Throttle body spacer and Tornado for 4.9

The Big Block of inline Ford sixes

Moderator: Mod Squad

Throttle body spacer and Tornado for 4.9

Postby longhaul » Sat May 03, 2008 3:02 am

I have an 89 Econo 150 4.9 with FI and an auto od. I was thinking of putting a throttle body spacer on it to get better mpg but I can't find any for the E150 6 but they have them for the F150 6 is there any difference between these engines. Also the "Tornado" is said to increase mpg and add torque anyone tried these? Thanks.........
longhaul
 

Postby journeyman » Sat May 03, 2008 3:38 am

I am also interested in this...

Cost of it? Promised gains?

Where are the gains... Top end? bottom end (low rpm)?
journeyman
 

Re: Throttle body spacer and Tornado for 4.9

Postby shmoozo » Sat May 03, 2008 10:07 am

longhaul wrote:I have an 89 Econo 150 4.9 with FI and an auto od. I was thinking of putting a throttle body spacer on it to get better mpg but I can't find any for the E150 6 but they have them for the F150 6 is there any difference between these engines. Also the "Tornado" is said to increase mpg and add torque anyone tried these? Thanks.........


The Tornado? Junk. They don't do a damned thing.

I doubt a throttle body spacer will make any measurable difference, either.

If you want to get better fuel economy, follow the normal tips given for that by responsible sources that aren't trying to sell you snake-oil and gimmicks. Here are a few links:

How to Improve Your Fuel Economy: 23 Top Tips for Better Gas Mileage

How to Improve Your Fuel Economy

Tips To Live By For Better Fuel Economy
"Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin slitting throats."
-Henry Louis Mencken
User avatar
shmoozo
Registered User
 
Posts: 767
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2004 3:56 pm
Location: Rivervale, Central Antonica

Postby longhaul » Sat May 03, 2008 12:43 pm

OK thanks for the info can't beat a little common since. I'll buy good beer save my hard earned bucks.
longhaul
 

Postby journeyman » Sat May 03, 2008 12:56 pm

longhaul wrote:... I'll buy good beer save my hard earned bucks.


Hard to argue with that logic.
journeyman
 

Postby BIGREDRASA » Sat May 03, 2008 3:30 pm

The Tornado claims up to 25% fuel mileage improvement. Right. Wanna buy a bridge? Cheap? It's a historical landmark connecting Brooklyn and Manhattan. Sell it to you very cheap. :wink:
Image
TonyS, Ret USAF Mustang. RIP Charlie, 1966 Mustang Convertible, soon to be desecrated with a Bent 8. (I suspect.)
"Lead, follow, or get out of the way." http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20081004032319AAWUT56
User avatar
BIGREDRASA
Registered User
 
Posts: 2089
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 11:14 pm
Location: Plattsmouth, Nebraska "The Good Life"

Postby Thad » Sat May 03, 2008 7:47 pm

No, No, No, you do not want the Tornado, you want the Hurricane.

Bigger and has a much larger volume of Hot Air.

Seriously if this technology was good why doesn't any of the OEM uses it.
User avatar
Thad
FSP Moderator
 
Posts: 4329
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 12:56 am
Location: Vinton, La / Orange,Tex --- Hurricane Alley

Postby AbandonedBronco » Mon May 05, 2008 10:03 am

They keep meaning to, but they realize they forgot to do it again after the vehicle is already designed. Pretty fortunate for the aftermarket guys. :roll:
1981 Ford Bronco 300. 3.00 final drive, 4 speed OD manual. 4bbl Holley 390 w/Offenhauser DP Intake. EFI manifolds and 2.5" exhaust.

Sixes owned:
1957 Chevrolet 150 Sedan 235ci I6
1987 Toyota Supra Turbo 183ci I6 (3.0L)
1981 Ford Bronco 300ci I6
1984 Ford Bronco 300ci I6

Never owned a V!
User avatar
AbandonedBronco
Registered User
 
Posts: 573
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 3:29 pm
Location: Boise, ID

Postby Thad » Mon May 05, 2008 11:02 am

Right and I'm in line to be the next pope.

Look for the white smoke.

Coming from a Tornado.
:roll:
User avatar
Thad
FSP Moderator
 
Posts: 4329
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 12:56 am
Location: Vinton, La / Orange,Tex --- Hurricane Alley

Postby Hooptie » Mon May 05, 2008 5:21 pm

Come on now, TECHNICALLY the throttle ody spacer is sound science.

It lengthens the intake plenum
Hooptie
 

Re: Throttle body spacer and Tornado for 4.9

Postby LaGrasta » Mon May 05, 2008 6:51 pm

longhaul wrote:Also the "Tornado" is said to increase mpg and add torque anyone tried these? Thanks.........



Pure crapola!
1963 1/2 Falcon 170/C4/8" (alt, a/c, Petronix/42v coil/8mm wires, 16" electric fan, electric fuel pump, Holley 1940, K&N Harley air filter, power dual m/c, 11" disc, 3" drop, Shelby drop, white tuck/roll, Moon steering wheel, '59 Caddy tail lights, fishtail exhaust tip, shaved trim, handles, cowl, fuel, dash, 4" radius trunk/door corners, power windows, 600w iPod system)
User avatar
LaGrasta
VIP Member
 
Posts: 3738
Joined: Fri Jan 03, 2003 4:08 pm
Location: Mission Viejo, CA

Postby Harte3 » Mon May 05, 2008 7:46 pm

The throttle body spacer may be sound science IF it actually improves performance/economy on a specific, individual application...much like a carb spacer.
'83 F150 300, 0.030 over, Offy DP, Holley 4160/1848-1 465 cfm, Comp Cam 260H. P/P head, EFI exhaust manifolds, Walker Y Pipe, Super Cat, Turbo muffler, Recurved DSII, Mallory HyFire 6a, ACCEL Super Stock Coil, Taylor 8mm Wires, EFI plugs.
User avatar
Harte3
VIP Member
 
Posts: 2440
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:17 pm
Location: Spokane, WA

Postby Thad » Tue May 06, 2008 2:45 am

The science is good. BUT---
What % plenum volume or ram length increase is achieved?
Is it enough to make a difference on flow dynamics alone ?
Under a carb one of the major benefit is not th plenum volume increase per se but the moving of the carb up from the floor of the plenum creating more room for the a/f mixture to make the almost 90 degree turn from carb to manifold runner. Better flow and less mixture separation. Behind modern EFI TBs the flow is without the 90 degree turn and the airflow is dry.
User avatar
Thad
FSP Moderator
 
Posts: 4329
Joined: Fri Nov 08, 2002 12:56 am
Location: Vinton, La / Orange,Tex --- Hurricane Alley

Postby Hooptie » Tue May 06, 2008 8:59 am

I never said they worked, I said the science was at least sound.

The Tornado is total and utter crap.
Hooptie
 

Postby THE FRENCHTOWN FLYER » Tue May 06, 2008 12:23 pm

Hooptie wrote:I never said they worked, I said the science was at least sound.



So was the original science used by Ford to optimize the runner length UNsound?
FORD 300 INLINE SIX - THE BEST KEPT SECRET IN DRAG RACING
User avatar
THE FRENCHTOWN FLYER
VIP Member
 
Posts: 4616
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 10:25 pm
Location: FRENCHTOWN

Postby Harte3 » Tue May 06, 2008 1:52 pm

The definitive results of difference in plenum volume, runner length, etc., might only be achieved with extensive dyno testing...but I suspect the cost v results would not be productive of any real benefit.
'83 F150 300, 0.030 over, Offy DP, Holley 4160/1848-1 465 cfm, Comp Cam 260H. P/P head, EFI exhaust manifolds, Walker Y Pipe, Super Cat, Turbo muffler, Recurved DSII, Mallory HyFire 6a, ACCEL Super Stock Coil, Taylor 8mm Wires, EFI plugs.
User avatar
Harte3
VIP Member
 
Posts: 2440
Joined: Sat Oct 21, 2006 9:17 pm
Location: Spokane, WA

Postby Hooptie » Tue May 06, 2008 11:34 pm

THE FRENCHTOWN FLYER wrote:
Hooptie wrote:I never said they worked, I said the science was at least sound.



So was the original science used by Ford to optimize the runner length UNsound?


aaaaaahh, no? But any increase in low end torque is still an increase. Will it have adverse effects on higher rpm power? Likely. But this motor has no business at high rpms.

Saying the OEMs did everything they could in the name of efficiency is a little nuts, the factory safe tune it set on the rich side for starters.
Hooptie
 

Postby THE FRENCHTOWN FLYER » Wed May 07, 2008 9:53 pm

I don't think adding a short section of TB spacer to the secondary tuning length will make a noticeable improvement in torque at low RPM.

The primary runner length is - what? - maybe 25" from valve - to - plenum. And the secondary tuning length is maybe another 25" from air box inlet to TB. I don't know the Tornado length - 1 1/2" or so at max? In the grand scheme of things adding 1.5" to that system upstream of the plenum will not move the lower end up me thinks.

Maybe a young automotive engineer reading this can crunch the numbers for us in MANDY or similar program.
FORD 300 INLINE SIX - THE BEST KEPT SECRET IN DRAG RACING
User avatar
THE FRENCHTOWN FLYER
VIP Member
 
Posts: 4616
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2002 10:25 pm
Location: FRENCHTOWN

Postby rhetor » Wed May 07, 2008 10:00 pm

You know what i find interesting, once we start talking about runner length?

I believe its the GM L31 motor, went into the late 90's trucks, 5.7L.

It had a really goofy lower intake manifold with a plastic upper. The runners were pretty much just the length of the head ports, maybe lengthened a few inches by the lower manifold. Then it had these shapes in the plastic and lower intake manifold. They looked like where the air would be flowing, a sort of pseudo runner.

That had nothing to do with the tornado. I think the tornado is stupid. Intake spacers make sense in certain applications, i don't think a TB spacer would do much considering the set up on the 300.
300- mild head porting - 204/214 cam - 1.73 rollers - 2.5" exhaust DEAD AND GONE!

New truck- 71 F-100 302/AOD. Missing my 300 dearly. 302 belongs in a mustang, lifters tick, headers sound annoying, vibrates, is ugly, etc.
User avatar
rhetor
Registered User
 
Posts: 797
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2003 9:05 pm

Postby 56mulberry » Thu May 08, 2008 10:15 am

Tornadoes and similar devices introduce an obstruction into the intake passage that DOES NOT increase the velocity and decreases the volume available. You do not want an obstruction in your intake. We go to the trouble to portmatch and "gasket-match" to get SMALL inconsistencies OUT of intake systems--no way adding a huge obstacle will increase intake volume or velocity. WHEn we were building Dodge Neons to race we would put Auto tranny TB's on in place of Manual TB's because they were a couple mm larger to gain fractions of HP.

NO TORNADOES ALLOWED !
56mulberry
Registered User
 
Posts: 165
Joined: Thu Jan 03, 2008 11:59 am


Return to 240-300 "Big Block" Six Performance

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 6 guests