Generation IV External Engine LS2 | LS3 | LS7 | L92 | Bolt-Ons | Intakes | Exhaust | Ignition | Accessories
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Gwatney/Rick Crawford radius rod intakes or Fast 102

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 09-18-2017, 02:37 PM
  #1  
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
andy-lswon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default Gwatney/Rick Crawford radius rod intakes or Fast 102

Trying to decide which way to go as I've heard mixed reviews about the gains of the LS3 version of the Fast 102. I have the Tick stage 2 cam 229/244 with stock heads and intake at the moment. Looking to upgrade both heads and intake. Any real world data or tests about either of these intakes would be greatly appreciated. Maybe Tony Mamo can chime in with some info about the Fast
Old 09-18-2017, 02:54 PM
  #2  
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
andy-lswon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

And price isn't a factor in my decision. I just want which ever one will gain the most without sacrificing low end torque
Old 09-18-2017, 05:21 PM
  #3  
TECH Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
 
99 Black Bird T/A's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Posts: 8,583
Received 1,432 Likes on 992 Posts

Default

Notice the Rick Crawford is within 5-8 cfm of the Ported Fast LSXR LS3. An unported Fast might flow the same or less than the Rick Crawford intake. I don't know, I haven't tested an unported LSXR LS3.




In theory, all times equal 5-8 cfm would be 10 to 15hp. However, it's not equal. The Fast uses a bigger runner to get the extra few cfm so velocity is less and that's important as Rick said in another thread. It's very possible the two intakes are within a few hp of each other. However, the higher velocity Rick Crawford will drive better. The Crawford with the 92mm throttle body will also be less hassle to tune for good driveability on an older cable throttle body car than a 102 TB.

Many people will ignore the velocity issue and go big. I did that on the cathedral set up on my 383 LS1 91RS. The RS had a Fast LSXRT intake and 102 mm TB. For my moderate rpm LS1 383, it turned out based on dyno testing a ported LS6 intake with a 90mm snout made better hp & tq than the LSXRT. The Fast LSXRT intake has been collecting dust on the shelf for almost two years

Dyno and or track testing for the specific combo of parts is probably needed to determine for sure which is better.

If your motor is under 400 cubes, I would try the Crawford before the Fast.

Hell, I may still put a Crawford on my new 416 if the Fast LS3 LSXR is as disappointing as the LSXRT proved on my RS.
Old 09-18-2017, 05:25 PM
  #4  
TECH Senior Member
 
G Atsma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Central Cal.
Posts: 20,876
Received 3,021 Likes on 2,352 Posts
Default

I would think the rod mod on a stock manifold would cost less than ANY FAST.
Old 09-18-2017, 05:54 PM
  #5  
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
andy-lswon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I know dollar for dollar the radius modded intake will be cheaper but I'm not gonna let the price difference of the Fast make my decision. When I do heads I just don't want the intake to be my restriction even if that means paying big money for a fast. I've seen nothing but good results for the radius rodded intakes but reviews of the Fast are all over the place that's why I was hoping someone that has used the LS3 Fast could share their results if possible
Old 09-18-2017, 06:06 PM
  #6  
TECH Senior Member
 
G Atsma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Central Cal.
Posts: 20,876
Received 3,021 Likes on 2,352 Posts
Default

I agree with you in that if you need something more than a stock LS3 manifold, you need enough to satisfy the particular engine setup you have.
MY thinking is for the guy with a bit more cam and maybe a mild port job on the heads, the rod mod would be the icing on the cake for a well-rounded(AND STEALTHY!) setup that could be worth around 500+ FWHP. A case where the "little mods" add up.
Old 09-18-2017, 06:14 PM
  #7  
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
andy-lswon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by G Atsma
I agree with you in that if you need something more than a stock LS3 manifold, you need enough to satisfy the particular engine setup you have.
MY thinking is for the guy with a bit more cam and maybe a mild port job on the heads, the rod mod would be the icing on the cake for a well-rounded(AND STEALTHY!) setup that could be worth around 500+ FWHP. A case where the "little mods" add up.
that is true. I'm just indecisive on what heads to go with. Car is just a cammed LS3 with full bolt ons right now. I just don't want to give up low end torque. The fasts seem to shine up top on peak power but on the street your really not there that much which is why I'm leaning to a Crawford intake
Old 09-18-2017, 06:16 PM
  #8  
LS1Tech Premium Sponsor
iTrader: (2)
 
tech@WS6store's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 4,659
Received 238 Likes on 184 Posts
Default

It really depends on cid honestly and max rpm.
Old 09-18-2017, 06:23 PM
  #9  
TECH Senior Member
 
G Atsma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Central Cal.
Posts: 20,876
Received 3,021 Likes on 2,352 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by tech@WS6store
It really depends on cid honestly and max rpm.
Agreed. Bigger engines &/or those winding up pretty high still need the FAST. The rod mod just extends the capabilities of the LS3 enough for those who might be sitting on the fence about needing a FAST, or whatever.
Old 09-18-2017, 06:26 PM
  #10  
11 Second Club
 
BODUKE's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 545
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

Rick Crawford all the way.
Old 09-18-2017, 06:29 PM
  #11  
TECH Senior Member
 
G Atsma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Central Cal.
Posts: 20,876
Received 3,021 Likes on 2,352 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by BODUKE
Rick Crawford all the way.
I would say for up to around 550 FWHP, it would do it!
Old 09-18-2017, 06:44 PM
  #12  
8 Second Club
iTrader: (13)
 
SLOW SEDAN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: No VA
Posts: 4,025
Received 944 Likes on 700 Posts

Default

I prefer the FAST for NA setups because I don't like having epoxy and metal pieces inside my intake manifold. As years go by heat cycles cause things to come loose. We've seen a few of the modified stock intakes that don't look that great after a few years. We've seen good results with the FAST both in mid range torque and top end power. Over 6500RPM the larger plenum and runners of the FAST seem to really shine, at 7000 on even a basic head/cam can be +40 over a stock manifold.

The downside to the FAST is on boosted cars, for them I prefer a cast or stock intake as we've seen the FAST flex a lot. Even on a NA 416 the FAST flexes a little but we haven't seen any damage at that power level.
Old 09-18-2017, 06:57 PM
  #13  
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
andy-lswon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by tech@WS6store
It really depends on cid honestly and max rpm.
it's a stock cube LS3 my max rpms are 6800 with the cam I have
Old 09-18-2017, 07:11 PM
  #14  
TECH Senior Member
 
G Atsma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Central Cal.
Posts: 20,876
Received 3,021 Likes on 2,352 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by andy-lswon
it's a stock cube LS3 my max rpms are 6800 with the cam I have
With your setup, I can see why you would lean towards this setup. It would sharpen the response a little, plus gain a few HP.
Old 09-18-2017, 07:20 PM
  #15  
TECH Enthusiast
Thread Starter
iTrader: (1)
 
andy-lswon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 578
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

I guess my main question I'm trying to get at are what are the under the curve gains like with the Fast not necessarily the the peak gains
Old 09-18-2017, 07:42 PM
  #16  
LS1Tech Premium Sponsor
iTrader: (2)
 
tech@WS6store's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 4,659
Received 238 Likes on 184 Posts
Default

We can give the fast102 ls3 some special love if needed. Make that midrange grow!
(Don't read this post while listening to Barry White)
The following users liked this post:
LilJayV10 (04-27-2021)
Old 09-18-2017, 08:01 PM
  #17  
TECH Senior Member
 
G Atsma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Central Cal.
Posts: 20,876
Received 3,021 Likes on 2,352 Posts
Default

^^^^^lol!!^^^^^^
Old 09-19-2017, 10:44 AM
  #18  
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
 
Darth_V8r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: My own internal universe
Posts: 10,446
Received 1,836 Likes on 1,145 Posts
Default

On blackbirds post, the fast intake is showing it is already a "WS6/VR Ported Fast 102". Seems to me it's got all the love its going to get...?
Old 09-19-2017, 10:50 AM
  #19  
TECH Senior Member
 
G Atsma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Central Cal.
Posts: 20,876
Received 3,021 Likes on 2,352 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Darth_V8r
On blackbirds post, the fast intake is showing it is already a "WS6/VR Ported Fast 102". Seems to me it's got all the love its going to get...?
Just saw that, upon you mentioning it; even after porting, STILL not much ahead of the rod modded LS3, making it even a better deal!
Old 09-19-2017, 10:51 AM
  #20  
LS1Tech Premium Sponsor
iTrader: (2)
 
tech@WS6store's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 4,659
Received 238 Likes on 184 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Darth_V8r
On blackbirds post, the fast intake is showing it is already a "WS6/VR Ported Fast 102". Seems to me it's got all the love its going to get...?
No. There is plenty more to be done to them.


Quick Reply: Gwatney/Rick Crawford radius rod intakes or Fast 102



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:37 AM.