FAST are a waste on everything, those intakes have junk build quality for the price. Even NA mine flexed so much I thought it was going to break and many have under boost.

 

Comes a point you can’t add any more boost on some setups, especially the smaller singles people like to run or larger engine turbo limited class cars. Price is certainly a consideration but you can gain a lot more than 20-30hp setting up things properly. I gained more than 30hp just swapping out my truck intake even with the same baby 80mm throttle body.

 

Is there another intake on the market with better area under the curve? Not talking 6500+ gains only. Fbodys don't fit truck intakes.

 

Thankfully not everyone has F bodies or LS1’s

 

Sure, but that point is often well beyond the 1200 hp and below street car. He also says all cams are boost cams which again he is right to a point, but I would argue there is more to gain from the correct cam then there is from an expensive intake especially if we are talking street cars under 7000 rpm. So basically holdener seems to be arguing that intakes are more important in boost applications than cams are because on one hand he says cams don't matter because they are all boost cams, but on the other hand stresses intakes do matter. Then we say cubic inches don't matter in boost, but worry about giving up a little low end with the wrong intake.

Just looking at some of the arguments and seeing things all together as a package. Obviously we'd all like to have the most efficient combo, but when it comes to the 1200 and below street car and $$$ more boost seems to often be the cheapest/best option. I saw a guy with a $20,000 motor make 1000 rwhp with 8 psi which was cool, but does anyone care if it takes 15 to 20 psi to make that goal?

 

Very true, except that's what the majority of members on this site have owned....

 

I enjoy more when someone runs an ET at a low boost level. Slow Sedan ran like a mid 9 at some silly low boost level. I went mid 10's at 8 psi in a 3800lb stick car. That is fun to me.....and messes with peoples heads LOL.

 

Running faster on a lower boost level “usually” costs more also. For example I was over 15 psi with stock 241’s ls6 intake and stock throttle body. If I put $2000 heads and spent $1000 for an intake and throttle body I might make 50 more rwhp at 10-12 psi. Or I could spend that $3000 on a bigger head unit and push 20 psi on my current combo and make 150 more rwhp. Since I’m on ethanol and have no heat or iat issues the 20 psi is no big deal. At some point raising boost instead of improving the inefficient motor combo will become an issue I’m just not there yet. Some day I’ll have a gear drive and big blower then I’ll need better stuff, but for now I’ll just add more boost in the current motor combo.

How many people show up with 241 heads and a complete stock top end and run 9’s? That messes with their heads too lol.

One guy I know has a $20,000 427 making over 1000 rwhp on 8 psi another makes 1000 rwhp with a 5.3 on near 30 psi. Of course we’d all rather have the 427, but when money is a factor boost is only a number whether it takes 8 or 30 psi to achieve the number.

 

I think we would need to know the OP's intended vehicle purpose, desired redline, and cam choice to pick an intake to match well. If all he cares about is looks, a simple cheap china short runner Sheetmetal intake would be fine. It will help reduce power below 6k where it's not needed anyway IMO.

78mm to 9xmm is more than enough TB wise. The larger you go on the TB, the less control you have over the engine at slight throttle openings. Huge TB's move a TON of air at very little throttle opening. So they can make for a twitchy street car.

"1000 HP street Cars" seem to be the new thing. Entry level turbo guys need to realize there's no such thing as a 1000hp street car. Guys that run those power levels or higher have the power ramped WAY down so get the tire planted until they hit 100mph+ in most cases. I'm around 375 WHP till 50ish mph and slowly ramp in 700ish HP by 90mph to keep a drag radial planted. Even then the tires are fighting to stay planted on typical dirty road surfaces. A better setup car and suspension with larger tires can do much better obviously, but but the point is 1000whp is a $hit ton. And takes serious power management to make even remotely safe on the street. Unless you just want to spin the tires (which can be done with 500whp very easily).

Aside from the expensive and weak long runner FAST manifolds, what intakes out performs the stock truck TBSS/LS6 up to 6500? I haven't seen one... REC port heads and the stock LS3 intake seem to be the way to go on a 6.0 to make power cheap on factory parts. Though the cost of a rec port setup VS a cathedral is pretty high considering I paid $50 for my last set of 706 cath. port heads.

As mentioned, I too prefer to get the most out of my money. Stock parts and lots of boost is the way to do this. Going fast on little boost is simply a matter of $ spent. Yes, an NA 600hp motor can make 1000hp on 10lbs. Let's add up what a 600HP NA motor costs to build compared to a cam only 4.8 doing the same thing at 25-30lbs. The turbo is already there, size it to do the majority of the work. IMO, the whole purpose of having a turbo car is to let the turbo do the work. Why go through all the trouble of adding a power adder to have it do so little work? IMO, A 350hp NA engine making 1000hp in boost is much easier to drive/manage on the street than a 600hp NA engine making 1000HP in boost.

That said... nothing against big boost on big $ motors! Just not friendly street turbo cars and not in my budget personally.

 

On a side note what is the weight difference of some of the cast or sheet metal intakes compared to an ls6 intake? Not that it’s a big difference or determining factor just curious. Some of those monstrous high rams have to weigh more.

 

The cast manifolds are heavy! The last Holley high-ram I had was over 35lbs. The LS1/LS6 intake is about 10lbs.

 

I've gained less from a cam swap then I did from an intake change, so it depends on the setup. I don't know many street cars that stay under 7000 any more, even some basic cam only cars shifts over that these days. It also doesn't take a huge cam for these engines to want to rev higher under boost.

I agree nobody really cares how much boost you run, generally people are only shocked when its super low or its super high on a SBE and the engine stayed together. To me its just more of a personal goal because its super easy to make a bazillion horsepower on high boost, so for something new trying to make it on lower boost with better parts.

Yup, 9.3 on 9lbs in a stick car I didn't think was too terrible for first day out in the car, lots to improve upon though!

Hi rams do weigh a good bit, super vic's are in the 17-18lb range which isn't too bad but sheet metal are often lighter. But as a perk the ones that weight more won't blowup when you crank the boost up past 35lbs.

 

I have always been of the mindset that one should build the smallest, most efficient motor that will achieve 50% of your goals naturally aspirated. Use the least amount of displacement, the smallest heads/cam/intake possible to get you halfway there without boost. Then use the smallest turbo(s) that will get you the rest of the way there.

Then, hopefully, you can achieve your goals with about 10psi.

If the turbo and cam are sized correctly, the turbo should be about tapped out by the time you run out of cam. Even a bigger cam won't extract anything else from the turbo, and a bigger turbo won't get much more without a larger cam... perfection.

Like a system that was planned for a set goal.

 

The problem I see with that is the use of the word efficiency. Boost is the most efficient way of making power I'm aware of. So why not use the most efficient method possible to hit your goal with the least amount of cost?

E85 changed the game IMO. 20 years ago your 10lb theory on pump gas is probably a very sound one. Now we can run 30-40lbs (if setup correctly) without detonation on $2 fuel.

I agree not to over turbo your setup to the point the car is lazy and not fun to drive. But if your end goal is say 900hp and your adding a turbo anyway... why spend the extra money to reach the 450HP mark NA? Why not buy the cheapest motor (a 4.8) and run the "correct sized" turbo to hit your power goal? I routinely see Gen4 4.8s for sub $300-500 here. A small cam and S475 will make 900hp+ with good fuel. Yet a 450whp 4.8/5.3 would cost 3-5x the money to build.

 

To me, E85 doesn't allow one to run more boost... it allows you to run the same boost with higher compression. Which involves doing it correctly by building/changing the engine... not just adding more boost.

Something about "just add more boost" doesn't sit right with me. I truly believe that less is more.

Just because you can make the same power with a less optimal combination, doesn't mean you should. Lots of people destroying perfectly usable engines, just because they can.

Well, not everyone has the money to build a 500hp naturally aspirated motor before adding boost if they want 1000hp... to that, I say, maybe those broke-@$$ b!tches can't afford 1000hp then. I can't afford an airplane, so I don't make goals that involve flying, sort of thing... Oh, but they can afford to do it half-@$$'ed, and that's fine for some people. To each their own.

I view boost as a piece to a puzzle, not the whole picture. If I can't afford to build a naturally aspirated engine, and I have to use a stock longblock... then my goals adjust accordingly.

Pick a reasonable cam to stab in there, see what it makes... aim to double that. Even a 4.8L with a trip-12 cam will be over 600rwhp with a mild single. 600rwhp is WAY more than, like, 80% of everyone knows how to sensibly handle.

 

Define "optimal". How is more boost less optimal in any way?

Money aside... Compression is less efficient at making power than boost, this is a fact. The higher you'll go compression wise the more peaky your cylinder pressures will be at PK TQ and the more likely you are to hurt something. Higher compression narrows the tuning window. Makes it harder to keep the heads down, and the bottom end together as well. Where as lower compression and more boost will give you a wider tuning window, more average power, and less peaky cyl pressure. If money weren't in the picture, the correct answer is to find a happy median between the two. To arbitrarily limit yourself to 10lbs is shooting yourself in the foot for no reason. Look at the biggest names in turbo drag racing. Guys with 600+ cu inch proline blocks. Do you think money is a factor for them? Do you see them running 18:1 compression and 10lbs? There's a reason for that. What kind of static compression do top fuel cars run? If they could go quicker with more compression... don't you think they would?

Then we have to factor in streetability. If the goals 1200hp... How street friendly is a 12:1 600+hp 408 VS a mild 5.3? I don't see running more boost on a mild motor as any sort of a short cut is my point I guess. As you say... to each their own.

 

Street ability and 1200hp don't belong in the same sentence for sane/responsible people.

But you are absolutely correct about finding a happy medium for your tuning window. I don't mean that you have to only run 10psi... but doubling your torque under 2bar usually means you are doing it "right".

 

Not building something because you can't make half the power NA as the "right" way to do it is asinine. It's about as smart as saying that someone else who makes xxxhp isn't "proper" because THEY couldn't or didn't build it the way THEY would.

 

Why do you even need an LS then? Wouldn't a 2JZ make the same power? Just add more boost, right? Probably don't even need a 2JZ... there's 1000hp 4G63's out there, all it takes is boost. Are LS engines just cheap and easy to find, otherwise you would be building 1000hp V6 Essex motors or whatever those K24 motors are/were?

At some point, displacement keeps the boost and rpms managable. Not everyone wants to spin their motor 10k+ rpms. Not everyone wants to deal with 45psi. Finding that balance point is what it's all about, in my opinion. Cramming more boost into a BS combo is not finding balance, it a bandaid for BS.

For me, at least, there absolutely is a right way and a wrong way to make the power one might want.

 

My physics degree says otherwise.