Is it worth to upgrade from LS6 intake to a FAST Intake?
9 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 13,616
Likes: 185
From: Norn Iron
not sure if it has been posted but here is my take on this...folks have been 8's on a ls6 folks have been 8's on a FAST. both are good intakes but both are harder to tune. look at most of the boosted motors that are or have been hurt....number 7 is almost aways the hurt one. this is because the intake design. If i were going to spend the money for an intake i would do a vic jr and an elbow with a ported stock tb. it makes things easier to tune as well as gives you more power up top....plus its the coolest looking intake every IMHO...thats not a custom 
And the intake posing risks to any individual cylinder ( ie no 7 ) has already been proven to be bullshit.
And again show some back to back proof that a carb intake is better ? I run one myself, and it was only for looks I did it. I dont believe for one second it made me go faster. I dont do dynos though, so have no numbers either way.
Regardless of what everyone is saying, the truth is that whatever makes power on an N/A setup will make power on an FI setup. GMHTP ran something like this recently.
Nothing wrong with making the same power on less boost. I prefer it.
Nothing wrong with making the same power on less boost. I prefer it.
9 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 13,616
Likes: 185
From: Norn Iron
Just because an intake offers a small increase on a n/a setup, doesnt mean it will do the same on a boosted setup.
The LS6 is just superb on boosted setups.
Are there better ones ? You would assume so. But it does still amaze me that there still arent any back to back tests showing that any brand of aftermarket intake is light years ahead of a bog standard LS6 intake when boosted.
The proof simply isnt there ? So why isnt it there ?
Surely if these companies made an intake, they would test it and if the results were also very good, they would be telling everyone so people would buy it.
Again...listen to the silence.
Show me a back to back test on a blower equipped car, ie a centrifugal, and then I'll believe there are other intakes that really shine over an LS6.
Tests with turbocharged cars dont count, as airflow cannot be regarded as consistent between the two.
i dont tune and i know that most tunners can do great things. I was just posting what i had read. I run a vic jr as well. and i git it for thr looks as well. but i have read on here many times that the ls6 style intake was hard to tune and make big power on. i talked to my tunner and he said that was bull **** so so i guess i was wrong..hell i would just save my money!!! put that 1000 bucks into more go fast goodies
so i guess i was wrong..hell i would just save my money!!! put that 1000 bucks into more go fast goodies Again, show any proof to back this up on a boosted setup ?
Just because an intake offers a small increase on a n/a setup, doesnt mean it will do the same on a boosted setup.
The LS6 is just superb on boosted setups.
Are there better ones ? You would assume so. But it does still amaze me that there still arent any back to back tests showing that any brand of aftermarket intake is light years ahead of a bog standard LS6 intake when boosted.
The proof simply isnt there ? So why isnt it there ?
Surely if these companies made an intake, they would test it and if the results were also very good, they would be telling everyone so people would buy it.
Again...listen to the silence.
Show me a back to back test on a blower equipped car, ie a centrifugal, and then I'll believe there are other intakes that really shine over an LS6.
Tests with turbocharged cars dont count, as airflow cannot be regarded as consistent between the two.
Just because an intake offers a small increase on a n/a setup, doesnt mean it will do the same on a boosted setup.
The LS6 is just superb on boosted setups.
Are there better ones ? You would assume so. But it does still amaze me that there still arent any back to back tests showing that any brand of aftermarket intake is light years ahead of a bog standard LS6 intake when boosted.
The proof simply isnt there ? So why isnt it there ?
Surely if these companies made an intake, they would test it and if the results were also very good, they would be telling everyone so people would buy it.
Again...listen to the silence.
Show me a back to back test on a blower equipped car, ie a centrifugal, and then I'll believe there are other intakes that really shine over an LS6.
Tests with turbocharged cars dont count, as airflow cannot be regarded as consistent between the two.
But I don't see why you're claiming turbo boost to be so different than SC boost though. Ramps up differently but boost is boost regardless of how you get it.
This particular test I'm speaking of was in Sept. 2011 in an article titled "turbo torture test" being the most recent. They also did not do a direct comparison of the LS6 intake. There was also a marked gain with a FAST intake over the stock intake on a turbo 5.3. But again another turbo car.
You're right though, I haven't seen any tests of a fast over an LS6 on a SC car. All this means is that I don't think you can really state for a fact that a gain isn't to be had. I on the other hand don't see how it couldn't because of the general rule I stated. I'm sure someone out there has done it and knows for certain though.
Lot's of people running FAST's on blower cars, maybe not on this forum though. I'm sure my local shop has done them. They put FAST's on all their really big blower street cars. 102's on LS3's particularly. They may have some back to back comparisons, I should ask.
If he were do a swap from an LS6 to a FAST 102 he may not pick up enough power to warrant the cost, but I bet he will see a drop in boost. To some that's not a worthwhile gain and others it is.
I'm not a FAST nutswinger, don't even have one on my car, but I haven't seen anyone put a fast 102 on ANYTHING and not pick up power. Those 102's are boss. If I had the scratch right now, I would throw one on my 5.3L.
9 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 13,616
Likes: 185
From: Norn Iron
If that was the case a little T3 running 30psi would make the same power as a GT35 at 30psi.
or a T88 running 20psi would make the same power as a T68 running 20psi. Which everyone knows is wrong
And for the purposes of the test, if airflow through the engine improved, the boost control system would maintain the same boost pressure, the impeller would be spinning faster and shifting more air...but a naive person would assume airflow is the same.
If you insist on using a turbocharged engine for the test, you would have to know turbine shaft speed and run the turbo at the same speed regardless of boost pressure so airflow quantity is consistent with both intakes.
You are supposed to be testing the intake, not the turbocharger.
With a SC, airflow quantity is fixed with rpm speed. You cant alter that simply by changing a intake. If airflow through the engine improves, boost pressure should drop, and hopefully you should be able to release more power.
SC is little different to n/a in that respect. There is nothing else compensating to fire more air into the engine.
But the hard facts are that there are low 8sec and upwards runners with stock LS6 intakes and TB's
They work, and work very very well. The bottom line seems to be the intake or TB simply is not a restriction on most engines.
Totally and utterly wrong.
If that was the case a little T3 running 30psi would make the same power as a GT35 at 30psi.
or a T88 running 20psi would make the same power as a T68 running 20psi. Which everyone knows is wrong
And for the purposes of the test, if airflow through the engine improved, the boost control system would maintain the same boost pressure, the impeller would be spinning faster and shifting more air...but a naive person would assume airflow is the same.
If you insist on using a turbocharged engine for the test, you would have to know turbine shaft speed and run the turbo at the same speed regardless of boost pressure so airflow quantity is consistent with both intakes.
You are supposed to be testing the intake, not the turbocharger.
With a SC, airflow quantity is fixed with rpm speed. You cant alter that simply by changing a intake. If airflow through the engine improves, boost pressure should drop, and hopefully you should be able to release more power.
SC is little different to n/a in that respect. There is nothing else compensating to fire more air into the engine.
But the hard facts are that there are low 8sec and upwards runners with stock LS6 intakes and TB's
They work, and work very very well. The bottom line seems to be the intake or TB simply is not a restriction on most engines.
If that was the case a little T3 running 30psi would make the same power as a GT35 at 30psi.
or a T88 running 20psi would make the same power as a T68 running 20psi. Which everyone knows is wrong
And for the purposes of the test, if airflow through the engine improved, the boost control system would maintain the same boost pressure, the impeller would be spinning faster and shifting more air...but a naive person would assume airflow is the same.
If you insist on using a turbocharged engine for the test, you would have to know turbine shaft speed and run the turbo at the same speed regardless of boost pressure so airflow quantity is consistent with both intakes.
You are supposed to be testing the intake, not the turbocharger.
With a SC, airflow quantity is fixed with rpm speed. You cant alter that simply by changing a intake. If airflow through the engine improves, boost pressure should drop, and hopefully you should be able to release more power.
SC is little different to n/a in that respect. There is nothing else compensating to fire more air into the engine.
But the hard facts are that there are low 8sec and upwards runners with stock LS6 intakes and TB's
They work, and work very very well. The bottom line seems to be the intake or TB simply is not a restriction on most engines.
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo
Awesome K5 Blazer Restomod Comes With C7 Corvette Power
Verdad Gallardo
10 Camaros You Should Never Buy
10 LS Engine Myths That Refuse to Die
Verdad Gallardo
9 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 13,616
Likes: 185
From: Norn Iron
TECH Enthusiast
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 538
Likes: 0
Hey Stevieturbo...is 20lbs on a P1 and 20lbs on a f4 the same power, don't think so.
If u want a back to back test it doesn't matter if it's turbo or s/c used ad long as ONLY the intake is changed...use some logic
If u want a back to back test it doesn't matter if it's turbo or s/c used ad long as ONLY the intake is changed...use some logic
9 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 13,616
Likes: 185
From: Norn Iron
Maybe you need to read my very clear post again. Nowhere did I say test at the same boost pressure. Nowhere did I say same boost with different blowers will mean the same airflow.
Boost is largely irrelevant, its all about airflow.
What you are suggesting is as daft as comparing a normally aspirated engine to a turbocharged one. Ones air supply is fixed, the other totally dynamic with a variable air supply at will.
You need to apply some common sense before you can even think about logic.
Boost is largely irrelevant, its all about airflow.
What you are suggesting is as daft as comparing a normally aspirated engine to a turbocharged one. Ones air supply is fixed, the other totally dynamic with a variable air supply at will.
You need to apply some common sense before you can even think about logic.
Last edited by stevieturbo; Jan 6, 2012 at 06:32 AM.
ive been looking for months now and talking with several vendors and tuners, not one of them told me i would see a significant (if any noticable) gain dumping all kinds of money on a fast setup.
9 Second Club
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 13,616
Likes: 185
From: Norn Iron
Ive asked anyone to show back to back tests of other intakes where they have shone over and above the LS6 though.
And still waiting.
LOL to the "boost is boost" comment.
As for the intake manifold causing #7 to go lean that myth was already exposed as false. They actually ran a test where someone installe the intake manifold backwards and #7 was still the leanest cylinder. It has more to do with the coolant system and head design that causes #7 to go lean. I will grant that in a traditional front inlet manifold design the rear cylinders would be prone to being leaner than the front's due to the path of airflow, but that is not the root cause of the infamous #7. Also, adding an elbow to the top of a carb style intake negates most of the benefits of more even airflow distribution of the carb style intake.
As for the intake manifold causing #7 to go lean that myth was already exposed as false. They actually ran a test where someone installe the intake manifold backwards and #7 was still the leanest cylinder. It has more to do with the coolant system and head design that causes #7 to go lean. I will grant that in a traditional front inlet manifold design the rear cylinders would be prone to being leaner than the front's due to the path of airflow, but that is not the root cause of the infamous #7. Also, adding an elbow to the top of a carb style intake negates most of the benefits of more even airflow distribution of the carb style intake.
