Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums Modifications 3.0L Duratec throttle body question??

Originally posted by Big Jim:

---

In the roughest of terms, the 3.0 has 20% more displacement than a 2.5. Assuming that it can use 20% more air, the math would be simple. A throttle body with 20% more area would be between 65 and 66 mm.

With a hotter cam, head porting, larger exhaust, and no restriction from the MAF, a larger throttle body may be more optimal.

With stock exhaust, milder cams, etc, a smaller throttle body may be optimal.

Other factors may also change the results.

As I started to say, in the simplest of terms, a 65 mm throttle body would be a good place to start with a 3.0 with SVT cams. With Escape cams, the 60 mm would be a good palce to start.

You would need a set of cams hotter than the SVT cams to even thk about a 70 mm throttle body.

My $.02.

---

You mean like a 3L turbo capable of swallowing 500 cubic feet per minute...if not a bit more 7-8psi?

Originally posted by warmonger:

---

Originally posted by Big Jim:

---

In the roughest of terms, the 3.0 has 20% more displacement than a 2.5. Assuming that it can use 20% more air, the math would be simple. A throttle body with 20% more area would be between 65 and 66 mm.

With a hotter cam, head porting, larger exhaust, and no restriction from the MAF, a larger throttle body may be more optimal.

With stock exhaust, milder cams, etc, a smaller throttle body may be optimal.

Other factors may also change the results.

As I started to say, in the simplest of terms, a 65 mm throttle body would be a good place to start with a 3.0 with SVT cams. With Escape cams, the 60 mm would be a good palce to start.

You would need a set of cams hotter than the SVT cams to even thk about a 70 mm throttle body.

My $.02.

---

You mean like a 3L turbo capable of swallowing 500 cubic feet per minute...if not a bit more 7-8psi?

---

Originally posted by DemonSVT:

---

Originally posted by giddyup306:

---

Most will tell you that 70mm is overkill for a n/a 3L but, if you keep the secondaries functional, I don't think it'd hurt especially up top.

---

Considering the engine can't use but half of it's flow potential and the added size hurts velocity and causes a much greater pressure drop right at the mouth of the intake manifold. Gee why would people say it hurts performance???

A widened SVT UIM mouth is 67mm. You would have to port the UIM back a few inches to even allow the 70MM TB to flow properly.

Then do the math.
70mm TB outlet has a 73-75mm inlet.
The stock rubber boot is ~50mm
The SVT boot is ~54mm
The BAT pipe is ~62mm
The "huge" CTA pipe is ~72mm (That's 3" piping folks!!!)

The stock MAF has a flow area around 53-54mm


So large, small, large, small is how the incoming are goes. You can imagine this is not good for conserving energy & velocity. That is lost efficiency plain and simple.

BIGGER IS NOT ALWAYS BETTER!!! Far too many people just do not get this novel concept of flow dynamics.

---

Some people don't believe in doing some extra work to make things do-able. Not just direct bolt-ons.

Originally posted by giddyup306:

---

Some people don't believe in doing some extra work to make things do-able. Not just direct bolt-ons.

---

That's your reply.

You just do not get it do you. "Do-able" has nothing to do with it. You can mount single 5" exhaust in the stock tunnel without any issues so that makes it "doable" as well.
You better go do it then because your ignorant mind is exactly like the people I was talking about. Originally I was not trying to lump you in but your idiotic response shows all that needs to be seen.

Go put on your 70mm TB and sewer pipe exhaust. I'm sure you will make eleventy billion horsepower.

Originally posted by Big Jim:

---

Originally posted by warmonger:

---

Originally posted by Big Jim:

---

In the roughest of terms, the 3.0 has 20% more displacement than a 2.5. Assuming that it can use 20% more air, the math would be simple. A throttle body with 20% more area would be between 65 and 66 mm.

With a hotter cam, head porting, larger exhaust, and no restriction from the MAF, a larger throttle body may be more optimal.

With stock exhaust, milder cams, etc, a smaller throttle body may be optimal.

Other factors may also change the results.

As I started to say, in the simplest of terms, a 65 mm throttle body would be a good place to start with a 3.0 with SVT cams. With Escape cams, the 60 mm would be a good palce to start.

You would need a set of cams hotter than the SVT cams to even thk about a 70 mm throttle body.

My $.02.

---

You mean like a 3L turbo capable of swallowing 500 cubic feet per minute...if not a bit more 7-8psi?

---

I'm not sure. Remember that with forced induction the boost is in front of the throttle body. It certainly does add another dimension to tuning though.

---

Originally posted by DemonSVT:

---

Originally posted by giddyup306:

---

Some people don't believe in doing some extra work to make things do-able. Not just direct bolt-ons.

---

That's your reply.

You just do not get it do you. "Do-able" has nothing to do with it. You can mount single 5" exhaust in the stock tunnel without any issues so that makes it "doable" as well.
You better go do it then because your ignorant mind is exactly like the people I was talking about. Originally I was not trying to lump you in but your idiotic response shows all that needs to be seen.

Go put on your 70mm TB and sewer pipe exhaust. I'm sure you will make eleventy billion horsepower.

---

You know, after reading the string of posts, I think Giddyup was agreeing with you, not contradicting you.

I think he was implying that you supported your opinion with a few facts and that other people weren't willing to do their homework like that. Of course I could be wrong.........

Originally posted by incubusjunkie614:

---

i'm glad i sparked a debate (what i was going for)

so from what im hearing the best setup for a N/A 3L is to use the svt Tb and maf? with svt uim/lim? or 3L uim/lim?

---