FAST 92mm Intake Vs FAST LSXR 102mm Intake... RESULTS INSIDE!!!
#1
FAST 92mm Intake Vs FAST LSXR 102mm Intake... RESULTS INSIDE!!!
Test Vehicle-2000 C5 Corvette
6spd Manual
LS1
Modifications:
Cold Air
Custom Camshaft
CNC Ported Cylinder Heads
Longtubes
FAST 92mm Intake Ported by Vengeance
GM LS2 90mm Throttlebody Ported by Vengeance
We fully tuned the car as it came to us. The ONLY changes were the intake manifold itself. NO tuning done with the 102mm. Testing was done with the GM LS2 throttlebody on BOTH intakes.....
Results:
92mm Intake (Ported by Vengeance) /90mm Throttlebody Combo- 431/397
102mm Intake (Ported by Vengeance)/90mm Throttlebody Combo-440/403
Gains of 9RWHP/6RWTQ
Dyno Graph
We will be testing against the 92mm intake on a stroker combo in the coming weeks... Stay tuned for results on that as well!!!
6spd Manual
LS1
Modifications:
Cold Air
Custom Camshaft
CNC Ported Cylinder Heads
Longtubes
FAST 92mm Intake Ported by Vengeance
GM LS2 90mm Throttlebody Ported by Vengeance
We fully tuned the car as it came to us. The ONLY changes were the intake manifold itself. NO tuning done with the 102mm. Testing was done with the GM LS2 throttlebody on BOTH intakes.....
Results:
92mm Intake (Ported by Vengeance) /90mm Throttlebody Combo- 431/397
102mm Intake (Ported by Vengeance)/90mm Throttlebody Combo-440/403
Gains of 9RWHP/6RWTQ
Dyno Graph
We will be testing against the 92mm intake on a stroker combo in the coming weeks... Stay tuned for results on that as well!!!
Last edited by Ron@Vengeance; 06-10-2010 at 09:33 AM.
#2
TECH Regular
iTrader: (25)
Not bad considering it was stock cubes, a 90mm tb, and no further tuning. That's a true apples to apples comparison on just the intake itself. The results was kind of what I expected under the curve. Wich on my car with a 4.125 crank and the torque I have, I don't mind trading a little low end for the upper rpm range. Thank you for the info Ron we definately appreciate it! I can't wait to see the results on a stroker setup!
Last edited by Hamrdown; 03-18-2010 at 10:20 AM.
#5
completely across the board gains too...how is the fit of the intake 102 vs 92...they use differnet bottom shells or are they the same...I know my 92 fit like absolute crap...just wondering if the gains are do to the fit or the runner...I do like the 102 runners over the 92 though...thanks
#6
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Western Burbs of Detroit
Posts: 6,524
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Any specs on the cam?
IMO it looks like a pretty decent gain for a stock cube (346) and relatively mild h/c setup.
Is it me or does it appear that there are some sections of the graph with 15+ rwtq gained ? If I'm wrong I apologize. The computer I am on isn't the best, and I'll have to look at the graph again when I get home. One other thing, there are gains below 5000 and gains above 5000, but its funny how at 5000 rpms they touch. Just saying..............
Thanks Ron, hopefully I can get my end situated and stop in for the day. If we do a little guess-estimation from the 346's gains, a 402 MAY gain 15 rwhp 10 rwtq ! If so that would be huge !!
Thanks again man, and keep up the good work.
IMO it looks like a pretty decent gain for a stock cube (346) and relatively mild h/c setup.
Is it me or does it appear that there are some sections of the graph with 15+ rwtq gained ? If I'm wrong I apologize. The computer I am on isn't the best, and I'll have to look at the graph again when I get home. One other thing, there are gains below 5000 and gains above 5000, but its funny how at 5000 rpms they touch. Just saying..............
Thanks Ron, hopefully I can get my end situated and stop in for the day. If we do a little guess-estimation from the 346's gains, a 402 MAY gain 15 rwhp 10 rwtq ! If so that would be huge !!
Thanks again man, and keep up the good work.
Trending Topics
#9
11 Second Club
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: columbus, ohio
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#12
#13
#14
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Western Burbs of Detroit
Posts: 6,524
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Maybe Ron will shed some light on this question. From the view I have on this computer I can't tell with 100% certainty. I am going to look again when I get home. If it is a loss downlow, I'm willing to bet a larger cube engine won't have that issue. Then again who knows, we'll just have to wait and see. This intake may be more then is needed for a 346 cubic inch motor. BTW what was the COMPRESSION ratio on this motor? Less then 11.4/5 to 1 ? Would higher compression be able to maintain air velocity better?
#16
after zooming in, I saw the same as you. Both intakes were ported also, so Im guessing had the FAST 102 been unported, it would have made the same numbers as the ported FAST 92 and 90, which goes to show that the FAST 102 is indeed superior and would definately benefit a stroker.