Gotts mod
You increase the diameter of the intake that goes into the fender wall, which in turn would allow more air to enter the engine. More air=more power. Yes its worth doing it. Costs about $15, and takes about 20 minutes. Tough to beat the price for essentially a home made air intake
Member
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
From: ontario
I am thinking of doing the gotts mod to my 2006 f150 (4.6 liter). I have read talk that its possible that it might run lean on an 04 and 05....whats the verdict on an 06 ...is it safe for me to do the mod?
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 397
Likes: 0
From: Ohio USA
Oh how some things don't change!
10 years ago we were all trying this on our 97+ trucks. I was one of them. For some trucks, I would agree this is a good mod, but for many it is not.
My truck is an automatic with the biggest stock tires that came on 97-03 trucks as well as being about the heaviest for a 4.6 to push. This meant the truck needed every bit of low end torque to move the truck at highway speeds to get the best economy and prevent it from downshifting. The "snorkle" is a velocity stack that increases the volume of air going into the engine at lower RPM's helping to create more low end torque. By removing it, one is losing low end torque and gaining top end.
I initially noticed better acceleration, but after driving the same route to work daily, I noticed the truck kept downshifting more often to go up the same grades with the cruise set when it didnt shift prior to the mod. MPG's went down too.
As hard is it might seem for some to believe, the engineers aren't stupid. Every design has compromises and Ford needed and wanted to make low end power, but they didn't need it for every truck. Rather than creating more than one intake system, they settled for one that did everything well.
For those with manual trannies, other mods boosting low end, or have a lighter set-up, losing the stack can make a positive improvement. For others, not so.
10 years ago we were all trying this on our 97+ trucks. I was one of them. For some trucks, I would agree this is a good mod, but for many it is not.
My truck is an automatic with the biggest stock tires that came on 97-03 trucks as well as being about the heaviest for a 4.6 to push. This meant the truck needed every bit of low end torque to move the truck at highway speeds to get the best economy and prevent it from downshifting. The "snorkle" is a velocity stack that increases the volume of air going into the engine at lower RPM's helping to create more low end torque. By removing it, one is losing low end torque and gaining top end.
I initially noticed better acceleration, but after driving the same route to work daily, I noticed the truck kept downshifting more often to go up the same grades with the cruise set when it didnt shift prior to the mod. MPG's went down too.
As hard is it might seem for some to believe, the engineers aren't stupid. Every design has compromises and Ford needed and wanted to make low end power, but they didn't need it for every truck. Rather than creating more than one intake system, they settled for one that did everything well.
For those with manual trannies, other mods boosting low end, or have a lighter set-up, losing the stack can make a positive improvement. For others, not so.
Member
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
From: ontario
Oh how some things don't change!
10 years ago we were all trying this on our 97+ trucks. I was one of them. For some trucks, I would agree this is a good mod, but for many it is not.
My truck is an automatic with the biggest stock tires that came on 97-03 trucks as well as being about the heaviest for a 4.6 to push. This meant the truck needed every bit of low end torque to move the truck at highway speeds to get the best economy and prevent it from downshifting. The "snorkle" is a velocity stack that increases the volume of air going into the engine at lower RPM's helping to create more low end torque. By removing it, one is losing low end torque and gaining top end.
I initially noticed better acceleration, but after driving the same route to work daily, I noticed the truck kept downshifting more often to go up the same grades with the cruise set when it didnt shift prior to the mod. MPG's went down too.
As hard is it might seem for some to believe, the engineers aren't stupid. Every design has compromises and Ford needed and wanted to make low end power, but they didn't need it for every truck. Rather than creating more than one intake system, they settled for one that did everything well.
For those with manual trannies, other mods boosting low end, or have a lighter set-up, losing the stack can make a positive improvement. For others, not so.
10 years ago we were all trying this on our 97+ trucks. I was one of them. For some trucks, I would agree this is a good mod, but for many it is not.
My truck is an automatic with the biggest stock tires that came on 97-03 trucks as well as being about the heaviest for a 4.6 to push. This meant the truck needed every bit of low end torque to move the truck at highway speeds to get the best economy and prevent it from downshifting. The "snorkle" is a velocity stack that increases the volume of air going into the engine at lower RPM's helping to create more low end torque. By removing it, one is losing low end torque and gaining top end.
I initially noticed better acceleration, but after driving the same route to work daily, I noticed the truck kept downshifting more often to go up the same grades with the cruise set when it didnt shift prior to the mod. MPG's went down too.
As hard is it might seem for some to believe, the engineers aren't stupid. Every design has compromises and Ford needed and wanted to make low end power, but they didn't need it for every truck. Rather than creating more than one intake system, they settled for one that did everything well.
For those with manual trannies, other mods boosting low end, or have a lighter set-up, losing the stack can make a positive improvement. For others, not so.
ok that makes sense. I have over sized tires and need as much low end torque as possible. I might do an exhaust system for sound, but I think i may just leave the intake the way it is for now. maybe down the road I might take the silencer out to make it sound different but in a way thats kind of pointless to. Thanks for the reply.
Technical Article Contributor
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,584
Likes: 0
From: Sask. Canada
Oh how some things don't change!
10 years ago we were all trying this on our 97+ trucks. I was one of them. For some trucks, I would agree this is a good mod, but for many it is not.
My truck is an automatic with the biggest stock tires that came on 97-03 trucks as well as being about the heaviest for a 4.6 to push. This meant the truck needed every bit of low end torque to move the truck at highway speeds to get the best economy and prevent it from downshifting. The "snorkle" is a velocity stack that increases the volume of air going into the engine at lower RPM's helping to create more low end torque. By removing it, one is losing low end torque and gaining top end.
I initially noticed better acceleration, but after driving the same route to work daily, I noticed the truck kept downshifting more often to go up the same grades with the cruise set when it didnt shift prior to the mod. MPG's went down too.
As hard is it might seem for some to believe, the engineers aren't stupid. Every design has compromises and Ford needed and wanted to make low end power, but they didn't need it for every truck. Rather than creating more than one intake system, they settled for one that did everything well.
For those with manual trannies, other mods boosting low end, or have a lighter set-up, losing the stack can make a positive improvement. For others, not so.
10 years ago we were all trying this on our 97+ trucks. I was one of them. For some trucks, I would agree this is a good mod, but for many it is not.
My truck is an automatic with the biggest stock tires that came on 97-03 trucks as well as being about the heaviest for a 4.6 to push. This meant the truck needed every bit of low end torque to move the truck at highway speeds to get the best economy and prevent it from downshifting. The "snorkle" is a velocity stack that increases the volume of air going into the engine at lower RPM's helping to create more low end torque. By removing it, one is losing low end torque and gaining top end.
I initially noticed better acceleration, but after driving the same route to work daily, I noticed the truck kept downshifting more often to go up the same grades with the cruise set when it didnt shift prior to the mod. MPG's went down too.
As hard is it might seem for some to believe, the engineers aren't stupid. Every design has compromises and Ford needed and wanted to make low end power, but they didn't need it for every truck. Rather than creating more than one intake system, they settled for one that did everything well.
For those with manual trannies, other mods boosting low end, or have a lighter set-up, losing the stack can make a positive improvement. For others, not so.
Trending Topics
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 397
Likes: 0
From: Ohio USA
"Your truck runs at a constant A/F ratio of ~14.7 or close to it at part throttle."
What does this have to do with what we are talking about? The CPU will always try to create an optimized fuel ratio. As long as air flow over sensors has not been disturbed by a mod, or volume of air has not exceeded the capacity of the fuel system, the engine will always see this ratio.
What does this have to do with what we are talking about? The CPU will always try to create an optimized fuel ratio. As long as air flow over sensors has not been disturbed by a mod, or volume of air has not exceeded the capacity of the fuel system, the engine will always see this ratio.
Member
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
From: ontario
lol no I was not saying I would want to do this mod for low end torque. I was saying maybe I shouldn't because I would loose some low end torque.....
and when it comes to the air to fuel ratio. I was concerned that maybe by opening the fender hole up to 3 inches could let more air past the mass air flow senser then it can register...making you run lean.
and when it comes to the air to fuel ratio. I was concerned that maybe by opening the fender hole up to 3 inches could let more air past the mass air flow senser then it can register...making you run lean.
Last edited by countryman777; Dec 6, 2010 at 07:42 AM.
Member
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
From: Vacaville, CA
Take it forwhat its worth, this is my .02
I am a new member here who has caught the mod bug. I did this and immediately noticed an improvement in throttle response. the truck now cruises about 150-200 rpms lower than it did prior. I havent burned through enough gas to see the mpg improvement but looking at it right now it seems i may have improved about .5 mpg....
Like I said, that is just my experience with it, YMMV.
Justin
I am a new member here who has caught the mod bug. I did this and immediately noticed an improvement in throttle response. the truck now cruises about 150-200 rpms lower than it did prior. I havent burned through enough gas to see the mpg improvement but looking at it right now it seems i may have improved about .5 mpg....
Like I said, that is just my experience with it, YMMV.
Justin
Technical Article Contributor
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,584
Likes: 0
From: Sask. Canada
"Your truck runs at a constant A/F ratio of ~14.7 or close to it at part throttle."
What does this have to do with what we are talking about? The CPU will always try to create an optimized fuel ratio. As long as air flow over sensors has not been disturbed by a mod, or volume of air has not exceeded the capacity of the fuel system, the engine will always see this ratio.
What does this have to do with what we are talking about? The CPU will always try to create an optimized fuel ratio. As long as air flow over sensors has not been disturbed by a mod, or volume of air has not exceeded the capacity of the fuel system, the engine will always see this ratio.
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 13,678
Likes: 82
From: missing Texas...
your truck is equipped with a 2 valve motor, so as long as you reset your ecm you'l be fine
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Something to think about.... if the cpu is always adjusting the amount of fuel to achieve the 14.7 a/f ratio at all times and this is based on the amount of air that the mass air meter reads. Then as you have more air... wouldn't the computer compensate this with more fuel to achieve the same a/f ratio?
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 3,031
Likes: 45
From: The Shenandoah Valley
white elephant, I understand increased velocity in a ventui which the stock intake tube forms, but that velocity is lost when the pipe then grows again and then that air has to pass through a filter after making it's way past all those bumpy walls of that plastic intake.
The intake tube's shape is simply to cut noise.
The intake tube's shape is simply to cut noise.
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 13,678
Likes: 82
From: missing Texas...
lol no I was not saying I would want to do this mod for low end torque. I was saying maybe I shouldn't because I would loose some low end torque.....
and when it comes to the air to fuel ratio. I was concerned that maybe by opening the fender hole up to 3 inches could let more air past the mass air flow senser then it can register...making you run lean.
and when it comes to the air to fuel ratio. I was concerned that maybe by opening the fender hole up to 3 inches could let more air past the mass air flow senser then it can register...making you run lean.