Question on FAST intake
06-20-2017, 05:36 AM
#1
Question on FAST intake I know this is an old story. But i wanted to ask something. I've been told by a few on this forum that the TPIS 90mm opening won't have an effect on power cause the TB size means nothing. If thats the case them why did FAST originally use a 78mm opening? Then later used a 90mm opening. Then upped to 92mm.
And lastly a 102mm opening. So it's obvious that the TB opening has some importance or FAST would have just kept their TB opening at 78mm or atleast 90mm, correct? IMO if you run a setup with a small cam, like a EPS 222/226 113lsa cam, AFR 210cc heads, or ported 243,799 heads, etc. I can't see the setup ever needing a FAST 102 cause the engine wouldn't draw in enough air in to get the most out of the 102 or even the 92 either. But if i ever wanted to spend over $1,500 for an intake to gain maybe 15rwhp i might try the 92mm intake.
But if i ever was able to find a used FAST 92mm w a TB and get it cheap, i MIGHT and i mean MIGHT try it. Now to use a 102mm on a 346cid LS1 without ported heads, and a small cam is no way worth the cost. So no one post back CLAIMING you have a million HP and TQ from just bolting on a FAST 102. Remember the intake is not a power adder. It's just an intake manifold. So when i see people make those inflated gains it make me say "Bull ****".
You show me a time slip showing how much better at the track you did with that large of an intake. It's like back in the day, when the f-body first got the LS1. Guys were only running cam only and 4.10's and still went 11.8's and 11.9's. Thats with the LS1 intake. And even after ported heads came out, guys were buying the largest runner heads they could find, and a large cam. And they couldn't understand why they were getting beat at the track and the street. And guys were getting beat by guys with small heads and small cam setup and still ran deep into the 11's. That's were the saying "bigger isn't better" came from. So i was just asking why a stock cube engine needs the large 102mm intake. Unless you're running a 427cid LS motor than i can see that. LET THE FLAMING BEGIN....lol
And lastly a 102mm opening. So it's obvious that the TB opening has some importance or FAST would have just kept their TB opening at 78mm or atleast 90mm, correct? IMO if you run a setup with a small cam, like a EPS 222/226 113lsa cam, AFR 210cc heads, or ported 243,799 heads, etc. I can't see the setup ever needing a FAST 102 cause the engine wouldn't draw in enough air in to get the most out of the 102 or even the 92 either. But if i ever wanted to spend over $1,500 for an intake to gain maybe 15rwhp i might try the 92mm intake.
But if i ever was able to find a used FAST 92mm w a TB and get it cheap, i MIGHT and i mean MIGHT try it. Now to use a 102mm on a 346cid LS1 without ported heads, and a small cam is no way worth the cost. So no one post back CLAIMING you have a million HP and TQ from just bolting on a FAST 102. Remember the intake is not a power adder. It's just an intake manifold. So when i see people make those inflated gains it make me say "Bull ****".
You show me a time slip showing how much better at the track you did with that large of an intake. It's like back in the day, when the f-body first got the LS1. Guys were only running cam only and 4.10's and still went 11.8's and 11.9's. Thats with the LS1 intake. And even after ported heads came out, guys were buying the largest runner heads they could find, and a large cam. And they couldn't understand why they were getting beat at the track and the street. And guys were getting beat by guys with small heads and small cam setup and still ran deep into the 11's. That's were the saying "bigger isn't better" came from. So i was just asking why a stock cube engine needs the large 102mm intake. Unless you're running a 427cid LS motor than i can see that. LET THE FLAMING BEGIN....lol
06-20-2017, 08:02 AM
#2
The intake is simply an air director and is completely dependent on the draw of the engine to function correctly. That being said there is no way to say XYZ displacement couldn't benefit from one intake or another. An engine that makes max power at 6000 does not have the same intake needs as an engine that spins to 8000...if it makes more power then it makes more power. There are more factors that affect how an intake change would perform at the track as well. Changing from A intake to B intake might not gain anything at the track even with a jump in HP if the curve shifted higher and the converter (if auto) was better suited to the lower curve.
It sounds like you are trying to convince yourself (and others) that you don't need a 102 to get the most from your setup...
It sounds like you are trying to convince yourself (and others) that you don't need a 102 to get the most from your setup...
06-20-2017, 08:13 AM
#3
10 Second Club
The fast 102 isn't just a larger TB. It has better runners and plenum as well. A 92 is a pretty good intake for a stock CI ls1. Max effort a 102 is better but takes more work to get it on. TB size is kinda irrelevant unless it's too small
06-20-2017, 01:04 PM
#4
The intake is simply an air director and is completely dependent on the draw of the engine to function correctly. That being said there is no way to say XYZ displacement couldn't benefit from one intake or another. An engine that makes max power at 6000 does not have the same intake needs as an engine that spins to 8000...if it makes more power then it makes more power. There are more factors that affect how an intake change would perform at the track as well. Changing from A intake to B intake might not gain anything at the track even with a jump in HP if the curve shifted higher and the converter (if auto) was better suited to the lower curve.
It sounds like you are trying to convince yourself (and others) that you don't need a 102 to get the most from your setup...
It sounds like you are trying to convince yourself (and others) that you don't need a 102 to get the most from your setup...
Last edited by BlackNiteWS6; 06-20-2017 at 11:39 PM.
06-20-2017, 01:45 PM
#5
11 Second Club
The fast intakes don't have to be ported. To get the most out of it yes. Just like out of the box cylinder heads being ported for more.
You have your own car & goals. It's good you have these questions.
I wouldn't go as far to say they built the intake, talking w/ speed/porting shops, so people would have to port it. Everybody has different heads. You can't have one design that is the best for everything.
Wilson Manifolds designed the original fast intake. Up to the 92 hence their name on the manifold. The 102 has RHS on the manifold now w/ updated design.
This is a cool read. If you haven't seen it already. Although not tested on a stock ci motor.
http://www.hotrod.com/articles/20-ls...ifolds-tested/
You have your own car & goals. It's good you have these questions.
I wouldn't go as far to say they built the intake, talking w/ speed/porting shops, so people would have to port it. Everybody has different heads. You can't have one design that is the best for everything.
Wilson Manifolds designed the original fast intake. Up to the 92 hence their name on the manifold. The 102 has RHS on the manifold now w/ updated design.
This is a cool read. If you haven't seen it already. Although not tested on a stock ci motor.
http://www.hotrod.com/articles/20-ls...ifolds-tested/
06-20-2017, 07:37 PM
#6
10 Second Club
To be honest i would NEVER run a FAST 102 on a stock cube engine. I don't drive on the dyno, and i don't want to rev my engine out to 7,000rpm or 8,000 rpm. for a quick street car the most i would use would be a FAST 92mm. Now if i ran the motor out to 7000+rpm then maybe a FAST 102 would be better. But the plenum on the 102 is very large. That means the air speed that flows through that intake with be sluggish at best. Plus the runners have huge volume which again makes the air move slow through the intake. NOW if you run more cubes and rev the **** out of it, then sure then i would hope the 102mm would be a good choice. But now there's the MSD intake. They used straight runners from the beginning...FAST had to catch up and make different runners for the 102mm intake. Maybe someday i'll try a FAST 92mm. But i think about that...there are people on here that removed their LS6 intake and installed the FAST 90 or 92 and they didn't have to richen up their fuel. If the FAST flowed more the car would have ran leaner, but there wasn't any need to adjust the A/F ratio. That was a back to back test on the same day and dyno. Plus i think FAST has a lot of guts selling these intake for almost $1000 and you still need to port them? I mean they are an aftermarket company. They're supposed the fix any **** ups that a factory part has then make their part the best it can be. So instead FAST actually builds the intake to have built in restrictions which makes you have to spend MORE money for porting....lol. I'm sure they talked with a lot of speed/porting shops and they decided to build the intake in a way so shops can charge a mint to remove material that FAST themselves should have made the intake as free flowing as possible. That's what a good aftermarket company does. It would be like AFR not installing springs or retainers or valves and make it the customers problem.
06-20-2017, 10:54 PM
#7
The fast intakes don't have to be ported. To get the most out of it yes. Just like out of the box cylinder heads being ported for more.
You have your own car & goals. It's good you have these questions.
I wouldn't go as far to say they built the intake, talking w/ speed/porting shops, so people would have to port it. Everybody has different heads. You can't have one design that is the best for everything.
Wilson Manifolds designed the original fast intake. Up to the 92 hence their name on the manifold. The 102 has RHS on the manifold now w/ updated design.
This is a cool read. If you haven't seen it already. Although not tested on a stock ci motor.
http://www.hotrod.com/articles/20-ls...ifolds-tested/
You have your own car & goals. It's good you have these questions.
I wouldn't go as far to say they built the intake, talking w/ speed/porting shops, so people would have to port it. Everybody has different heads. You can't have one design that is the best for everything.
Wilson Manifolds designed the original fast intake. Up to the 92 hence their name on the manifold. The 102 has RHS on the manifold now w/ updated design.
This is a cool read. If you haven't seen it already. Although not tested on a stock ci motor.
http://www.hotrod.com/articles/20-ls...ifolds-tested/
But put all that stuff aside, the intake is purposely made with a added restriction. FAST has great designers, so you think that the designers wouldn't know that the intake was going to be made in a way that the buyer would have to spend $300 to $400 to have it ported? For any part that expensive should not be sand bagged. So what's the point of FAST doing that? It's not like the intake runners are restrictive. But you shouldn't have to remove any material from a part for it's cost. Since i owned a company and have customers like Acme Markets, Rite Aid, and A.C. Moore to name a few. And i saw shops that i competed with do a shitty job. I've seen some shops just wipe a rag over the machine's then send it back. And they never fixed the problem. So the unit got sent back, so the repair shop had another 5 to 10 working days to fix the unit properly.
You are a little incorrect about people having different setups so those guys don't need it ported. The FAST 92MM will benefit guys that run bolt on only, or cam only guys will benefit from the intake being as high flowing as possible.
It's not like a ported FAST wouldn't make power even on a bolt on car only. So there's no reason that FAST shouldn't make the intake flow the best it can without any porting. When the 90mm got upgraded to a 92mm. FAST could have made the intake as high flowing as if it was ported. But i'm amazed at guys on here just bought the thing cause it was the new trendy thing to do. Most never post what their track times were after the install. Only dyno numbers
Last time i checked we don't drive on dyno's. Sure now there's these big shops now that add a FAST and get great gains. BUT, they are closer to race cars, not street cars. They are lighter, have a lot more motor, run HUGE cams, etc....And they still might gain a tenth or 2 tenths. For a $900-$1000 intake? Never. Use the $1500+ on other mods that will give you better gains that work on the street and at the track. Not on a dyno. Guys with those intake always post their gains on the dyno. And a lot of the time they barely make 15hp to maybe sometimes close to 20hp.Less than 10 years ago guys were in the 10's with the stock LS6 intake. So what's that show ya? It shows that the LS6 intake has well designed runners, and a descent plenum design. I find it funny that people act like the LS6 intake is ****. And they compare a stock LS6 intake against a FAST intake that's fully reworked. It's not the right comparison. They are 2 different animals at that point. Then they come on here and cheering that their FAST intake maybe made 20rwhp over a non prepped stock factory intake. Even then theirs guys still beating guys with a FAST at the track with the factory LS6 intake.
Last edited by BlackNiteWS6; 06-20-2017 at 11:07 PM.
Trending Topics
06-20-2017, 11:11 PM
#8
Is this a real post? Well yes it is. If you don't agree or understand my post tell me what gains you got from a FAST. ANd not just a dyno number. Dyno's can be adjusted to show more or less power than what the car is actually making. So what's your question about my post? I be glad to talk about this stuff.
I'll just add....Not long ago and now as well guys are running in the low 11's and high 10's with a LS6 intake. That's because the LS6 runners are 11 inches like the FAST. And the LS6 plenum volume is only a little smaller
than a FAST. The LS6 intake is a great design, especially for guys running a smaller setup. Spending over $1500 for guys running a smaller setup isn't needed versus the cost of a FAST setup.
I'll just add....Not long ago and now as well guys are running in the low 11's and high 10's with a LS6 intake. That's because the LS6 runners are 11 inches like the FAST. And the LS6 plenum volume is only a little smaller
than a FAST. The LS6 intake is a great design, especially for guys running a smaller setup. Spending over $1500 for guys running a smaller setup isn't needed versus the cost of a FAST setup.
Last edited by BlackNiteWS6; 06-20-2017 at 11:20 PM.
06-21-2017, 12:09 AM
#9
What part is made now that cannot be improved on? The FAST was made to make power and it does. But seriously what intake can be 100% optimized for every setup with 1 part number out of the box?
They didnt go and talk to shops etc etc. They designed it to be a good performer. There are many areas to work on that improve flow as well. The msd is the same way and a few others. The 102 is completely diff from the 92 and the 92 is completely diff from the 78 in many aspects.
The people saying the tpis 90 upgrade wont make more power are also the ones that say the ls6 is better than a 92 and will pull with a 222 cam to 7k. The ideas on tb size are plentiful. Also the ideas on tuning them.
The 102 is a bit of stretch on an ls1 car, but hawks uses them solely to make their 450hp kit, because with the 92 they wouldnt make 450+ as they claim. Its not all smoke a mirrors, youve just got to pay attention. They dont pull the cars above 6300 either. The longer runners on the reg 102 still work the way they are supposed to.
You want a good performer, use the fast. take your pick on either one. You want a good performer that is a bit better on budget but take a few modifications get the Dorman Ls2.
The secret to the rest of the recipe isnt just in the intake. Its also in the fuel system, intake, and exhaust.
With your train of thought why even use 1 3/4 headers at all since 1 7/8 make more power? Or vice versa if 1 3/4 make as much but keep the bottom end or ground clearance etc. The better conversation right now is why buy kooks for 1k more when speed eng is stainless and fits ok and i bet they perform just as good. We all know the answer to that one im sure.
The ls2 intake is a good performer as well, but takes a bit more to make it work on cable tb vehicles.
Msd doesnt make an ls3 airforce intake. You can prob guess why. If they didnt make power and were just 2x the price because they have a bigger tb theyd never sell.
They didnt go and talk to shops etc etc. They designed it to be a good performer. There are many areas to work on that improve flow as well. The msd is the same way and a few others. The 102 is completely diff from the 92 and the 92 is completely diff from the 78 in many aspects.
The people saying the tpis 90 upgrade wont make more power are also the ones that say the ls6 is better than a 92 and will pull with a 222 cam to 7k. The ideas on tb size are plentiful. Also the ideas on tuning them.
The 102 is a bit of stretch on an ls1 car, but hawks uses them solely to make their 450hp kit, because with the 92 they wouldnt make 450+ as they claim. Its not all smoke a mirrors, youve just got to pay attention. They dont pull the cars above 6300 either. The longer runners on the reg 102 still work the way they are supposed to.
You want a good performer, use the fast. take your pick on either one. You want a good performer that is a bit better on budget but take a few modifications get the Dorman Ls2.
The secret to the rest of the recipe isnt just in the intake. Its also in the fuel system, intake, and exhaust.
With your train of thought why even use 1 3/4 headers at all since 1 7/8 make more power? Or vice versa if 1 3/4 make as much but keep the bottom end or ground clearance etc. The better conversation right now is why buy kooks for 1k more when speed eng is stainless and fits ok and i bet they perform just as good. We all know the answer to that one im sure.
The ls2 intake is a good performer as well, but takes a bit more to make it work on cable tb vehicles.
Msd doesnt make an ls3 airforce intake. You can prob guess why. If they didnt make power and were just 2x the price because they have a bigger tb theyd never sell.
06-21-2017, 01:20 AM
#10
11 Second Club
Easy blacknite. No need to get personal.
Obviously you have something against the fast intakes. If you don't want one don't get one. I think it's funny you talk about how cars "performed" with the ls6. Which is good. But obviously you think if those people had a fast 92 they would not gain anything.
You think $1k dollars is a lot for an intake manifold? You would go crazy what people spend on custom manifolds.
Just get some nitrous. Wait, you already have some.
Obviously you have something against the fast intakes. If you don't want one don't get one. I think it's funny you talk about how cars "performed" with the ls6. Which is good. But obviously you think if those people had a fast 92 they would not gain anything.
You think $1k dollars is a lot for an intake manifold? You would go crazy what people spend on custom manifolds.
Just get some nitrous. Wait, you already have some.
06-21-2017, 08:58 AM
#13
10 Second Club
Is this a real post? Well yes it is. If you don't agree or understand my post tell me what gains you got from a FAST. ANd not just a dyno number. Dyno's can be adjusted to show more or less power than what the car is actually making. So what's your question about my post? I be glad to talk about this stuff.
I'll just add....Not long ago and now as well guys are running in the low 11's and high 10's with a LS6 intake. That's because the LS6 runners are 11 inches like the FAST. And the LS6 plenum volume is only a little smaller
than a FAST. The LS6 intake is a great design, especially for guys running a smaller setup. Spending over $1500 for guys running a smaller setup isn't needed versus the cost of a FAST setup.
I'll just add....Not long ago and now as well guys are running in the low 11's and high 10's with a LS6 intake. That's because the LS6 runners are 11 inches like the FAST. And the LS6 plenum volume is only a little smaller
than a FAST. The LS6 intake is a great design, especially for guys running a smaller setup. Spending over $1500 for guys running a smaller setup isn't needed versus the cost of a FAST setup.
Out of the 20 cathedral intakes hotrod tested the ls6 was almost the worst out of all of them
06-21-2017, 09:15 AM
#14
Is this a real post? Well yes it is. If you don't agree or understand my post tell me what gains you got from a FAST. ANd not just a dyno number. Dyno's can be adjusted to show more or less power than what the car is actually making. So what's your question about my post? I be glad to talk about this stuff.
I'll just add....Not long ago and now as well guys are running in the low 11's and high 10's with a LS6 intake. That's because the LS6 runners are 11 inches like the FAST. And the LS6 plenum volume is only a little smaller
than a FAST. The LS6 intake is a great design, especially for guys running a smaller setup. Spending over $1500 for guys running a smaller setup isn't needed versus the cost of a FAST setup.
I'll just add....Not long ago and now as well guys are running in the low 11's and high 10's with a LS6 intake. That's because the LS6 runners are 11 inches like the FAST. And the LS6 plenum volume is only a little smaller
than a FAST. The LS6 intake is a great design, especially for guys running a smaller setup. Spending over $1500 for guys running a smaller setup isn't needed versus the cost of a FAST setup.
06-21-2017, 10:07 AM
#16
10 Second Club
06-21-2017, 06:24 PM
#17
I guess I took a different route when purchasing the fast 102 intake. I wanted to make sure with my EPS 226/234 cam and tea/Tfs215s heads that there was no doubt I left anything on the table, even used a 102 tb which picked up 5hp. The intake was matched by tea to the heads. I was happy with 462hp ran mid 11s. Plus when more motor came around it would work on it also.