75 mm throttle body needed, maybe upper plenum too.

What are the recommendations for a 75 mm TB on a 2002 4.6L??

How different are things on the Mustang for all the little bits and tubes versus the Explorer?

Thinking also of the C&L upper plenum. Thoughts?

Thanks
RichardM

Hey, you would have to check if it would fit but I have the C&L Plenum and a 75mm BBK throttle body off my 2000 4.6 Mustang GT asking $150 shipped to U.S. or even better picked up. BTW There is absolutely nothing wrong with either of them.

I'd be interested in that deal.
Send me your direct contact info.
rfmj2@msn.com

Thanks
RichardM

Info sent to email

So I have the mustang version upper CL plenum. There is a vacuum port on the top of the factory elbow for power brake booster that is not present. Will need modification.

The throttle cable bracket with its ears for the plastic engine cover mounting may not clear the bump on top so need to find mustang bracket or cut the factory one's ears off.

Minor things really. This weekend with time I will do the install With 75mm TB

Good Luck man and keep us posted. I'm am sure others here have been wondering if this mod can be done and how difficult it would be.

I have done this and it works fine only issue I had was back vacuum connection had to grind a little on the c&l plunem but works great sorry don't have any pics

Oh and yes the plastic engine cover will not fit without mods I left mine off

Here it is installed. Used 3.5" hose and tubing to create the new intake tube.
Foam is for heat protection. It does OK but the underhood air just gets in and IATs run hotter than ambient for sure.
I did not resize the image so you can see detail.
ONE SNAFT. The cruise control cable does not lift up off its peg, it pulls away sideways and I broke the little plastic tab. Gotta fix that next.
Sounds mean and pulls hard in the mid range rpms.

Great Job! I'm glad it worked out for you. Thanx for the update.

Next this you can do to free up some HP, if you haven't done it already, is an electric fan swap. The truck runs alot looserwith the electric one.

I hate to burst your bubble. but that cobbled together "setup" is not only counter productive to performance, but is also dangerous.

Both the exposed, loose foam and the "accordion" type dryer vents are both serious fire hazards. They are both made of highly flammable materials and have no business being in an engine compartment. The foam would ok, if it were inside an enclosed box or something, so it could never accidentally come in contact with the exhaust or other very hot parts.

As for the dryer vent, again, it is a fire hazard. It is also bad for airflow. It is a rough, constantly changing id for the air to move through. With all the ridges inside (from the wire reinforcement) it is likely creating a very turbulent airflow. This is especially problematic for the entrance and exit of the MAF. Your "ad counts" are probably all over the place. Basically, your probably confusing the hell out of the computer, as far as it knowing exactly how much air is going in. Also, as thin as that stuff is, its picking all kinds of engine heat, as the air runs through the hose, defeating the purpose of any kind of cold air intake. That is a very simple tube to fabricate in some more appropriate material. In fact, it looks like you could just use straight pipe/tubing, with a 30 or 45 deg rubber elbow at the throttle body.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but you have no idea what those materials are or some of the laws of heat exchange.
Let me expand.
The hose is double ply neoprene with a smooth bore liner. I get it for $16 a foot. It is good to 300°F operating temperature and after having used it for years in other applications I worry not about its performance underhood. It is an industrial hose not some "dryer vent" hose.
UL rated at 94-v-0 for flammibility.

The foam is a temporary solution but is likewise UL rated at 94-v-0.

As for the MAF, you are sorely mistaken.
First, engine impulses are the biggest feedback to accurate MAF counts, not little perturbations in the tubing. Downstream and transitions are pretty small and will not affect counts.
The MAF should always see at least a foot of straight pipe/hose behind it to ensure smooth air flow and accuracy. Ford Engineers will tell you that, I got the straight info.
As I've stated above the hose in question and the 3.5" metal support tube with my IAC and PCV ports are nice and smooth and more than a foot long.

As for heat, my materials will reach the same underhood temperatures as the factory plumbing. How hot do you think that factory tube gets?
Regardless of the heat the materials get to, the amount of heat stripped from the inside of the tube is very small due to the nature of thermodynamics in a flowing duct. My heat addition is no larger than than the heat transferred by the stock unit I will guarantee you. In fact due to the larger cross section at 3.5 inch diameter I carry more air that is not touching a surface based on the ratio of area to volume.

This may not be the final solution. As you mention a bent tube could help. The actual angle of approach from the MAF in the factory and the current position is 60°.
But, If I did not touch this setup for 5 years I could open the hood and it will all be right there doing its job every single day.