Throttle Bodies

[Big Jim M]

Unions!

My take on auto engineering is there are three prerequisites to balance:

1.) How cheap can we build it?
2.) Will it meet emissions?
3.) Will it last 100,000 miles?

Not everything is optimal or there would be no need for aftermarket parts. If engineering did everything right the first, or even second time, the 3.0 wouldn't have nearly a half dozen cranks, four head designs, and multiple intake configurations across the board. I'm not knocking Ford, but maybe thers a corner thats been cut.

The thinking sounds simplistic but then again, why do you think the US auto industry needed a bailout? Just sayin...

The Auto UNIONS! That's the reason the auto companies needed a bailout! I'll tell ya something else about the unions!! The foreign auto makers moved to this country and into NON-UNION states! They did that because they knew the UNION companies had their feet to the fire and couldn't compete with the prices the foreign companies could charge. So in effect the UNIONS have made the foreign companies more PROFIT then the US companies could make. YOUR new car price is highly inflated because of the union worker getting more money for his labor than ANY other worker in the US. Oh... The bailouts ain't over yet neither!

I value your guys's opinions, or else I wouldn't have posted the questions in the first place. I'm trying to ask the questions before I make any serious error.

Big JIm

 

[McCormack]

I just did the MAF mod as well and noticed a HUGE difference in response....

Yep, it's definitely a worthwhile mod. If you haven't done so yet, throw in a 180* T-stat and you'll probably notice a bit more responsiveness on top of the gain you made with the MAF mod, and an electric radiator fan will add even more on top of that, and pretty soon the 3.0 isn't such a bad little engine.

Stock Ranger throttles won't go wide open (part of the Ford engineer's "system" I'm sure) so if you haven't done so do the throttle cable mod so that your throttle will open up all the way when you get on it.

 

[Beanmachine7000]

You guys are just funny, that's all I have to say...

 

[disciplerocks]

Wow now its the 180 degree t stat adding power?

Just so you know, your engine reaches the same operating temp whether the t-stat opens at 160, 180 or 195. And if you are abusing your motor by revving it way up before it completey warms up, then I hope it returns the favor very soon.

 

[James86]

Wow now its the 180 degree t stat adding power?

Just so you know, your engine reaches the same operating temp whether the t-stat opens at 160, 180 or 195. And if you are abusing your motor by revving it way up before it completey warms up, then I hope it returns the favor very soon.

^^^ I;m not sure i want to go changing that... the engine will run at what it runs at pretty much. the thermostat will open at what its set for, but flogging a motor under it ideal temperature isnt the best thing for it. As for the throttle mod, are you referring to cutting away at the throttle stop or putting zip ties on the cable to take the slack out as mention on this site? Ive done the zip tie thing but not the throttle stop mod.

 

[James86]

You guys are just funny, that's all I have to say...

How so?

I'm agreeing in principle to Big Jim on some things, to others on other things, but in the end, unless you own or have owned a 3.0, I don't really know what help you are if you just pop into a 3.0 thread to criticize ideas and suggestions. I had asked what TB's work on a 3.0 and so far, no one has answered that question.

 

[Beanmachine7000]

It amazes me what kind of BS myths people can claim over the internet... There is no such thing a cheap or easy horsepower, period... If you really want more power than what your truck came with from the factory swap in a bigger engine, or make it where your engine will suck in more air (cam, heads, etc)... Nothing will create horsepower except for more air... You can dump gallons of fuel and have a 1.21 jigawatt ignition system and you won't get anymore power unless you put in more air to burn all that fuel... Making the most power is a delicate science of balancing fuel, air, and spark... Ford tuned your engine PERFECTLY for the 3.0L it is... You can't do any better than that... Now, start changing internals and you might need other supporting mods...

 

[Beanmachine7000]

How so?

I'm agreeing in principle to Big Jim on some things, to others on other things, but in the end, unless you own or have owned a 3.0, I don't really know what help you are if you just pop into a 3.0 thread to criticize ideas and suggestions. I had asked what TB's work on a 3.0 and so far, no one has answered that question.

I don't have to own a 3.0L to know how an engine works...

 

[James86]

. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ,.-‘”. . . . . . . . . .``~.,
. . . . . . . .. . . . . .,.-”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .“-.,
. . . . .. . . . . . ..,/. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ”:,
. . . . . . . .. .,?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\,
. . . . . . . . . /. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,}
. . . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`^`.}
. . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:”. . . ./
. . . . . . .?. . . __. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :`. . . ./
. . . . . . . /__.(. . .“~-,_. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`. . . .. ./
. . . . . . /(_. . ”~,_. . . ..“~,_. . . . . . . . . .,:`. . . . _/
. . . .. .{.._$;_. . .”=,_. . . .“-,_. . . ,.-~-,}, .~”; /. .. .}
. . .. . .((. . .*~_. . . .”=-._. . .“;,,./`. . /” . . . ./. .. ../
. . . .. . .\`~,. . ..“~.,. . . . . . . . . ..`. . .}. . . . . . ../
. . . . . .(. ..`=-,,. . . .`. . . . . . . . . . . ..(. . . ;_,,-”
. . . . . ../.`~,. . ..`-.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..\. . /\
. . . . . . \`~.*-,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..|,./.....\,__
,,_. . . . . }.>-._\. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|. . . . . . ..`=~-,
. .. `=~-,_\_. . . `\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . .`=~-,,.\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . `:,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . `\. . . . . . ..__
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .`=-,. . . . . . . . . .,%`>--==``
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _\. . . . . ._,-%. . . ..`


So bolt on horsepower is imposible? So how did they put those OHC's on a 40 year old design, aka "Cologne"? Magic? Unicorns? You're telling me that phenolic spacers, porting and polishing, headers, freer flowing exhausts, and other add-ons do nothing? I don't know if you've been outside since you left the dealership/guy's front yard with your 1991 Ranger, but since then, even you're sacred cow 4.0 now puts out almost 60 more HP than it did then, and its still a 4.0. Technology is constantly changing and while not everything works 100%, there are things that DO work. I'm not going to run out and get a tornado for my intake hose, but I am dying to know what Ford did, and I can do, to get the increases in power and torque between a 1999 3.0 and a 2007 3.0. I don't expect 200HP from a 3.0 that came with 145, but if I can get 5-10 or even 15 more HP and pick up some MPG's along the way, why is that so wrong?

 

[stmitch]

So if you yourself haven't run a larger TB on a stock 3.0 engine, then how can you state as fact that it will only give a small increase in power? Aren't you just guessing?

Dude, I'm on your side here! If you go back and read my first post, I said, that it might give you a slight increase, but for me, I'd skip that step and go straight for the box intake that Morana sells. I never stated anything as fact. I never used any words like "will" "won't" or "definitley" which would imply personal experience. I concede that some minor gain could be found by bolting on a slightly larger throttle body, but you would see much larger gains with a redesigned intake manifold/larger throttle body combo like Tom's. For my time and money, I wouldn't bother with the minor gains, and I'd go straight for something that would give me a larger benefit. You could buy a bigger throttle body, and larger MAF, and air intake, and see maybe 10-15 hp, or you could spend the same money on just one mod, and see significantly larger gains.

 

[McCormack]

Wow now its the 180 degree t stat adding power?

Once again, have you yourself ever actually tried running a 180* T-stat in a stock 3.0 engine? Or are you one of these know-it-all book educated mechanics that loves to offer "expert" internet advice about things that you have no personal experience with?

 

[disciplerocks]

Once again, have you yourself ever actually tried running a 180* T-stat in a stock 3.0 engine? Or are you one of these know-it-all book educated mechanics that loves to offer "expert" internet advice about things that you have no personal experience with?

I don't have to own a 3.0 to know that ALL engines reach a certain operating temp no matter when the t-stat opens.

And FYI, I have a 180 degree in my B2 and a 160 degree in my Focus.

 

[James86]

I'm not knocking ya stmitch, and in fact i support your mods as well, but Morana want's $750 for his intake box:

http://www.moranav6racing.com/category.html?CategoryID=36

If i can pick up a throttle body at a junkyard for 10 bucks or so, that's what I'm gonna do. I'm pretty sure ANY increse in responsiveness and what not is easily worth 10-20 bucks. I don't know how much money everyone else has lying around for engine swaps and stuff, but I don't make a ton of money working at Walmart The u-pulls around here have decent pricing from what I've seen, and I think a less expensive alternative would be to grab an upper and lower and portmatch and polish them.

 

[McCormack]

Dude, I'm on your side here! If you go back and read my first post, I said, that it might give you a slight increase, but for me, I'd skip that step and go straight for the box intake that Morana sells. I never stated anything as fact. I never used any words like "will" "won't" or "definitley" which would imply personal experience. I concede that some minor gain could be found by bolting on a slightly larger throttle body, but you would see much larger gains with a redesigned intake manifold/larger throttle body combo like Tom's. For my time and money, I wouldn't bother with the minor gains, and I'd go straight for something that would give me a larger benefit. You could buy a bigger throttle body, and larger MAF, and air intake, and see maybe 10-15 hp, or you could spend the same money on just one mod, and see significantly larger gains.

OK dude, I stand corrected on the "might" issue. But until someone with personal experience fitting a larger throttle body (and the discussion is centered on a bored-out 3.0 TB offering a 23% increase in flow, which is more than a "slight" increase in flow) comes forward and definitively says that it's only good for a minor increase in power on a 3.0 engine, I'm not going to rule out the likelihood that there are significant gains to be made by fitting a larger throttle body.

The Morana box intake is $750, plus the cost of a larger MAF, while a bored out TB and a hogged out MAF and an opened up airbox will set you back around $185, which will give you a bit less hp, so that extra couple of Morana hp is going to cost quite a bit more.

Peace.

 

[Beanmachine7000]

. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . ,.-‘”. . . . . . . . . .``~.,
. . . . . . . .. . . . . .,.-”. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .“-.,
. . . . .. . . . . . ..,/. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ”:,
. . . . . . . .. .,?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\,
. . . . . . . . . /. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,}
. . . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`^`.}
. . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:”. . . ./
. . . . . . .?. . . __. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :`. . . ./
. . . . . . . /__.(. . .“~-,_. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,:`. . . .. ./
. . . . . . /(_. . ”~,_. . . ..“~,_. . . . . . . . . .,:`. . . . _/
. . . .. .{.._$;_. . .”=,_. . . .“-,_. . . ,.-~-,}, .~”; /. .. .}
. . .. . .((. . .*~_. . . .”=-._. . .“;,,./`. . /” . . . ./. .. ../
. . . .. . .\`~,. . ..“~.,. . . . . . . . . ..`. . .}. . . . . . ../
. . . . . .(. ..`=-,,. . . .`. . . . . . . . . . . ..(. . . ;_,,-”
. . . . . ../.`~,. . ..`-.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..\. . /\
. . . . . . \`~.*-,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..|,./.....\,__
,,_. . . . . }.>-._\. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .|. . . . . . ..`=~-,
. .. `=~-,_\_. . . `\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . .`=~-,,.\,. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .\
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . `:,, . . . . . . . . . . . . . `\. . . . . . ..__
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .`=-,. . . . . . . . . .,%`>--==``
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _\. . . . . ._,-%. . . ..`


So bolt on horsepower is imposible? So how did they put those OHC's on a 40 year old design, aka "Cologne"? Magic? Unicorns? You're telling me that phenolic spacers, porting and polishing, headers, freer flowing exhausts, and other add-ons do nothing? I don't know if you've been outside since you left the dealership/guy's front yard with your 1991 Ranger, but since then, even you're sacred cow 4.0 now puts out almost 60 more HP than it did then, and its still a 4.0. Technology is constantly changing and while not everything works 100%, there are things that DO work. I'm not going to run out and get a tornado for my intake hose, but I am dying to know what Ford did, and I can do, to get the increases in power and torque between a 1999 3.0 and a 2007 3.0. I don't expect 200HP from a 3.0 that came with 145, but if I can get 5-10 or even 15 more HP and pick up some MPG's along the way, why is that so wrong?

How do I answer this... Yes? The only thing you stated that would work is P&P the heads... How does Ford increase horsepower? Changing head designs, increasing compression ratio, different camshaft profiles, etc... I don't want to argue... I'm just here to debunk all the myths and save YOU money