AND the adapter needed to run stock lines then get back to us. Add in the FTP 100 lid and TSP MAF and you're at 2Gs. Not a cheap mod to do correctly.

Price the intake, matching TB, and the billet rails AND the adapter needed to run stock lines then get back to us. Add in the FTP 100 lid and TSP MAF and you're at 2Gs. Not a cheap mod to do correctly.

This. :judge: Then possibly add injectors into the mix as well and then more tuning. It is not as easy as it looks.

Very impressive gains, your really making me want to do this to mine. Damn 1K intakes lol Curious to see the slips to back it as well.

Price the intake, matching TB, and the billet rails AND the adapter needed to run stock lines then get back to us. Add in the FTP 100 lid and TSP MAF and you're at 2Gs. Not a cheap mod to do correctly.

Didn't mean to imply it was cheap. It's not. But to me it is not as simple as calling it a $2000 mod either.

But it isn't out of the ballpark either, especially if you factor in labor (either paid for or personal time spent). I recently did a head swap and it was a lot of work with hidden costs to be accounted for. The manifold swap can be done in a few hours.

Also depends on if parts are purchased new or used. I almost never buy new on non-wear/low chance of failure items.

Injectors will need to be purchased at pretty much any HP point past mild cam only, so I don't think those should be a chalk mark against the swap. A tune is needed for any major mod as well.

You also get to sell stock parts to regain some funds. A ls6 intake is worth $350 easy. Rails, injectors, lid, maf should get another $200 or so.

If the OP puts on better flowing heads, he would benefit more from this previous mod as well.

What would this mod be worth with 9lbs of boost knocking at the door???Here are some boosted LSXR/T articles I have found. The boosted Trailblaser SS gained 50rwhp with one.

Here are the articles Ive seen;

LSXRT on boosted Trailblazer SS (+50rwhp)
http://www.gmhightechperformance.com/tech/lsx_engine/1102gmhtp_fast_lsxrt_intake_manifold_upgrade/index.html

LSXR 4.8L, 21psi (1200hp)
http://www.hotrod.com/techarticles/hrdp_1109_stock_gm_ls_engine_big_bang_theory/

LSXR Z06 (21psi 8 second car)
http://www.gmhightechperformance.com/features/1104gmhtp_2007_chevrolet_corvette_z06/index.html

I only gained 13whp same time back to back with a FAST over a LS6 on my car

http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/generation-iii-external-engine/1167661-ls6-vs-ls6-85tb-vs-bbk85-vs-fast92.html

You used a Fast92 not the newer 102...

That's definitely a pretty healthy chunk of power you picked up. This thread pretty much invalidates all of those claims some people make about the FAST 102 not doing much on a mildly modded stock cube application. It's an expensive piece, but it's worth it IMO, especially if you plan to modify the car much heavier in the future, that's probably when it will REALLY shine.

I only gained 13whp same time back to back with a FAST over a LS6 on my car

http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/generation-iii-external-engine/1167661-ls6-vs-ls6-85tb-vs-bbk85-vs-fast92.html13whp is 16fwhp, you have extreme expectations. 13hp is a lot for something you simply bolted on and was probably only $400 once you sold your intake.......

Wow nice results!

Yes the swap is quite expensive but luckily I've collected a bunch of misc fittings, braided line and the other stuff from other builds before that made it cheap this go around. All I had to purchase was the intake cause the rails, TB, fittings, hose, adapter, 60# injectors I had sitting on the shelf.

I know 60#er's are WAY over kill but my 35.5lb Flex Fuel injectors I had planned on using were stopped up.

Price the intake, matching TB, and the billet rails AND the adapter needed to run stock lines then get back to us. Add in the FTP 100 lid and TSP MAF and you're at 2Gs. Not a cheap mod to do correctly.

The words of someone who doesnt know..One day you will jump on the 102 bandwagon and see for yourself the swap is worth every penny.
You gain power everywhere.
What intake are you running? The 102s aren't that expensive to do..
Cost of intake is 812 shipped brand new(if you know where to look)
Add a 102 TB, and LS2 fuel rails.. Thats it. You dont need to run the billet FAST fuel rails AND the adapter..The LS2 fuel rails connect right onto the stock fuel line.
Go to home depot and spend $1 on shims, and your all set.
TSP 100MM MAF not needed, and not recommended. SD tune for the win.

I bet you where one of those guys that used to say that a 102MM intake is too big for a stock CI motor . :eyes:

I agre with jimmy. I was in Memphis last year and I got the chance to tour Comp cams facility. I also got to talk to the guy who engineered the 102. He said that the rumor bout the 102 being to big or a stock ci motor was ridiculous. He said you could put a 12 inch opening on the front it wouldn't matter what mattered was the runners shape and engineering. That was the coolest tour I've ever been on. I would recommend if you were in the area to go check it out.

The words of someone who doesnt know..One day you will jump on the 102 bandwagon and see for yourself the swap is worth every penny.
You gain power everywhere.
What intake are you running? The 102s aren't that expensive to do..
Cost of intake is 812 shipped brand new(if you know where to look)
Add a 102 TB, and LS2 fuel rails.. Thats it. You dont need to run the billet FAST fuel rails AND the adapter..The LS2 fuel rails connect right onto the stock fuel line.
Go to home depot and spend $1 on shims, and your all set.
TSP 100MM MAF not needed, and not recommended. SD tune for the win.

I bet you where one of those guys that used to say that a 102MM intake is too big for a stock CI motor . :eyes:

Maybe somebody doesn't want to run SD tune and Home Depot shims....Bandwagons, 102mm is too big...Stop assuming shit, it makes you look stupid. ;)

The FAST 102 is the superior intake over previous Fast manifolds from what I've seen, but since information is a lot more scarce on the 102, some may think that installation is just as simple as a 90/92, when it is in fact not.

13whp is 16fwhp, you have extreme expectations. 13hp is a lot for something you simply bolted on and was probably only $400 once you sold your intake.......
Just said my facts. My 13whp is 13whp, and a LOT less then 31whp the OP got. I spend about $2,250 in intakes testing btw, it had nothing to do with the resale money. :lol:

OP, how did the ebay Godspeed throttle body work out for you?

where can i get one for 812

13whp is 16fwhp, you have extreme expectations. 13hp is a lot for something you simply bolted on and was probably only $400 once you sold your intake.......

It looks like he had a stock TB too, I had a really nice ported one for new era.I forgot about that:emb: Thats normally a 5-7hp on a stock car, I think mike told me the most he's seen up to a few years, was 12hp on a cam car. I bet that was giving me 10whp over a unported stock TB. My best ET was 11.1 with the LS6/ported stock TB, MPH 125 I think a few times. That 30whp gain makes more sence now

I was just looking to get a 102 fast. I remembered they were $980-$1050 when they came out. newera has them for $819 right now
http://www.neweraperformanceparts.com/index.php?page=shop.product_details&flypage=flypage.tpl&product_id=261&category_id=50&option=com_virtuemart&Itemid=54

Thanks for the post
And legit numbers from a dyno!!!

OP, how did the ebay Godspeed throttle body work out for you?
From a performance aspect it works awesome however I'm having a lot of idle tuning issues. The blade didn't come with a hole drilled in it like the stock throttle body has so to compensate for that along with blocking off the PVC I had to crack the blade slightly to get my IAC counts inline... The problem with that is the throttle body is obviously cheaply made compared to a NW and when the blade comes go rest on the bump stop the blade is in a slightly different position and allows different amounts of airflow in each time it comes to a rest. I am going to attempt to drill a hole in the blade the same size as stock and close the blade back down just before it sticks to see if it eliminates the issues. If not then I'll be purchasing a NW102 to test the gains on. I done suspect any gains as the map readings never dropped with this TB but the transition from TB bore to the intake flange should be quite a big smoother with the larger TB.

It looks like he had a stock TB too, I had a really nice ported one for new era.I forgot about that:emb: Thats normally a 5-7hp on a stock car, I think mike told me the most he's seen up to a few years, was 12hp on a cam car. I bet that was giving me 10whp over a unported stock TB. My best ET was 11.1 with the LS6/ported stock TB, MPH 125 I think a few times. That 30whp gain makes more sence now
Yea that is a good point! The throttle body on the LS6 was the OEM 100k mile TB.

Thanks for the post
And legit numbers from a dyno!!!

Thanks the biggest reason I did this test was because I've seen numerous FS threads of the older 90/92's claiming they are superior and now all of the sudden a rare item to have. Well this pretty much proves its better than a 90/92 intake and can be had for a price some ppl are asking for a used 90/92.

How does the throttle response feel off the dyno and actually running on the street tho? I wouldnt expect it to be lazy at all, but just because something shows power gains on the dyno doesnt mean it will feel better on the street.

Throttle response as in when you blip the throttle or ease into the gas abruptly has increased significantly just due to the fact X% of throttle movement allows much more airflow than the stock throttle body could supply.

Now as far as how it feels on the street it's hard to say honestly cause it's been cold here in KY and on hard 275/40/17 street tires with a 4000 stall makes for nothing very quick other than a bunch of tire smoke. I did pedal the car once and pulled up through 3rd gear really good and I noticed a huge difference at higher speeds.

The tell tell will be this upcoming weekend at beech bend. As long as the weather holds out for opening day TnT I will be there to see how it does.

Just to add to this thread I took the pacesetter LT's and tsp ypipe off and installed arh 1-7/8 LT's and ypipe and replaced the slp lid and MAF for a FTP 10xmm lid and straight pipe running SD now and the car picked up pretty good. I am now up to 439rwhp/408rwtq. I don't have the graph off the dyno yet but will edit the post and add the picture of it later tonight.

Furthermore I took the car to the track yesterday and did fairly well considering the strong headwind we had managed a 11.41@118 3570lb race weight and not so optimal gearing (3.42 and 275/60/15 radials). Either way I'm tickled with the car and will be heading back soon with a few more adjustments to the shift points hoping to clip an 11.20 and 120mph without the wind.

379wtq to 408wtq with the header/ypipe swap? Very nice! Setup is working very well

I was off 2tq... got the graphs loaded on the computer and it looks like 406rwtq instead of 408. I updated the first post with a little description and some dyno graphs!

Once I get the video's from the track done and uploaded I will post those up in the first post as well.

I had planned on a FAST 90 or 92 setup for my 00' TA when funds allowed, but this has me leaning towards running a 102/92 setup. What all has to be clearanced, changed, and/or modified to install a FAST 102 on a 346? Anything with the water pump, other accessories, PCV, etc??

Great job James!

Isn't 118 kinda low? I was thinking 122-124 would be on the normal/slow side for this setup, power/weight.

Gearing and strong headwind was the cause for trap speeds. 28" tire and 3.42 gears aren't optimal at all. Really need another 500rpm in 3rd gear to get up in the meat of the power curve. Just for the record with a 3.73 and 26" tires it went 115mph at the same track with 395rwhp. I'll have it back to the track before too long.

Gonna eventually spray the car which is why the gear is still tall. Plus I like to cruise on the interstate at a decent speed without cranking all kinds of rpm.

Just spray the bitch...lol

Anybody else notice a 50 ft/lbs increase in torque at 3500 rpm after the header/lid swap. I understand the change to peak TQ was considerably less, however 50 ft/lbs at any point in the curve seems huge.

Am I missing something here?

Makes me want to completely ditch the K&N FIPK (which you could make the argument for already) and the 1 3/4" headers for a big lid setup and 1 7/8" headers.

The headers was the main reason for the huge TQ gains. Brian Tooley told me that the larger tube headers really shine with the smaller stock exhaust valve. The TQ it picked up down low and in the midrange is very very noticeable as well. Flashing the car at the track bumped up to ~4400-4500rpm where as before it would only flash to ~4000-4100. It also took a ton more fuel in the midrange which reflects the torque/power increase.

The headers was the main reason for the huge TQ gains. Brian Tooley told me that the larger tube headers really shine with the smaller stock exhaust valve. The TQ it picked up down low and in the midrange is very very noticeable as well. Flashing the car at the track bumped up to ~4400-4500rpm where as before it would only flash to ~4000-4100. It also took a ton more fuel in the midrange which reflects the torque/power increase.

Precisely what I was hoping to hear. Thought I had hit the "end of the road" with upgrade options (short of bigger motor or additional F.I.), however it sounds like it might make sense to pull the FAST 92 off, upgrade to a 102 lid setup and step up the headers.

Thanks for an awesome thread. These are the types of things that are debated on the board all day long....it's nice to actually see some concrete "apples-to-apples" numbers to support the conclusions!

Wow I love it, its satisfying for me to see this after hearing people say you will lose low end. Love it

EXACTLY... Everybody was complaining that you'd lose low end.. I didn't and I don't see a loss here either. :D

looks like i am leaning to a 102, subscribed. keep us updated

EXACTLY... Everybody was complaining that you'd lose low end.. I didn't and I don't see a loss here either. :D

Its because they are designed not to. FAST could make them make more power at the cost of giving up some low end.
I agre with jimmy. I was in Memphis last year and I got the chance to tour Comp cams facility. I also got to talk to the guy who engineered the 102. He said that the rumor bout the 102 being to big or a stock ci motor was ridiculous. He said you could put a 12 inch opening on the front it wouldn't matter what mattered was the runners shape and engineering.
"This guy" sounds super smart to me....lol
That was the coolest tour I've ever been on. I would recommend if you were in the area to go check it out. Ive been there too!
http://www1.autotraderclassics.com/images/a/cms/75996/75996.jpg?v=1.5.209671

I will def keep you guys posted with the car. Not made any changes but will be heading back to the track tomorrow if the rain holds off. Not expecting crazy numbers though cause it was 80% humidity today. But we will see.

***Edit***
Track was closed for rain so maybe next time...

Awesome gains!

Made it back to the track this past weekend without the headwind but was quite humid and eventually rained us out shortly after these runs. Track prep was non existant so the 60's suffered some but I did manage to get the shift points dialed in prior to this track outing and seemed to help the trap speed quite a bit.

Best pass this time was a 11.54@120 on a high 1.6 60'. I really need a gear and a 26" tire to get me up in the RPM on the big end. Right now it needs a good 150-200 shot to use the gear it has with the 28's haha.

wish my result was as good as yours man...i envy you lol

Ditch the cam and heads for a more track proven setup and you'll get the results! TEA CNC 243/799 along with a nice custom spec cam will get you better results. I spec'd my cam myself and appears to be rocking!

Pulled a new best at the track this past Saturday. DA was ~1400ft
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PQlIMjaOFsI

Any updates?

Nice results! Congrat's...I see now which intake and tb i'm getting.

No new updates, it's gotten hot here in KY and I've not done anymore modding to the car. Actually it will be getting de-modded actually cause the FAST102 is going to be used on my Camaro.

Also I want to clarify to all those that know Dyno Dynamics dyno's, these numbers had an extra 13% added to them to read similar to DJ numbers. I had dyno'd the car at LSFest back in the Fall of 2011 on a dynojet 224x and it made 395rwhp. I then dyno'd it on my Dyno Dynamics with only weather corrections and it made 349rwhp. I then calculated the difference and came up with 1.13x for the correction to read like the DJ.

So with that said the Dyno Dynamics numbers are as follows:
LS6 Intake: 349.8hp
FAST Intake: 381.3hp
ARH Headers: 388.7

Noticeable gain all the way through.

Interesting.

Impressed for sure, would like to see a 92mm for comparison purposes

Can you imagine if he added heads to this car!!!?
Nice write up and thanks for sharing.

Funny you say heads.... I have a nice freshly CNC'd set of 799's with TEA's stage 2 port job and milled to 61cc that will be going on in the upcoming few weeks. Trying to get it finished before Holley LSFest so I can get a good comparison on how it does on the same track. I'll keep you guy's updated.

The next mod after the heads is to pull the intake back off and send up the road to Brian Tooley for his port matching to the CNC job to see what benefit that gives over the un-touched intake.

Funny you say heads.... I have a nice freshly CNC'd set of 799's with TEA's stage 2 port job and milled to 61cc that will be going on in the upcoming few weeks. Trying to get it finished before Holley LSFest so I can get a good comparison on how it does on the same track. I'll keep you guy's updated.

The next mod after the heads is to pull the intake back off and send up the road to Brian Tooley for his port matching to the CNC job to see what benefit that gives over the un-touched intake.

You should already know what that is going to do to the car!

Brian is the best bar none!

Swapped the heads onto the car and it is now up to 418rwhp dynodynamics numbers and if you use the 13% correction for DJ comparison that comes to 472rwhp. That is a happy DJ though, I would say on a normal DJ this thing would be in the neighborhood of 455-460hp.

I've not gotten any track times due to my work schedule but hopefully here in the next few weeks I can get to the track and see how it does. I'm hoping for a 10.99 @ 124-125 or so. I also have now got 26" 275/50/15 DR's and switched to a 3.73 gear so a reduction in tire size along with better gear should also help alot with ET and trap.

Swapped the heads onto the car and it is now up to 418rwhp dynodynamics numbers and if you use the 13% correction for DJ comparison that comes to 472rwhp. That is a happy DJ though, I would say on a normal DJ this thing would be in the neighborhood of 455-460hp.

I've not gotten any track times due to my work schedule but hopefully here in the next few weeks I can get to the track and see how it does. I'm hoping for a 10.99 @ 124-125 or so. I also have now got 26" 275/50/15 DR's and switched to a 3.73 gear so a reduction in tire size along with better gear should also help alot with ET and trap.

That is one stout combination for a set of 799's.

Very nice numbers.

Got to the track and the head only swap got me down to an 11.13 @ 123mph. Had the exact same DA as when I ran the 11.39@120 so it's a good apples to apples comparison. I wanted the heads to pick me up more than they did but I believe I'm going to have to tweak the camshaft now with the larger runners and valves, maybe just advance this cam a couple degrees to get some more meat in the 5000-6000rpm region.

I'll upload a couple video's once I get a chance.

Either way I'm tickled with a legit full weight car running so close to the 10's with a 107K mile OEM shortblock.

Got to the track and the head only swap got me down to an 11.13 @ 123mph. Had the exact same DA as when I ran the 11.39@120 so it's a good apples to apples comparison. I wanted the heads to pick me up more than they did but I believe I'm going to have to tweak the camshaft now with the larger runners and valves, maybe just advance this cam a couple degrees to get some more meat in the 5000-6000rpm region.

Either way I'm tickled with a legit full weight car running so close to the 10's with a 107K mile OEM shortblock.

You thinking that you're losing port velocity and losing torque because of it with the larger runners and valves now?

I think it's mostly IVC point wasting some cylinder filling because of the larger runner and valve. The air column is now different and having quite a bit larger cross section and volume will tune a little differently so I'm thinking I'm gonna move my IVC point from 47.5 to 45.5 and might try a little larger exhaust lobe as well. I have a 243* LSL exhaust lobe right now and want to use a 246 extreme rpm hi lift lobe.

I think it's mostly IVC point wasting some cylinder filling because of the larger runner and valve. The air column is now different and having quite a bit larger cross section and volume will tune a little differently so I'm thinking I'm gonna move my IVC point from 47.5 to 45.5 and might try a little larger exhaust lobe as well. I have a 243* LSL exhaust lobe right now and want to use a 246 extreme rpm hi lift lobe.

I would think that by advancing the IVC point all you would be doing is raising dynamic, lowering the rpm where peak horsepower is made and gaining some torque.

Nothing wrong with that, but I would think that if you could keep the IVC where it is at 47.5, but open the intake valve sooner, you would keep the same peak power, the same rpm in which peak horsepower is made while gaining that under the curve 5000-6000rpm torque back from opening it sooner which would also gain you dynamic and help with low speed torque production.

IMO that would make for a fatter curve, but there are many ways to skin the proverbial cat in this situation.

I too think that the 246 Extreme RPM lobe would be a great choice. I have been using it a lot lately with great results over the LSL exhaust lobe. I honestly wouldn't be afraid to throw the 248 lobe on it either.

Great numbers james and with a little more tweaking I'm sure you'll be in the 10's!

Yeah the dynamic compression is what I'm after and I really didn't want or feel the need to use larger than a 235 intake lobe so to get the intake valve open sooner and closed slightly sooner will bring peak power down a fuzz if the same exhaust event was used however with the addition of a larger exhaust lobe and the lobe profile that should extend rpm roughly back to where I'm at and maybe a bit further. Ultimately the 5000-6000rpm area is my main concern of getting torque and power up. I don't even know that such a little change in the cam I have and the new one I want would have much if any effect... maybe over the winter if I get slow enough I can give it a try just as a test.

Yeah the dynamic compression is what I'm after and I really didn't want or feel the need to use larger than a 235 intake lobe so to get the intake valve open sooner and closed slightly sooner will bring peak power down a fuzz if the same exhaust event was used however with the addition of a larger exhaust lobe and the lobe profile that should extend rpm roughly back to where I'm at and maybe a bit further. Ultimately the 5000-6000rpm area is my main concern of getting torque and power up. I don't even know that such a little change in the cam I have and the new one I want would have much if any effect... maybe over the winter if I get slow enough I can give it a try just as a test.

As I said and we both know there are many ways to skin that cat.

I think you're on the right path though...I'd be looking to do nearly the exact same thing if that was my goal.

Updates James?

Yeah I guess I could update this...

My 4L60E ended up acting up since the head install and I believe that is some of the reason for the smaller gains compared to the airflow increase it saw. Got it back to the track after installing a Moser 9" with a 3.89 gear and ran a 11.07@122 with it goofing up on the 2-3 shift.

While I was at it I sprayed a 175 dry shot on it as well and went a 10.34@133 but as you can see in my video linked in my sig it was literally blowing through the converter the entire track. Datalogs showed it never dropped under 6100rpm from the starting line. It was on a soft cut limiter the last 4-500ft which is set at 6800rpm. Was gonna bump the rpm up some and try again but they shut the track down and I've not been back. I had to peddle it quite a bit on the 2-3 shift as well to get it to shift.

Tranny is coming out soon and probably gonna put a tighter convertor in it for a balls out 200-225 shot pass to see how far in the 9's I can take it.