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

How Much Hp Gain Will I Get From Gt40 Intake And 65mm Throttle Body?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Paul Randle
  • Start date Start date Oct 17, 2012
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last

Paul Randle

Member
Sep 27, 2012
87
2
8
orlando
Oct 17, 2012
#1
  • Oct 17, 2012
  • #1
I know it wont be a perfect number but i am just wanting a ball park.
 

Dino Dino Bambino

15 Year Member
Jun 13, 2007
1,672
89
79
Cyprus
Oct 17, 2012
#2
  • Oct 17, 2012
  • #2
Around 10hp.
 

ratio411

Founding Member
Apr 21, 2002
3,870
73
109
Pensacola FL
Oct 17, 2012
#3
  • Oct 17, 2012
  • #3
I'd say 10 rwhp is a good guess. (~18 fwhp)
However, that's on a stock engine.

Like anything else with your engine, the gain from each mod is either hindered or enhanced by other mods.
So what gives 10 hp to a stock engine, might give 15 to a modded engine.
It's all in the mix.
 

Paul Randle

Member
Sep 27, 2012
87
2
8
orlando
Oct 17, 2012
#4
  • Oct 17, 2012
  • #4
okay cool thanks
 

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash
20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 10, 2002
9,457
1,377
234
Ontario, Canada
Oct 17, 2012
#5
  • Oct 17, 2012
  • #5
As bad a restriction as the stock E7TE heads are, the intake is even worse. I put the gains closer to 20-25fwhp....especially with the 65mm throttle body and the rest of his exhaust bolt ons. The difference between rear wheel and flywheel horsepower power is in the 13%-15% ballpark at modest power levels.
 
Reactions: Paul Randle

Paul Randle

Member
Sep 27, 2012
87
2
8
orlando
Oct 17, 2012
#6
  • Oct 17, 2012
  • #6
cool thanks man
 

Paul Randle

Member
Sep 27, 2012
87
2
8
orlando
Oct 31, 2012
#7
  • Oct 31, 2012
  • #7
Brian,
I have a question whats the difference between a 70mm and a 65mm? if i go with a 70mm will the gain be worth the extra money for the bigger throttle body?
 

JordanB21

Active Member
Feb 6, 2012
804
27
29
Killeen, Texas
Oct 31, 2012
#8
  • Oct 31, 2012
  • #8
Paul Randle said:
Brian,
I have a question whats the difference between a 70mm and a 65mm? if i go with a 70mm will the gain be worth the extra money for the bigger throttle body?
Click to expand...
It wouldn't make a difference, the explorer intake has a 65mm lip I believe, that's why the throttle body matches. Unless you tried to do port work on the intake then it wouldn't do anything.
http://www.stangnet.com/mustang-for...-be-modified-for-a-70mm-throttle-body.862997/
yes I just refered to back to your own thread.
 

Paul Randle

Member
Sep 27, 2012
87
2
8
orlando
Oct 31, 2012
#9
  • Oct 31, 2012
  • #9
if i did a port match for 70mm would the gain over 65mm to anything noticeable?
 

ratio411

Founding Member
Apr 21, 2002
3,870
73
109
Pensacola FL
Oct 31, 2012
#10
  • Oct 31, 2012
  • #10
I wouldn't bother with 5mm on a car that has such a mild combo.

You could make a larger TB fit, and do all sorts of work, but I don't think you are going to get your money's worth with your combo.

It's all about cubic dollars.
 

ratio411

Founding Member
Apr 21, 2002
3,870
73
109
Pensacola FL
Oct 31, 2012
#11
  • Oct 31, 2012
  • #11
Gearbanger 101 said:
The difference between rear wheel and flywheel horsepower power is in the 13%-15% ballpark at modest power levels.
Click to expand...

I know this is off topic, but maybe some people might find it good info for bench racing.

The standard figures to go from flywheel power to rear wheel power in bench racing are:
Flywheel power - 20% = Rear wheel power (with an automatic trans)
Flywheel power - 15% = Rear wheel power (manual trans)

Those numbers can go as low as 12% with a T5/T56, aluminum driveshaft, and lighter than stock rims/tires.
(This formula was in use before my time. It is just a general rule of thumb.)
 

Gearbanger 101

Straight Outta Locash
20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 10, 2002
9,457
1,377
234
Ontario, Canada
Nov 1, 2012
#12
  • Nov 1, 2012
  • #12
As the other guys have stated Paul, upgrading to a 70mm at this point wouldn't be cost effective. If you had no throttle body at all and were in the market for one I would suggest the 70mm, but not if you've already got a 65mm unit read to go. Based on your current combo, the 65mm will be plenty for your current airflow needs.

There are more cost effective things to be spending your money on at this point.
 
Reactions: Gs1987GT and ratio411

stykthyn

I want to measure mine. It doesn't look that tall.
15 Year Member
Jul 6, 2006
5,232
2,652
223
gainesville
Nov 1, 2012
#13
  • Nov 1, 2012
  • #13
seeing as how the hp boost wouldnt even be worth the cost of new gaskets and tube of silicone much less the cost of a new TB, save the explorer intake do the explorer tb mod and look for a set of low buck heads. with better heads you can boost the 10hp to easily 25-40hp depending on setup.
 
Reactions: 2000xp8

2000xp8

SN Certified Technician
Aug 8, 2003
8,036
1,625
194
NJ
Nov 3, 2012
#14
  • Nov 3, 2012
  • #14
As someone that once did just a gt40 (tubular) intake on a stock engine with 65mm tb, i say it's barely worth the effort.
If you are expecting any SOTP feel, you aren't going to get it.
 

Foxslider

im not that much of a idiot
Oct 25, 2019
543
156
53
Houston, TX
Jul 12, 2020
#15
  • Jul 12, 2020
  • #15
How about with headers,exhaust, no cats. E cam, 70mm MAF..

Going from stock intake/tb to gt40 intake and 65mm tb i'll be able to feel it?

I sold my systemax yesterday, cause i didnt want to lose the 10hp/tq lower and might go pick up this explorer setup. + i need the 19lbers it comes with. So i know mine will run better and appropriately leaner vs. My pig rich setup now. (24's stock maf).
 

7991LXnSHO

wanna catch the space herp
10 Year Member
Sep 1, 2010
7,387
2,745
194
Kearney, NE
Jul 12, 2020
#16
  • Jul 12, 2020
  • #16
I see you searched for existing threads and must be reading up instead of asking the same questions in a new thread.

To me, the MAF, tubing, trottle body and throat of the upper intake need to all be considered as a system leading to the intake valve. At WOT, it will work best as a funnel leading through a Venturi In the throat of the upper intake. It is at least It should be a cylinder of fairly consistent ID, without any wide or narrow spots to interrupt smooth airflow.
Based on that theory, there is not much point in having a TB that is bigger than the MAF or intake. That’s unless you need to change it now, and will need it for future upgrades
An Exploder intake, (especially when the lower is ported and the upper’s throat is ported to match the TB), should make more of a difference with some type of Gt-40 iron heads (that Is what Ford designed the intakes for) or better flowing aluminum heads.
And as far as porting the stock heads, do not do it. Unless you are in a stock appearing class, or there are other class restrictions, It’s not a good use of time or money. Porting E-7 heads is time consuming, and it’s expensive per power return to have someone knowledgeable to do it and get any significant power increase.
My car came with seriously ported Stock heads and intakes. Yes, Two sets. The second set was for the next motor they did not end up building, but was good to see the quality of work that was put in.

So in this case, a bigger throttle body and bigger MAF made a noticeable difference with how responsive the throttle is and it sure seems to breath better at higher RPMS. I am going to install a prepared Explorer when I get better flowing heads. The combo I have is working well now, and that’s something I want to mess up for an increase limited by the heads.
 
Reactions: Foxslider

General karthief

wonder how much it would cost to ship you a pair
20+ Year Stangneter
Aug 25, 2016
27,955
10,598
203
polk county florida
Jul 12, 2020
#17
  • Jul 12, 2020
  • #17
Look at the hp numbers for the 93 cobra for a reference, this is basically a gt40 head, 24 lb injectors, and explorer intake (internally), I didn't see cam specs in the limited search I did and I believe the computers were tweaked for the bigger injectors, all that for a gain of 5 hp at 200 rpms lower than a standard 5.0 HO.
 

2000xp8

SN Certified Technician
Aug 8, 2003
8,036
1,625
194
NJ
Jul 12, 2020
#18
  • Jul 12, 2020
  • #18
I stand by my comment from 8 years ago.

An e cam with stock heads? You are go to float valves (yet again, something I've done, except I think it was a crane 2031 or something line that).

The heads are the choke point on a stock engine. If you aren't going to change them, you really don't get the benefit of the rest of the parts.
 
Reactions: Hoytster

Foxslider

im not that much of a idiot
Oct 25, 2019
543
156
53
Houston, TX
Jul 12, 2020
#19
  • Jul 12, 2020
  • #19
Right on.. Im hoping i'll feel it with the intake, tb, maf, proper injectors. Went and picked the intake setup up for $150. I have to change my injectors anyways so ill already be in there.

I got some E7's i've started porting. Need to finish them and get 1 flow tested. But ill prob. Sell em either way. Id have to do springs/and get em milled .020 if i were to use em. Thats $400. Depends what they flow. Im no where near done and i have over 10 hours easy in them. Lol.
 

Hoytster

I don't dare do that to my Knob
20+ Year Stangneter
Dec 30, 2002
1,069
700
164
Cornwall, PA
Jul 13, 2020
#20
  • Jul 13, 2020
  • #20
You'll see the biggest gains by properly matching the injectors to your tune/MAF. Running a bigger intake and TB on stock E7's is like dressing up an overweight chick. Might look good from the outside but feels the same when your on it (can I say that in 2020?). The E7 port and combustion chamber design just isn't made for performance and takes a ton of proper work to be able to gain even 40HP over stock.

Ultimate flow numbers also don't mean much, there's much more to making power. As others have said, it's all about matching the combo. You would be better suited to installing a stock or modified set of GT40 heads to match with that intake a TB then to continue with the ported E7's. And as @2000xp8 said, you will float stock E7 valves with that E cam. My buddy didn't listen and installed the mighty B cam I gave him on his 5.0 swapped E36 M3 and is now having to pull the engine apart since he floated and bent a valve. He's now having a set of GT40 three bars rebuilt with better springs so he can get it running again.
 
Reactions: General karthief
  • 1
  • 2
Next
1 of 2 Next Last
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

9
Engine Donor '00 Mountaineer meet '91 Fox
  • 91firecracker
  • May 11, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
  • 2 3
Replies
41
Views
932
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech May 28, 2026
91firecracker
9
Drivetrain How much resistance, if any at all, is normal on a new 1st gear and synchro on a WC T5 transmission?
  • sleep-e
  • Jan 21, 2026
  • Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech
Replies
2
Views
263
Fox 5.0 Mustang Tech Jan 22, 2026
sleep-e
Hard to start when engine is cold
  • 86_Capri
  • Mar 11, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
32
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Jun 21, 2026
CAMTWO1070
A
Discussion on mild budget build/ top end
  • Acesario
  • Feb 21, 2026
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 2
Replies
20
Views
763
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- Feb 23, 2026
General karthief
O
My rebirth, Hi from PA
  • onemore1987
  • Jun 28, 2026
  • The Welcome Wagon
Replies
3
Views
136
The Welcome Wagon Jun 29, 2026
onemore1987
O
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?