pdd000

:withstupid:

robz

Thanks for the research.

J-Rod

Manifolds are currently on the flow bench with sets of tests heads at an "unamed head vendor" I am sure they will be back soon with results. There could indeed be some weird issue, but to me at this point, it looks like a design issue with the runner, or some variance between the prototype and the production piece. I won't discount anything, but if you look at MTIs numbers, even the 78MM version lost torque till around 5000 on a stroker. If it was air supply on a stroker, you should have seen better numbers with a big cube motor, and they didn't.

427CPE

Wow, I've been anxious about getting data on the water pump then saw your post today. Excellent data/testing. Was that 8rwhp or 8hp?

:cheers:

z-u-later

J-Rod thanx for the testing & posting the results.

:cheers:

0Kaley@DragonRace

What does the modified TPIS intake manifold cost? Thanks, Kaley

cliffkh

Thanks for posting all this info for our benefit - nice job.

Just curious - were those dyno runs using 4.10s??

J-Rod

Dyno runs were with 4.10s.

The HP gains were 8 RWHP with the pump.

I'll keep everyone posted on our results.

I think the TPIS manifold is around $1100+ an LS6 core.




[Modified by J-Rod, 12:52 AM 1/25/2004]

MTWallet

Flyin'Brian, I was refering to stock cubed motors only since that is what this test was performed on.

J-Rod

I'm sure more testing will be done, and this question can be answered to everyones satisfaction.

NEPTUNEBILL

You furnish a zo6 intake and they alter it for 500 bucks, the TPIS is 650--seems odd to build a TB for the ls1 that does not fit and then charge another 500 to make it work on your car, they would be better just to say its 1150 dollars with exchange for TB and manifold--

John Shiels

Two Guys Garage on speedtv just said they gained 25 HP on engine dyno with the Fast unless I miss understood them :lol: :lol: :lol:

Nothing like unbiased testing and the Forum :thumbs:

With the new C6 manifold FAST may be in trouble.

Thanks for the info and saving me money :thumbs:

kwik8racr

Thanks for your effort! :cheers:

I agree, I have a stroker and have been patiently waiting for results of this intake, and now I am somewhat disappointed. Guess I will have to spend my money elsewhere! The electric water pump looks good though! Thanks for the "real world" results.

robz

Will Tommy go with these mods on the car. Interested in seeing if you pick up some time on the track. Let us know.

Cobraeater

Two Guys Garage actually used a computer dyno software program where they inputted the specs on the camshaft to find out how much hp it would make.

For the LSX manifold they entered a single-plane high flow manifold.:rolleyes:

The program said they would make 400 hp at the flywheel and on the engine dyno they made 391hp, and they tested the engine with a stock lid, stock cats, and exhaust manifolds.

What that means is the intake was useless on that specific setup and the cam gained 25hp.:_dupe:

With headers, no cats, and an aftermarket lid or Blackwing the gain for the cam and the LSX would have been much higher.


[Modified by Cobraeater, 3:47 PM 1/25/2004]

HeaderDesign.com

The TPIS vs FAST dyno plot looks strange to me. I would fully expect the torque curves to converge at low RPM since intake runner wave strength is weak down low. Do you have the A/F ratio plots for both tests? Something is fishy.

NEPTUNEBILL

A friend that builds my car was asking the same thing about using a wide band o2 or a tech 2 to see if it was going way lean the way the line looks all the way across the board--but i'm sure you guys were looking at A/F and would have made note of it if something went nuts, the other post on the test indicated that the A/F didn't vary much at all between manifold setups--

HeaderDesign.com

That's interesting. I wonder about the barometer and air temperature since the FAST was last in the test series.

Do any of you engine builders or tuners have the cross-sectional area versus length profiles for the runners in these intakes, and total manifold volumes? If you do the Forum and I would appreciate the data. Thanks.

washguy

Ive got a stupid question.......the guys that developed the "fast intake" spent a whole lotta of time and money on this intake.... they had to have tested the heck outta this thing.....Why would they bring to market such a "weak" part to market? :confused: Wash

Blorton

:iagree:

I'm not sure this is a fair test. For all we know, the 90mm version of the FAST might've had larger openings into the heads which would've *really* hurt power if the heads used had smaller ports.

How about pulling the top half of the FAST off and see what it looks like when bolted up?

Btw, I agree on the comments over the two guys show. Why anyone would go with cam and intake manifold upgrades and leave the stock airbox and exhaust in place just baffles me. Also - I don't know if anyone else did this, but I paused the tv (tivo rocks!) when they were showing the dyno-sim screen and noticed that some of the values they had entered were wrong. :smash:

Dan