Fast?
nope. the engine will only take as much air as it needs, and if memory serves me correct, the only difference between the 90 92 and 102 is the TB opening and the 102 has removable runners.
same with the 78 and 90, the runners are the same, thats why you used to see people taking 78 intakes and putting 90mm openings on them.
same with the 78 and 90, the runners are the same, thats why you used to see people taking 78 intakes and putting 90mm openings on them.
Trending Topics
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
I'm in the market for FAST intake ,but I would prefer a 92 mm intake and no one seems to sell them anymore.
here's a link to : FAST 92 vs FAST 102 on stock bottom end LS1
https://ls1tech.com/forums/generatio...ts-inside.html
here's a link to : FAST 92 vs FAST 102 on stock bottom end LS1
https://ls1tech.com/forums/generatio...ts-inside.html
Last edited by Mac 2002 SS; May 11, 2010 at 08:27 AM.
Yeah ,it seems to answer all of our question but as you can see that test was done with a 102 intake with 90 mm tb and they didn't tune it and it made 9 hp more than the " Tuned" ported 92 mm intake and 90mm tb.
They also claim that the 102 fits better than the 92 intake . I guess I can get a 102 intake /92 mm tb set-up and it should work just fine.
They also claim that the 102 fits better than the 92 intake . I guess I can get a 102 intake /92 mm tb set-up and it should work just fine.
nope. the engine will only take as much air as it needs, and if memory serves me correct, the only difference between the 90 92 and 102 is the TB opening and the 102 has removable runners.
same with the 78 and 90, the runners are the same, thats why you used to see people taking 78 intakes and putting 90mm openings on them.
same with the 78 and 90, the runners are the same, thats why you used to see people taking 78 intakes and putting 90mm openings on them.
Thread Starter
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 4,768
Likes: 26
From: Central Valley
isn't it harder to tune (for drivablility) the 102 compared to the 90 and the 92? i'm just afraid this intake is too much for my 347 LS1. the heads are stage II 243's from west coast cylinder racing head with a TR227/224 cam. the reason i'm goin with this cam is because it only has 300 miles on it and i'd like to get use out of it, down the road i plan to upgrade to a 23X/23X cam
i agree, the design is different, but the mechanics of the intake are the same. i.e plenum volume, runner length...etc...the design changes have nothing to do with the functionality of the intake. even if they did, it in no way changes it to where it is "too much" for a stock LS1. otherwise, they wouldnt have stopped selling the 90/92 and replaced it with the 102. that would be stupid because they would have lost out on 2/3 of their market to sell to because not everyone has 600+hp engines.
isn't it harder to tune (for drivablility) the 102 compared to the 90 and the 92? i'm just afraid this intake is too much for my 347 LS1. the heads are stage II 243's from west coast cylinder racing head with a TR227/224 cam. the reason i'm goin with this cam is because it only has 300 miles on it and i'd like to get use out of it, down the road i plan to upgrade to a 23X/23X cam
