Hey guys just had my car finish tuned for the FAST setup after getting driveability all sorted out. Anyway went to the dyno with the setup and a fast 92 tb. and made 440/391 sae corrected. Then I decided after that the car needed more air at Idle for the cam and to help out with the light clutch. Picked up a NW 102 for the larger iac port and head back to the dyno for a touch up tune. That sheet is below. I dont have the original but it was the same exact sheet just with 7hp/6 tq less. The ONLY change to the car was the TB.

For those wondering I noticed better driveability with the 102 tb over the 92 although I did not use the vmax ring like most use.The NW does not have a hump in the bottom like the fast and godspeed tb's do. weather conditions were about the same during most runs and both were corrected. AFR was kept around 12.8-13.1:1 for all runs. Timing was set to 28 degrees with 93 octane and no knock. Car made power all the way to there then stopped I had no ping even at 29.5 but we backed it off to be safe.

 

Very nice! So you have stock LS6 heads?

 

wait so you lost or gained power with th 102 lol..?

 

I've heard the fast tb's are a pita to tune. Maybe the NW tb is the reason the car drives better. The tune is spot on now?

 

Tune was good at wot before when I originally had the 92tb and the car made 440. we had some trouble with drivebaility with the 92 tb which I hammered out after swapping on the nw 102 then just brought the car back to have the dyno tuned checked with the 102. The FAST iac hole just is a little small for novice tuners with a cam. It was giving me fits and the 32lb clutch in my car wasnt helping at all. I went to the NW 102 and I had it nailed down pretty well in 2 days. The problem with the FAST is the iac hole not the throat. The nw 102 is actually suppsoed to drive worse than the fast 102 because the fast has a hump in the throat to help with low speed driveability.

Car had a 102/92 setup on it the first time then swapped the tb for a 102 unit and gained 7hp/6tq

Yes stock heads and bottom end. only thing done to the motor is the cam setup. I spent a lot of time optimizing my bolt ons to get the most from the combo lol. Fwiw a white ss with a TV3 and PRC 2.5 5.3 heads got up there and pounded out 441 so I was pretty pleased lol

 

Very nice gain from just swapping a throttle body!

 

Great numbers and excellent build! I'll be following this thread closely as I'm also doing optimal supporting mods. I have Kooks headers/duals already and will be doing Mamo ported FAST 102 with NW 102, TSP 100 MAF, and FTP lid before year's end. Then AI heads/cam next year. Any chance there will be some track times before the end of the year?

 

Oh, ive been up 16 hours at work. the way i read it, it seemed like you said you lost power from the larger TB

 

Great gains man. I'm getting a re tune tomorrow. I have a nice set up also but my shitty ls1 intake is choking my engine. We'll see what the fast 92/92 does. Feels like an entirely different car past 3500 now!

 

I most likely will its florida so i can run whenever i please any time of the year lol. And i gave a lot of thought to the tsp maf but in the end the 85mm wasnt a restriction for me at all and I would have gained nothing going to a 100. You may want to save the money, people often complain about the 100mm setups because at low speeds there isnt enough airflow to get solid reasons.
Nice post up the results. I had an ls6 and it really woke up over 3500 the fast over an ls1 would be huge.

I made this thread because lots of people say a 102 tb isnt needed and actually hurts driveability and it makes no more power. I never saw that actually tested though....this seems to debunk that pretty well

 

I've read that as well but there's plenty of people that say a 102 TB isn't necessary either and this thread is an example of otherwise. If you were local it'd be great to try the TSP MAF back to back. Maybe I'll just buy an 85 and test it back to back. Post up some results after the track. Are you planning on doing heads as well or staying cam only?

 

My 6.0L Lq9 was set to 27 degrees with no problems 11.5:1 CR on 93 then we moved it to 29 degrees and it made 1 more hp and lost 4 ft-lbs. Backed it back to 27 degrees and left it there.

 

Ya it would be but redoing the maf would require a complete retune of wot as well as part throttle. The FAST doesnt change the tune as much as people think. The idle part is the biggest thing that needs changing. If you have a wideband you can tune it all yourself with relative ease since it really only alters the maf calibration and timing. I tuned mine at part throttle using stft's (no wideband) then went to the dyno to get wot dialed in with a wide band.

One thing to note is that a gm 85mm maf is actually around 90-92mm on the inside so with a 92mm tb there really is no restriction. With that tb I pulled 98-100 kpa on the map at wot. Swapping to the 102 tb showed no difference no the map reading. If there was a restriction with the new 102 due to the maf the map would have dropped indicating a vacuum pull.

The tuner and I formulated our own opinion on why the 102 gained....The 92 tb without the vmax ring has a large step for the 102 intake throat. This step causes a reversion with an air cushion hindering proper feed to the runners. In theory this will be alleviated by using the vmax ring but I didnt have one with me. And in that case if you're buying a tb anyway I would just go to a 102 and not spend the 50 bucks on the vmax ring anyway.

In the end its nice to see my attention to detail paid off. Many people told me that an ewp, fast 102 on a cam only motor, light clutch, bigger headers, ati ud etc werent worth it in the long run. What people fail to realize is even though not one of those make a huge difference combined they can produce some stellar results like here.

 

I knew it would have to be retuned if I wanted to do back to back MAF just wasn't thinking when I posted that late last night. I appreciate the detail in your post and will keep it in mind when I get mine tuned.

I 100% agree with your last paragraph. I'm planning to do a lightweight twin disk clutch and an ATI 10% UDP as well. Haven't really considered the EWP too much. I've had a few people say spending the money on supporting mods isn't worth it but I'm certain they will all add up. Glad to see I'm not the only one with this mindset.

 

Gaining anything from the TB swap shows that even at mid 400s you begin to gain something. As you hit 500+ the gains would widen. Once you port your heads you'll be very near 500rwhp with a pretty mild cam.

I wish FAST had a larger IAC opening - at least as big as stock (or some sort of tuning reference because I do realize the 102s dramatically change the idle airflow characteristics and maybe the smaller IAC is to compensate for that). But the hump is better for part throttle drivability. I did manage to get my FAST 102 to idle and behave, but I had to adjust the IAC steps table.

 

You're off to a good start with the TD's I love the way mine sound and they have been proven to be worth a few ponies over a catback y setup.

The EWP is expensive if you buy it new but if you shop around you can find a like new or brand new one like i did in the realm of 4-500. At that point its around 80-100 per hp. Which isnt the best hp/dollar but its not the worst. I felt a gain in mine a little in the upper rpm and the motor revved easier. My twin disk is awesome, the pedal feels like a honda lol however with such a lightweight setup there are trade offs. Take off and shifting is fine dont let anyone tell you a light setup like mine at 30lbs (20 lbs lighter than stock) will be a bitch to drive. They are not, they are a little more touchy but you get used to it in a couple days. What is affected epecially with a cam and the fast 102 is realy low speed. The heavier clutch has more inertia and helps the motor deal with loads at low speeds like turning. Mine is fine everywhere except when turning the wheel coming out of a parking space. i have to do this somewhat slowly and play with the clutch but its only in reverse. The lighter clutch coupled with the cam and fast just doesnt have the same inertia a heavy setup would have to be able to deal with the increased load from the ps. My pump does spew a bit of fluid through the cap so I'm thinking about trying a turnone which should help that issue.

Try the NW Jake you'll like it lol. JK I probably could have modified the iac table but this was just easier at this point lol and it gained power. I would really like to see the low speed difference between the hump and no hump as I dont have any problems with mine but who knows maybe the fast would be better.

DONT TEMPT ME with a head swap lol. I often think about what happens if I had my 243's hogged out by AI and milled to get 11.5:1 static. I'm really happy with the setup as it is now people do a lot more to get that same number whereas I'm a cam only ls6. Further proof that the type of bolt ons do matter. I know its JUST number however it was pretty nice to see the white 6spd SS get up there and with a large TV3 cam and a PRC 2.5 5.3 heads make 441 albeit he was through a 9" rear but still....

 

Have you ran the car yet? Curious to see some time slips.

 

nope just got it tuned needs tires first I cant go over half throttle in first gear without it lighting em up. Then it'll burn all of 2nd with the 295 kdw's on the back. New tires should be here this week then I'll head to the track.

 

More compression will make the car drive better too... just a thought.

Now that I've got mine almost dialed in, it honestly doesn't drive much different than stock. Part of that is playing with the tune. The other is the added compression. The 4200 stall just takes more gas to get moving, but it doesn't lug even at 1200 RPM in OD with my automatic locked up...

 

Believe mee I know the compression would make it more snappier, and who DOESNT love the cackle of high compression at idle? Lol Maybe after I graduate college here and have some extra funds laying around. I would probably do AI on my heads then arp bolts, .040 cometic gasket to get the quench down and mill the heads for a target 11.5 cr. I havent worked out what dynamic at that point would be but I imagine it would be fine and I may even be able to push it higher but i dont think it ould be worth the risk.

One thing I'd like to bring up that I think a lot of people over look is their valvetrain setup. Everyone wants the biggest baddest cam and dont bother to pay attention to anything else. People will get LSL or XER lobes then couple it with heavy stainless valves and heavy dual springs just to control it all. This beats the snot out of the motor and rarely makes any more power than a well thought out milder setup. A good beehive spring with a controllable lobed cam and stock rockers will match or outperform a harsher setup any day of the week assuming similar size... within reason of course