NEW LSX Intake Mainfold better then FAST
01-10-2008, 04:08 PM
#23
11 Second Club
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maryland
Posts: 4,796
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lets think about 6500 rpm shifts its a common rpm that alot of people with mid size cams have.
would it out pull the ls6 to 6500, or at 6200 does it fall flat on it face
would it out pull the ls6 to 6500, or at 6200 does it fall flat on it face
01-10-2008, 04:36 PM
#25
In a moderately heavy to heavy car this intake will shine..
On the street this intake will shine...
Most cam only cars will like this intake and headed cars with smaller cam should too.
Shifting at 6500 IMO will be perfect for this intake which is 300 rpm above its peak..
People leaving high on the clutch or guys running 4000 stalls will not want this intake as the Fast will be better above 5500......
I believe a moderately cammed F-Car,Corvette,GTO will benefit better from this intake
Cams in the 216 to 230 range will love this intake....Once u go bigger cam,heads and converter the Fast is the intake to run.
I love TQ and I love area under the curve...
I will add this Weiand intake to me 224-230 Cam only GTO..
On the street this intake will shine...
Most cam only cars will like this intake and headed cars with smaller cam should too.
Shifting at 6500 IMO will be perfect for this intake which is 300 rpm above its peak..
People leaving high on the clutch or guys running 4000 stalls will not want this intake as the Fast will be better above 5500......
I believe a moderately cammed F-Car,Corvette,GTO will benefit better from this intake
Cams in the 216 to 230 range will love this intake....Once u go bigger cam,heads and converter the Fast is the intake to run.
I love TQ and I love area under the curve...
I will add this Weiand intake to me 224-230 Cam only GTO..
Last edited by JS; 06-05-2008 at 11:09 AM.
01-10-2008, 04:49 PM
#26
This intake is basically a street intake for small cams. We will be doing a back to back dyno and et comparison when this intake is available. However preliminary testing show it to be a beast at low rpms >6200 rpm. so if you have a daily driven ls1 with a moderate to small cam this is for you!
01-10-2008, 07:06 PM
#31
11 Second Club
Thread Starter
iTrader: (5)
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Morris IL
Posts: 637
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any word on any other good intake manifolds coming out for those of us that spin closer to 7K? I like the FAST 90/90 setup but I'm not gonna pay a grand for the gains you get.
01-10-2008, 07:16 PM
#32
Keep in mind that good competition could drive the price down somewhat on your FAST. Even if the two aren't direct competitors, if the Weiand undercuts the price of the FAST enough to become an attractive alternative, we could see some drop in price...
Just a thought.
Just a thought.
01-11-2008, 08:48 AM
#33
12 Second Club
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NEWARK OHIO
Posts: 439
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
subscribing so when speedweekerz does there dyno comparison ill be on top of it. for all those people whom ask if the ls6 and fast will be better cause u shift at 6500 i'll ask u a question, do u think it is better to have 30 more hp and 40 more tq from 2000 to 6200 and 5-10 less for the next 300 rpms, or have less power every place in the curve exept for right between 6200-6500? seems like a pretty damn easy answer to me. if u have a purpose built drag car then when u shift u would want to be around peak tq. with a car shifting at 6500 after u shift ur rpms will drop to around 5000 meaning ull have 1200 rpm where ur making 30 more hp(according to weiand) and 300 where ur making 5-10 less. now if ur shifting at 7000 or above, yeah a ported fast 90 90 would be where its at but ur also paying $1400-$1500 plus the cost of port work
01-11-2008, 10:02 AM
#36
I like the idea of a one peice design, For high boosted applications, i dont see having to pull it apart and having to put a ton of sealant and goop into the groves like i did on the fast to keep all the plates from leaking. I will be getting one of these for sure to play around with when Peter Starr has them ready. I think it will better under the hood also.
For boost, i see this being a better alternative and wont be effected by the longer runner as the na guys would see. Not everyone revs thier motors as high as 6500.
Also for the price, that makes it one more step in the good direction. just me 2cents....
For boost, i see this being a better alternative and wont be effected by the longer runner as the na guys would see. Not everyone revs thier motors as high as 6500.
Also for the price, that makes it one more step in the good direction. just me 2cents....
01-11-2008, 10:08 AM
#38
I think some people are missing a few points, they tested it on a GTO and it made 32 more HP than the LS6 but at what rpm did it make 32 more hp?
Where is there more info on dyno graphs or flow numbers?
If it is making 32 more HP at peak it obviously is flowing better than the LS6, and outflowing it enough to make an additional 32 HP oven in the higher rpm range.
They say it is designed to be most effective from idle to 6200 rpm, but that doesn't mean that it is going to fall on it's face at 6500 rpm like people keep saying.
It is doing much better than the LS6 does and by 32 hp, if it was as poor flowing in the upper range it wouldn't be making 32 HP more than the LS6 manifold, it would make a bunch of torque and then start falling on its face, which it isn't.
Does swapping from a LS6 to a FAST gain you 32 HP?
Like one person said before whats better, 10 more hp from 6200-6500 or more power from idle to 6k?
Plus having great numbers down low will be awesome for the nitrous guys who leave at lower rpm and use the big increase in torque down low to launch the cars hard.
I don't know, I haven't used both on my car, but who can say this manifold won't make good numbers with a bigger cam? It hasn't even come out yet and a lot of people seem to know everything about it.
Some people fail to understand you don't have to run a big cam and rev the motor to 7,000 to make power, if that is your goal, high rpm power why run a fast, why not run a single plane or sheetmetal tunnel ram?
Like the guy said it does have a longer runner, but it is also completely unobstructed without extra bracing and has a completely flat floor, which is also going to increase airflow at any rpm.
It is supposedly also designed by Formula 1 guys, which know more about high rpm power than anyone else considering the old Formula one stuff was revving to 16,000 to 17,000 rpm.
Longer runners are going to make power at a lower range, but with less obstructions inside the manifold there isn't going to be as much of a loss at higher rpm either.
It is also supposed to be 650.00 which is cheaper than either of the fast manifolds and has a 90 MM TB opening to start with and will still obviously make good numbers at low rpm and up to 6,000 and hopefully more.
The new manifold is also one piece, not saying there are issues but you're not going to have to worry about leaks having two pieces.
Can you port it like a FAST, no you can't, but then again how many have a fast manifold ported?
Some do, some don't but then your $850.00 manifold has now cost you well over $1,000.00, which obviously isn't cheap.
I think another point people are missing is they are having to run these bigger cams to make higher peak HP, if you can make close to the same power or even a little less at much less rpm it is a way better combo because, you don't have to rev the motor as high which is easier on the internals and less engine wear.
It will also have more power under the curve which will result in better acceleration. If you can make close to the same power or even a little less peak HP but do it at a lower rpm range and it's going to have way more torque.
I know I would feel pretty bad getting my *** spanked by a guy with a $650.00 manifold and exhaust when I have a big cam and gears and high stall and he walks away from my *** at the stop light
I would personally rather make 450 hp at 5,800 than 480 at 6,800.
You also have to factor in other variables, the higher stall torque converter you'll need to run is also going to be less efficient than a lower stall torque converter. Some might care and some might not, but gas is pretty expensive these days and also higher stalls create a lot more heat and you have more issues with a transmission if you run an auto.
When it says that it made 30 more torque at 4,000 rpm, you have to figure that is is also making more than the FAST or LS6 manifold below that as well.
With a stick car it is nice because you don't have to rev the motor as high when you leave which is easier on the POS rear end these things come with, it will also pull harder on the bottom end, so now leaving at 3,000 rpm will work a lot better without the motor falling on it's face or having to rev it to 5-6k and side step the clutch which a 10 bolt isn't going to take anyways.
Keeping the peak torque at a lower rpm will make it way more streetable as well as require less stall and gear to effectively use the combination.
Another thing is cams will have different effects in different type of manifolds, so hopefully even with a bigger cam it'll peak HP down a few hundred rpm without losing much peak power.
Will it work as good as it says? I sure hope it does because 850.00 is way to much for a manifold and those after market intakes are already way over priced to begin with.
I hope they make more stuff that makes more and more power in the lower rpm range.
Will it happen maybe, maybe not, but hopefully this thing works good and brings something new and if it makes more power than the 78mm FAST in the upper rpm, and more torque than the FAST 90mm in the lower rpm, I know which one I'll be buying.
EL cheapo
Where is there more info on dyno graphs or flow numbers?
If it is making 32 more HP at peak it obviously is flowing better than the LS6, and outflowing it enough to make an additional 32 HP oven in the higher rpm range.
They say it is designed to be most effective from idle to 6200 rpm, but that doesn't mean that it is going to fall on it's face at 6500 rpm like people keep saying.
It is doing much better than the LS6 does and by 32 hp, if it was as poor flowing in the upper range it wouldn't be making 32 HP more than the LS6 manifold, it would make a bunch of torque and then start falling on its face, which it isn't.
Does swapping from a LS6 to a FAST gain you 32 HP?
Like one person said before whats better, 10 more hp from 6200-6500 or more power from idle to 6k?
Plus having great numbers down low will be awesome for the nitrous guys who leave at lower rpm and use the big increase in torque down low to launch the cars hard.
I don't know, I haven't used both on my car, but who can say this manifold won't make good numbers with a bigger cam? It hasn't even come out yet and a lot of people seem to know everything about it.
Some people fail to understand you don't have to run a big cam and rev the motor to 7,000 to make power, if that is your goal, high rpm power why run a fast, why not run a single plane or sheetmetal tunnel ram?
Like the guy said it does have a longer runner, but it is also completely unobstructed without extra bracing and has a completely flat floor, which is also going to increase airflow at any rpm.
It is supposedly also designed by Formula 1 guys, which know more about high rpm power than anyone else considering the old Formula one stuff was revving to 16,000 to 17,000 rpm.
Longer runners are going to make power at a lower range, but with less obstructions inside the manifold there isn't going to be as much of a loss at higher rpm either.
It is also supposed to be 650.00 which is cheaper than either of the fast manifolds and has a 90 MM TB opening to start with and will still obviously make good numbers at low rpm and up to 6,000 and hopefully more.
The new manifold is also one piece, not saying there are issues but you're not going to have to worry about leaks having two pieces.
Can you port it like a FAST, no you can't, but then again how many have a fast manifold ported?
Some do, some don't but then your $850.00 manifold has now cost you well over $1,000.00, which obviously isn't cheap.
I think another point people are missing is they are having to run these bigger cams to make higher peak HP, if you can make close to the same power or even a little less at much less rpm it is a way better combo because, you don't have to rev the motor as high which is easier on the internals and less engine wear.
It will also have more power under the curve which will result in better acceleration. If you can make close to the same power or even a little less peak HP but do it at a lower rpm range and it's going to have way more torque.
I know I would feel pretty bad getting my *** spanked by a guy with a $650.00 manifold and exhaust when I have a big cam and gears and high stall and he walks away from my *** at the stop light
I would personally rather make 450 hp at 5,800 than 480 at 6,800.
You also have to factor in other variables, the higher stall torque converter you'll need to run is also going to be less efficient than a lower stall torque converter. Some might care and some might not, but gas is pretty expensive these days and also higher stalls create a lot more heat and you have more issues with a transmission if you run an auto.
When it says that it made 30 more torque at 4,000 rpm, you have to figure that is is also making more than the FAST or LS6 manifold below that as well.
With a stick car it is nice because you don't have to rev the motor as high when you leave which is easier on the POS rear end these things come with, it will also pull harder on the bottom end, so now leaving at 3,000 rpm will work a lot better without the motor falling on it's face or having to rev it to 5-6k and side step the clutch which a 10 bolt isn't going to take anyways.
Keeping the peak torque at a lower rpm will make it way more streetable as well as require less stall and gear to effectively use the combination.
Another thing is cams will have different effects in different type of manifolds, so hopefully even with a bigger cam it'll peak HP down a few hundred rpm without losing much peak power.
Will it work as good as it says? I sure hope it does because 850.00 is way to much for a manifold and those after market intakes are already way over priced to begin with.
I hope they make more stuff that makes more and more power in the lower rpm range.
Will it happen maybe, maybe not, but hopefully this thing works good and brings something new and if it makes more power than the 78mm FAST in the upper rpm, and more torque than the FAST 90mm in the lower rpm, I know which one I'll be buying.
EL cheapo
Last edited by RAGENZ28; 01-11-2008 at 10:34 AM.
01-11-2008, 10:29 AM
#39
Launching!
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: pensacola,FL
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow, it definately sounds like this would be a great intake for my setup! I will be doing a mild cam to go with my 3000 stall and im all about power down low! I agree that if i can shift my car at 6200 to 6300 and make nearly as much power up top and more down low than shifting it at 6500 then i'm all for it! Can't wait to see some testing on this thing and get some real results.
01-11-2008, 11:14 AM
#40
TECH Enthusiast
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: York, PA
Posts: 590
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
subscribing to this one, everyone brings up good points. in my case this intake seems to be exactly what i need. having a stroker motor, i dont need to rev my motor as high to see my peek hp and tq.