2004 - 2008 F-150
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: Real Truck

Throttle body gasket/restrictor?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old May 29, 2012 | 12:29 AM
  #1  
Ghost.F150's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Member
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Throttle body gasket/restrictor?

I was hoping someone could tell me the purpose of the very obstructive appearing throttle body gasket on my 2007 4.6 motor.

I had the throttle body off for cleaning the other day and it appears the gasket itself is very large and has a mesh system built into it that situates itself directly in the air intake tract.

What is the purpose of this screen design?
Has anyone ever tried trimming the screen portion off while keeping the gasket portion that seals the tb to truth upper plenum?

I'm sure it has a purpose but I've already addressed one bottleneck with the gotts mod, could this be another?
 
Reply
Old May 29, 2012 | 08:22 AM
  #2  
glc's Avatar
glc
Senior Member
15 Year Member
Veteran: Navy
Veteran: Reserves
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 43,538
Likes: 817
From: Joplin MO
The stock intake has NO bottleneck - it can flow more air than the engine can handle.
 
Reply
Old May 29, 2012 | 08:48 AM
  #3  
Longshot270's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 689
Likes: 0
From: San Marcos, TX
Can you post a pick? I removed my throttle body a while back and do not remember that.

Originally Posted by glc
The stock intake has NO bottleneck - it can flow more air than the engine can handle.
x2
 
Reply
Old May 29, 2012 | 10:18 AM
  #4  
Ghost.F150's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Member
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Yes, I will post a pic later to show exactly what I'm referring to.
 
Reply
Old May 29, 2012 | 10:20 AM
  #5  
Ghost.F150's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Member
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by glc
The stock intake has NO bottleneck - it can flow more air than the engine can handle.
This statement baffles me.
How is it the stock intake has no bottleneck when the factory snorkel is a smaller diameter than that of the throttle body itself.
 
Reply
Old May 29, 2012 | 11:17 AM
  #6  
MGDfan's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 10,390
Likes: 10
Originally Posted by Ghost.F150
This statement baffles me.
How is it the stock intake has no bottleneck when the factory snorkel is a smaller diameter than that of the throttle body itself.
Two reasons:


1) Bernoulli's Principle ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernoulli's_principle )

2) The engine requires LESS cfm @ max rpm than the Stock intake (including the snorkel section) can supply ( https://www.f150online.com/forums/4739726-post9.html ) ...


So - it *may* appear to be a bottleneck IF cfm demands were exceeded, but they're not, so the term is irrelevant.... especially
on a 4.6L
 

Last edited by MGDfan; May 29, 2012 at 11:23 AM.
Reply
Old May 29, 2012 | 12:08 PM
  #7  
SoonerTruck's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 2,230
Likes: 21
From: Broken Arrow, OK
Originally Posted by Ghost.F150
This statement baffles me.
How is it the stock intake has no bottleneck when the factory snorkel is a smaller diameter than that of the throttle body itself.
It's kind of like putting a Holley 850 carb on a Ford 302. Due to volumetric efficiency, there's no way to make use of anything over 600cfm in stock form (i.e. no intake work/head work/forced induction/etc). The stock intake can handle the intake needs of the factory engine. Aftermarket intakes due not generally produce any meaningful amount of power without additional mods to take advantage of it, and can cause a lean condition.
 
Reply
Old May 29, 2012 | 02:17 PM
  #8  
Ghost.F150's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Member
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Originally Posted by MGDfan
Two reasons:


1) Bernoulli's Principle ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernoulli's_principle )

2) The engine requires LESS cfm @ max rpm than the Stock intake (including the snorkel section) can supply ( https://www.f150online.com/forums/4739726-post9.html ) ...


So - it *may* appear to be a bottleneck IF cfm demands were exceeded, but they're not, so the term is irrelevant.... especially
on a 4.6L
Thank you for the intelligent response and the links, I am learning here and alot of that comes from responses like yours.
I was somewhat surprised to see our VE for a 3 valve motor rated at 85 percent though.
I have done forced induction calculations in the past for dual cam 16 valve four cylinders and used similar numbers.
 
Reply
Old May 29, 2012 | 08:53 PM
  #9  
jgger's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,581
Likes: 6
From: Corona, Crazyfornia
Thank you for the intelligent response and the links, I am learning here and alot of that comes from responses like yours.
Hey MGDfan, you might want to put that one in your sig, you don't get that very often!JK
 
Reply




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:23 PM.