I'd like to see some actual results......seat of the pants placebo effects can't replace real dyno numbers.
The basic premise that a larger throttle body will "let more air into the engine" is totally incorrect. The engine is an air pump. The intake stroke creates a vacuum that draws air in through the intake tract. This action is limited by displacement of the cylinders, port size and size of the valves, and as such can only draw so much air can be drawn in. A larger throttle plate doesn't necessarily mean more air is going through, it just means that the throttle plate is larger. If the engine isn't capable of drawing more air, or the TB is sized for optimum flow for that motor, a larger TB won't have much effect.
You can probably do a quick test by using an OBD scanner that reads MAF flow. You'd need to check the flow (gm/sec) using the original TB then compare readings with the replacement part. The difference between the two will show if any actual gains are being made and at what rpm.

 

Hey @JP.Gour how's this mod doing after 6mo? Any quantitative results or feedback?

 

I would agree with @arathol
Show us the numbers
As general rule if air intake is restricted
and MAF can manage the increase air flow and fuel mix
then yes they would be a few ponies added.
What i see happening is less restriction eguals faster engine response
especial in higher rev when VVT kick in and open intake longer.

Increase intake valve size and maximize head flow , + better flowing exhaust + a tune to maximaize it all
is whats need to be eventual done for a proper HP increase

 

Hey Team,

Bit the bullet here after reading a bunch of Mazda FB group reviews & it being pretty low-cost. I agree w/ @JP.Gour that it pulls harder past 4k now.

[LOGS]

Prior to replacing

• MAF (lb/min): min-max .05-9.59
• Intake manifold absolute pressure (psi): 2.2-14.9
• Actual air-to-fuel ratio: 0.734-1.992

After replacing

• MAF (lb/min): .01-15.00
• Intake manifold absolute pressure (psi): 2.2-15.1
• Actual air-to-fuel ratio: 0.727-1.992

I have no idea what these numbers mean but would appreciate any insight from you all here.



[Part#: PY01 13 640 A got it for <$30 on eBay]

 

Hey Team,

Bit the bullet here after reading a bunch of Mazda FB group reviews & it being pretty low-cost. I agree w/ @JP.Gour that it pulls harder past 4k now.

[LOGS]

Prior to replacing

• MAF (lb/min): min-max .05-9.59
• Intake manifold absolute pressure (psi): 2.2-14.9
• Actual air-to-fuel ratio: 0.734-1.992

After replacing

• MAF (lb/min): .01-15.00
• Intake manifold absolute pressure (psi): 2.2-15.1
• Actual air-to-fuel ratio: 0.727-1.992

I have no idea what these numbers mean but would appreciate any insight from you all here.



[Part#: PY01 13 640 A got it for <$30 on eBay]

Looks like it's getting more air through the MAF. I've seen pretty solid boosts to the high end on other cars with upgraded TB. Dyno by that increase in air should be 5-10hp in the high end.

 

in the past, on other vehicles, i have done larger throttle body swaps and sometimes it makes a noticeable difference that is positive, and sometimes its not positive.

since you guys don't have any complaints about a touchy gas pedal, you have not gone to large. i did it on a jeep 4.0 once and it made it a pain to drive so i swapped back to normal. that larger diameter helps at the upper end though, as you have both noticed.

throttle bodies are not like carburetors where the velocity of the air flow past the bowl ports and jets effect the amount of fuel you are getting and directly affect drivability. throttle bodies just let you control the air the engine is trying to pull into the cylinders so there is a lot less trouble when swapping to a slightly larger diameter tb.

back in carb days, venturis were used to maximize air flow around hte ports and jets to you could drive at a lower rpm and still have proper fueling. direct injection fueling doesn't require this anymore and you can get better throttle response and gas mileage.

its always good to see people trying stuff like this though. without people willing to test changes, we would all be driving the same vehicles and wishing we had something more.

 

• MAF (lb/min): .01-15.00

.01 to 15 pounds of air flowing per minute, with .01 being when the tb is closed and 15 when fully open.

• Intake manifold absolute pressure (psi): 2.2-15.1

map is the pressure in the manifold compared to the pressure on the outside of the manifold, or atmospheric pressure.

• Actual air-to-fuel ratio: 0.727-1.992

this is the reading of fuel versus air in the exhaust and is used to adjust the fuel flow at the injectors. stoichiometric is perfect fuel mixture for burn and is adjusted for richer or cooler to keep power and temps within a specified range.

"The theoretical air–fuel ratio mixture for a gasoline fueled engine, for complete gasoline fuel combustion, the stoichiometric air–fuel ratio is about 14.7:1."


HomeEngine Maintenance and OperationAircraft Reciprocating Engine Basic Operating Principles

Combustion Process
Normal combustion occurs when the fuel/air mixture ignites in the cylinder and burns progressively at a fairly uniform rate across the combustion chamber. When ignition is properly timed, maximum pressure is built up just after the piston has passed top dead center at the end of the compression stroke.

The flame fronts start at each spark plug and burn in more or less wavelike forms. [Figure 1]

Figure 1. Normal combustion within a cylinder

The velocity of the flame travel is influenced by the type of fuel, the ratio of the fuel/air mixture, and the pressure and temperature of the fuel mixture. With normal combustion, the flame travel is about 100 feet/second. The temperature and pressure within the cylinder rises at a normal rate as the fuel/air mixture burns.

 

@superj you are clutch w/ the knowledge. Appreciate you!

@gregersonke Niceee

 

yes sir. i cannot remember lots of stuff but some engine stuff i remember well enough from aviation maintenance school to know where to find it online to share with others.

i used to work on small private planes and helicopters, which run basically the same engines as in cars, just mounted differently.

 

if you are ever bored, find a half price books and see if any aviation maintenance manuals are for sale. the engine theory book is very very good for any person who likes to do stuff on their car. a reciprocating engine is the same, air, water, or land based vehicle and the a&p books go into depth on stuff. you can also grab the others if you want to learn about metal working and carbon fiber/fiberglass works as its all done by a&p mechanics out in the field.

 

After driving the car with an upgraded TB the car feels great! I still recommend this mod for sure! @grywng Thanks for sharing some data! @superj Thanks for sharing your knowledge on the topic!

So I am currently tuning my car and I ask my tuner if he noticed any difference with this mod, and he said yes that it was a great upgrade, seeing a lot more air coming in the engine.

This is what he said: "A stock 2nd gen 2.0l has a mass airflow of 115g/s while your current logs show 130g/s"

Now I do also have a CAI so it's probably not all the TB but I'm convince it does add some power.

 

This is what he said: "A stock 2nd gen 2.0l has a mass airflow of 115g/s while your current logs show 130g/s"

LOL.....My stock logs show a peak of 130 g/s....

 

You're right! I just clarified that with my tuner, and those numbers are post tune for stock cars vs modified because of the timing overlap, so it's not super relevant to compare to stock, my apologies.

I looked at my first logs I sent before any tuning done, and yes there is more air coming in as my peak is at 136.45 g/s

This is with an AEM CAI and a 2.5 TB. I would like to mentioned that my filter for my CAI filter was pretty dirty at the time of this run and have since changed it, so keeping that in mind, with a clean filter numbers could have been potentially higher.

Hopefully this clarifies things out!

 

I would like to mentioned that my filter for my CAI filter was pretty dirty at the time of this run and have since changed it, so keeping that in mind, with a clean filter numbers could have been potentially higher.

Nope.....not unless your filter was about 80% clogged solid. If by "dirty" you mean it was discolored and had a bit of dust on it, the filter wasn't even close to being restrictive. Most car filters can pass many times more air then the motor can draw.

 

my 2022 4gen 2.0 Mazda 3 also changed a 2.5TB from cx5 .. i do experience it pull harder after 4k rpm ... i do not notice any downside..... but my friend 2019 4gen 2.0 Mazda 3 do see some negative effect, the rpm is not stable when idling... the rpm like dancing between 700rpm to 900rpm...

 

Did he disconnect the battery during the installation? Is he using a 2.0l or a 2.5l intake?

 

Have you thought od adding headers to increase your flow

 

Anyone knows if this 2.5l tb fits a 3rd gen 1.5l?

 

hi bro,
do you able to get the answer? i having the same question.

 

I actually did this "mod" today out of sheer curiosity. I am going to emphasize "FEEL" right off the bat, "FEEL" is pretty much all I have to go on and all I will talk about. I have ZERO science to back up any claims for or against it nor will I even pretend to know what I am talking about. But I will tell my experience.

I have a 2015 Mazda 3 I Touring 2.0L w/manual trans, car is bone stock except for the Corksport intake and cold air box, OCC, and some extra ground wires. I read a lot about the throttle body swap and came to the conclusion that for my stock car it would not really make much of a difference so why waste the money. But curiosity got the best of me so I ordered one and threw it on this morning. Shortly after completely the swap I got called into work which is a pretty long test drive, about 150 miles round trip and 3 to 3.5 hours depending on traffic, with a healthy mix of highway and twisty winding back roads. I can honestly say that my 3 feels better with the TB swap. It feels like there is more range in the gas pedal, not sure how to describe it but the gas pedal feels like at half throttle I'm actually at half throttle now, not WOT at half throttle. Also, the engine feels more eager to accelerate and to revv out, and more smooth as well. And it honestly feels a slight bit quicker. Definitely seeing a slight improvement in gas mileage too. Everything just feels more smooth, like the engine took a Xanax and all of its cares, drama, stress and woes went away and it's just enjoying life, chillin' like a villain. I honestly can't really figure out how to describe it, I know it's not making any real, noticeable power or torque difference, and really shouldn't have changed much. I really thought I was going to be disappointed with the swap and it was going to be a waste of money, figured it was basically the short ram intake placibo affect but I can honestly say I'm very happy with this "mod" and now I am glad I did it. Again, really not sure how to describe the difference since it's a small difference, but it's a small difference that feels like a big difference if that makes any sense. I wish I could have posted some before and after dyno numbers or something but I don't have the time, access, or especially money for that stuff. I will say that this "mod" really, really makes me want the Corksport CBE, lightweight pulley, and a tune for my 3. And maybe one day I'll finally have enough money to throw the VT Racing supercharger on her since its looking like we will never get a Corksport 2.0L turbo kit🤨😐

 

I know this is an old thread now but the throttle body swap got me thinking..... What about the 2.5L intake manifold? Is it even possible? If so, is there any difference between the 2L and 2.5L manifolds? How much of a difference? I've seen a lot posts saying "it's not possible" just to have someone post right after saying "yes it is, I've done it" but I can't seem to find any info about this. I've seen that the exhaust manifolds are not interchangeable but nothing about intake manifolds.

 

I found my answer to my previous post and the short of it is No. The long of it is definitely not. Here's my next question tho. I had the Corksport Intake on my car for the 2.0L engine, but then swapped the 2.5L TB and am still using the 2.0L intake. Corksport shows a different part number for the 2.5L intake. Would it be beneficial to get a 2.5L intake or would it make no difference. I figure the 2.0L intake would still move enough air since the displacement hasn't changed but i was just curious.

 

Hey guys, all the way from Malaysia ~ read through all the replies and I've learned a lot...just wanna ask which of the 2.5 throttle body could possibly fit into a 2010 Mazda 3 2.0? If the Mazda 6 GH 2.5's will fit? Thanks a lot guys

 

Neither. You are in the the wrong forum for 2nd gen cars. The MZR and the SA-G are completely different motors.

 

Never had a CS intake, but all the other ones I have seen are different. Usually the intake tube is bigger on the 2.5 so the MAF sensor works properly.

 

So I'm curious if the 2.5L intake would make any real difference with the 2.5L TB on the 2.0L. But I feel like it probably wouldn't because of the intake manifold itself. 2.5L intake manifold is wider so more volume but the 2.0L there's only so much you can do, right? Does that make any sense?

Also, I recently installed Versatune Manual Trans 93 octane tune on my car with Corksport Intake, Corksport air box, OCC, and 2.5L TB. I noticed today while logging that when I go wide open throttle all the way to the floor the throttle position reads a max of 82% open. Could this be due to the tune thinking it's a 2.0L TB?

 

So I'm curious if the 2.5L intake would make any real difference with the 2.5L TB on the 2.0L. But I feel like it probably wouldn't because of the intake manifold itself. 2.5L intake manifold is wider so more volume but the 2.0L there's only so much you can do, right? Does that make any sense?

Its not so much volume but how that volume is moving through the intake tube. The engine will only pull in so much air, how much is determined by cylinder volume and piston stroke. The velocity of the air traveling through the intake and past the MAF sensor is part of the calculations used to determine oxygen content going into the combustion chamber, which in turn allows the ECU to keep the AFRs where they need to be at any given point in time. For any given air mass, velocity moving through the tube is dependent on tube diameter. If you change the diameter of the intake, the air mass velocity changes, and you would need to recalibrate the MAF sensor to accommodate the change in velocity of the air mass moving through it.
The larger diameter throttle plate in the 2.5 throttle body might provide a faster response, but I don't think that the 2.0 TB is restricting airflow enough for the 2.5 to make a real power difference.

Also, I recently installed Versatune Manual Trans 93 octane tune on my car with Corksport Intake, Corksport air box, OCC, and 2.5L TB. I noticed today while logging that when I go wide open throttle all the way to the floor the throttle position reads a max of 82% open. Could this be due to the tune thinking it's a 2.0L TB?

Might be normal. TPS readings never get close to 100%.
Check your stock logs and compare if it was recorded.

 

Its not so much volume but how that volume is moving through the intake tube. The engine will only pull in so much air, how much is determined by cylinder volume and piston stroke. The velocity of the air traveling through the intake and past the MAF sensor is part of the calculations used to determine oxygen content going into the combustion chamber, which in turn allows the ECU to keep the AFRs where they need to be at any given point in time. For any given air mass, velocity moving through the tube is dependent on tube diameter. If you change the diameter of the intake, the air mass velocity changes, and you would need to recalibrate the MAF sensor to accommodate the change in velocity of the air mass moving through it.
The larger diameter throttle plate in the 2.5 throttle body might provide a faster response, but I don't think that the 2.0 TB is restricting airflow enough for the 2.5 to make a real power difference.

Might be normal. TPS readings never get close to 100%.
Check your stock logs and compare if it was recorded.

Thank you sir, I appreciate your help!