Results with ETP heads.
Thread Starter
The know it all's know it all
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by calongo_SS
Huh?
I didn't say there was anything wrong w/ the #'s, they are good. Just trying to figure out the power loss going to a FAST intake.
I didn't say there was anything wrong w/ the #'s, they are good. Just trying to figure out the power loss going to a FAST intake.
Seems to me its more about the parts working well togethor, I see what collins is saying all the cams that put out big numbers with the fast combo seem to have tight angles and smaller lobes(relatively)
You just hear so much more about gains than loses
You just hear so much more about gains than loses
i would be curious to see what happens to my car if the LS6 is taken off and used with the FAST setup. then again, most likely the same thing that happened to the red vette in the first post will happen to my car....
Thread Starter
The know it all's know it all
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by 02sierraz71_5.3
Seems to me its more about the parts working well togethor, I see what collins is saying all the cams that put out big numbers with the fast combo seem to have tight angles and smaller lobes(relatively)
You just hear so much more about gains than loses
You just hear so much more about gains than loses
Originally Posted by CollinsAutomotive
Heres is the FAST VS LS6 dyno sheet. The bottom blue TQ line is the FAST so is the bottom Red Line. Here you can clearly see that the FAST 90/90 induces a harmonic in the intake tract that cuase a substantialy loss in power.
Thread Starter
The know it all's know it all
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Phil99vette
I'd be willing to bet you have a leak with the manifold.
Thread Starter
The know it all's know it all
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Slowhawk
must be a specific Cam you guy's use. I've done alot of testing back to back and the FAST 90mm setup ALWAYS makes more power across the curve than the LS6 manifolds. Atleast your setups will save the customer money
Last edited by CollinsAutomotive; Nov 13, 2006 at 06:06 PM.
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
Originally Posted by CollinsAutomotive
I question this statement immensly. We are pushing the limits of this manifold design with a 347ci motor. On a bigger engine the FAST would most likely perform better but we have seen that not work out either. There was one application with a very tight LSA dragshaft cam that made 3hp more then the LS6 but the car never approached these power numbers. 350tq 390 hp.
I dunno how the fast 90/90 would have worked out on the 402/Et240 setup that I'm running..... but I think i will find out how it compares to an edlebrock with an elbow next year... I suspect the edlebrock will make more power, but we will see.
Thread Starter
The know it all's know it all
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Slowhawk
Then,why are you guy's the only one not gaining HP/TQ?Your #'s are good but not huge by any means.It seams like you are trying FAST setup's on alot of cars from the sound of it.
Thread Starter
The know it all's know it all
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by JL ws-6
I dunno how the fast 90/90 would have worked out on the 402/Et240 setup that I'm running..... but I think i will find out how it compares to an edlebrock with an elbow next year... I suspect the edlebrock will make more power, but we will see.
If this is a standing wave issue, isn't there a frequency dependence? I see the difference between the LS6 and the FAST appears to be parallel throughout the RPM range, I would have thought that this wouldn't have occurred.
Originally Posted by CollinsAutomotive
We have been testing the FAST setups and been consistently disspointed.Its not us but the people need to retune after changing the intake and all it does is looose power.These numbers are extremly good. dynojet numbers consistently come in 16% higher then this particular Mustang 1750de dynomometer.if you adjust for the dynojet numbers the engine is up in HP alot and the TQ is silly.
I'm getting into the Dyno HP game on different dyno's. You can go by your's and I'll go by mine
Originally Posted by JL ws-6
I dunno how the fast 90/90 would have worked out on the 402/Et240 setup that I'm running..... but I think i will find out how it compares to an edlebrock with an elbow next year... I suspect the edlebrock will make more power, but we will see.
Thread Starter
The know it all's know it all
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by Slowhawk
I'm guessing that this is after your Cam package? I can see maybe your Cam design just doesn't use a FAST,but pretty much saying all the H/C cars out there loose HP? I just haven't seen it but I have seen a few cars gain nothing with a FAST because the setup's just didn't need the extra intake flow.
I'm getting into the Dyno HP game on different dyno's. You can go by your's and I'll go by mine
I'm getting into the Dyno HP game on different dyno's. You can go by your's and I'll go by mine
Thread Starter
The know it all's know it all
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by vettenuts
If this is a standing wave issue, isn't there a frequency dependence? I see the difference between the LS6 and the FAST appears to be parallel throughout the RPM range, I would have thought that this wouldn't have occurred.
leak?
Originally Posted by calongo_SS
Huh?
I didn't say there was anything wrong w/ the #'s, they are good. Just trying to figure out the power loss going to a FAST intake.
I didn't say there was anything wrong w/ the #'s, they are good. Just trying to figure out the power loss going to a FAST intake.
Could it be the Valley Cover Bolts? FAST uses specific low profile mounting harware...
Originally Posted by CLHAKA
Could it be the Valley Cover Bolts? FAST uses specific low profile mounting harware...
Thread Starter
The know it all's know it all
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 500
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by CLHAKA
Could it be the Valley Cover Bolts? FAST uses specific low profile mounting harware...