Marc 85Z28

iTrader: (8)

This TPIS modified intake saves absolutely no money over a FAST 92/92 setup, and does not offer the same power potential. Furthermore, purchasing the FAST setup means you don't have to wait weeks of downtime. Foolish if you ask me. The original poster could now have a FAST 92mm intake and throttle body for the exact same price! And now that he bought the Polluter cam!?

LS1-450

iTrader: (33)

That's a very bold statement & only holds true because & if the original poster bought a polluter cam. A 92/92 FAST will not out perform a 90mm LS6 intake on stock & mild cams up to 6300 RPM, under the curve.

It's "Foolish" for the FAST crowd to continue to claim that the FAST is the do all & end all, best intake for everyone. The FAST is not the correct intake for the mild cam guys up to 6300 RPM. The air velocity through the FAST runner is less than it is through an LS6 intake on stock cubes up to 6300 ish RPM's. So, you're telling people w/ low lift cams to fill the combustion chamber w/ less air when you claim that a FAST is their better choice.

The FAST is the correct intake for guys of whom want max peak HP on stock cubes reving to 7000 RPM & beyond. The FAST is also the correct intake for the greater than 346 stock cubes looking for peak HP while reving to 7000 RPM & beyond.

In order for a FAST 90/90, 92/92 or whatever intake to improve on a mild cam set-up, one has to ASSume that there is a RUNNER restriction holding back the LS6 intake that the FAST improves upon. This is not the case. The LS6 runners can actually handle more air than the stock LS6 intake inlet allows to enter. So, doing anything to reduce the pressure drop into the LS6 (ie; 90mm inlet) intake will increase runner efficiency. From what I have tested, the runner velocity of an LS6 intake is just about as good as it gets while feeding stock cubes w/ mild cams, up to 6300 RPM.

So, one can pay for the FAST & lose HP & TQ, or spend the money on an intake modification that improves HP & TQ.

teke184

iTrader: (5)

"A 92/92 FAST will not out perform a 90mm LS6 intake on stock & mild cams up to 6300 RPM, under the curve."

so explain why i gained 10hp and 10lbft of torque at 3500rpm with my ported FAST 90/90....on my stock headed 233 cam only car??

yeah...that was over the LS6 intake and ported TB....not the 90mm ls6...but still.

will have the dyno graph up in a few days...gotta scan it.

i lost NO power under the curve.


"The FAST is the correct intake for guys of whom want max peak HP on stock cubes reving to 7000 RPM & beyond. The FAST is also the correct intake for the greater than 346 stock cubes looking for peak HP while reving to 7000 RPM & beyond."

and i gained about 18hp in the peak.....oh yeah...and it peaked at 6300rpm....

didn't need to rev any higher than 6400 or so. so much for you 7000rpm theory.

LS1-450

iTrader: (33)

Perhaps I need to speak sloooooooowwwwwly so that everyone can understaaaaaand. Clearly stated stock & mild cams. Your are running a larger than mild cam of which can take advantage of the FAST. Much higher lift & longer duration. FAST is correct for you.

Look up the stock cam specs before you rant.

01ssreda4

iTrader: (96)

^^^^^. OP thanks for the pics....

teke184

iTrader: (5)

geez....my bad.

forgive me for not reading all 3 pages of this thread.

i jumped to the conclusion that we were talking about cammed cars. i think if i picked up 10hp/10ftlbs at 3500rpm and nearly 20hp peak with a 233 cam....than even the cams in the 224-230 range would benefit.


but whatever

HavATampa

iTrader: (49)

haha...no kidding . It amazes me how people come in a thread that was just showing requested pics of a modified intake that's on the market and they want to tell the world what they have is the best thing out there and there is no other better options and people are stupid for looking at other options. I didn't ask for any advice in this thread about my intake of choice and didn't want it to turn into a pissing match for the Fast crowd. There's plenty of threads on that elsewhere. And now my choice of a Polluter cam has a few people losing sleep over it. Makes me want to install it even more just to see what it does. This is not my daily driver by any means, it's just a hobby I like working on. I bought it new at the end of '99 and it only has 46k miles, so downtime is not an issue.

AINT SKEERED

iTrader: (2)

I think the polluter cam will make good power for you but you stated that you wanted it for low end tq. That is what was in question.

For a fun ride, go for it. As for your reasoning for the 90 mm ls6, I would run 1 as well. I did loose some tq going to a ported fast 90 over my ls6 with ported tb.


I since got my power back up to 441/409 tq but lost more tq than I gained hp with going from a ls6 to a ported fast 90. This is the intake that Allan Futral ported for his own car that went 9.90 or so stock cubes with a 6 spd. I bought it from him

AINT SKEERED

iTrader: (2)

oh yeah, my 11.38 pass was before the fast also. after that I would bog out the hole due to putting an aluminum flywheel on the car and the loss of tq from the intake. Ran 122 mph but never ran better than 11.42 with the fast.

I will most likely put the fast on my Nova since its light and all about topend with a 5300 converter. I just have to get the right deal on a ls6 to put on the t/a. Or maybe the myth intake from Weiand if it ever comes out. the lq4 with that intake would get that car moving better as it is over 3800 lbs with the iron block in it.

Marc 85Z28

iTrader: (8)

http://www.gmhightechperformance.com...old/index.html

That's a mild cam if I ever saw one... Hey, look at the power gains at low rpms...

Finally, the biggest difference between the LS1 and LS6 intakes is NOT the runner, it's the plenum volume. That's the most important contributor to the power potential difference in most any type of manifold. It's no different with the FAST 92, as it offers substatial more volume that the LS6.

I see you have AFR heads. Perhaps you should give Tony Mamo a call and see what he thinks of your assumptions.

LS1-450

iTrader: (33)

^^^
Let's not name drop. If Tony has something to say, I'm sure he can speak for himself.

Who's comparing the LS1 to LS6 intake? You're all over the place.

Finally, I don't need you or anyone alse to tell me about the advantage of an LS6 over intakes w/ larger area runners. The plenum volume means very little if the area of the runner is large enough to slow the airspeed into the head. If the area of the runner causes the airspeed in the runner to decrease, it will not benefit a valvetrain w/ low lift & shorter duration. Have tested & seen this for myself. Some of us don't rely on internet postings to tell us what's best for our set ups.

If you're gonna post an apples to apple argument, then your dyno sheet needs to compare the 90mm LS6 to the 90mm Fast.

Marc 85Z28

iTrader: (8)

You won't find that on a mild cam setup. For the same price most get the FAST.

HavATampa

iTrader: (49)

Guys, take the Fast pissing match to a PM or something else. This thread isn't about that at all. I appreciate LS1-450 coming in and adding to the conversation of the TPIS intake, but this thread has gone way off topic. There's enough threads elsewhere on how "perfect" the Fast intake is and how loyal it's "followers" are. It's like a religion with you guys...geez! This thread is for pics showing what this intake looks like because a few board members wanted to build there own 90mm LS6 and didn't want a Fast. I wasn't comparing it to anything else out there so quit trying to sell us a Fast.

thunderstruck507

iTrader: (18)

where would you get the 90mm snout?

HavATampa

iTrader: (49)

That's a good question. I really don't know. If you look at this thread, https://ls1tech.com/forums/showthrea...ferrerid=13535 , Matty found a used LS2 intake for cheap and cut the snout off for his project. I wonder if you look behind the TPIS workshop, would you see a pile of dead LS2 intake carcuses with their snouts cut off.

Mike94ZLT1

iTrader: (3)

No... because it is plain to see that the piece that TPIS uses is NOT a stock LS2 snout, it is a piece molded and made specially for TPIS. I highly doubt the dude making his own intake will be successful.

LS1-450

iTrader: (33)

I'm rooting for him. Agreed, it's not easy to get it sealed properly, but it can be done. Haven't seen any updates lately. Don't know if that means he's having trouble or just too busy to post.

Mike94ZLT1

iTrader: (3)

Oh don't get me wrong I would love to see it too, but I don't think the stuff will line up right.

108dragon

iTrader: (5)

QUOTE LS1-450
"Finally, I don't need you or anyone alse to tell me about the advantage of an LS6 over intakes w/ larger area runners. The plenum volume means very little if the area of the runner is large enough to slow the airspeed into the head. If the area of the runner causes the airspeed in the runner to decrease, it will not benefit a valvetrain w/ low lift & shorter duration. Have tested & seen this for myself. Some of us don't rely on internet postings to tell us what's best for our set ups."

I agree with LS1-450 in that plenum volume is not nearly as important as velocity and runner design efficiency. Edelbrock and GM both played hell trying to keep the velocity and runner efficiencies high. Ron and Ken Sperry even "reduced" the speed of the LS head ports and intake runners, "The intake port was so good, we actually had to slow the airspeed down. We found that an airspeed of more than 350 feet/second could easily be achieved, but would not allow the air to turn at the short side radius just before the valve seat- it would just skip past and all the air would go through the backside of the intake. This effectively reduced the the swept area of the intake valve and hurt flow and power production."
The cam design also plays a significant role in the effectiveness of the intake as well, or maybe vice versa. As the intake valve closes, it creates an instant stoppage in the flow of intake air. This is witnessed in the intake flow as "pulse" in airflow. Efficiency is in how quickly this air flow can resume upon the next opening of the valve. Here is the critical balance where peak flow speed numbers give way to port and runner efficiency.
Nowhere in any equation or design theory have I seen plenum volume as a decidedly critical item in the design of the intake manifold -except maybe in reducing turbulance. A "tuned port" fuel injection system is tuned for maximum air velocity and efficiency.
I have always thought it funny how quickly the aftermarket moves to "reinvent the wheel" and market it to us as the "best thing since sliced bread". I also agree with LS1-450 in that the stock performance manifolds that GM puts on thier engines are the best items for the money that you can get for the realistic range of driving the vast majority of us will see. Think about it. How many of us routinely push our engines to 6800+? Even if you do, how long do you stay there? For the (what? 10hp or so?) power gain at that engine speed, the price for the aftermarket manifold is only really worth it to a professional drag racer or maybe road racer. For all that, you are better off spending the money first on a better valvetrain so that the engine will even survive 6800rpm.
The TPIS manifold IS pretty though.

BlackNiteWS6

iTrader: (2)

Have you ever installed one? NO right? Then you can't say **** about the TPIS intake. The FAST is overpriced for its mostly top end gains. The TPIS is $350.
The FAST is what $850?? So you can get your LS6 intake modded by TPIS and buy a 90mm TB for just what the FAST intake by itself cost. And who cares about alittle down time when you are saving atleast $400. So its foolish to you and buying a FAST is foolish to me. I still can't find anyone posting that they shaved anything off their E.T. with the FAST...And some have lost E.T. thats a joke!! Plus all its issues like no solid mounting point for the MAP, the fact that the thing had issues like it cracking. And you have to spend even more to get it ported if you want to see any real gains...but still the only gains posted are dyno numbers not track times.