• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech

65mm or 70mm TB?

  • Thread starter Thread starter fox racer
  • Start date Start date Nov 6, 2005
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2

CRASH7772

Member
Apr 27, 2003
401
1
16
NH
Nov 23, 2005
#21
  • Nov 23, 2005
  • #21
5spd GT said:
crash7772 - There are a lot more factors for the torque at 2000rpm than just the throttle body. Stroke/cam/heads/intake/maf/exhaust/etc. Not a valid point
Click to expand...

I understand that but the TB isn't going to drop the TQ like larger/smaller runners in the intake/heads or a aggressive cam.
 

04sleeper

Founding Member
Jun 22, 2002
2,674
14
89
Dallas, TX
Nov 23, 2005
#22
  • Nov 23, 2005
  • #22
A friend of mine took his car to Steeda for a dyno comparison between a 65, 70, and 75 mm tb. This was on a 306 with Edelbrock Performer RPM heads, Performer Intake and e-cam, all with a 77mm Pro-M and 1 5/8 LT's w/ 2 1/2" out the back.

The 75 actually lost 2 ft .lbs of torque over the 65 and 70 which made IDENTICAL power and torque.

This was on back to back runs so the 2 ft lbs could be a variance but not close enough to really make a difference.

Most Pro 5.0 cars run a single 90mm TB and are fine making 2400 HP. Do you really think you need a 75?
 
V

v8only

Active Member
Jul 3, 2003
2,378
22
49
Nov 23, 2005
#23
  • Nov 23, 2005
  • #23
every bit of research that I've done for the gt40/gt40p heads seem to indicate that a 70 is overkill, and that the 65 is perfect. I wouldn't go 70 unless you port the heads or go aluminum. And, stick with the 19 pounders, those 24's are still a little overkill for that combo.
 

5spd GT

"the 5.0 owns all"
Founding Member
Aug 7, 2002
9,516
6
99
Arkansas
Nov 24, 2005
#24
  • Nov 24, 2005
  • #24
89sleeper said:
A friend of mine took his car to Steeda for a dyno comparison between a 65, 70, and 75 mm tb. This was on a 306 with Edelbrock Performer RPM heads, Performer Intake and e-cam, all with a 77mm Pro-M and 1 5/8 LT's w/ 2 1/2" out the back.

The 75 actually lost 2 ft .lbs of torque over the 65 and 70 which made IDENTICAL power and torque.

This was on back to back runs so the 2 ft lbs could be a variance but not close enough to really make a difference.

Most Pro 5.0 cars run a single 90mm TB and are fine making 2400 HP. Do you really think you need a 75?
Click to expand...

Interesting...makes me rethink the whole 75mm TB idea I had...
 
5

5.0Grunt

Banned
Nov 22, 2005
0
0
0
where ever I may roam
Nov 24, 2005
#25
  • Nov 24, 2005
  • #25
IMHO 65mm is plenty,if you get a cam in the future maybe I'd go 70.But rite now you will love a 65mm accufab..
 
Prev
  • 1
  • 2
First Prev 2 of 2
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Engine 87 NA - Tune or no Tune needed?
  • R82148V
  • Sep 17, 2025
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
8
Views
360
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Sep 17, 2025
R82148V
Progress Thread Progress Thread- From6to8's 95 GT/Saleen Supercharged 331 install
  • from6to8
  • Mar 22, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
24
Views
893
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 6, 2026
from6to8
Progress Thread Progress Thread- From6to8's 1994 Cobra Supercharger install
  • from6to8
  • Sep 25, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 20 21 22
Replies
420
Views
9K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 6, 2026
from6to8
SN95 Desktop 363 Engine Combination - Looking for input
  • WhiteCobra95
  • Sep 8, 2025
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
11
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Oct 6, 2025
Habu135
MAF Voltage Readings.
  • PonyGTrider
  • Oct 15, 2023
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
34
Views
4K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jun 4, 2024
limp
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?