Dorman ls6 intake 615-900
Teching In
Joined: Feb 2016
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
From: Dubai
ive done a bunch of searching and a lot of the posts are somewhat old and or have the same info, ive seen the onallcylinders page that shows the dyno comparison to the gm ls6 and the fast 90, and ive heard how its basically a 2 peice fast 78 design re done a little to look gm factory, with that being said, im looking at getting one cause $600-700 for an original ls6 is ridiculous imo and something has to be better then my factory ls1 one. my concerns are though is im a turbo car and this being a 2 piece intake and having those burst disc things on the bottom, would this not work for a turbo application? or be a bad idea and i should just stick with the ls1 intake for now?
only reason im not getting an ls2 or etc is its not in the budget atm as i would have to get new rails and TB with an ls2 or something aftermarket thats not an ls1/6 intake manifold, when the time and money comes next year or 2 i plan on doing ls3 heads and intake with 92 tb, just not in the budget atm but a $300 intake is lol
only reason im not getting an ls2 or etc is its not in the budget atm as i would have to get new rails and TB with an ls2 or something aftermarket thats not an ls1/6 intake manifold, when the time and money comes next year or 2 i plan on doing ls3 heads and intake with 92 tb, just not in the budget atm but a $300 intake is lol
Well its been almost a year since Ive heard anything from you about a LS2 version just thought you guys gave up on the idea. Would like to see Dorman make the mouth opening be, say 96mm with enough meat for the guys that want to port and open it up to 102mm if they so desire.
Last edited by omc8; Apr 27, 2016 at 10:14 PM.
I'd say it would sell, and sell well at that. The LS2 folks got the 90mm Throttle body, but the runners sucked. The LS6's were far superior.
I think making it with the 90mm opening but the ablility to swap between LS1/6 and LS2 cars would be win/win, especially from a tooling standpoint as well. Even leave the top middle hole so the guys with a 78mm TB could bolt it on and go as well... They can upgrade to a cable or electronic TB down the line.
I think making it with the 90mm opening but the ablility to swap between LS1/6 and LS2 cars would be win/win, especially from a tooling standpoint as well. Even leave the top middle hole so the guys with a 78mm TB could bolt it on and go as well... They can upgrade to a cable or electronic TB down the line.
I'd say it would sell, and sell well at that. The LS2 folks got the 90mm Throttle body, but the runners sucked. The LS6's were far superior.
I think making it with the 90mm opening but the ablility to swap between LS1/6 and LS2 cars would be win/win, especially from a tooling standpoint as well. Even leave the top middle hole so the guys with a 78mm TB could bolt it on and go as well... They can upgrade to a cable or electronic TB down the line.
I think making it with the 90mm opening but the ablility to swap between LS1/6 and LS2 cars would be win/win, especially from a tooling standpoint as well. Even leave the top middle hole so the guys with a 78mm TB could bolt it on and go as well... They can upgrade to a cable or electronic TB down the line.
That's why suggested making it 96mm with enough material to be able to port it up to 102mm.. That way those that want a 92mm can right out of box , and those want to go 102 just need to port it.
Your logic makes no sense. A 92 will bolt to a 102 opening. There's no reason to have to modify an intake.
As a big company, I'd say they are pretty restricted on their "creative freedom". To market and sell an LS2 intake, it'd undoubtedly have to be as close to a stock replacement as possible for the suits upstairs to green light it. They care exactly none how much extra power it could make with x modifications. So I vote they stick with a 90 mm version of the original intake like we all talked about it when it came out and work on the small details we all mentioned before. I think that's a winner. Like someone else mentioned, the people who want/need a 102 will pay for a FAST. I'd put money on the fact that even in 90 mm form, the tb inlet is no longer the area of restriction. To fully utilize (from a power standpoint) a 92/96/102 whatever tb inlet would require a complete redesign of the top shell at the very minimum, and that simply won't happen.
To sum it up, Doorman has leased the rights to the FAST 78 lower shell and runner design. That in itself is better than the LS6. The top shell was on them.
Give the people essentially a FAST 90 is what this boils down to. Win/win for the LS1/6 guys and a direct bolt on for the LS2 guys. The fact that it will come with fuel rail spacers is a bonus as well.
If I still had a cathedral port anything I'd love to test the 90mm version back to back against an LS2 intake in a complete apples to apples comparison, but I don't.
Give the people essentially a FAST 90 is what this boils down to. Win/win for the LS1/6 guys and a direct bolt on for the LS2 guys. The fact that it will come with fuel rail spacers is a bonus as well.
If I still had a cathedral port anything I'd love to test the 90mm version back to back against an LS2 intake in a complete apples to apples comparison, but I don't.
Makes no sense , really ok. I not going to argue the point because it really does not matter for a number of reasons. First Dorman is not going to make two versions of the LS2 intake. Dorman is not going to make a 102 and I will bet money on that. Dorman is not going to spend the time or money in R & D to develop a new runner design and upper shell on par with FAST or MSD. As far as the 102 goes there are going to be guys that will want to bolt a 102 up to this intake without an adaptor so give them the capability to do so . Dorman should learn from the LS6 intake , Make the LS2 96mm opening with a longer lingual lip and more material to increase it by porting.
Last edited by omc8; May 1, 2016 at 08:41 PM.
Teching In
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
From: Long Island, NY
For those who have ported this intake, can you please be more specific on the tools/materials you used to do it. I want to give this intake a try, but I also don't want to damage it in the process. I have a dremel if that would be needed.