Intake ideas? MAF Questions too. (again)

[Bayer-Z28]

It's down to the FAST and Vic Jr now.

Also, what MAF should I run? (Don) From a tuning stand point. I've heard you can go TOO big. If I'm running a 102 TB would a 100mm blade MAF be ok? I would think an 85mm MAF would be a restriction on a 102TB.

Anyway.. I was told a Vic Jr is wrong for my cam. Someone mentioned that it performs better with wide overlap cams. Mine only has 5* of overlap. Can I get a 95 or 92mm 120* elbow for the Vic Jr to clear the stock SS hood?

[My84Z]

Victor jr will make less down low but more up high where as the fast will make more mid but less peak and at top.

[Batman]

and stock cubes a Vic JR will kill you. Same with a FAST 102, there have been alot of complaints about them. I'd go with a Fast 92/92 and an 85MM Z06 MAF. But DEF I don't think you have anywhere near the cubes to pull off a Vic JR or a 102.

[Slowhawk]

I all comes down to the head and cam selection.No wide splits with victor junior intakes. LSA is best at 106-110.

Just did a 01 Z that made 445hp/400tq on my dyno with TFS 215 heads,230 cam,LS6 intake,ported TB,stock MAF, ARH headers and 12 bolt with 4.11 gears. Compare that to your #'s or even Batmans car on my dyno.( I think was 380hp or so).

[941LE]

393/366 were the dumbers Don. Gonna be seeing u when i get home

[Batman]

393/366 were the dumbers Don. Gonna be seeing u when i get home

Needs to be tuned too....

[941LE]

lol its what its for Nick

[ILuvPizzaTimes10]

Needs to be tuned too....


needs more then tune.

[Batman]

needs more then tune.

it NEEDS a tune to run correctly the way it is, after that it's up to him what to do with it. But at least it's running...:p

[c4boom]

mikes car runs we started it at the party :P

[Formula413]

mikes car runs we started it at the party :P

True fact, I was there :)

[Bayer-Z28]

Mine ran 403/38-something and needs a retune for sea level.

I've been wanting a retune, but I want to do the intake first. I'd like to see 440/390 out of this cam. It's a low end Tq cam, so I don't want anything that will kill the low end. It's got a 110* LSA, but only 5* of overlap.

I was just wondering about the MAF too because I was reading that you can go too big and that will throw the MAF off because it won't be getting a "bottle neck" (in a way) in order for it to get an accurate reading of what is really passing by its sensors. Too big is too slow, IIRC. I wonder if it'd be worth it to go SD tune.. I've asked around and the replies are mixed, but this isn't a DD car. It's just a street car.

I've been saying since day 1 that the 102 was too big for an LS1 and everyone was saying "Noez itss not!!! It's amazing!" but I never saw any numbers showing it was any better over a good 92 setup.

[Bayer-Z28]

And Don, if you find a FAST 92, could you PLEASE hold onto it for me!?!? For a decent price that is. Once tax season comes around I'll pick one up, IF I can find one that is. I found a damaged one on eBay last week, but I couldn't find the outer shell anywhere.

[ILuvPizzaTimes10]

why would sea level tune vs. 4000 feet tune make a difference on a MAF tuned car? maf should correct it self on a few street runs around here. and judging by your numbers your about right on for numbers based on the TSP bloated DynoJet numbers.

Fast sells the pieces to repair there intakes from individual runner to top and bottom "cases" if it was cheap enough id have bought it.

[Bayer-Z28]

^ I would have gotten that damaged FAST 92 if I could have found the shell easily enough.

If I could find all the pieces, I'd piece together an intake. :)

[Batman]

Wat Pizza is saying is FAST sells the shell pieces, you just have to call them

[Bayer-Z28]

I was wondering... I'll have to wait till I get my taxes done and give em a call. Doesn't make sense that they wouldn't sell the intakes anymore, but the pieces.

[Bayer-Z28]

85mm Delphi MAF on the way.. $75 shipped. :D

Found an ASP UDP with ARP Bolt AND both belts for $170 NIB.. But the fuker hasn't gotten back to me about it yet.

[Bayer-Z28]

Found flow #'s for the 92 and 102 non-ported. I've been looking for these for YEARS! 4" bore, but nearly same heads as mine. Worked over 243's. I'm running a .639" cam. I don't see the minimal gain being worth it for a 102 over a 92. Shown as head flow with the intake.

Would it still be ok to stick a 92mm TB on a 102 IM?

-=EDIT=-
On the contrary. Check out Mamo's post on here:
http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/generation-iii-internal-engine/1381284-need-help-picking-intake-between-fast.html


Flowed our LS2, 243 CNC'd head on a 4.00" bore. Runner volume is ~225 cc and these are with 2.00" intake valves. These are going on a project here and since we have a few of the new 102's, I figured it was appropriate to update the flow numbers.

Fast 92 - Stock
.100 71.4
.200 144.7
.300 205.9
.400 235.7
.500 259.0
.550 270.8
.600 272.6
.650 276.2

Fast 102 - Stock
.100 74.4
.200 150.7
.300 211.9
.400 241.7
.500 265.6
.550 271.7
.600 274.0
.650 278.4

here is the link of the original post


http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-tech-performance/2591475-fast-102-ported-and-stock-flow-numbers.html

[Slowhawk]

Ok,so how does flow translate to hp/tq?

[ILuvPizzaTimes10]

stick a 3000 cfm intake on your car see if it really makes That much more power. flow numbers mean shit. i dunno why your researching this so much. the 102 is terrible from all the reviews ive seen on moderatly modded cars such as yours. like the PPI with FI or HUGE CUBES the extra CFM will be a waste if not completely rob your car of drive-ability and low end Anything. But it will make a few more peak MAYBE! i dunno man get what you can at a decent price. or what you can afford. my buddy installed a FAST 92 FAST TB and he gained ZERO miles an hour and ZERO ET over the LS6 he had. similar power levels to you. just food for thought.

[Bayer-Z28]

^ What heads was he running? What cam/lobes? Engine? All of this comes into play.
-And if flow numbers don't mean shit, then how do YOU buy a set of heads?? By looks?
-Like Mamo said, the head is what depicts what intake you should be running. And seeing as I was spec'd a set of AFR 205's, a good intake will be needed in the future.

I've always said that the 102 is too big, It's just that the deeper I look, the more conflicting evidence I find. I think a 92 and adding cats to my setup will help me keep my bottom end. I don't want to lose any because that's what this cam is for.

And I take flow #'s seriously. It's evidence that something is "different." I bought some cheap parts back then and didn't research them and I am royally kicking myself for it now. Hard to explain, but I DO research things to death before I buy them.

With these "quick" lobes (XE-R, IIRC) that I'm running, if the head can get to a higher flow earlier in the lift (Degrees of rotation = time also), the cam doesn't have to reach max lift (LOST time in rotation) in order to achieve a solid amount of airflow. = more cyl filling, more air earlier and quicker. The intake can obviously add a bit of a bottle neck to this. I don't want to say "restriction" because that's not the word. I also understand that if the runners are too big, it will lose port velocity. And yes, an engine can only injest soo much air.

I am looking to extract EVERYTHING this cam has to offer. I am damned to PROVE that it will perform AS GOOD if not BETTER than the other huge cams and that mine has much better driveability. I ran a 12.14 for my second time ever at the track, so this has something.

Yes, I'm stubborn. I'll get either the 92 or the 102. Not sure yet. I researched my cam for two years before I bought it and I'm only on about 6 months to a year researching the intake. It's fascinating to me. I want to know why it is as good as it is.(or is not) I started looking into things and as soon as I opened a can of worms, I just kept wanting to know more. This is a hobby of mine, I guess. Research.

[Slowhawk]

Cam is the cheapest.

I like Mamo but don't listen to him much anymore. Never seen one of his custom Mamo H/C setups make more then 430rwhp even though it is a 460-470rwhp package.

XER Cams are just valvetrain killers. Stopped ussing them years ago,much better cams out there now.

[Batman]

I was gonna say, if you can't use that much air it is useless to you. A 346 is never gonna push that kind of volume. I mean realistically cam only an LS6 intake is probably one of your best options

[Batman]

^ What heads was he running? What cam/lobes? Engine? All of this comes into play.
-And if flow numbers don't mean shit, then how do YOU buy a set of heads?? By looks?
-Like Mamo said, the head is what depicts what intake you should be running. And seeing as I was spec'd a set of AFR 205's, a good intake will be needed in the future.

I've always said that the 102 is too big, It's just that the deeper I look, the more conflicting evidence I find. I think a 92 and adding cats to my setup will help me keep my bottom end. I don't want to lose any because that's what this cam is for.

And I take flow #'s seriously. It's evidence that something is "different." I bought some cheap parts back then and didn't research them and I am royally kicking myself for it now. Hard to explain, but I DO research things to death before I buy them.

With these "quick" lobes (XE-R, IIRC) that I'm running, if the head can get to a higher flow earlier in the lift (Degrees of rotation = time also), the cam doesn't have to reach max lift (LOST time in rotation) in order to achieve a solid amount of airflow. = more cyl filling, more air earlier and quicker. The intake can obviously add a bit of a bottle neck to this. I don't want to say "restriction" because that's not the word. I also understand that if the runners are too big, it will lose port velocity. And yes, an engine can only injest soo much air. FOr the cam you have you will never make the HP numbers of bigger cams, it is not a possibility. But staright HP numbers are about as worthless as CFM numbers. Build the car to run the way you like it and forget about the numbers. Talk to Pros like Don to help you get the exact set-up you are looking for and don't be blinded by numbers that in the scheme of things don't determine how a car runs

I am looking to extract EVERYTHING this cam has to offer. I am damned to PROVE that it will perform AS GOOD if not BETTER than the other huge cams and that mine has much better driveability. I ran a 12.14 for my second time ever at the track, so this has something.

Yes, I'm stubborn. I'll get either the 92 or the 102. Not sure yet. I researched my cam for two years before I bought it and I'm only on about 6 months to a year researching the intake. It's fascinating to me. I want to know why it is as good as it is.(or is not) I started looking into things and as soon as I opened a can of worms, I just kept wanting to know more. This is a hobby of mine, I guess. Research.

Flow numbers are only part of the story, Knowing how much CFM your engine can actually push and matching the heads to the cam, intake, fuel etc. You can bolt a set of 300+CFM heads to your 346 and if you can only push 215CFM then you are wasting your time and most likely causing the engine to run poorly. Also where are these huge CFM numbers? if it is over .600" lift you probably aren't going to like what you get. You need to find the correct CFM for your set-up and your best bet with that is to talk to someone like Don or buy a complete package. You also need to consider combustion chamber size, shape, etc. Buying heads just by CFM doesn't make much sense.

[Bayer-Z28]

^ I have found that the TFS heads flow more at the mid lift numbers. The exhaust flow is up there also compared to the AFR heads. Mid and low lift #'s are where the money is. Such as a set of stock heads that flow maybe 160 cfm at .300" and top out at .600" at 220cfm. If you can get that head to flow more, sooner, you won't have to run a HUGE lift cam. My .640" cam was a bit much for me, but I had to compromise on something. I wanted under 230 duration and around .600", but the reviews on this cam were pretty good. .600" lift, initially, scared me off, then I warmed up to the idea. The MS cams never caught my eye. But the Torquer V2 and 3 were an option when I was buying mine.

And from what I've read, these heads will always outflow the plastic intakes.

I was wanting a set of the TFS heads for a while and asked what heads were recommended and they actually spec'd me a set of AFR 205's. I'll do those eventually and save the TFS idea for an L92/LS3/LS9 clone idea I've been tossing around. And the guy who spec'd my cam has had a setup push 550rw with NA h/c. -Not with my cam, but still. I have an idea how to extract what I'm looking for.

[84ta406]

stick a 3000 cfm intake on your car see if it really makes That much more power. flow numbers mean shit. i dunno why your researching this so much. thought.

Agreed flow #'s do mean shit, Anyone can port a intake or head to push out CFM, now to retain velocity is a different ball game. If theres too much volume the air speed slows down. Buy me a Super Victor and watch my car fall on its face.

^ What heads was he running? What cam/lobes? Engine? All of this comes into play.
-And if flow numbers don't mean shit, then how do YOU buy a set of heads?? By looks?


Like Nick said, flow #'s are only part of it. Whats the use of so much flow if the heads cant handle it? Now you turned your intake into a bottle neck.

I look at heads based off chamber design, intake/exhaust port sizes, Min/Max CSA, etc. Theres a lot more to it IMO. You also have to look into how big the motor is, compression, cam profile and crap. Some heads and intakes work better with different cams.

[Batman]

IMO TFS > AFR for a street/strip application. The AFR's make more peak but the TFS's seem to carry a wider, broader power badn

[ILuvPizzaTimes10]

ive seen more cars make power with AFR then TFS lately. the fast as cast is a joke and id take AFR over an out of the box TFS head.

[Bayer-Z28]

^ I've ALWAYS wanted the TFS heads just because of the mid-lift numbers. They don't need a HUGE cam for them to flow crazy. I've always had my eye on the Torquer V2 or 3. I like those cams and the sound, but TSP seems to only be into higher RPM power and TR seems to do their research in power under the curve.

I think the 215's would still work, but the 205's may have a better velocity. And I'm looking into clarification on "these heads will always outflow the plastic intake" claims. A 102 unported may just be a match. Ported it flows over 280cfm at around .500". My heads peak out at around .280".

And from what I've gathered, the 102 design isn't an increased overall intake VOLUME, it's just a better runner design. And the gurus are saying that the throat has little effect on this, actually. Claims are that they almost needed a radius on the TB during testing of the 92 and the 102 did not need one. The air was slightly obstructed entering the 92mm TB right at the edges of the TB, while on the 102 it was not. Now, I'm wondering if that is from a decrease in air speed entering the TB. Same volume with a larger "hole" would mean slower.... Right? 0_o


And I've got LSK lobes on my cam. Asked the guy who designed it. I can't find my cam card.. :-\

[Batman]

ive seen more cars make power with AFR then TFS lately. the fast as cast is a joke and id take AFR over an out of the box TFS head.

Agreed, but TFS kills them in the low and mid range which would be preferable for a car mostly driven on the street, IMO anyway. Once again you throw peak dyno numbers in the garbage with the other numbers, in the scheme of thing they only tell you part of the story. I don't care if the car makes 50 more HP at peak RPM if the "lesser" heads make more power across 80% of the RPM range then the only place you are really gonna see an advantage with the higher HP number is on the racetrack, and chances are it will be a negligible difference. I will take bigger low/mid range numbers over peak HP any day of the week in any application except a pure track car

[Bayer-Z28]

^ This is why I research stuff.. :D Peak numbers don't mean as much to me. I look at lot at the mid-lift and middle of the powerband numbers. My buddy has an MS4 with PRC heads and he swears by it, but I pulled on him even though he made more power than I did. I've driven it and I don't care for it as a street cam. I've noticed that TR seems to pay more attention to all around performance and TSP seems to be just peak power. I figured that out a couple years ago.

The TFS also runs a lower valve angle which can also help run a different range of cams due to a slightly less risk of PTV clearance.

[Slowhawk]

I won't buy AFR heads anymore. Build quality sucks. We mostly prefer to use TEA/TFS heads. They always outperform AFR,ported TSP heads ect.

[84ta406]

Agreed, but TFS kills them in the low and mid range which would be preferable for a car mostly driven on the street, IMO anyway. Once again you throw peak dyno numbers in the garbage with the other numbers, in the scheme of thing they only tell you part of the story. I don't care if the car makes 50 more HP at peak RPM if the "lesser" heads make more power across 80% of the RPM range then the only place you are really gonna see an advantage with the higher HP number is on the racetrack, and chances are it will be a negligible difference. I will take bigger low/mid range numbers over peak HP any day of the week in any application except a pure track car

Greater AVG. power > Peak power with a lower average IMO as well. I dont know all this LSx crap but I will say if you go to the track, you wont see many AFR headed cars. Brodix FTW! lol

[Bayer-Z28]

I'm torn.

I've seen all the data and I'm just still worried about losing low end on the 102. I've got the money to buy it now. Just last minute jitters, I guess.

[Batman]

I think the 92 or 90 would be a better fit for you if you can get your hands on one.

[Formula413]

Between the bad things I've heard about the 102 and just the fact that it's huge and your motor is stock cubes and not too radical a cam it doesn't seem like a good fit to me. Have you heard good things about it in your research?

[Batman]

I would almost go LS6 or an LS2 intake over a 102.

[Bayer-Z28]

^ The LS6 outperforms the LS2. LS2 is a turd compared to the 6 and 3. The TB size doesn't make the intake and has little to do with it. I've learned a LOT this week.. :)
As I see it, the 102 is almost an ITB intake wrapped in polymer/plastic.


Check it.. This settles it.

OK...this thread is pretty funny talking about nothing....LOL

Guys...

When we are discussing fuel injected applications.....the size of the plenum and the opening or the TB (size) will have zero effect on "low end" power.

This is old school thinking stemming from the very real and often practiced applications where too large a carb might have been bolted on a particular engine combination.

The problem stemming from the fact the large carb slowed the airspeed down enough in the venturi's of the main body to negatively effect the carb atomization and therefore hurt power, torque, fuel economy, and responsiveness until enough RPM was generated to allow the carb to become more effective again (guys older than 45 will be nodding their heads up and down right now while reading this!).

We aren't atomizing fuel here folks....thats handled by the injectors and the real meat and potatoes of manifold design (runner length, shape, and taper) hasn't changed much from the 90, 92 or 102.....its very similar but the 102 does have a superior shaped runner (although the length is very similar), is slightly taller, and ultimately flows more, especially when properly ported.

Yes....a FAST 102 can flow more than a 280 CFM head but thats always the case with a really good intake....ideally you want ALOT of headroom when selecting a manifold so when you bolt it in front of your heads it flows more net to the cylinder with the ultimate situation to not hurt the port any more than placing a radius plate in front of it. Thats pure theory unless we are discussing extremely optimized straight shot tunnel ram style manifolds.

I can port a Gen I single plane intake and make it flow 400 CFM.....when you place it in front of a 300 CFM intake port that port still loses 20 CFM which is very good all thing considered. Take the same intake unported by me that still flows way more out of the box than the 300 CFM intake port in question (say the intake flows 360 CFM out of the box) and now you may only see 265 CFM when placed in front of the head because it hurt the net flow more.

INTERNET MYTH #1 .....My 102 Fast is too big for my 346

Wrong....its a better designed intake thats going to allow more air to pass thru the intake ports and be mixed with more precisely atomized fuel from your injectors.

INTERNET MYTH #2....Its already big....you dont need to port it (or it might hurt the bottom end).

Also wrong....at least when ported properly. Once again it simply makes a good piece even better but I would be the first to admit that on a marginal set of head the gains from the work would be less as well. The better the heads, the more aggressive the RPM, displacement, etc. the more that ported 102 is going to pay you in spades.

The larger the restriction the intake manifold becomes....the better your results will be when you swap to the better intake.

If your still questioning anything lets get it handled now and please refer other people back to the answers when we see the same questions and bad information in other threads....I wish I had a nickel for the guys convinced their inaccurate theories are accurate....LOL

The ONLY potential negative to the 102 design...well besides the cost of admission with the rails etc.....is the TB (airblade) is so large it can create drivability challanges with the tune but its a much easier deal on a cable operated 102 with an IAC motor. ALso, it tends to be extremely responsive which I personally like, however some have complained its too responsive (on/off) and they have to get used to driving it. No big deal in my book....

Hope this helps!

-Tony

[ILuvPizzaTimes10]

i dont agree with that completely. larger intake runners on an engine say at at low rpm and low vacuum. the air can stall in the ports. too big a plenum on a small displacement engine spinning at low rpm/high load will stall air inside the plenum. i mean believe what you wwant. real world is real world not some engine dyno/chassis dyno and the car made 40 more rwhp but ran 3 tenths slower...... i mean get it if you wish. if you choose to believe a guy who ultimatly is a sales man for FAST. of course he's going to tell you its great. and you wont lose anything. there are back to back tests on this i believe hot rod did it and the 102 lost everywere but peak over the 92/92 setup SAME 92mm tb. if i read it right.

[Bayer-Z28]

^ link? I'll read it over. And the vacuum would be created at the TB.. If the TB is closed, then there should still be the same 28" or 32".. Whatever the # is.

-=edit=-

vacuum would be created at the point of restriction = heads/valves/ports. But the intake plenum could also bee seen as a vacuum chamber but the TB regulates this.

[TBerry95z28]

I can understand the 102 cause your probally going to be doing more modding down the road anways so atleast that way you can support it either way. hey in the end its your money.

[Batman]

I don't agree with that, the larger runners are what will kill you on stock cubes. You lose all your velocity. The 102 MM T/B isn't necessarily the problem, you can't push the kind of volume to make the 102 effective. Long runners = high RPM power. I Don't see you gaining much if anything but top end over an LS6 intake. The LS6 may bottle neck in the really high RPM but with something like TFS heads and a small/medium size cam for a car you want to be good ont he street and make lots of low and mid range power you aren't gonna be hurt that badly if not better off. I would def go LS6 before a 102 on the engine you are talking about. The 102 has proven in more then one app to be a lesser intake then it's smaller kin (just ask Don).

[Bayer-Z28]

^ I sold my LS6 intake to a member here. I was seeing it as a bottle neck. Don was telling me to ditch it as well. And my cam is probably trying to pull more air through the heads than we realize. And I don't see a .639" cam as being small. The duration will fool ya.

And you guys' opinion does matter to me or else I would have bought the intake already. Still looking for a good deal.

And I was thinking of a 102 with a 96mm TB. Something that won't kill the driveability with an on/off switch.

[ILuvPizzaTimes10]

tb size has little to do with how an intake performs on top of an intake port. AIR SPEED! its all about making sure the air moving threw the intake IE plenum and Runner size are sized properly for your setup. STuff a HUGE Tunnel ram on a stock chevy 350 and tell me if it makes any low end. that esentially what you will be doing with a FAST 102 on a midly modded LS1. TB size has nothing to do with it at that point does it?

[Bayer-Z28]

^ That "low end" concern was addressed in regards to the runners. I CAN do a 102 intake with a 96mm TB. Been thinking of that. And the 90 and 92 flow the same FWIW.

Think of how an ITB intake works. This is almost that, minus 8 TB's. Just has one big one and 8 individual runners. If I can find a ported 92, I'll prolly do that. I PM'd my cam designer and asked him what he thinks..

And "mildly modded" ?? I don't get that? There must be a fine line between "eXtreme mods" and Mild. H/C is typical. Yes I have a stock bottom end, but the demand for air is still there.

If I was just bolt ons looking at a full 102 setup, yeah.. That would be overkill. An LS6 intake would be fine then. Which is what I was back in 06.

[Batman]

forget the T/B , the issue is having more air in the intake than a 346 CI engine can use. Doesn't matter how big the cam is there is only so much volume in the cylinders. The Long runners are the killer on the 102. if you can't flow that air into the cylinder the velocity slows down and it creates turbulence. If you had that cam on a 402 I would still say the 90 or 92 is better for the street but the 102 would at least be functional. I just don't see a 346 being able to pull in enough air to make that intake efficient. You will probably only make good numbers on the top end, which, if I am correct, isn't what you want. Yes the LS6 will be too small of an intake but between the 2 I think you would be happier with the LS6 for what you are asking the car to do. IMO I'd surf the boards and ebay and try to find a FAST 90, that, IMO is the correct intake for what you are doing

[Bayer-Z28]

^ I actually found a couple places that sell the FAST 92 now. Just gotta know where to look. And I'm not sure. If it didn't work, then why are so many people using the intake? And as far as the runners being too big; don't know how it can be. They seem to be the same size as the 92, just removable, which take up more room in the intake = bigger overall body.

[c4boom]

if it dosnt work then why do so many people buy them? try asking that on a mustang forum they would be more educated on that particular point.

[ILuvPizzaTimes10]

reason people buy the 102 is because they stopped making/marketing the 92 and everyone thats on the boards think LS1 tech is Gods Country. and listen to there Sponsors/sales man.

Now the 102 does have longer runner. i think 1/4" longer if memory serves? also are a larger CC length obviously has to do with it. as well as larger plenum. i dont know how many ways i can slice it for you. research can only get you so far un less you get an unbiased opinion. But FAST has been in the buisness so long they have people in there back pocket as far as i can tell. and no matter were you look THERE SHITS the best!!! there isnt really much else out there that is better. But wen you pretty much stop making intakes for people in your boat. mildly modded motors. Yes mildly. your stock cubes small cam and heads? i dont mean to insult if your taking it the wrong way But your car puts down(i dont know average power.) but using your peak as a compare. Cam Only cars make just as much as you. So IMO Mildly modded LS1. thats just my take on your situation. id get a 92/92 setup and have it ported. it will out perform the 102 in all areas i can almost garantee it with your current mods.

[Bayer-Z28]

^ Yeah, I do take it kind of personal. I don't want an MS4 that will kill driveability and not really be of any use until over 3500 rpm. Call it a small cam all you want. And I'm not going for the low blow here so I'll stop now.. yeah, my car put down small-ish numbers for the setup, but my Y-pipe is smashed, the LT's are garbage, not to mention a stock TB and MAF on an LS6 intake with 243 heads. I KNOW this will push 450 rw with those parts replaced with better stuff. I just need time to get the income together for it. I'm closer now than I was last year. We all know these LS cars can surprise people.


But I agree that FAST pretty much monopolized the markert and it does piss people off.

[84ta406]

i dont agree with that completely. larger intake runners on an engine say at at low rpm and low vacuum. the air can stall in the ports. too big a plenum on a small displacement engine spinning at low rpm/high load will stall air inside the plenum. i mean believe what you wwant. real world is real world not some engine dyno/chassis dyno and the car made 40 more rwhp but ran 3 tenths slower...... i mean get it if you wish. if you choose to believe a guy who ultimatly is a sales man for FAST. of course he's going to tell you its great. and you wont lose anything. there are back to back tests on this i believe hot rod did it and the 102 lost everywere but peak over the 92/92 setup SAME 92mm tb. if i read it right.

I don't agree with that, the larger runners are what will kill you on stock cubes. You lose all your velocity. The 102 MM T/B isn't necessarily the problem, you can't push the kind of volume to make the 102 effective. Long runners = high RPM power. I Don't see you gaining much if anything but top end over an LS6 intake. The LS6 may bottle neck in the really high RPM but with something like TFS heads and a small/medium size cam for a car you want to be good ont he street and make lots of low and mid range power you aren't gonna be hurt that badly if not better off. I would def go LS6 before a 102 on the engine you are talking about. The 102 has proven in more then one app to be a lesser intake then it's smaller kin (just ask Don).

tb size has little to do with how an intake performs on top of an intake port. AIR SPEED! its all about making sure the air moving threw the intake IE plenum and Runner size are sized properly for your setup. STuff a HUGE Tunnel ram on a stock chevy 350 and tell me if it makes any low end. that esentially what you will be doing with a FAST 102 on a midly modded LS1. TB size has nothing to do with it at that point does it?

forget the T/B , the issue is having more air in the intake than a 346 CI engine can use. Doesn't matter how big the cam is there is only so much volume in the cylinders. The Long runners are the killer on the 102. if you can't flow that air into the cylinder the velocity slows down and it creates turbulence. If you had that cam on a 402 I would still say the 90 or 92 is better for the street but the 102 would at least be functional. I just don't see a 346 being able to pull in enough air to make that intake efficient. You will probably only make good numbers on the top end, which, if I am correct, isn't what you want. Yes the LS6 will be too small of an intake but between the 2 I think you would be happier with the LS6 for what you are asking the car to do. IMO I'd surf the boards and ebay and try to find a FAST 90, that, IMO is the correct intake for what you are doing

We have some winners BOB! Same reasons I didnt go with a Super Victor...

[Bayer-Z28]

I asked my cam designer which intake HE recommends. He will have the final say for me.

[Bayer-Z28]

And one last one... I'm just trying to kill some myths here. I was against this (102) intake from the beginning for the exact reasons that pizza has voiced here, but I have seen a LOT the data and from what I have gathered the 102 is an effective piece. Now I'm going to see what PatG recommends and I will go from there and onto real-world "tests" this spring.

Honestly that's a scary quote....(air "stalling" in the intake runners)

Even at idle you have eight pistons 4" across moving vertically close to the same depth at 6-7 times per second (just counting the "intake stroke" in the four cycle engine, not the power stroke)....trust me there is no air "stalling"....its moving thru that plenum at a pretty good clip (because there are eight cylinders pulling from the plenum) and moving thru the runners at a reasonably brisk pace as well. Start turning some RPM's and look out....you guys would be amazed and how much airflow is really moving thru only a 500 HP engine combination. A 300 CFM intake port @ 28" depression will suck you hand to that head (if you get close enough) with enough force to hurt you and that doesn't even represent whats really going on when an engine is at full song.

The good thing about the Internet is the plethora of information available to digest.....the bad thing about the Internet.....yes you guessed it....the plethora of information available to digest.

You need to be selective about who's theories and opinions you might latch on to....

I have seen so much bad info "parroted" from one source to the next its crazy.....

Always verify the accuracy of the source in question....whether discussing engines or which electric razor might work the best.

I love researching things on the Net but I have a pretty good nose for what info might be accurate and what info might not be....comes with age I think though :lol:

-Tony

[Batman]

I don't think Pizza was trying to insult you with the mildly modded comment, but when you are talking to people on tech with 75MM+ turbos, 300 hits of nitrous are 430+ CI engines making 700+ wheel HP then yes, you are mildly modded. A H/C 346 is a baby in the LSx world now. Absolutely nothing wrong with it and I think it will make for a more enjoyable car for you, but when there are an awful lot of $30,000+ engines out there a 346 may as well be a VTEC 4 banger. I mean a stock LS3 will beat up on a lot of H/C 346's. It isn't an insult in any way shape or form. Exact same reason the 102 is "THE" intake right now, the market has gone to much larger engines. I still think the FAST 90 is the best bet for you, port match to the intake runners and I think you would be very happy with it. It was fantastic on my 346 and made power all the way to redline. Just my $.02, do with it as you will. Unfortunately the people who have them aren't giving them up for that exact reason.

[Batman]

The guy from AFR isn't lying, but the key sentence there is "start turning some RPM's". AFR heads and a 102 intake are gonna make a ton of top end so of course he is going to recommend it. I have absolutely no doubt a 102 will make more HP then an LS6, or a Fast 90/92, but it is all gonna be up high in the RPM range. If that is what you want then go for it, but it is exactly the opposite of what you said you were going for. He is a salesman who wants you to buy HIS products and giving you the pitch 90% of buyers like to hear "my set up makes more HP then theirs". What we have been trying to steer you toward is a more useful power band, but yes, there is no free lunch, you will lose peak ponies in the process. When I was working to get my engine together I decided I spent a whole lot more time in the low RPM range than wound out above 4000 RPM so that's what I went for. So it's up to you, either way is a win win but the car will drive significantly different depending on your choice

[Bayer-Z28]

^ I heard back from my cam designer and he said it will be money well spent. Said the gains will be dramatic compared to an LS6 intake (duh.) Mamo gave me a good price for a 102. Worse comes to worse, I can sell it or trade it back to him (he'll sell it as a trade for a used piece. Good a good price, so I won't be taking a hit.) I had to pass on one of his ported 92's a month or so ago at a killer price. I just didn't have the money at the time and of course NOW that I DO have the money, the deals have flat-lined. Just the way ti goes I guess.

And I agree that the LS3 and up are the new crowd, and I would LOVE an LS3, but I can't swing that right now or prolly even this year, so I'm just going to tweak what I have for now.

[Slowhawk]

Alot of talk for just a stock 346ci build.. LOL

Custom Cam designer must be Patrick. I remember when he knew nothing about Cams..LOL. Nice guy, good sales pitch. Magic Cams ? -no.

It's all setup design for power curve. I can get a SV intake to make more power than the LS6/FAST intakes but it is Cam/head combo's that dictate it all.

We made 460hp/435tq (peak at 6200rpm)out of a TR224 Cam/ported stock 00 Z heads car on our old dynojet. Alot of detail when putting it together.

If you bounce around the net and put parts together more than likely the combo will not be matched and the owner is disapointed.

[Bayer-Z28]

^ Agreed. I never asked what heads I should use until recently (never thought of it... Live and learn), but I found a set of P+P'd 243 heads in mint condition apparently done by Wheel 2 Wheel in Detroit on Tech classifieds back in 07 and they were a budget head at the time. Assembled and shipped for $600, IIRC.. Apparently they're not as bad as I thought. I lumped them into the 241 stocker category. They're not top of the line, but they're good for what they are. Someone mentioned to ask your cam designer what they would recommend, so I did.

Ordered the 102 a couple minutes ago and got a good deal on it, shipped. (Sold my camera gear to fund it) I'll prolly get one of the eBay TB's. There have been good reviews on them lately. I've already got the 85mm MAF, all I need now is fuel rails and 42# injectors. Was going to get the LS3 rails as a budget, but we'll see how the prices play out. $130 for LS3 rails, or $150 for the billet budget rails kit from Speedinc. Just going to need the spacers, FPR and lines. And gotta find some damn fernco. And different lid.

Was thinking of an SD tune, but being a street car, I don't think it'd be the best idea.

[ILuvPizzaTimes10]

my car runs GREAT!!!! Speed Density. and really your car is speed density all of them are the maf just cleans it up.

[Bayer-Z28]

^ Yeah, that's what I was reading. Neat stuff. I've been back and fourth about the SD thing. From what I gather, it goes off the VE tables (IIRC) and compares to the MAF data. So it's running off an "idea" of how much air is coming into the engine based on set parameters. again, IIRC. Half the crowd tells me to keep it until Mods dictate deleting it and the other half say go SD.

What happened to yours anyway?? last I paid attention it was down and you decided to keep it.

[Batman]

Dude you are well within the parameters for MAF control on your car, you are making it more complicated than it has to be. Keep the MAF, it will run better overall because it can make more automatic adjustments than an SD tune. Even a stock MAF will not be a bottleneck for you and can be tuned for what you are doing, if you are sweating it get the AC delco screened 85MM MAF with the adapters for the wiring. Pizza car is ALOT different than what you are trying and SD was the best way for him, but for a HC 346 I wouldn't even try. And I bet the 102 is gonna be wrong for what you are talking about, I will go on record now. You will make lots of HP above 4500 and that'll be it. Hopefully you prove me wrong. If you are going to do fuel rails go for the billet ones, and I am a big fan of Nick Williams TB's. Not sure what ebay T/B you are talking about but I would do it once and do it right.

[Bayer-Z28]

^ I'm not pushing the SD idea. It didn't get far with me.. And the LT1 is a different platform. I don't compare anything about my stuff to that.

Already got an 85mm TB based on other advice I've gotten here. I think from Don, but don't quote me on that one.

I wanted the NW TB, but I haven't decided yet.. There's a thread floating around Tech about the eBay TB's. From what I've heard it's the same casting as the name brands, but minus the name. I'll have to look it up as I haven't done much reading on it at all.

And only way to tell how this is all going to pan out is to get it running and to get it tuned. I'll prolly have to trailer it as I've read one or two threads about fresh 102 installs that don't want to idle. No big deal for me, I'll figure it out.

-=EDIT=-
Here's the TB. Looks identical to the FAST.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/GM-GEN-III-LS1-LS2-LS6-102MM-CNC-INTAKE-THROTTLE-BODY-/360341855386?pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item53e60c5c9a#ht_3454wt_1042

Thread:
http://www.ls1tech.com/forums/generation-iii-external-engine/1369829-ebay-92-102mm-throttle-bodies.html

[ILuvPizzaTimes10]

i just feel no maf simplifies a modded car. it may cause a fuel economy suffer. but other then that i dont really see the benifits of running one on a car modified much past stock bolt ons. maybe its me.

[Bayer-Z28]

^ Meh.. I don't really know much better. I just see the LT and LS as two completely different setups. All I knew was that the LT was a MAP setup/SD. I didn't think they had a MAF setup.

[84ta406]

^ Meh.. I don't really know much better. I just see the LT and LS as two completely different setups. All I knew was that the LT was a MAP setup/SD. I didn't think they had a MAF setup.

They did have some with MAF's I know my dads 9C1 caprice is a MAF car.

[Formula413]

94-97 LT1s use a MAF, 92-93 are SD

[Bayer-Z28]

^ I thought it may have been the later models with the MAF. Was wondering if I DID see one on a TA with a CAI.

[ILuvPizzaTimes10]

LT and LS have little to do with how an engine will run based on moddifications and tuning. my car is also running an LS computer hence it runs as if it was an LS. and it runs Awesome just the way it is OL/SD!! and i like it that way. one less then to go bad/fuck up. once you start moving the maf from stock locations, adding "cold airs" lids Oiled air filters your asking for maf issues.

[Bayer-Z28]

^ I mean it's just a different platform. They all use, essentially, the same sensors to monitor and control engine activities. I forgot you're running an LS harness. I just don't compare the two sides. I don't know much about LT series other than the Opti setup and that long tubes are murder to install. :haha:

I've been running a K&N since 2000 or so on my cars and haven't had a problem. Just be easy on the oil, only apply to the outside, dab up any extra and let it dry for a while before using it.
And I did some experimenting/testing this winter:
http://ls1tech.com/forums/generation-iii-external-engine/1347060-wiped-down-inside-my-lid-k-n-argument.html

[Formula413]

I use the K&N oil in the spray can, as opposed to the bottle. It's much easier to apply that way and you almost can't over oil it unless you really tried.

[Bayer-Z28]

^ I gotta look for that.. Still gotta find a good cleaner substitute that will work instead of their stupid pump dispenser for the cleaner. HATE that damn thing!

[Formula413]

This is the aerosol K&N oil, much easier to use:

http://shop.advanceautoparts.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_Air-Filter-Oil---6-5-oz----Aerosol-K&N_17402353-P_N3335I_P|GRP2026____

The instructions for the bottled oil say to saturate the filter and let it drip dry. Fuck that, that will still be wayyyyyy too much oil. Easy to apply just the right amount with the aerosol can.

[84ta406]

Pshhhh my dads K&N out of the damn box foiled his MAF... fuckin POS...

[Bayer-Z28]

If you can see the droplets, there's too much on there, IMO.. I only spray one side and never had a problem.. Check that link I posted. Wiped down the INSIDE of my lid a couple months back and it was clean. I've have never cleaned that lid, to my recollection.

[ILuvPizzaTimes10]

So a clean lid is your proof your K&N doesnt pass any oil?

if the oil can pass threw a cotton gause filter im pretty sure the oil wont "stick" to the top of the lid. especially under vaccum. wich is wen you will have oil passing threw anyway.

didnt you also go on to say you hads to clean your maf to get your car to run right/stop consuming fuel? how can a maf get dirty IF the air filter as you say is cleaned properly oiled properly and meticulously maintained. i use a K&N only because it was free. i will buy a paper filter wen the time come(spring) and never look back.

i have never seen so many dirty mafs on cars other then these f buckets. and EVERYTIME someone i know has a dirty maf its a damn K&N sitting there. NOT saying that only K&N's cause dirty mafs Or cars without them will never have a bad/dirty maf. just saying more often then not its a K&N and Only beacuse of how close it is in proximity to the maf itself.

[Batman]

Or you can get one of the dry hi po filters that are out there, they do exist. In fact I think GMPP makes one for our cars

[ILuvPizzaTimes10]

have you ever seen a car run faster/slower with a paper or oiled filter. track time rwhp means shit. at the track Does it will it make a difference? ive seen cars run a tenth faster with NO air filter. but never a difference from one filter style to another. K&N is to air filters as SLIC 50 was to motor oil. the shit they sellin yah just aint true.

[84ta406]

I agree 100% with Pizza... Ohh yeah I use a paper filter

[Formula413]

K&N filters do offer slightly restriction than paper, problem is they are less efficient. I've read that people have run K&N filters and had their oil analyzed and seen more silica than with a paper filter. I would run paper but there's no paper filter to fit my CAI.

[ILuvPizzaTimes10]

spectre.

[Bayer-Z28]

So a clean lid is your proof your K&N doesnt pass any oil?

if the oil can pass threw a cotton gause filter im pretty sure the oil wont "stick" to the top of the lid. especially under vaccum. wich is wen you will have oil passing threw anyway.
OIL.. Oil would stick and that was my argument in that thread. Oil can cling to plastic and a LOT of people like to aargue that the K&Ns will "throw oil all over your engin and gumz ups your MAAAF and they're junk!" And this was showing that in OVER FIVE YEARS since I've had that lid on there that is as dirty as it is going to get. Bought the filter with the lid back in, I dunno, 04 or so when I was deployed to Qatar. So It's been six years or so.



didnt you also go on to say you hads to clean your maf to get your car to run right/stop consuming fuel? how can a maf get dirty IF the air filter as you say is cleaned properly oiled properly and meticulously maintained.
I had ONE issue back in 06 where my car was DRINKING fuel, but that didn't even last a day. I don't know what it was or even if it was FROM the MAF. That was in 05, I think. I still have the O2's I bought when that happened. Never installed them and I have no clue what it was.
And it wasn't meticulously maintained, I cleaned it when it got dirty and let it dry before reinstalling it. My car was a garage queen for half of it's life with me (since 03 and it's back in the garage again) but it was a DD for about two years. Drove it across the country and lived in all sorts of climates. And the back of my throttle plate was typically the dirtiest, but I blame the LS1 PCV system for that.




i have never seen so many dirty mafs on cars other then these f buckets. and EVERYTIME someone i know has a dirty maf its a damn K&N sitting there. NOT saying that only K&N's cause dirty mafs Or cars without them will never have a bad/dirty maf. just saying more often then not its a K&N and Only beacuse of how close it is in proximity to the maf itself.
You gotta think of who's driving them, too. Most of our cars ingest more air in three months than most non-gearhead driver cars see in a year.


But I agree that there is no direct proof that it's the filter. Look at the filter placement too (MAF I agree with.) It would be like putting a filter in the wheel well with no fender liner and complaining that it gets dirty.


I'm not trying to argue with you dude, but I will defend what I believe. This filter hasn't given me an issue.......Yet.......
It just seems like you keep trying to either; A: pick a fight (through this thread)or B: trying to mod my car for me or C: tell me I've done a lot of stuff wrong. Live and learn is how I see it, this just happens to be an expensive way to do things and its WHY I research stuff now so I know I'm not making a bad/expensive choice like I have when I first bought the car... like my junk ass SLP LTs. And I don't know LT1's, I believe you when you say your car runs (or ran) great.. I don't know what you've done to it since it broke down. I DO have a tendency to overanalyze, but that's just who I am.

And the same thing goes with wheels, not everyone likes the same thing. That's why there are so many types. If I was mad or yelling things would be in caps, I would be swearing or using some smilies. Unless I'm overreacting or misinterpreting things here, but you've seemed stand-off-ish this whole thread.

[ILuvPizzaTimes10]

not stand off ish? just voicing my opinion. just find it funny you asked for our help/opinions then wen we give you the one you dont like you just tell us were all wrong and do what you were going to in the first place. imo dont ask unless you intend to listen. or atleast learn from or ACT like you learned from something. this whole time you seem to be very edgy on your car and anything sed negative in any sort of way about or even remotly related to your car you get snooty. haha

thats not or has never been any of our intentions ESPECIALLY mine to bash your setup or anything. its just anything we say you just say were wrong and do what you want any way. So instead of choosing my words to not just be blunt and to the point. i just typed what came out and that was that. knowing full well you were just going to call me wrong anyway. i love your car. i dont understand why your so edgy with the fact that your car is Not modded to holly shit 900rwhp(wich alot of LSx cars are doing now days) i call your car mildy modded. i appologize and it wasnt intended to piss you off. But you need to stop being so :wammbulance: wen YOU asked for our opinion we gave it and you react in a negative way to some (trying to be!!) positive influences.

So if i came off stand off ish.....

[84ta406]

Is mine considered mildly modded? lol

[ILuvPizzaTimes10]

mines concidered mildly modded why is that Such a bad comment?

we dont have 430+ cubic inch fire breathers......

[Batman]

Is mine considered mildly modded? lol

Nowadays there are 4 bangers that outclass you stock :p




Just messin with ya!

[84ta406]

mines concidered mildly modded why is that Such a bad comment?

we dont have 430+ cubic inch fire breathers......

I;ve always considered mine mild really.. It's a POS

I am close to those cubes though LOL

And screw you Nick!

[Formula413]

I think cabin fever has a firm grip on NEFBA

[84ta406]

STFU Alex.. My car is slower than your car!

[c4boom]

mine is slower than probably every one It is stuck at the moment LOL

[84ta406]

Yours runs, mines in a million pieces 500 miles away lol

[ILuvPizzaTimes10]

:wammbulance:

[Bayer-Z28]

^ ahhh... whateva..

[Bayer-Z28]

Rewired my MAF today. :D Got some pins and a crimper off my uncle.

I dun ficksed duh fwow tingy mai sewf. :D

http://img713.imageshack.us/img713/5848/img0609vy.jpg

http://img201.imageshack.us/img201/3928/img0610o.jpg

http://img842.imageshack.us/img842/5108/img0611ot.jpg

[Bayer-Z28]

And yeah.. I think it's cabin fever. Didn't notice that last page..

I'm defensive of my car, I guess. I was just trying to squash some myths about the 102. I was posting info as I found it in an attempt to open some eyes. I found it interesting, but the more I learned about the intake the more I believed. I would post it and some would still tell me not to listen to someone who's spend countless hours of R&D into these intakes. No offence but I think I just got to the point where I trusted someone who's spent a LOT of time working with these intakes since they came out over someone who read a couple of reviews on the net (again, no offense.) But before I started this debate, I was the one also going by reviews and initial impressions. It was an uninformed negative opinion on my part. I wanted a FAST 92 in the back of my head, but the numbers were just in favor of the 102.

It can also be difficult to decipher someone's demeanor through text. So I probably mid-interpreted.

And these 400-someodd cube engines MAY be the NEW technology, but it's not common in our paygrade. I only wish I had the money to do up a C6 ZO6 with TT or H/C, or even an LS3 swap in my car with a tap-shift 6L80.

My dream Vette.
jd2yWjDhLiI

[irockidz28]

assholes talkin about slow cars...mines the slowest on the entire forum(that is in one piece/currently running lol)

[bottledbird68]

I think cabin fever has a firm grip on NEFBA

Ah cabin fever!

Just watched "the shining" for re first time the other night lol.

[Bayer-Z28]

Is it accurate to say that an 85mm MAF on this 102/102 setup will be a bit more "kind" to the tuner? From what i've gathered you will be able to see small changes in airflow past the sensors with the MAF being a hir smaller than the TB?

NOT looking for opinions here, just fact... So I'm not gonna take a side on this one.. Just FYI.. :lol:

[Slowhawk]

It's just fun playing with your emotions. You can do whatever you like since it's your car. If it was my car I would of went another way to extract power and it would be cheaper/easier. I would also not use the IAT inside the 85mm MAF,but thats just me and the cars we build here.

[Bayer-Z28]

^ I just never saw it done before and was wondering why. Figured maybe people were lazy or something. *shrug*

[KLAB]

K&N is to air filters as SLIC 50 was to motor oil. the shit they sellin yah just aint true.

win

[KLAB]

I don't know much about LT series other than the Opti setup and that long tubes are murder to install. :haha:
[/url]

They're easy as cake if you have the right tools get it high off the ground and have a good amount of time set aside. I'd do em again :)

[JoeyxGx2]

http://www.ls1gto.com/forums/showthread.php?t=400750
^^ porter fast 90mm

http://www.ls1gto.com/forums/showthread.php?t=397991
^^ 0 mile tsp torques v3 cam

Yes it's a gto forum.. But ls1 parts :)

[Bayer-Z28]

I'm all set..


[/THREAD]