Another Gotts Mod [Review]
#1
Another Gotts Mod [Review]
After looking through all of the forums on which CAI I should get, I stumbled across the Gotts Mod. For the cost, I decided it couldn't hurt to give it a try. I followed this how-to
https://www.f150online.com/forums/ch...l?ref=esp-link
Here is what I have noticed so far:
1. My throttle response is slightly faster, I still have that temporary, ugh, then it gets up and goes.
2. Higher RPM feel like they are easier for the truck to maintain. Before it really felt like the truck struggled to maintain speed if the RPM were required to be above ~2000. Now, even 4000 RPMs feel effortless.
3. I did the mod over at my parent's house (my dad has all those, "odd" tools) and while driving there (original intake still on) at 70 MPH I was doing roughly 2200 RPM, and the truck always seems to fight to maintain speed. After the mod, the truck sat at ~1800-1900 RPM at 70 MPH. I found this to be the biggest surprise because it felt effortless to the truck to stay there. Before this mod, the truck would always fight at that speed.
So, overall, I would highly recommend this mod. There isn't anything to lose because of how cheap it is. The longest part for me (like everyone else) was sanding/grinding down the replacement pipe.
As a side note, I'm still using the stock filter and after a few miles (enough to get all the little plastic bits that may find their way in) I will replace it with a new one (that is already on order). Instead of a new stock filter I decided to go with a K&N. I've had a great experience with them in the past, just need to keep the MAF clean!
https://www.f150online.com/forums/ch...l?ref=esp-link
Here is what I have noticed so far:
1. My throttle response is slightly faster, I still have that temporary, ugh, then it gets up and goes.
2. Higher RPM feel like they are easier for the truck to maintain. Before it really felt like the truck struggled to maintain speed if the RPM were required to be above ~2000. Now, even 4000 RPMs feel effortless.
3. I did the mod over at my parent's house (my dad has all those, "odd" tools) and while driving there (original intake still on) at 70 MPH I was doing roughly 2200 RPM, and the truck always seems to fight to maintain speed. After the mod, the truck sat at ~1800-1900 RPM at 70 MPH. I found this to be the biggest surprise because it felt effortless to the truck to stay there. Before this mod, the truck would always fight at that speed.
So, overall, I would highly recommend this mod. There isn't anything to lose because of how cheap it is. The longest part for me (like everyone else) was sanding/grinding down the replacement pipe.
As a side note, I'm still using the stock filter and after a few miles (enough to get all the little plastic bits that may find their way in) I will replace it with a new one (that is already on order). Instead of a new stock filter I decided to go with a K&N. I've had a great experience with them in the past, just need to keep the MAF clean!
#3
The gott's mod ain't gonna reduce RPM (2200 down to 18-1900) related to speed (70) as it still takes same HP to move the vehicle and the transmission and TC don't know about a gott's mod.
Now, if you live in Kansas and your parents live in Denver, then you are climbing and maybe against a wind and using more throttle going and coming home, you are coasting and the "now" tail wind is pushing.
Now, if you live in Kansas and your parents live in Denver, then you are climbing and maybe against a wind and using more throttle going and coming home, you are coasting and the "now" tail wind is pushing.
#4
#5
The question I've had about this since it's been out is, why didn't the engineers design the intake like this in the first place? There is always a balancing act between two things when a truck is built:
1. Cost
2. Performance
Changing the diameter of that short piece of tube isn't going meaningfully impact cost, I would imagine so why not? Are we smarter than they? Not likely.
There's a phenomenon called the Venturi effect that no one seems to think about when they remove that smaller neck in the intake.
1. Cost
2. Performance
Changing the diameter of that short piece of tube isn't going meaningfully impact cost, I would imagine so why not? Are we smarter than they? Not likely.
There's a phenomenon called the Venturi effect that no one seems to think about when they remove that smaller neck in the intake.
#6
The question I've had about this since it's been out is, why didn't the engineers design the intake like this in the first place? There is always a balancing act between two things when a truck is built:
1. Cost
2. Performance
Changing the diameter of that short piece of tube isn't going meaningfully impact cost, I would imagine so why not? Are we smarter than they? Not likely.
There's a phenomenon called the Venturi effect that no one seems to think about when they remove that smaller neck in the intake.
1. Cost
2. Performance
Changing the diameter of that short piece of tube isn't going meaningfully impact cost, I would imagine so why not? Are we smarter than they? Not likely.
There's a phenomenon called the Venturi effect that no one seems to think about when they remove that smaller neck in the intake.
#7
The Venturi effect would happen in the bottle neck of the stock tube but in reality there is no need. The Venturi is used in carburetors to speed the incoming air, causing a low pressure. The low pressure is used to suck fuel out of the bowl of the carb into the intake tract.
My guess for the downsized tube would be noise reduction of the intake. There is some crazy people out there that like a quite truck
My guess for the downsized tube would be noise reduction of the intake. There is some crazy people out there that like a quite truck
Trending Topics
#8
The Venturi effect would happen in the bottle neck of the stock tube but in reality there is no need. The Venturi is used in carburetors to speed the incoming air, causing a low pressure. The low pressure is used to suck fuel out of the bowl of the carb into the intake tract.
My guess for the downsized tube would be noise reduction of the intake. There is some crazy people out there that like a quite truck
My guess for the downsized tube would be noise reduction of the intake. There is some crazy people out there that like a quite truck
__________________
Jim
Jim
#9
The Venturi effect would happen in the bottle neck of the stock tube but in reality there is no need. The Venturi is used in carburetors to speed the incoming air, causing a low pressure. The low pressure is used to suck fuel out of the bowl of the carb into the intake tract.
My guess for the downsized tube would be noise reduction of the intake. There is some crazy people out there that like a quite truck
My guess for the downsized tube would be noise reduction of the intake. There is some crazy people out there that like a quite truck
#10
https://www.f150online.com/forums/20...ts-2009-a.html
#12
A gearing change or just the difference between TC Lock and unlock will result in the drop .... or increase. Take note next time you''re driving to your Dad's tools.
Glad it helped too .... we can all use help saving RPMs and $$$. The "Gott's Mod" maybe one of the few mods that pays off in the long run thanks to it's near zero costs .... you don't loose if you maintain, any savings is a plus.
#13
I was thinking the same thing. I did the GOT's mod and noticed NO increase in performance. I actually think it got worse? I removed it and went back to stock.
#14
There are real dyno results out there. Good for about 7-8 hp:
https://www.f150online.com/forums/20...ts-2009-a.html
https://www.f150online.com/forums/20...ts-2009-a.html
#15
I did notice a noise increase (my wife even commented on it). It isn't enough that the radio doesn't drown it out at very minimal volume (on a volume scale of 0-100 I couldn't hear the intake at ~24, which isn't very loud, if you were to talk at that volume, you would drown the radio out).
Update on the RPM comment made earlier: I did a bunch of mixed freeway/city driving yesterday and got an MPG average that I haven't ever seen in this truck. Before my average was < 14.5 MPG. It is now at 18.2...I'm going to leave the MPG average on there for a few tanks and see what it ends up being in ~2 months. So far, this mod is going to save me way more than it cost.
Update on the RPM comment made earlier: I did a bunch of mixed freeway/city driving yesterday and got an MPG average that I haven't ever seen in this truck. Before my average was < 14.5 MPG. It is now at 18.2...I'm going to leave the MPG average on there for a few tanks and see what it ends up being in ~2 months. So far, this mod is going to save me way more than it cost.