Ford Forums banner

1 - 18 of 18 Posts

·
T5 Expert Operator
Joined
·
6,540 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Guys,

Just wondering, is there an after market larger throttle body for the EF-EL inline 6's that can be fitted, also will it throw the computer out???

I'm guess there would be one, since the windsors have 65mm and 70mm throttle bodies.
 

·
T5 Expert Operator
Joined
·
6,540 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
IIV8II said:
Has a rice racer told you a bigger throttle is bolt-on power?!
Nah, i was just wondering thats all, from discussions with various people there seems to be no point of a bigger throttle body unless the engine and head have been worked. I am alittle embarrassed askin the question actually. A bit of a silly question :eek: :eek: :eek: :(
 

·
The SparkleHunter™
Joined
·
10,144 Posts
EF_Falcon_GuY said:
I am alittle embarrassed askin the question actually. A bit of a silly question :eek: :eek: :eek: :(
Mate no question is silly if you don't know the answer to it. That's why this section was created. I wouldn't know shyte from clay when it comes to mechanical stuff which is why I read more than post in this area. All questions are good questions in here.. just trust me on that!! :D
 

·
Australian ED XR6 Member
Joined
·
569 Posts
There's no such thing as a stupid question, only stupid people (see south park for explanation)
Doesn't hurt to ask a question, especially as there are others that post who have 6's that most certainly could use the larger throttle body.
Not everyone chooses to beef up a V8 remember.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
253 Posts
The EEC set-up on the 6 is different to the 8. The 8 has mass air sensored which is adaptable to increased air flow. The 6 is MAP sensored and is calibrated to a fixed air flow. Crow Cams do have a camshaft that fitted will not upset the EEC. The EEC is calibrated to run a bit more richer than what is ideal to compensate for petrol quality and for different states of tune different engines can be in their lifetime. I think this Crow cam takes advantage of this factor. Chip tuners know this also.
I think if you change the throttle body to a larger size you might gain a little bit of top end but you will lose out down low. You would be better off giving air a straighter, smoother path to the throttle body.
 

·
T5 Expert Operator
Joined
·
6,540 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Yeah thanks guys, it's really cool that we have a panel of experts here to point everyone in the right facts not the fibs and fairy tales "hello fellow mountain holden friends" just referring to a few of my mates i know:p .
 

·
Australian Ford Member
Joined
·
252 Posts
airflow

Sneak a peek at KB's workshop in Street Machine this month - there's a pic of a mandrel-bent pipe between the aircleaner an TB which is worth a few kW. Looks like a stock EL piece (not an EF two-runner pipe, if U know wot I mean..) A bigger snorkel (I think an EL GT one goes on - there's been a bit of dicussion here in recent weeks) will stop the airbox sides sucking in at wide-open throttle. The outlet of the aircleaner (top half of the box) I think is a bit smaller than ideal, too - smaller than the TB diameter. There's a few hints anyway. ;)
 

·
T5 Expert Operator
Joined
·
6,540 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Re: airflow

IIV8II said:
Sneak a peek at KB's workshop in Street Machine this month - there's a pic of a mandrel-bent pipe between the aircleaner an TB which is worth a few kW. Looks like a stock EL piece (not an EF two-runner pipe, if U know wot I mean..) A bigger snorkel (I think an EL GT one goes on - there's been a bit of dicussion here in recent weeks) will stop the airbox sides sucking in at wide-open throttle. The outlet of the aircleaner (top half of the box) I think is a bit smaller than ideal, too - smaller than the TB diameter. There's a few hints anyway. ;)
yeah i got the air scoop of the GT fitted, i must admit i did notice an increase in mid-range pickup nothin else though. I'll have a sticky beek at the latest Street Machine to see that setup. IMO the two runner setup on the EF is better than the EL, as when you measure the pipe from the airbox the EF has a 7cm bigger daimeter piping. Plus for the "ricer appeal" the Twin setup looks better, if it looks better it will go better. :p :p :p :p :p
 

·
Australian Falcon Member
Joined
·
865 Posts
I've run both the EF and EL intake ducts on my machine (with EF inlet manifold of course) and I reckon that the EF setup runs noticeably better - yep, probably largely cause of that restricted airbox end on the EL duct.

The larger TB thing is something I've pondered a lot - at one time when I had a certain brand of plug in module fitted, my machine went very well indeed at the top end but tended to run massively rich at the low end and acceleration enrichment was waaay overdone. In that situation I figured that a larger TB that resulted in more air for a given throttle position would help make it leaner, but by the same token the ECU is also looking at MAP - which would see the extra airflow. At that point I start going ????? - Which would cause a result first? the greater airflow for given TPS resulting in leaning at bottom, or would the MAP reading higher for given TPS signal make it rich (in which case it would be a good thing for most modified engines)??? AAaaaaarrrrggghhh!
 

·
Australian Falcon Member
Joined
·
865 Posts
No. On the I6 the ECU calculates air intake volume by the "Speed Density" method - it doesn't sense actual Mass Air Flow but calculates what "should" be happening according to engine rpm, manifold pressure and throttle position (with fine tuning from air temp and engine temp). So if you fit a larger TB then the butterfly will deflect less for a given airflow, giving a smaller TPS reading (which should make it lean) - but the MAP will read higher for that given TPS position as well (which would make it richer) - so which one will have the "upper hand"?

Maybe they would both even out against each other so we'd just be left with better WOT airflow?

Ideally, the TPS would have a slight edge so we could tweak up the fuel regulator, which would return mixture to suitable level thru the low and midrange but give the extra fuel needed for the improved WOT airflow - which should benefit any engine with improved exhaust, intake and cam.
 

·
Australian ED XR6 Member
Joined
·
569 Posts
With the EEC4 it has a O2 sensor in the exhaust manifold (used for pollution - or so I believe) If it senses too much O2 in the exhaust it will "richen" the mix a little,too little O2, will lean it off a tad(ie it will improve for the optimum fuel/air mix.)
From what I understand, yes the EEC4 is MAP controlled, but it can be "adapted" to accomodate more performance (a little bit anyway)from bigger TB, Cams etc.
 

·
Australian Falcon Member
Joined
·
865 Posts
Bottom line is: there's lots of info/experience around regarding larger TB's on MAF systems (ie. V8's) but does anyone know for sure what happens on Speed Density systems with larger TB's?
 

·
Australian BA XR6 Falcon
Joined
·
1,249 Posts
Wulos said:
With the EEC4 it has a O2 sensor in the exhaust manifold (used for pollution - or so I believe) If it senses too much O2 in the exhaust it will "richen" the mix a little,too little O2, will lean it off a tad(ie it will improve for the optimum fuel/air mix.)
From what I understand, yes the EEC4 is MAP controlled, but it can be "adapted" to accomodate more performance (a little bit anyway)from bigger TB, Cams etc.
Thats the EGO sensor, and its used in closed loop mode. when the EEC enters closed loop, it does as you say and the computer aims for the optimum air/fuel mix of 14.63:1 for fuel economy and emissions. the EEC does have a few other modes though.

The EECIV on the Falcon 6 is MAP controlled which uses various inputs (mentioned in another post here) to calculate air flow and then uses a lookup table to find the optimum figure to achieve to optimum a/f mix. The calculations and/or tables have a built in 'wear factor' which can be exploited my modified induction to a small degree.

The MAP setups downfall is it doesn't know the real airflow, and this is were a MAF based EECIV is superior as it knows the real airflow.

BTW - if i'm not mistaken, the V8Supercars use MAP systems, I can see the reasons why, but does anyone know for sure?

Kieron
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
253 Posts
Yeah, the V8Supercars use MAP for a number of reasons. There is a lot more programming in MAF and that is of all the variables. To run MAF the entire air intake has to be directed through an Mass air sensor and that lessens air flow and those V8's need all the air they can get. You can make more power from MAP than MAF because you are programming for one tune only. The downfalls of MAP is that if you change anything on the engine, ie, ram tubes, cam , injector size, you need to reprogramme. MAF lets you do all these things without the same hassle.
Sometimes when the V8's run in good 'air' they cannot always take advantage of it due that they cannot put the engine on a dyno to tune it to the 'air' at the track.
 

·
Australian BA XR6 Falcon
Joined
·
1,249 Posts
Mr GTHO said:
Yeah, the V8Supercars use MAP for a number of reasons. There is a lot more programming in MAF and that is of all the variables. To run MAF the entire air intake has to be directed through an Mass air sensor and that lessens air flow and those V8's need all the air they can get. You can make more power from MAP than MAF because you are programming for one tune only. The downfalls of MAP is that if you change anything on the engine, ie, ram tubes, cam , injector size, you need to reprogramme. MAF lets you do all these things without the same hassle.
Sometimes when the V8's run in good 'air' they cannot always take advantage of it due that they cannot put the engine on a dyno to tune it to the 'air' at the track.
Just to add to that, they run 8 throttle bodies which makes it much harder to run MAF.
I believe Mass Air Sensors are available that have a pitot tube to measure airflow rather than interfering with the main airflow to the engine too.

Kieron
 
1 - 18 of 18 Posts
Top