Mazda 6 Forums banner

Why not to do the throttle body coolant bypass

76368 Views 82 Replies 40 Participants Last post by  jman
I've been lurking around here for a while, so here goes:

This is why it is a bad idea to bypass your throttle body coolant line:

First, we need to make some assumptions. The first set of these assumptions deals with the operating condition of the engine. Let’s assume that we are running the engine at full throttle at 4,000 RPM. We have a 3.0L engine that is efficient and has about an 85% volumetric efficiency. Our effective engine volume is 0.85*3.0L or 2.55L. Since we have a four stroke motor, we are pulling in 2.55L of air 2000 times a minute. Therefore we are ingesting 3.00 cubic feet of air per second, after unit conversions. Our throttle body’s inside diameter is 2.5 inches (D) and its total length is 2 inches (L).

The second set of assumptions deals with the air and coolant flowing through our throttle body. Let’s assume that we are pulling in air from outside the engine bay on a warm day. Our intake air is 80 degrees, Fahrenheit. At 80F and 1 atmosphere, air has the following properties:

Density (p): 0.0735 lbm/ft^3
Thermal conductivity (k): 0.01516 BTU/hr*ft*F
Kinematic Viscosity (v): 16.88*(10^-5) ft^2/s
Specific heat (Cp): 0.24 BTU/lbm*F
Prandtl Number (Pr): 0.708 Unitless

Let us also assume that our coolant is 280F and that our throttle body is not cooled significantly by the incoming air. That is, the surface temperature of the inside of the throttle body is always 280F.

Now we will figure out how much and how fast the air is entering the engine. Through simple calculations, knowing the throttle body dimensions and volumetric flow rate and the density of the air, we can find out the mass flow rate and velocity of the air entering the engine. These values are found to be 794 lbm/hr (m) and 88 ft/s (V).

We now need to know if the flow of the air is turbulent or laminar. This will allow us to determine what appropriate equations to use later. First, we need to find the Reynolds Number (a unitless number that allows one to know if the flow is turbulent or not). This is found by the equation:

Re = V*D/v

We find our Reynolds Number to be 110,000. This is definitely turbulent flow! (Anything over 10,000 is defined as fully turbulent flow)

We need to find our entry length, or the length of tubing needed for the flow to become fully turbulent. This value is defined as Lh = 10*D. This value is found to be 2.08 ft. This is acceptable, since there is, most likely, two feet of piping between the throttle body and the air filter.

Since our entry length is less than our actual piping length, we can use Dittus-Boulter equation to determine the Nusselt Number (Nu):. (Sorry about all of this name dropping)

Nu = 0.023*Re^.8*Pr^.4 = h*D/k

We find our Nusselt Number to be 214. The ‘h’ value above is the average heat transfer coefficient. Now, we can actually find the temperature of the air coming out of our throttle body. Solving for h in the above equation yields h equal to 15.58 BTU/hr*ft^2*F.

By using Newton’s law of cooling, where the rate of heat transfer (Q) is determined to be:

Q=h*(area of heat transfer)*(Surface temperature-Medium Temperature)

By using differential equations, natural logs and some other hocus pocus, we get the following equation:

Texit=Tsurface-(Tsurface-Tinlet)*exp(-h*A/m*Cp)

Finally, by using the above equation, the outlet temperature can be determined to be 81.3 degrees Fahrenheit.

Now, using the SAE J1349 correction factor, you lose ~1% of your total power for each 10 degree increase in inlet air temperature. With this 1.3 degree increase, due to the throttle body coolant, you are losing 0.13% of your power. Or, on a 200hp car, you are losing 0.26hp. By overriding the coolant flowing through your throttle body, you are risking having your throttle body freeze open in cold weather (the whole purpose of running coolant through the throttle body in the first place). Hope this clears up any confusion.
See less See more
  • Like
Reactions: 1
41 - 60 of 83 Posts
Ok you state I post before reading... Sure I have done that a few times, and I have admitted it. And if I make a mistake I say sorry...So how about this thread?

http://forum.mazda6club.com/index.php?showtopic=71487

You first off post a a "search" to his question, which is rude in itself... Then you point him to a thread that has nothing to do with what he is asking. And you never say your sorry or anything, you just change the subject.

http://forum.mazda6club.com/index.php?showtopic=20357 That is the glass hose link btw, it was pretty easy to find I just used the search your always throwing in peoples faces.
You haven't been on here in a while.How's the cooling mods working out for you?[/b]

I kinda lost interest when I bought a car that was actually fast. Just a few easy bolt-ons and my '06 350z is making about 300 tq and hp (not wheel power though), and handles incredibly. :) Keeps a BIG goofy smile plastered to my face pretty much constantly.
Just another soon to be M.E. chiming in...To the original Poster, I feel like I just got out Thermo class after reading your post. Nice Proof.
Perfect timing. I was just about to do this mod, tried to have dealer do it, they said it would have no benefit and could screw with PCM. Initially, I disagreed and figured I would just do it myself, but the astute researcher in me decided to do additional investigation.

I originally had doubts as to how much of an impact on air temp the coolant made. These proofs confirmed my suspicions. The air is normally moving at a velocity which would prevent much heat transfer.

I was also thinking that perhaps there is actually a cooling advantage to have the line run through the TB. Since the hot coolant in the TB radiates heat and obviously heats up the TB, isnt it also cooling the coolant? The TB acts as a sort of basic radiator. Tell me if I am wrong, but just a thought.

I am going to wait to do this mod, despite my strong desire to do anything possible, particularly if its DIY and cheap, to lower the operating temps of the car. I hate it when the timing gets all retarded :slap:
QUOTE (Sapphire6s @ Aug 1 2008, 01:44 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=1402831
Perfect timing. I was just about to do this mod, tried to have dealer do it, they said it would have no benefit and could screw with PCM. Initially, I disagreed and figured I would just do it myself, but the astute researcher in me decided to do additional investigation.

I originally had doubts as to how much of an impact on air temp the coolant made. These proofs confirmed my suspicions. The air is normally moving at a velocity which would prevent much heat transfer.

I was also thinking that perhaps there is actually a cooling advantage to have the line run through the TB. Since the hot coolant in the TB radiates heat and obviously heats up the TB, isnt it also cooling the coolant? The TB acts as a sort of basic radiator. Tell me if I am wrong, but just a thought.

I am going to wait to do this mod, despite my strong desire to do anything possible, particularly if its DIY and cheap, to lower the operating temps of the car. I hate it when the timing gets all retarded :slap:[/b]
With apologies for being a drive-by poster (I don't own this model) I will jump in.

Yes, heating the TB means heat is taken from the coolant. BUT: The trivial amount of heat absorbed from the coolant is not material to underhood temps or engine temp. The radiator makes a much better heat xfer device than the TB ;-).

And .... lowering underhood temps will prolong the life of the zillions of rubber and plastic parts. They are expensive - think of wiring harnesses and connections, seals on your AC compressor etc. BUT, you don't want to lower the engine temp on a daily driver car. The factory sets it to squeeze the most work out of every gallon of fuel, lower emissions and boil cr#p out of the oil. Racing is another matter.

SO, moving more air through the engine compartment at low speeds and esp when shut down hot should have some benefits. One way would be wiring the fan so that it can run with the key off, controlled by a thermal switch. Back in the 80s some cars were set up like that from the factory. You wanna be really fancy, you could vent the hood, but you gotta place the vents where there's a pressure drop and deal with water pouring down through them. I believe some Vipers and other exotics do this.
See less See more
QUOTE (Sapphire6s @ Aug 1 2008, 12:44 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=1402831
Perfect timing. I was just about to do this mod, tried to have dealer do it, they said it would have no benefit and could screw with PCM. Initially, I disagreed and figured I would just do it myself, but the astute researcher in me decided to do additional investigation.

I originally had doubts as to how much of an impact on air temp the coolant made. These proofs confirmed my suspicions. The air is normally moving at a velocity which would prevent much heat transfer.

I was also thinking that perhaps there is actually a cooling advantage to have the line run through the TB. Since the hot coolant in the TB radiates heat and obviously heats up the TB, isnt it also cooling the coolant? The TB acts as a sort of basic radiator. Tell me if I am wrong, but just a thought.

I am going to wait to do this mod, despite my strong desire to do anything possible, particularly if its DIY and cheap, to lower the operating temps of the car. I hate it when the timing gets all retarded :slap:[/b]


2 years on this mod and no regrets at all.actually was beneficial with keeping underhood temps down and heat where it is supposed to be.

Funny though,I work at a Mazda dealership and all the techs that work for us that own the 6 have done this mod as well......... :nana:
Thanks for the fresh perspective. I realize that the TB is far from an optimal radiatior, but I am wondering if Mazda designed it as a way to both prevent icing AND reduce return coolant temps.

I may or may not ultimately do this mod, but I am still curious as to whether anyone measured the in bay temps before and after the mod. Also, for those who did it, did they notice that the fan came on less frequently? Honestly, I would not be doing this mod to reduce air intake temps as much as improving engine bay temps.

On another note, I am considering getting the Greddy aluminum air diversion panel. Some have said the CF is better, since aluminum will absorb heat. But does that really matter, since the air velocity, as we have discussed ad infinitum here, will not change in temp much, its more to just direct air to the core. Even if the diversion panel were to warm it, it would still be much cooler than the radiator core. Any thoughts?
QUOTE (Sapphire6s @ Aug 1 2008, 01:26 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=1402863
Thanks for the fresh perspective. I realize that the TB is far from an optimal radiatior, but I am wondering if Mazda designed it as a way to both prevent icing AND reduce return coolant temps.[/b]
It was designed to prevent icing of the TB in cold(think arctic)climates.I had the Greddy diversion panel for a while and it would not fit when I put the body kit and new hood on.There are other mods that are cheaper and work better than the panel,like two wheeling fan controler
I had thought about the fan controller, but wont it end up that my fan will almost constantly be running?
QUOTE (Sapphire6s @ Aug 1 2008, 01:40 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=1402875
I had thought about the fan controller, but wont it end up that my fan will almost constantly be running?[/b]
Depends on the outside temperature and where you have it set.
QUOTE (Sapphire6s @ Aug 1 2008, 01:26 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=1402863
Thanks for the fresh perspective. I realize that the TB is far from an optimal radiatior, but I am wondering if Mazda designed it as a way to both prevent icing AND reduce return coolant temps.

I may or may not ultimately do this mod, but I am still curious as to whether anyone measured the in bay temps before and after the mod. Also, for those who did it, did they notice that the fan came on less frequently? Honestly, I would not be doing this mod to reduce air intake temps as much as improving engine bay temps.

On another note, I am considering getting the Greddy aluminum air diversion panel. Some have said the CF is better, since aluminum will absorb heat. But does that really matter, since the air velocity, as we have discussed ad infinitum here, will not change in temp much, its more to just direct air to the core. Even if the diversion panel were to warm it, it would still be much cooler than the radiator core. Any thoughts?[/b]

The TB has very little surface area, so I really don't think it was designed to have any significant impact on heat transfer from the coolant system. If you run your car for a while, the hoses get pretty hot as well, and they certainly weren't designed for this purpose, either.
Aside from keeping underhood temps lower and thus helping to prolong the life of rubber, plastics, I can say it makes working on the engine a little easier if the engine's hot. I've touched my by-passed TB on 105 degree days and not burned myself. Before bypassing it, I'd burn myself on the coldest winter day if the engine was hot. Since the coolant isn't acting as a lubricant for any moving parts in the TB, it's completely safe to do this mod unless you drive in very cold climates, which don't really occur here in N. Texas. Canada, N. Dakota, Alaska may be different stories, though.
After conferring with DJQuik, I think I will ultimately get the Adj. Fan controller and coolant sensor from TwoWheelin. This will address both the TB bypass and the fan. Also, the sensor provides a nice brass fitting, which I would have to buy seperately with just the bypass. Also, since i am in NJ, I dont have arctic temps, and hope to not face them anytime soon.

Thanks again everyone for the informed input.
As far as the icing issue goes, how many millions of cars are out there that don't have coolant running through their TB's and don't have icing problems. The 6 is the first car I have owned that does have the coolant running through the TB and I never had a problem with the others.
i havent done this to my 6, but have done this to 2 of my other car's ive owned in the past. im here right off the great lakes where it gets extremely nasty every winter, and i have never had any issues with my TB freezing up, and as stated, millions of other cars were made without this even there, and never had a problem.

but ill say this also, ive never noticed any gain from bypassing the TB, no HP gain, no temp difference. the only way ive ever lowered the intake temp was when i installed some pheno spacers! and those made a MASSIVE difference in heat. if your seriousely wanting to cool your intake manifold temps down, look into pheno/thermo spacer's.

as i said, ive done the coolent bypass on two of my past cars, and HAVENT on my 6, just because on the other two, it didnt really do anything. and i have a surface temp reader that you just point at it, and it tells you the surface temp reading (you can get it at sears) so im not just guessing here, i actually tested it out. just not worth the 5-10 minutes when there's no gain anyway.
See less See more
Its not even worth arguing against this mod. It is one of the best things you can do, especially if you have a CAI and even more so if you have an ATX. Immediately after rerouting the coolant line, I noticed no change in timing and more consistent shifts on a hot day with traffic and lights. Normally, I would have noticed a decrease in performance after some time on the road. Having the CAI makes this mod even more important. The coolant line often will run near to or touch a CAI. This combined with the hotter TB, drastically increases the intakes temp. Response and endurance have more consistency. The MAFCi doesnt hurt either. :yesnod:
I didnt notice ANY difference of the TB temp after doing this mod.. then again i am in Phoenix where its 115* every day.
QUOTE (Sapphire6s @ Aug 24 2008, 01:52 AM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=1419694
Its not even worth arguing against this mod. It is one of the best things you can do, especially if you have a CAI and even more so if you have an ATX. Immediately after rerouting the coolant line, I noticed no change in timing and more consistent shifts on a hot day with traffic and lights. Normally, I would have noticed a decrease in performance after some time on the road. Having the CAI makes this mod even more important. The coolant line often will run near to or touch a CAI. This combined with the hotter TB, drastically increases the intakes temp. Response and endurance have more consistency. The MAFCi doesnt hurt either. :yesnod:[/b]
The 'no point in arguing' comment is a bit laughable. Seat of the pants evaluation is hardly fact. And what did you use to monitor engine timing?


Until someone comes out with hard & fast data, I don't buy into this 'mod'. I've seen numerous claims made over the years on everything from Mustangs to imports and seen many magazine tests showing the coolant actually COOLS the TB once the engine is up to temp, especially with any level of stop & go driving. And short-term heat sink was major, with the coolant immediately working to cool down the TB upon re-start.

Until someone around here connects a thermocouple and starts running tests, I'll stay on the side of those that have proved this a false theory in the past.
Before, my TB and CAI would get very hot. The TB was too hot to touch, and the CAI was very hot, particularly near the TB. It was so hot, that it was more so than above the exhaust manifold. It was the hottest place in the engine bay. Now, the CAI is much cooler, and the TB can be touched. Maybe this mod is worthless on a totally stock vehicle, but considering the location near the CAI, and in my case the AT, it definitely seems to make a difference. I also had noticed my transmission behaved more consistently then prior to the mod. Anyways, its done, and I am satisfied.
though i find it hard to imagine that the TB/intake pipe was the hottest part in the engine bay (i'm guessing you don't touch the radiator or oil pan much), i would agree it obiously gets pretty damn hot with the stock setup.

i'm also one of the people that doesn't recommend this mod, i've done it, but i think it's pointless unless you work on the TB much, as it makes life a lot easier in that case. for people in the warmer states/areas, i don't think there is any down side to this mod, for many of us, the car is rarely exposed to temps under 30-40* no matter the time of year....so the downside of this mod has no relivence.

as stated in the thread, i'm sure it might be a bit noticable off the line after traffic or something....but is that really a performance gain? that air is ingested in a sec...then you are back to norm. again, i don't think it's bad, but for this to be a "performance mod" is pushing it for me.
Well, did some searching and came up with the following.

http://www.bmrfabrication.com/tb-dyno.htm

While this isnt on a 6, the general impact should be the same. This dyno shows a HP/TQ gain, which is probably not realistic on our cars. However, there is a very good before, after and during on temperature tests. Initial temp decrease is 20deg, and after heat soak it is a decrease of 2deg. Coolant temp is raised by about 2deg, which appears to suggest that the TB coolant line does provide a slight radiator effect. Overall, I think it proves that this is worthwhile if one is trying to reduce temps, but probably not worth it as a power mod.
41 - 60 of 83 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top