Dynamometer Results & Comparisons - Ported FAST 90 vs LS6 dyno comparison

I've done this many times on high compression applications, but never on a 9.2:1 compression motor running 87 octane. The following dyno comparison is on my 2000 TA with a forged 347, 9.2:1 static compression, AFR 225 heads, and 224/230 .609/.604 113LSA +2 turbo cam. With help from 98Aggie (Kurt Decker), we baseline dynoed the car with an optimally tuned motor running an LS6 intake, factory 78mm TB and 85mm MAF. While the car was still on the dyno, we swapped to the Tony Mamo ported FAST 90 intake and Nick Williams 90mm throttle body. Same day, same dyno.

As usual, the Mamofied FAST lost nothing down low, but gained nicely in the upper ranges. The baseline dyno was 425 rwhp/405 rwtq. The after dyno was 449 rwhp/414 rwtq. A gain of 24 rwhp and 9 in torque. I've seen higher gains with 11.5:1 motors, but I was curious to see if the gains would work on a 9.2:1 motor. It did. Not surprising, my KPa at WOT improved with the intake/TB swap. Before, my manifold pressure would drop from 101KPa to 94KPa at WOT at peak power. Now, the pressure only drops from 101KPa to 97KPa. An improvement of 3KPa mean the engine is pulling less of a vacuum at WOT. Less intake restriction. Hats off to Tony Mamo for another great manifold.

http://www.guerragroup.com/2000TA_LS6vsFAST1.jpg

Nice job. Mustang dyno no less. Graph starts low enough to tell the whole story.........

Excellent (test) results Patrick (and Tony)! :D

Very good information. Any chance we'll see the same comparison done on a high compression motor ?? I bet the results would be even more dramatic. I'd guess a bit more hp and much better torque.

Nice back to back! Good info, not to sidetrack the thread but how much is the 85mm MAF worth over the stock one? Have you documented this before?

I ask because I am seeing MAP at 94 Kpa WOT with my 90MM NW TB and Mamo ported fast from a start of 100Kpa Baro. I was curious if it was the MAF and if the 85MM version would be worth anything? Mine is only 402 RWHP unlocked through an A4 and 9" Ford w/ 3.70's

Nice back to back! Good info, not to sidetrack the thread but how much is the 85mm MAF worth over the stock one? Have you documented this before?

I ask because I am seeing MAP at 94 Kpa WOT with my 90MM NW TB and Mamo ported fast from a start of 100Kpa Baro. I was curious if it was the MAF and if the 85MM version would be worth anything? Mine is only 402 RWHP unlocked through an A4 and 9" Ford w/ 3.70'sAn 85mm MAF is not usually a benefit when running a stock 78mm TB. The throttle body is the choke in the induction at that point. But once you go to a FAST 90, the stock 75mm MAF becomes the choke and there is a benefit to running the 85mm MAF. This swap was a good A-B comparison because the manifold was the only thing changed. The 85mm MAF was used in both comparisons. :)

I installed a Mamo Fast 90 w/ NW TB and SD tune at the same time. 11:1 compression
Picked up 24hp and 19tq.

good results

An 85mm MAF is not usually a benefit when running a stock 78mm TB. The throttle body is the choke in the induction at that point. But once you go to a FAST 90, the stock 75mm MAF becomes the choke and there is a benefit to running the 85mm MAF. This swap was a good A-B comparison because the manifold was the only thing changed. The 85mm MAF was used in both comparisons. :)

Was there no tuning done before and after?? Also what was the AF and timing

Awesome Comparison thanks alot Patrick and great work like always Tony.

IMO ported Fast 90/90 setup is a great mod for LSX and worth it.

Wow, impressive results. This makes me think about doing a 90/90/85 swap on my mild H/C setup. It would be much cheaper than upgrading the whole heads/cam package. It obviously wouldn't net the same gains, but would be attainable budget-wise and looks like it would help out quite a bit, not to mention it would be handy to have when I do have the money for the new H/C setup.

What kind of tuning would probably be required after a 90/90/85 swap on an already tuned mild H/C setup?

What kind of tuning would probably be required after a 90/90/85 swap on an already tuned mild H/C setup?Very little additional tuning involved if you're already running a MAF. If you're running speed density, you'll definitely need to increase your VE numbers to compensate for the additional airflow. You'll also need to make sure the hole in the throttle plate matches the one on the stocker (if you're running a cable operated TB). Often, the NW TB has a hole that is much smaller than stock.

Great results.

An 85mm MAF is not usually a benefit when running a stock 78mm TB. The throttle body is the choke in the induction at that point. But once you go to a FAST 90, the stock 75mm MAF becomes the choke and there is a benefit to running the 85mm MAF. This swap was a good A-B comparison because the manifold was the only thing changed. The 85mm MAF was used in both comparisons. :)

Was the 90/90 pull done with SD? and the LS6 with MAF? I see the 90/90 pull has SD typed after it/

Nice/good comparison for sure...This result reassures me that spending 1K on the whole 90/90 setup is worth it...Thanks Pat!:nod:

Kev

Well done!!! Great comparison Pat! And of course Tony Mamo does excellent port work as always.

The numbers seem pretty high for a mustang but its possible to set the mustang to spit out dynojet equivalent.Our local shop did that as guys didn't like the mustang numbers.

Still regardless good gain.

That there proves to the nay sayers, there is a gain on a ported 90/90

The numbers seem pretty high for a mustang but its possible to set the mustang to spit out dynojet equivalent.Our local shop did that as guys didn't like the mustang numbers.

Still regardless good gain.
I believe Kurt calibrated his Mustang Dyno very close to an inertia DynoJet (hell I would do the same....nobody likes low numbers....LOL). He or Patrick would be better commenting and clarifing that, but Im 90% sure that was/is the case.

As you mentioned however, the most important aspect of those curves is the delta between the two (whether it baselined at 400 or 475 RWHP)....they literally swapped intakes while it was strapped to the dyno and ran the test within 90 minutes of one another. Thats as good as it gets to eliminate any variables in the testing procedures.

Tony

I agree the gain is what is nice.

Patrick, if you were to guess, what would you think the average gain on a 11.4:1 engine would be?? Maybe 4-5rwhp higher than the the 9.2:1?? Say about 29-30?

Patrick, if you were to guess, what would you think the average gain on a 11.4:1 engine would be?? Maybe 4-5rwhp higher than the the 9.2:1?? Say about 29-30?Certainly another 2-3 better with the higher compression motor and the same cam. If you were running a bigger airpump like a 427 or 454, the increase would be even greater.

I believe Kurt calibrated his Mustang Dyno very close to an inertia DynoJet (hell I would do the same....nobody likes low numbers....LOL). He or Patrick would be better commenting and clarifing that, but Im 90% sure that was/is the case.

Tony


Correct we ran it both modes, mustang calibration and dyno jet calibration. The dyno jet numbers were posted because like you say everyone wants to see higher dyno jet number. But in either mode it shows the gain between the Ls6 intake and the ported fast.

Hey Patrick we should have done them in SD and took the MAF out to see how much more it would have gained. 2-3kPA is got to be worth another 5rwhp?

Kurt...

What were the the "standard" Mustang numbers without the DJ conversion?

Would you have to actually run the car again or could you go back to just the data to get that info?

Just kinda cuious....would have made for an interesting comparo.

Removing the MAF would have been cool as well like you mentioned but my guess would have been around 2-3 ponies....you never know though....might have been five and it might have been a bust....LOL

Thanks for taking the time to do all the testing before Pat sells his ride....

Tony

I have a similiar but more drastic dip in torque that starts at around ~3800 rpm and comes back up at ~4300 rpm. What causes it and how do you fix it?