FAST 102/102 set-up on stock 346 cubes ?
05-14-2010, 01:10 AM
#26
Launching!
iTrader: (18)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: DFW
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
102/102 I agree, the complaint about the IAC stuff is equivalent to buying a cam thats way too big and trying to complain that Comp screwed you. Use some common sense, 92mm is plenty enough for 500+RWHP. FAST just gave the option for even more if needed. That doesnt mean you should buy the biggest you can find(just like a cam).
Because you stand nothing to gain on a low HP applications. 92mm is plenty for 90% of street guys! You still get all the power benifits from the intake if you have a 92mm or 102mm.
Because you stand nothing to gain on a low HP applications. 92mm is plenty for 90% of street guys! You still get all the power benifits from the intake if you have a 92mm or 102mm.
Lets discuss MAP, TPS readings & drivability, I recall some of your other threads, you stated that the TB could be 300mm, at some point the MAP reading would be at 100% (very little engine vacuum) TPS reading is at 75% due to excessive throttle size now tell me how does the TB size not matter, this would make tuning the vehicle for drivability very difficult, the VE table would look terrible with a 300mm TB if you could even get it to run correctly at all. I am looking at the total overall picture.
I am not mad just would like you do know TB size does matter + drivability on the street or track.
I like my 102/102 and will continue to run it.
05-14-2010, 10:52 AM
#27
Let me get this straight you keep telling everyone that the TB size does not matter (I disagree), then you tell them to run a 92mm b/c the 102mm TB may be too big and it wouldn't make any difference b/c it’s the runner design of the intake? (that doesn't make any sense) and I proved to you that the IAC's are too low due to the design of the air going around the throttle blade, which could be fixed if I ran a NW 102mm, maybe maybe not. I honestly don't know I don't fill like buying a NW 102mm right now to test it.
Lets discuss MAP, TPS readings & drivability, I recall some of your other threads, you stated that the TB could be 300mm, at some point the MAP reading would be at 100% (very little engine vacuum) TPS reading is at 75% due to excessive throttle size now tell me how does the TB size not matter, this would make tuning the vehicle for drivability very difficult, the VE table would look terrible with a 300mm TB if you could even get it to run correctly at all. I am looking at the total overall picture.
I am not mad just would like you do know TB size does matter + drivability on the street or track.
I like my 102/102 and will continue to run it.
Lets discuss MAP, TPS readings & drivability, I recall some of your other threads, you stated that the TB could be 300mm, at some point the MAP reading would be at 100% (very little engine vacuum) TPS reading is at 75% due to excessive throttle size now tell me how does the TB size not matter, this would make tuning the vehicle for drivability very difficult, the VE table would look terrible with a 300mm TB if you could even get it to run correctly at all. I am looking at the total overall picture.
I am not mad just would like you do know TB size does matter + drivability on the street or track.
I like my 102/102 and will continue to run it.
05-14-2010, 11:56 AM
#28
Launching!
iTrader: (18)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: DFW
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
were not talking about tuning and driveability with a larger TB. people were bitching saying how a 102 is "too much" for a 346, and it was stated by SweetS10V8 and myself, that it does not matter how big the TB is, and that the 102 intake has the same plenum volume and runner length as the subsequent 78/90/92 versions. nowhere did anyone say a "300MM tb would be plausiable or work in reality." it was just used in comparision to prove that TB size does not matter as far as being too big, its the intake that decides that.
Read post # 9 please https://ls1tech.com/forums/generatio...questions.html
The TB size does matter, most guys on here are actually asking if the 102mm intake & 102mm TB is too much in combination with each other, not just the 102mm intake by itself.
Since most of us are buying the 102/102 for max effort anyways why not educate them on the whole process.
We already know FAST stop making the 90/92mm versions of the intake anyways, the 102mm intake is the new replacement for the previous intakes
I agree with Sweets10v8 that the 102mm intake will not give up any power down low, and that the intake runner and design help with the power & drivability
Last edited by camcamaro1991; 05-14-2010 at 12:15 PM.
05-14-2010, 12:09 PM
#29
Sweets10v8 has a bunch of good data, by no means is this to start a internet war.
Read post # 9 please https://ls1tech.com/forums/generatio...questions.html
The TB size does matter, most guys on here are actually asking if the 102mm intake & 102mm TB is too much in combination with each other, not just the 102mm intake by itself.
I would pefer if someone has a NW102mm TB on a 346 come in and let me know what there IAC's are as a comparison to the FAST 102mm TB.
Read post # 9 please https://ls1tech.com/forums/generatio...questions.html
The TB size does matter, most guys on here are actually asking if the 102mm intake & 102mm TB is too much in combination with each other, not just the 102mm intake by itself.
I would pefer if someone has a NW102mm TB on a 346 come in and let me know what there IAC's are as a comparison to the FAST 102mm TB.
im sure it will be a bigger bitch to tune, but it will work on a stock motor. period.
05-14-2010, 01:00 PM
#30
Launching!
iTrader: (18)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: DFW
Posts: 265
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
did you read the post? he made no refrence to driveablity or tuning, he simply stated that having a 300MM tb would make no difference power wise. now we all know that there will never be a 300 mm tb for our cars, but what he is getting at is on a stock motor, if a 90mm tb is plenty for a given car, switching to a 102 will have no effect on power.
im sure it will be a bigger bitch to tune, but it will work on a stock motor. period.
im sure it will be a bigger bitch to tune, but it will work on a stock motor. period.
Guys are here are asking for our help, they need to be informed about the drivability as well as the power gains. You cant honestly give out
"Good advice" with out discussing the drivability.
why would 90% of the street guys want to have drivability issues if the TB is too small or too big?
Why did we replace the stock TB to the 90mm TB is size doesnt matter, then the 92 now the 102, it may not be much more power, but if you are buying it new then run a 102.
Last edited by camcamaro1991; 05-14-2010 at 01:06 PM.
05-14-2010, 01:33 PM
#31
where did i say he didnt say anyhting about a 300mm TB? i know he did, i was part of that thread, as well as this one. he even mentioned the 300mm tb is this thread.
i agree with you, just get the 102. all im saying is, its not going to have an effect on power.
the 90 and 92 was replaced because people were maxing out the 90 and going with 4150 style TB's because at the time, that was all that would feed a large 400+ engine without choking it. FAST saw this and went with a larger TB and a "redesigned" intake to be used on stock engines all the way up to insane engines.
i agree with you, just get the 102. all im saying is, its not going to have an effect on power.
the 90 and 92 was replaced because people were maxing out the 90 and going with 4150 style TB's because at the time, that was all that would feed a large 400+ engine without choking it. FAST saw this and went with a larger TB and a "redesigned" intake to be used on stock engines all the way up to insane engines.
