Fast 102mm too big?
Great post ,Tony. But we all still haven't seen anyone with a set of good heads ,cam, exhaust etc post any ET's after installing the FAST102/102 on a stock bottom end LS1 !! I can find post all day long about LS2 this,LS3 that, but never LS1 with a FAST102/102 . Now if someone can find a few threads on here or any other site ,please post them on here. I'm sure I'm not the only one who wants to know.
Please don't take this like I'm trying to be an *** ,but I'm just stating a fact. I know Tony knows what he is talking about cause he has put together a bunch of monster over the years . But I'm just your everyday run of the mill weekend warrior whenever I have time kinda of guy !!
When I spend my money ,I want to know it works by seeing it work. Not by hearing it works. I'm sure you all can understand that. 
Please don't take this like I'm trying to be an *** ,but I'm just stating a fact. I know Tony knows what he is talking about cause he has put together a bunch of monster over the years . But I'm just your everyday run of the mill weekend warrior whenever I have time kinda of guy !!
When I spend my money ,I want to know it works by seeing it work. Not by hearing it works. I'm sure you all can understand that. Last edited by Mac 2002 SS; Oct 16, 2010 at 06:06 AM.
Great post ,Tony. But we all still haven't seen anyone with a set of good heads ,cam, exhaust etc post any ET's after installing the FAST102/102 on a stock bottom end LS1 !! I can find post all day long about LS2 this,LS3 that, but never LS1 with a FAST102/102 . Now if someone can find a few threads on here or any other site ,please post them on here. I'm sure I'm not the only one who wants to know.
Please don't take this like I'm trying to be an *** ,but I'm just stating a fact. I know Tony knows what he is talking about cause he has put together a bunch of monsters over the years . But I'm just your everyday run of the mill weekend warrior whenever I have time kinda of guy !! When I spend my money ,I want to know it works by seeing it work. Not by hearing it works. I'm sure you all can understand that.
Please don't take this like I'm trying to be an *** ,but I'm just stating a fact. I know Tony knows what he is talking about cause he has put together a bunch of monsters over the years . But I'm just your everyday run of the mill weekend warrior whenever I have time kinda of guy !!
When I spend my money ,I want to know it works by seeing it work. Not by hearing it works. I'm sure you all can understand that. If you are running a stock cube build and say already have one of my older ported 90's or 92 mm FAST, it wouldn't be a very cost effective move to see another 3-5 ponies, but if your were building an aggressive stroker with say our new AFR 245 head, I would sell the ported 90/92 and let me rework a 102 for you....on that application you will see more sizable gains and lets not forget your bring in some revenue to offset the cost by selling the original intake you had making the swap more cost effective.
If you don't have either already just step up and buy the 102 assuming the package warrants the purchase as I have previously discussed....there are no downsides to the 102....thats the point I have been trying to drive home....only slight upsides...with slightly larger upsides when discussing big cube big flow applications.
8,000,006 and counting
Regards,
Tony
I get your drift ,Tony. Thank you for your "professional " input. I will eventually find what I'm looking for sooner or later. Do you have anymore "Mamofied" 92 setups laying around the shop ?
Last edited by Mac 2002 SS; Oct 15, 2010 at 04:09 PM.
It clearly wasn't designed to be used on older vettes and f-bodies - the thing is massive compared to a stock intake. That's just an unfortunate side effect of coming up with one product that's supposed to do it all. Blame the free market economy if you must, but they didn't make this decision blindly.
No, its not the free market economy. FAST turned their back on a very rabid customer base they had with the C5 LS1 crowd. They can still make 90/92mm manifolds, they choose not to.
The LS1 is NOT for use on a C% as evidenced by the fact that you have to shim the sub frame to get them to clear the cowl, which is borderline ridiculous. They are doing C5 customers a huge disservice making the claim this is for LS1 engines. Either that or they have **** poor development and quality control.
No, its not the free market economy. FAST turned their back on a very rabid customer base they had with the C5 LS1 crowd. They can still make 90/92mm manifolds, they choose not to.
The LS1 is NOT for use on a C% as evidenced by the fact that you have to shim the sub frame to get them to clear the cowl, which is borderline ridiculous. They are doing C5 customers a huge disservice making the claim this is for LS1 engines. Either that or they have **** poor development and quality control.
The LS1 is NOT for use on a C% as evidenced by the fact that you have to shim the sub frame to get them to clear the cowl, which is borderline ridiculous. They are doing C5 customers a huge disservice making the claim this is for LS1 engines. Either that or they have **** poor development and quality control.
The R&D team at FAST mocked up the intake on a C5 owned by one of their in house techs and measured a 5 mm gap between the intake and the cowl. The problem is the cowl is glued to the fiberglass body shell and it is not a precision situation at all. Not to mention 5 mm is less than .200....not nearly enough room for comfort IMO.
I spend alot of time on the Corvette Forum as well....I think the general consensus is some guys have had fitment issues with the new 102 and others have not. I'm building a 454 CID engine to feature our new 245 head soon that I will be dropping in my C5 and the bottom line is I'm a motivated to do whatever it takes to get that intake under the hood of my car. I may modify the cowl if necessary and/or slightly shim the cradle which really isn't that big a deal when you consider how much Ive modified my car already in search of additional performance (handling and engine/driveline mods).
Once again, the guys looking for every last edge will always go the extra yard to make it happen....I'm one of those guys but everybody has their own threshold of pain versus gain.
-Tony
I'm building a 454 CID engine to feature our new 245 head soon that I will be dropping in my C5 and the bottom line is I'm a motivated to do whatever it takes to get that intake under the hood of my car. I may modify the cowl if necessary and/or slightly shim the cradle which really isn't that big a deal when you consider how much Ive modified my car already in search of additional performance (handling and engine/driveline mods).
Once again, the guys looking for every last edge will always go the extra yard to make it happen....I'm one of those guys but everybody has their own threshold of pain versus gain.
-Tony
Once again, the guys looking for every last edge will always go the extra yard to make it happen....I'm one of those guys but everybody has their own threshold of pain versus gain.
-Tony
But what about the average guy with a cam and headers car? The 102 is seemingly overkill, and they are left with no new intake from FAST.
I still think its stupid to shim a cradle/sub frame to make up for **** poor development and QA.
Yes, if I had a big inch high performance engine with ***** to the wall heads, the 102 would be a no brainer, I would even say you may need that intake.
But what about the average guy with a cam and headers car? The 102 is seemingly overkill, and they are left with no new intake from FAST.
I still think its stupid to shim a cradle/sub frame to make up for **** poor development and QA.
But what about the average guy with a cam and headers car? The 102 is seemingly overkill, and they are left with no new intake from FAST.
I still think its stupid to shim a cradle/sub frame to make up for **** poor development and QA.
Ive installed many 102s on C5/C6 and never had an issue. It's tight but it clears. If you want to point fingers, Id be upset with GM not FAST. I promise you the tolerance is much tighter on the intake than GM's firewall
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
Teching In
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
From: Pennsylvania
throttlebody and intake swap What is the largest throttlebody that can be used on a stock 2000 ls1 trans am intake manifold? I am considering upgrading my throttle body and possibly my intake manifold. The engine is basically stock except for a high flow air fliter,slp airbox lid, and a Corsa catback. Would you replace the intake and tb as the next small step in my quest for better response and more power?
