IHADAV8.com - Turbo Buick Tech, and Nonsense
Tech Area => General Buick Tech => Topic started by: TexasT on May 25 2016, 02:49:40 PM
-
Not really trying to reinvent the wheel but i do spend an inordinate time on research and how things can be done on the cheap. I'm meeting up with Jason later so I had time to kill.
I found this but looked through the full throttle site and don't see where they sell this pipe.
http://www.turbobuicks.com/forums/buick-v6-turbo-tech/61277-new-4-maf-pipe-built-maf-sensor-2.html (http://www.turbobuicks.com/forums/buick-v6-turbo-tech/61277-new-4-maf-pipe-built-maf-sensor-2.html)
Found these on the amazon so maybe you are suppose to buy the mafless pipe and put it in yourself.
http://www.amazon.com/Spectre-Performance-9924011-Mount-Plate/dp/B00EPYE21A/ref=pd_sim_263_42?ie=UTF8&dpID=31HIWxL5OcL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR160%2C160_&refRID=1YDNN8CNVZNMC0N3BWJK (http://www.amazon.com/Spectre-Performance-9924011-Mount-Plate/dp/B00EPYE21A/ref=pd_sim_263_42?ie=UTF8&dpID=31HIWxL5OcL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR160%2C160_&refRID=1YDNN8CNVZNMC0N3BWJK)
http://www.amazon.com/Mass-Sensor-Billet-Mount-Flange/dp/B00N2K2QRK/ref=pd_sbs_263_1?ie=UTF8&dpID=31FTw8oKKKL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR160%2C160_&refRID=0XDA16PN96J4HXC6C6WQ (http://www.amazon.com/Mass-Sensor-Billet-Mount-Flange/dp/B00N2K2QRK/ref=pd_sbs_263_1?ie=UTF8&dpID=31FTw8oKKKL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR160%2C160_&refRID=0XDA16PN96J4HXC6C6WQ)
and I guess just put in one of these.
http://www.amazon.com/ACDelco-213-4222-Original-Equipment-Temperature/dp/B0010GDGFY/ref=pd_bxgy_263_2?ie=UTF8&refRID=1S9C8793F2DMKPM059FA (http://www.amazon.com/ACDelco-213-4222-Original-Equipment-Temperature/dp/B0010GDGFY/ref=pd_bxgy_263_2?ie=UTF8&refRID=1S9C8793F2DMKPM059FA)
or maybe one of these housings
http://www.amazon.com/Spectre-Performance-9705-Polished-Aluminum/dp/B003J9IXT4/ref=pd_sbs_263_3?ie=UTF8&dpID=41ZOj3I9q9L&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR160%2C160_&refRID=0XDA16PN96J4HXC6C6WQ (http://www.amazon.com/Spectre-Performance-9705-Polished-Aluminum/dp/B003J9IXT4/ref=pd_sbs_263_3?ie=UTF8&dpID=41ZOj3I9q9L&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR160%2C160_&refRID=0XDA16PN96J4HXC6C6WQ)
Then there are these
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Super-Auto-BT153X-New-Mass-Air-Flow-Sensor-/251542777752?hash=item3a911e2f98:g:0F8AAOxyoBtTjd (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Super-Auto-BT153X-New-Mass-Air-Flow-Sensor-/251542777752?hash=item3a911e2f98:g:0F8AAOxyoBtTjd) t4&vxp=mtr
http://www.amazon.com/Shinehome%C2%AE-25180303-MASS-SENSOR-VEHICLES/dp/B018VSMIXY/ref=sr_1_16?ie=UTF8&qid=1464191293&sr=8-16&keywords=maf+impala+ss (http://www.amazon.com/Shinehome%C2%AE-25180303-MASS-SENSOR-VEHICLES/dp/B018VSMIXY/ref=sr_1_16?ie=UTF8&qid=1464191293&sr=8-16&keywords=maf+impala+ss)
I'm leaning toward one of these AXIS translator boxes. It seems it wont do all it can without 60lb injectors and a special chip. But can go that route in the future if the eric gets out with a chip good to use the 42lb injectors. Maybe I can get some 60s or the chip will get developed. Just seems like a better thing with more potential for an additional $20. Eric sez the 5.6 chip I have will have its tunability until the new stuff happens.
http://www.turbotweakstore.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=AXIS-1 (http://www.turbotweakstore.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=AXIS-1)
Any thoughts? TIA
-
I like the AXIS concept timing control that is not lost when the battery is disconnected have not seen to many reviews yet.
-
I like the idea of a $30 MAF sensor. Do any of the other translators support that sensor? That mighty tell us something.
The axis manual says the pipe is no longer in production.
I'd ask Eric and Mike how well they worked.
I guess at this point you would be an early adopter. Will the product become an orphan? Who knows, it would be useful to know how many have sold.
I guess not as of 2009:
http://turbobuick.com/threads/maf-pipe-with-integrated-maf.295131/#post-2281219 (http://turbobuick.com/threads/maf-pipe-with-integrated-maf.295131/#post-2281219)
-
The integrated MAF never caught on...for whatever reason. If you wanna run a stock MAF...then the one from Kirbans is the only one that's calibrated correctly for our cars. The ones from Blue Streak etc are a crapshoot...at best. I recommend Bobs translator cuz it's durable and it flat out works. I haven't heard of any crapping out. The LT1, LS1 and Z06 MAFS can be picked up at the wreckers for a song. The Z06 MAF requires a special 3 to 5 pin connector. Erics 5.6 and 5.7 chips are the same...with the exception of the 5.7 alky chip having aggressive mode.
FWIW I tested the LT1, LS1 and Z06 MAFS on the same day within 90 minutes...with the Z06 showing the leanest 02 reading.
-
Who wants me to go off on a rant?
-
I do i do!
-
Let's hear it
-
(https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQ_T2U2stieDWNgJN-Tvjy7Q9Qlyuk55DtoIrx18PHLmqwJxSv0)
-
Rant away.
So this integrated maf in a pipe is a thing that I would have to see about used or make my own. You can see the links the stuff is out there. From reading it just has to be a 4" tube. Not sure I want to do something like that. Just seems big as I'm running a stock turbo and inlet bell. I guess ill set the sights on the axis thing unless a used regular translator comes along.
Jason hooked me up with a lt1 maf as well as a remanned stock piece. I like the look of the black plastic lt1 maf and found one for cheap on eBay so I might get one of those to see about it.
I will say the int and bl data was much different on our trip back with the remanned maf on the car. We will see if the mileage comes back up. The af at idle was back down to 04 instead of being 07-08.
-
I went LT-1 3" with the 'tried n true' translator and couldn't be happier. I'm using the aluminum body MAF, which I read somewhere is a more reliable unit than the new black plastics ones. Figured I'd stick to the 'KISS' rule when it comes to the MAF.
I think RC did an extensive test on all the MAF's and there really wasn't much to be gained going larger. Please correct me if I'm wrong
-
'Cmon Mikey! Let it out before you explode :)
-
MAF vs Speed Density.
Go Mikey!!!!!
-
Okay here goes... but only because you guys asked for it. It is important to note that I am not objecting to the goal of this thread which I think is admirable.
My issue is with “translators” and assuming MAFs are relatively universal in all applications which has been going on for decades with Turbo Buicks. It is for this reason that I set my car to Speed Density and deleted the MAF so many years ago.
MAFs and their calibration are unique to the application – in all instances. If you change anything that impacts airflow in or out of the engine the MAF calibration is altered. If you de-screen a MAF the calibration (and accuracy) is changed. Same goes with an open air filter and size (diameter and length) of the MAF tube. Yep, cranking the boost up does it too.
How MAFs work: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3QuuEPef4k (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3QuuEPef4k)
At no time in the history of these translators has anyone actually scaled a MAF to a given application to get an accurate reading. The best I can tell is it is all guess work and left to the ECM to “trim” the fueling needs – because close is good enough.
Case in point, and I can provide the data/graphs to prove this, the blade-style MAF sensor mentioned in the original post is used in 7.0L and 6.2L V8s, V6s, and turbo 2.0s. In each application the calibration is different in order to compensate for mass air flow/consumption and velocity despite being the exact same part.
I would challenge anyone offering a bolt-on MAF solution to provide their justification for the calibration chosen to hand out to the masses under the pretense that it is accurate and better. Yes, the enhanced range over 255 grams/sec hardcoded limit in the stock Buick MAF is a definite advantage.
http://www.turbobuicks.com/forums/buick-v6-turbo-tech/38505-maf-255grams-sec-316-7-hp-true-false.html (http://www.turbobuicks.com/forums/buick-v6-turbo-tech/38505-maf-255grams-sec-316-7-hp-true-false.html)
But, there is just so much more information that is inaccurate it makes my blood boil.
Properly calibrating a MAF is a bit of a time consuming exercise, requires a WB02 to measure the error between the calibration and the fuel consumed, and will need to be revalidated after every change.
I am not even going to get into the challenges of running a blow-through MAF like my TBSS is using.
-
Thanks Mike
I was hoping for more fire and brimstone but this was very informative. I have seen the "altered results" my buddy runs a 3.5 inch MAF and had a 3 inch pipe. He decided to swap it out to 4" pipe with the same sensor and a new larger filter. The AFR leaned out and his max boost jumped up a couple pounds. Personally I think his old filter was the biggest restriction.
-
Does the maf have some sort of adjustment? You talk of calibrating the maf with the wideband, but I'm not sure how to adjust it. I pretty much want what is cheapest, but i do want it to work, and work long term. I'm running or at least was running the maf that is original to the car.
I dug out the maf that I put on the suburban. It is 3.5" in diameter. The one Jason hooked me up with is 3", both of them the metal housing. I just thought the blank plastic piece looked more stock. I still have to figure out how to mount the temp sensor into the air tube again. I had it in a 3" pvc pipe coupler (apparently I glued it to the maf) and it has been there at least 20 yrs. A buddy gave me some duct he got from atr way back then and I put my k&n cone behind the grille. I think it works good as the ats always was around outside temp. With that sensor hanging loose under the hood it will go to 143 then it starts flashing hot. Found that out yesterday on our way home from the meet while we were inline at Burger Street getting a couple hamburgers. I'll get some pix and add them to this post.
Good info Mike. So it is cost effective to go sd2 and mafless? I had an 89 LX Mustang that was. It ran pretty good. We hot it into the 8.80s on a good night when the eagles would kinda hook. Fun car to row the five speed. It had the 3.08 gears. Blew a head gasket about 40k miles and I traded it in on a 91 Regal Gran Sport, the only front drive car I ever owned.
My behind the grill air intake.
(http://s25.postimg.org/5ykazjh4v/WP_20160526_13_08_53_Pro.jpg)
Old original maf.
(http://s25.postimg.org/v79q6ybgf/WP_20160526_13_10_30_Pro.jpg)
-
3" mafs, gm part #25180303 (213-352 on acdelco.com)
2003 BUICK CENTURY CUSTOM V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = J
2003 BUICK CENTURY LIMITED V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = J
2003 BUICK RENDEZVOUS V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2003 CHEVROLET ASTRO V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
2003 CHEVROLET IMPALA V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2003 CHEVROLET MALIBU LS V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = J
2003 CHEVROLET MALIBU V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = J
2003 CHEVROLET MONTE CARLO LS V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2003 CHEVROLET S10 BLAZER V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
2003 CHEVROLET S10 PICKUP V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
2003 CHEVROLET VENTURE V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2003 GMC SAFARI V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
2003 OLDSMOBILE ALERO V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2003 OLDSMOBILE SILHOUETTE V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2003 PONTIAC AZTEK GT V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2003 PONTIAC AZTEK V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2003 PONTIAC GRAND AM V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2003 PONTIAC MONTANA V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2002 BUICK CENTURY CUSTOM V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = J
2002 BUICK CENTURY LIMITED V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = J
2002 BUICK RENDEZVOUS V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2002 CHEVROLET IMPALA V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2002 CHEVROLET MALIBU LS V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = J
2002 CHEVROLET MALIBU V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = J
2002 CHEVROLET S10 BLAZER V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
2002 CHEVROLET S10 PICKUP V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
2002 CHEVROLET VENTURE V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2002 GMC S15 SONOMA V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
2002 OLDSMOBILE ALERO V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2002 OLDSMOBILE AURORA V6 3.5L 214cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = H
2002 OLDSMOBILE INTRIGUE V6 3.5L 214cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = H
2002 OLDSMOBILE SILHOUETTE V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2002 PONTIAC AZTEK GT V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2002 PONTIAC AZTEK V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2002 PONTIAC GRAND AM V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2002 PONTIAC GRAND PRIX V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = J
2002 PONTIAC MONTANA V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2001 BUICK CENTURY CUSTOM V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = J
2001 BUICK CENTURY LIMITED V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = J
2001 CHEVROLET ASTRO V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
2001 CHEVROLET IMPALA V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2001 CHEVROLET LUMINA V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = J
2001 CHEVROLET MALIBU LS V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = J
2001 CHEVROLET MALIBU V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = J
2001 CHEVROLET MONTE CARLO LS V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2001 CHEVROLET S10 BLAZER TRAILBLAZER V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
2001 CHEVROLET S10 BLAZER V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
2001 CHEVROLET S10 PICKUP V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
2001 GMC S15 JIMMY ENVOY V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
2001 GMC S15 JIMMY V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
2001 GMC S15 SONOMA V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
2001 GMC SAFARI V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
2001 OLDSMOBILE ALERO V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2001 OLDSMOBILE AURORA V6 3.5L 214cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = H
2001 OLDSMOBILE BRAVADA V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
2001 OLDSMOBILE INTRIGUE V6 3.5L 214cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = H
2001 OLDSMOBILE SILHOUETTE V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2001 PONTIAC AZTEK GT V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2001 PONTIAC AZTEK V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2001 PONTIAC GRAND AM V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2001 PONTIAC GRAND PRIX V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = J
2001 PONTIAC MONTANA V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2000 BUICK CENTURY CUSTOM V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = J
2000 BUICK CENTURY LIMITED V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = J
2000 CHEVROLET ASTRO V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
2000 CHEVROLET IMPALA V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2000 CHEVROLET LUMINA V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = J
2000 CHEVROLET MALIBU LS V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = J
2000 CHEVROLET MALIBU V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = J
2000 CHEVROLET MONTE CARLO LS V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2000 CHEVROLET S10 BLAZER TRAILBLAZER V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
2000 CHEVROLET S10 BLAZER V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
2000 CHEVROLET VENTURE V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2000 GMC S15 JIMMY ENVOY V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
2000 GMC S15 JIMMY V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
2000 GMC S15 SONOMA V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
2000 GMC SAFARI V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
2000 OLDSMOBILE ALERO V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2000 OLDSMOBILE BRAVADA V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
2000 OLDSMOBILE INTRIGUE V6 3.5L 214cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = H
2000 OLDSMOBILE SILHOUETTE V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2000 PONTIAC GRAND AM V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
2000 PONTIAC GRAND PRIX V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = J
2000 PONTIAC MONTANA V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
1999 BUICK CENTURY CUSTOM V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1999 BUICK CENTURY LIMITED V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1999 CHEVROLET ASTRO V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1999 CHEVROLET LUMINA V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1999 CHEVROLET MALIBU V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = J
1999 CHEVROLET MALIBU V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1999 CHEVROLET MONTE CARLO V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1999 CHEVROLET S10 BLAZER TRAILBLAZER V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1999 CHEVROLET S10 BLAZER V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1999 CHEVROLET S10 PICKUP V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1999 CHEVROLET S10 PICKUP V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1999 CHEVROLET VENTURE V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
1999 GMC S15 JIMMY V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1999 GMC S15 SONOMA V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1999 GMC S15 SONOMA V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1999 GMC SAFARI V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1999 OLDSMOBILE ALERO V6 LA1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
1999 OLDSMOBILE BRAVADA V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1999 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1999 OLDSMOBILE INTRIGUE V6 3.5L 214cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = H
1999 OLDSMOBILE SILHOUETTE V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
1999 PONTIAC GRAND AM V6 LA1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
1999 PONTIAC GRAND PRIX V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1999 PONTIAC MONTANA V6 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
1998 BUICK CENTURY CUSTOM V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1998 BUICK CENTURY LIMITED V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1998 BUICK SKYLARK V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1998 CHEVROLET ASTRO V6 L35 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1998 CHEVROLET LUMINA LTZ V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1998 CHEVROLET LUMINA V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1998 CHEVROLET MALIBU LS V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1998 CHEVROLET MALIBU V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1998 CHEVROLET MONTE CARLO LS V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1998 CHEVROLET S10 BLAZER V6 L35 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1998 CHEVROLET S10 PICKUP V6 L35 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1998 CHEVROLET S10 PICKUP V6 LF6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1998 GMC S15 JIMMY V6 L35 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1998 GMC S15 JIMMY ENVOY V6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1998 GMC S15 SONOMA V6 L35 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1998 GMC S15 SONOMA V6 LF6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1998 GMC SAFARI V6 L35 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1998 OLDSMOBILE ACHIEVA V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1998 OLDSMOBILE BRAVADA REGIONAL V6 L35 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1998 OLDSMOBILE BRAVADA V6 L35 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1998 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1998 OLDSMOBILE SILHOUETTE V6 LA1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
1998 PONTIAC GRAND AM GT V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1998 PONTIAC GRAND AM SE V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1998 PONTIAC GRAND AM V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1998 PONTIAC GRAND PRIX SE V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1998 PONTIAC GRAND PRIX V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1998 PONTIAC TRANS SPORT MONTANA V6 LA1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
1998 PONTIAC TRANS SPORT V6 LA1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
1997 BUICK CENTURY CUSTOM V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1997 BUICK CENTURY LIMITED V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1997 BUICK SKYLARK CUSTOM V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1997 BUICK SKYLARK GRAN SPORT V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1997 BUICK SKYLARK LIMITED V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1997 CHEVROLET ASTRO V6 L35 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1997 CHEVROLET LUMINA LS V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1997 CHEVROLET LUMINA V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1997 CHEVROLET LUMINA LTZ V6 LQ1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1997 CHEVROLET MALIBU LS V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1997 CHEVROLET MALIBU V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1997 CHEVROLET MONTE CARLO LS V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1997 CHEVROLET MONTE CARLO Z34 V6 LQ1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1997 CHEVROLET S10 BLAZER V6 L35 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1997 CHEVROLET S10 PICKUP V6 L35 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1997 CHEVROLET S10 PICKUP V6 LF6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1997 CHEVROLET VENTURE V6 LA1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
1997 GMC S15 JIMMY V6 L35 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1997 GMC S15 SONOMA V6 L35 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1997 GMC S15 SONOMA V6 LF6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1997 GMC SAFARI XT V6 L35 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1997 OLDSMOBILE ACHIEVA SC V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1997 OLDSMOBILE ACHIEVA SL V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1997 OLDSMOBILE BRAVADA V6 L35 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1997 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS GLS V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1997 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1997 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS SUPREME SL V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1997 OLDSMOBILE SILHOUETTE V6 LA1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
1997 PONTIAC GRAND AM GT V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1997 PONTIAC GRAND AM SE V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1997 PONTIAC GRAND PRIX SE V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1996 BUICK REGAL CUSTOM V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1996 BUICK REGAL GRAN SPORT V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1996 BUICK ROADMASTER LIMITED V8 LT1 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = P
1996 BUICK ROADMASTER LIMITED WAGON V8 LT1 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = P
1996 BUICK ROADMASTER V8 LT1 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = P
1996 BUICK SKYLARK CUSTOM V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1996 BUICK SKYLARK GRAN SPORT V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1996 BUICK SKYLARK LIMITED V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1996 CADILLAC FLEETWOOD BROUGHAM V8 LT1 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = P
1996 CADILLAC FLEETWOOD V8 LT1 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = P
1996 CHEVROLET ASTRO V6 L35 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1996 CHEVROLET BERETTA Z26 V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1996 CHEVROLET BERETTA V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1996 CHEVROLET CAPRICE CLASSIC V8 LT1 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = P
1996 CHEVROLET CAPRICE CLASSIC V8 4.3L 265cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1996 CHEVROLET CORSICA V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1996 CHEVROLET IMPALA SS V8 LT1 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = P
1996 CHEVROLET LUMINA LS V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1996 CHEVROLET LUMINA V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1996 CHEVROLET LUMINA LS V6 LQ1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1996 CHEVROLET LUMINA APV V6 LA1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
1996 CHEVROLET MONTE CARLO LS V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1996 CHEVROLET MONTE CARLO Z34 V6 LQ1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1996 CHEVROLET S10 BLAZER V6 L35 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1996 CHEVROLET S10 PICKUP V6 LF6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1996 GMC S15 JIMMY V6 L35 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1996 GMC S15 SONOMA V6 L35 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1996 GMC S15 SONOMA V6 LF6 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1996 GMC SAFARI XT V6 L35 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1996 OLDSMOBILE ACHIEVA SC V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1996 OLDSMOBILE ACHIEVA SL V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1996 OLDSMOBILE BRAVADA V6 L35 4.3L 262cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1996 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS SUPREME SL V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1996 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS SUPREME SL V6 LQ1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1996 OLDSMOBILE SILHOUETTE V6 LA1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
1996 PONTIAC GRAND AM GT V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1996 PONTIAC GRAND AM SE V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1996 PONTIAC GRAND PRIX SE V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1996 PONTIAC GRAND PRIX GT V6 LQ1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1996 PONTIAC GRAND PRIX GTP V6 LQ1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1996 PONTIAC TRANS SPORT V6 LA1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = E
1995 BUICK REGAL CUSTOM V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1995 BUICK REGAL GRAN SPORT V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1995 BUICK ROADMASTER ESTATE V8 LT1 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = P
1995 BUICK ROADMASTER LIMITED V8 LT1 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = P
1995 BUICK ROADMASTER V8 LT1 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = P
1995 CADILLAC FLEETWOOD BROUGHAM V8 LT1 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = P
1995 CADILLAC FLEETWOOD V8 LT1 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = P
1995 CHEVROLET CAPRICE CLASSIC V8 4.3L 265cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1995 CHEVROLET IMPALA SS V8 LT1 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = P
1995 CHEVROLET LUMINA LS V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1995 CHEVROLET LUMINA V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1995 CHEVROLET LUMINA LS V6 LQ1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1995 CHEVROLET MONTE CARLO LS V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1995 CHEVROLET MONTE CARLO Z34 V6 LQ1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1995 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS SUPREME SL V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1995 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS SUPREME V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1995 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS SUPREME SL V6 LQ1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1995 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS SUPREME V6 LQ1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1995 PONTIAC GRAND PRIX SE V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1995 PONTIAC GRAND PRIX GT V6 LQ1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1995 PONTIAC GRAND PRIX GTP V6 LQ1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1994 BUICK REGAL CUSTOM V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1994 BUICK ROADMASTER ESTATE V8 LT1 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = P
1994 BUICK ROADMASTER LIMITED V8 LT1 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = P
1994 BUICK ROADMASTER V8 LT1 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = P
1994 CHEVROLET CAPRICE CLASSIC V8 LT1 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = P
1994 CHEVROLET CAPRICE LS V8 LT1 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = P
1994 CHEVROLET CAPRICE CLASSIC V8 4.3L 265cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1994 CHEVROLET CAPRICE CLASSIC LS V8 4.3L 265cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = W
1994 CHEVROLET IMPALA SS V8 LT1 5.7L 350cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = P
1994 CHEVROLET LUMINA EURO V6 LQ1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1994 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS CIERA SL V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1994 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS SUPREME S V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1994 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS SUPREME V6 L82 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
1994 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS SUPREME S V6 LQ1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1994 OLDSMOBILE CUTLASS SUPREME V6 LQ1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1994 PONTIAC GRAND PRIX SE V6 LQ1 3.4L 207cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = X
1994 PONTIAC GRAND PRIX SE V6 3.1L 189cid GAS FI N Engine VIN = M
A list of 3" mafs to use
-
Mike, I have a question. As Steve and I have found out...most can't figure out how to adjust Erics chip or comprehend the data that PL is presenting to them. How much better do you think they'll make out with SD?
-
No kidding :D
-
I assembled a trans, I'm hoping I could figure it out. Just not sure I want to spend the time, that's why I'm kinda leaning towards that axis thing. Just seems pretty simple.
On a side note, I bought a fuel tank for the GS, and get this, for $57 shipped. Off eBay. The original got "jammed up" so now I'm saving up for a robmc pickup and some fuel line.
I couldn't pass it up.
I sure am glad all yall help out. Thanks to everyone for sharing their knowledge and Jason for sharing his parts.
-
Thanks Rich! Just paying it forward.
I've been reading up on Eric's 6.1 chip verses the 6.2 SD chip. I'm thinking the 6.1 will be my next step but it won't be anytime soon as I'm a slow learner and a fast forgetter. I'm gonna be on the lookout for a translator for you.
-
Thought I had a new first edition out in the shop but I have not been able to find but it
-
Okay here are a few examples of the different demands of different engines on the same MAF sensor. 6.2L 436hp N/A, 7.0L 505hp N/A, 6.2L 558hp w/1.9L supercharger, and 6.2L 638hp w/2.3L supercharger V8s. All shown in grams/sec.
Note that the 2007 Z06 is hardcoded in the ECM to 512 g/s, this is a limit of the ECM not the sensor. Because if you look at the custom operating system (OS) in my TBSS (which uses the same ECM) that limit is extended to 973 g/s (upper limit is 1023 g/s). Now if you look at the other cars made after 2009 you will see that their MAF limits are dictated more by specific measured airflow unique to that engine rather than the OS or ECM. This blade MAF sensor is good to 4000 g/s in the ZR1.
I suppose the point is there is no canned solution to this unique requirement for a very specialized sensor; especially when adapted to a 30 year old platform.
Brad, I have no idea why people struggle with these Atari ECM'd Buicks. They were fun to learn on.
-
Atari based ECM lol they are a good way to learn
-
Not really trying to reinvent the wheel but i do spend an inordinate time on research and how things can be done on the cheap. I'm meeting up with Jason later so I had time to kill.
I found this but looked through the full throttle site and don't see where they sell this pipe.
http://www.turbobuicks.com/forums/buick-v6-turbo-tech/61277-new-4-maf-pipe-built-maf-sensor-2.html (http://www.turbobuicks.com/forums/buick-v6-turbo-tech/61277-new-4-maf-pipe-built-maf-sensor-2.html)
Found these on the amazon so maybe you are suppose to buy the mafless pipe and put it in yourself.
http://www.amazon.com/Spectre-Performance-9924011-Mount-Plate/dp/B00EPYE21A/ref=pd_sim_263_42?ie=UTF8&dpID=31HIWxL5OcL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR160%2C160_&refRID=1YDNN8CNVZNMC0N3BWJK (http://www.amazon.com/Spectre-Performance-9924011-Mount-Plate/dp/B00EPYE21A/ref=pd_sim_263_42?ie=UTF8&dpID=31HIWxL5OcL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR160%2C160_&refRID=1YDNN8CNVZNMC0N3BWJK)
http://www.amazon.com/Mass-Sensor-Billet-Mount-Flange/dp/B00N2K2QRK/ref=pd_sbs_263_1?ie=UTF8&dpID=31FTw8oKKKL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR160%2C160_&refRID=0XDA16PN96J4HXC6C6WQ (http://www.amazon.com/Mass-Sensor-Billet-Mount-Flange/dp/B00N2K2QRK/ref=pd_sbs_263_1?ie=UTF8&dpID=31FTw8oKKKL&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR160%2C160_&refRID=0XDA16PN96J4HXC6C6WQ)
and I guess just put in one of these.
http://www.amazon.com/ACDelco-213-4222-Original-Equipment-Temperature/dp/B0010GDGFY/ref=pd_bxgy_263_2?ie=UTF8&refRID=1S9C8793F2DMKPM059FA (http://www.amazon.com/ACDelco-213-4222-Original-Equipment-Temperature/dp/B0010GDGFY/ref=pd_bxgy_263_2?ie=UTF8&refRID=1S9C8793F2DMKPM059FA)
or maybe one of these housings
http://www.amazon.com/Spectre-Performance-9705-Polished-Aluminum/dp/B003J9IXT4/ref=pd_sbs_263_3?ie=UTF8&dpID=41ZOj3I9q9L&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR160%2C160_&refRID=0XDA16PN96J4HXC6C6WQ (http://www.amazon.com/Spectre-Performance-9705-Polished-Aluminum/dp/B003J9IXT4/ref=pd_sbs_263_3?ie=UTF8&dpID=41ZOj3I9q9L&dpSrc=sims&preST=_AC_UL160_SR160%2C160_&refRID=0XDA16PN96J4HXC6C6WQ)
Then there are these
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Super-Auto-BT153X-New-Mass-Air-Flow-Sensor-/251542777752?hash=item3a911e2f98:g:0F8AAOxyoBtTjd (http://www.ebay.com/itm/Super-Auto-BT153X-New-Mass-Air-Flow-Sensor-/251542777752?hash=item3a911e2f98:g:0F8AAOxyoBtTjd) t4&vxp=mtr
http://www.amazon.com/Shinehome%C2%AE-25180303-MASS-SENSOR-VEHICLES/dp/B018VSMIXY/ref=sr_1_16?ie=UTF8&qid=1464191293&sr=8-16&keywords=maf+impala+ss (http://www.amazon.com/Shinehome%C2%AE-25180303-MASS-SENSOR-VEHICLES/dp/B018VSMIXY/ref=sr_1_16?ie=UTF8&qid=1464191293&sr=8-16&keywords=maf+impala+ss)
I'm leaning toward one of these AXIS translator boxes. It seems it wont do all it can without 60lb injectors and a special chip. But can go that route in the future if the eric gets out with a chip good to use the 42lb injectors. Maybe I can get some 60s or the chip will get developed. Just seems like a better thing with more potential for an additional $20. Eric sez the 5.6 chip I have will have its tunability until the new stuff happens.
http://www.turbotweakstore.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=AXIS-1 (http://www.turbotweakstore.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=AXIS-1)
Any thoughts? TIA
Haven't seen very many running the AXiS yet but I've been running one for almost a year now. Couldn't be happier with it. Slightly less adjustability than a regular TT chip but I don't miss it. Not having to reprogram chip settings (if you change the defaults on a TT chip) when you disconnect the battery is a feature I like a lot. If you're looking for a simple, easy to use, tuning device it's worth a look.
-
Well, here surfing ebay for some couplers for the new maf install. Not sure what people do for the temp sensor. I guess I need to be more observant when perusing under the hoods.
I found this. http://www.ebay.com/itm/301871271618?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&fromMakeTrack=true&autorefresh=true (http://www.ebay.com/itm/301871271618?ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT&fromMakeTrack=true&autorefresh=true) Not sure how much it weighs but I thought I could drill and tap a hole for the temp sensor like I did with the pvc coupling I used many years ago(seen in the pic in the post above). Seemed expensive at $24 so I sent an offer of $7. we will see.
Also looking at coupling hoses. I guess the ricer guys use a lot of this kind of thing as there seems to be a warehouse in Rowland Heights, California that many of the sellers ship from or they are all just located there. as the pix all look very similar and ship from Rowland Heights, California.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/4-PLY-3-25-12-LONG-TURBO-AIR-INTAKE-INTERCOOLER-PIPING-BLACK-SILICONE-HOSE-PIPE-/400783027879?hash=item5d5087aea7:g:rKsAAOSw4HVWCW ok&vxp=mtr (http://www.ebay.com/itm/4-PLY-3-25-12-LONG-TURBO-AIR-INTAKE-INTERCOOLER-PIPING-BLACK-SILICONE-HOSE-PIPE-/400783027879?hash=item5d5087aea7:g:rKsAAOSw4HVWCWok&vxp=mtr)
http://www.ebay.com/itm/4-PLY-3-25-ID-8-LONG-TURBO-AIR-INTAKE-INTERCOOLER-PIPING-BLACK-SILICONE-HOSE-/400783027881?hash=item5d5087aea9:g:ziAAAOSwFnFWDL zl&vxp=mtr (http://www.ebay.com/itm/4-PLY-3-25-ID-8-LONG-TURBO-AIR-INTAKE-INTERCOOLER-PIPING-BLACK-SILICONE-HOSE-/400783027881?hash=item5d5087aea9:g:ziAAAOSwFnFWDLzl&vxp=mtr)
How does one cut this material? Utility knife? Hack saw? Or is it just better to buy it already cut to length? Like these.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/83mm-3-1-4-3-25-Inch-ID-Straight-Coupler-Silicone-Hose-Blue-/151681858923?hash=item2350f17d6b:g:oCwAAOSwgkRVVF OK&vxp=mtr (http://www.ebay.com/itm/83mm-3-1-4-3-25-Inch-ID-Straight-Coupler-Silicone-Hose-Blue-/151681858923?hash=item2350f17d6b:g:oCwAAOSwgkRVVFOK&vxp=mtr)
Ive been putting in the extra time to hopefully have the coin for one of these axis things next week or two. One graduating high school isn't helping the fundage.
Car starts and runs. idle af does hover 04-05 but the bl is up around 138-140 and Jason said this could be an intake leak. int is right at 128 and while cruising it drops to 122-126 and back to 128. This reman maf still doesnt go up to 255 in the af. Im going to take the k&n off for a test run, maybe that is a restriction. Probably should clean and oil it while I have it off.
-
Another video on the subject of MAFs and the fun of having one: https://youtu.be/RIpbZ74TuFk
-
I just buy a complete "intercooler pipe kit" off eBay in the size I need. Currently have 2.5", 3", and 4" on the shelf - never know when you need a tube or coupler. ;)
-
I was gonna go mafless...then I remembered Mike pulling his hair out over MAFTPRO and finally giving up...so I said piss on it. :)
I'm prolly never gonna exceed 12,000 RWHP like in the video...so that's another reason I don't need it. :)
-
A reman MAF not hitting 255? Nah...can't be. :)
-
I was gonna go mafless...then I remembered Mike pulling his hair out over MAFTPRO and finally giving up...so I said piss on it. :)
I'm prolly never gonna exceed 12,000 RWHP like in the video...so that's another reason I don't need it. :)
Mike who?
And that isn't 12000 Horsepower, that is 12000 Hertz.
-
Most folks are drilling a hole in the couplers and installing the IAT sensor just before the MAF.
I cut the hoses with a utility knife if needed. Otherwise I run the extra length up the tube.
I don't know what else to tell ya about the MAF. High blm at idle is a sign of a vacuum leak on the intake side. What is the IAC showing at idle as well as the TPS?
-
I was gonna go mafless...then I remembered Mike pulling his hair out over MAFTPRO and finally giving up...so I said piss on it. :)
I'm prolly never gonna exceed 12,000 RWHP like in the video...so that's another reason I don't need it. :)
From Bison today
...
Had Juan's GN on the dyno yesterday. Some decent numbers with an old 5.7 chip. Fuel was 110 octane. Ported iron heads, 6265, Precision slic, and small hyd roller. I did a back to back with and without the factory MAF sensor. The only thing I did before the MAF delete was add as much fuel as I could to the chip. I wasn't logging the hits so I'm not sure where the injectors maxed out but I'm estimating around 5200rpm. Peak boost was around 30psi in all hits. The difference with the restriction removed is quite remarkable. We were seeing boost fall off and a very momentary spike of peak power on ramp in with the stock MAF and falling as rpm climbed. Just removal netted us 34whp peak and almost 80whp in other areas. This is typically of a gain when converting to a speed density setup. Of course we are limited by a chip here. With an XFI or SD 2 or similar we could have easily picked up another 20-30whp and cleaned up the ramp in a lot. It's not always about peak. Looking at the entire curve is very important. You can see that once I got it over the MAF transition to chip fuel it absolutely took off. Very noticeable even before the numbers came up on the screen. This car is a prime example of why a good speed density setup is so beneficial.
-
I've seen Bison post before about removing restriction nets RWHP. I'd be curious to know what the RWHP was. I have an idea what it should be with that build at that boost pressure. Dan Keller came back from Bisons with Champion heads and a roller cam setup. I walked all over him with 7 lbs less boost. Let's see if he can beat me with the XFI he purchased. MAF against MAFLESS. Place your bets...
-
He said it himself, it isn't about peak, it is about the curve. If I can use a 3" lt1 maf and make a nice curve and decent power it is a good thing. 30-40 hp isn't going to make or break me at the peak. A nice fat torque band through the whole rpm curve is what I need. It is a street car. And a daily driver at that. I don't understand why anyone drives a Prius or smart car. Cant be fun. Maybe for them but I don't think It would work for me.
Sadly, the axis is out of stock and full throttle is running a $10 off on the regular translator. I think this is a sign to just take the 5% off and go that route. I will just have to deal with reprograming when the battery is disconnected like the rest do. I did see the plugs are different. I guess the translator takes care of that.
(http://s25.postimg.org/wia4tfo1r/WP_20160528_20_33_16_Pro.jpg)
-
I've seen Bison post before about removing restriction nets RWHP. I'd be curious to know what the RWHP was. I have an idea what it should be with that build at that boost pressure. Dan Keller came back from Bisons with Champion heads and a roller cam setup. I walked all over him with 7 lbs less boost. Let's see if he can beat me with the XFI he purchased. MAF against MAFLESS. Place your bets...
Selling stuff is a good way to make money. But as you proved, running it down the track is way different than running it on some rollers.
-
I would not be surprised at seeing 30 hp with that turbo and that level of boost.
I wonder if he had an inlet pipe on the turbo or if the air was going straight into the bell.
-
Bison has posted that the 6265 will put out another 30 HP all in vs the 6262. He cracked the 9's with the 6265...so I have a pretty good idea of the RWHP to break into the 9's...depending on the weight of the car Whats great about Bison...is he posts back to back tests. I remember years ago him and Otto would test turbos back to back after hours. The results...were interesting. Guys were making claims of outrageous HP at low boost in the teens. Testing proved otherwise.
-
Grumpy and I'm sure a few others that Steve could name have cracked the 9's with a MAF. The masses will always flock to a MAF setup...cuz it's easy...and it works. And try as you might...you can't beat a stock ECM. There's gazzilons of miles of testing that goes into them...compare d to very little feedback with an aftermarket unit. SD will give you a HP increase...but leep in mind that's 'all in'. How many people max a turbo out? The answer...very few.
I have TR owners contact me all the time...and tell me they wanna run XFI, SD, FAST or DFI. My advice to them is this. Make sure you fully understand whatever setup you're gonna use...and that you can tune it yourself. There's a couple of locals who pushed aftermarlet fuel management systems on a few guys...and the results have been less than spectacular... cuz they can't tune it...or have the wrong combination. It's tough to watch these guys struggle...whe n they don't have too. Personally, I never tell anyone that they need something...wh en they don't. If they don't understand a certain setup...then I tell them to stick to something they do.
-
I hear the term "ALL IN" when it comes to turbo's here.
What does that mean and why would you want to do this.
FWIW 9in filter ,3in maf, 3in pipe 4in turbo inlet 66mil turbo 94mph in the 8th and 122 in the 1/4 at 19 lbs of boost. Driven 200 miles to a track.
I can't imagine ALL IN.
-
Ron, 'all in' simply means maxing the turbo out in terms of boost. That 66 you had on your car prolly wouldn't run out of steam till 28-29 PSI. You'd have to have enuf high gear fuel in the chip to cover that high of boost. You have to tell Eric when you order your chip as to what your max boost is gonna be. He writes it on the back of the chip. I'll told him 28 plus for me.
-
I did see the plugs are different. I guess the translator takes care of that.
http://www.ihadav8.com/forum/index.php?topic=4621.0 (http://www.ihadav8.com/forum/index.php?topic=4621.0)
-
It just seems to me most people concentrate on the wrong things. 29 lbs of boost means nothing by itself.
Probably creating a lot of heat and running out of fuel with that much boost. Whats the IDC.
-
I have TR owners contact me all the time...and tell me they wanna run XFI, SD, FAST or DFI. My advice to them is this. Make sure you fully understand whatever setup you're gonna use...and that you can tune it yourself. There's a couple of locals who pushed aftermarlet fuel management systems on a few guys...and the results have been less than spectacular... cuz they can't tune it...or have the wrong combination. It's tough to watch these guys struggle...whe n they don't have too. Personally, I never tell anyone that they need something...wh en they don't. If they don't understand a certain setup...then I tell them to stick to something they do.
Brad...there is a certain amount of magic involved with marketing aftermarket systems. I recall when a certain well known tuner trumpeted his claim that FAST would knock two or three tenths off a chip right off the bat. He convinced one of the guys running a ME chip on a mid second nines car that miracles would follow. Took him a year to consistently out perform the ME after the sale.
There is much more profit in selling an aftermarket system than there is in selling chips and it opens up a market for Tuners to follow their clients from race to race to tune their cars and collect more money for their services. We tend to idolize these guys giving them credit for all sorts of abilities far beyond their actual performance in smoothing out the rough spots in a/f curves.
When they go too far and blow up an engine, it never seems to be their fault, but is marked off to "That's Racing"
The foremost marketing point is the slow 8 bit computer GM put into the cars in the 'eighties. No doubt that it is slow but it has never been a hinderance to Steve, Eric, or Bob as the speed is predictable which makes it possible to anticipate required timing to have the right fuel at the right time. Nothing happens instantly including injector response/dead time. As this can be measured, then the programmer can anticipate the time between command and response for a given computer and given injector.
Understanding reality vs marketing takes a lot of squeal out of selling the pig. In the past 15 years or more, we have seen many examples of 12 second cars running an aftermarket system combined with owners that have no clue as to how to tune it but it makes for good conversation at Sonic or Tim Horton's.
I suspect 95% just get in their cars and drive them and maybe 2% can actually tune them no matter what kind of system is in the car. I agree completely that most never tune their 5.7 chips based upon my experience that no one that writes me has ever read the instructions that came with the chip. Further, no matter how many times I explain how the chip works and ask people to read the instructions to reinforce what I have told them, they ask the same question the following week. Yet, they ask me how much faster they will go with FAST or such. When they ask me if they should bump the fuel pressure, I am pretty sure they don't read.
Now, back to MAF's. Bob, and others, have posted flow numbers for various types. I have never run a Translator and I could not find a new one that I have had in the box since they were introduced years ago. I was going to give it to Rich but I suspect I threw it away on some get rid of stuff binge in the past couple of years. Of course, I always suspect that when I cannot find something but it is usually true so....
I started running gutted MAF's back in the -90's when I went to ME chips. Then, I went SD when Steve introduced that on the ME and followed to Eric with the SD1 chip after Steve gave him his software and Eric revised it to do away with the thumbwheel.
The physics behind removing restriction on the inlet side of the turbo is indisputable. Anyone that has gone to a four inch inlet can immediately notice the throttle response-particularly if they get rid of the maf. Increasing the flow on the inlet side allows the turbo to do the same job with less effort. If one has a big turbo and runs 23 psi there will not be as much obvious gain as there will be if one has the same turbo and runs 30 psi where the turbo has to work to do the job. Run a 100 yards with your mouth closed and a finger closing one nostril for an example.
That eliminates most of us because we don't normally push our engines like that. The physics are still true, however. We go to all kinds of effort on the output side of the turbo-ported heads, bigger valves, bigger intercoolers, big exhaust, etc. to improve performance so it seems a bit odd that we resist doing the same at the beginning point of the process.
The SD1 chip is dead simple to use IF one will read the instructions. Eric writes instructions that even I can understand so they must be simple. Yes, it has 20+ adjustments, but in real life, no one touches much other than timing, and fueling. Beyond that turning down the cruise fuel a bunch is about all I ever touch. If you run it closed loop, just play with the A/F's and forget it.
I have been running open loop most of the time since I went thru three Innovate wb systems and average 21-24 mph on the highway and reasonable in town compared to conventional chips. I actually turned wb control back on in the GN recently as the NGK unit has not failed in three years! LOL
Eric asked me if I wanted to go to the SD2 but I did not because lately, I just get into the T and drive it...I have too many projects to want to play with Buicks lately. It does not look all that hard to learn but I really don't see the point because I don't think it will make a ten or eleven second car any faster.
These days, I suggest to most that they should get a 6.1 chip and run closed loop which tends to protect a lot of them from themselves. It seems to work quite well and I still look at the timing retard and narrow band as a guide for picking the A/F.
-
At what point does a 3in inlet become a restriction.
If I change my 3in inlet to a 4in mafless S.Y. how much will I pick up.
-
As you don't run your car hard, nothing.
-
In the past 15 years or more, we have seen many examples of 12 second cars running an aftermarket system combined with owners that have no clue as to how to tune it but it makes for good conversation at Sonic or Tim Horton's.
Ouch.
-
So at what point does a 3in become a restriction? Mid 10's?
Something I'm missing here.
-
Steve...did Grumpy not crack the 9's on a 3 inch setup? LSI MAF and a 3 inch pipe? I'm fairly certain he did.
-
yes, you are.
It's always a restriction. The question is a what point does it become significant and that is not only dependent upon ones combination but, also how far one tries to push it toward it's theoretical limit without going down hill. The turbo is an air pump...pumps are capacity limited by the intake size as well as the outlet size.
-
At what point does a 3in inlet become a restriction.
If I change my 3in inlet to a 4in mafless S.Y. how much will I pick up.
If you hit the old KenneBell catalog, a tenth of a second and one mile per hour. Or at least that is what they touted most of their products. If you added them all up you were in the sixes..
Is there an SD how to? I'm guessing you don't need a powerlogger as this was out before the powerlogger came along I think. I really shouldn't take on more but I think it is the challenge. Probably should just order the basic translator from full throttle and keep moving forward. I will say, having a scan master and being able to goof with the 5.6 chip hasn't gotten me to do any tuning . But I haven't been to the track either.
I'm just hoping to learn some power logging skills from Jim and Jason as they learn.
-
Now we are going around in circles. IS it a restriction or not a restriction and how much would you pick-up going from 3in to 4in if it is?
-
Correct me if I'm wrong...but a given engine can only 'swallow' a certain amount of air.
-
yes, the instructions are on line...but you do need a PL :) Here are the instructions https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.turbotweak.com%2Fturbotweaksds.pdf (https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.turbotweak.com%2Fturbotweaksds.pdf)
That's for the SD or as I called it, SD1
I believe you can operate the SD2 as if it is an SD1 if you wish to begin that way and get things close before worrying about AF tables, etc.
-
Correct me if I'm wrong...but a given engine can only 'swallow' a certain amount of air.
Basically, you are wrong :D
You can compute the cfm of an engine, but what is important is how dense that air is...in other words how many air molecules you put into the engine and that depends on the air density coming out of the air pump and it's size
That's the beauty of forced aspiration. There is a practical limit, however, in that we can reach a point where the mechanical structure of the engine can no longer contain the combustion pressure and things expand
-
Now we are going around in circles. IS it a restriction or not a restriction and how much would you pick-up going from 3in to 4in if it is?
No, you are going in circles....I said it was always a restriction, just as the air filter is a restriction. At what point does it become a significant restriction that is costing some power.
I would say that depends upon the total combination and the tune applied which affects the point where the turbo starts leaving the zone of maximum efficiency on the high side.
Now, if you had bothered to read Bison's post that I quoted above, he gave you a combination and gave you some dyno numbers for that particular car.
-
I over expanded an engine once...didn't like it. NASA is still looking for my head gaskets with the Hubble and I twisted a head into a pretzel. :icon_eyes:
-
LOL....NASA is government funded, those hgs are gone forever
-
Brad, take the HP rating of the 6262 and compute the cfm. Joe Lubrant, when he was the turbo guy at PTE said the hp was calculated by multiplying cfm by 0.69.
Compare that to the cfm of the engine at the rpm you shift at.
-
Now we are going around in circles. IS it a restriction or not a restriction and how much would you pick-up going from 3in to 4in if it is?
It is all a restriction, intake, turbo, intercooler, intake, heads, exhaust. As with any fluid, the volume, rate of travel, characteristic s of the fluid all change the amount that each of those things restrict. If you have a street car like mine with a stock turbo or a ta49 or other small turbo, I doubt you notice too much on the time slip. Just like a loose converter changes the way the car "feels", getting more air and fuel in quicker makes or enables the engine to rev quicker. Temp as Steve noted makes a big difference in just how dense that intake air is. More air in, the more fuel you van put with it and more power can be made. You know how much better your car runs on a cool evening than on a hot summer afternoon at the track.
-
Rich, I think Indy was a lot more interesting when the cars topped out between 160-180....now it looks like slot car racing to me. Also, there used to be more disparity in the cars, it seems :)
-
This has been a very educational thread and I can confirm the results regarding a change in pipe size like I said previously my buddy went from 3" tubing to 4" and he ended with a couple extra psi on his first test run. He removed a 3.5" MAF and a Z06 card MAF in 4" housing and all 4" tube. It was kinda funny he said "man my car was pulling great with the 4" pipe" then looked at the boost gauge it was at 24 not 22 where he had set it for the old set up. I like my GEN2 translator and a simple way to learn how to tune lots of adjustability with the extender G chip. If I could start again I would probably go with the SD2 set up as you have even more adjustability. I probably would have been overwhelmed at first but it look pretty cool.
-
Rich, why don't you ask if anyone is selling an AXIS - a WTB adv on the other board?
-
That's a good idea, ill try that.
-
Steve...here's what you're looking for. This is from Patrick Rubio just before he left Precision. Wish he was still there.
Mine's rated at 675 at the flywheel. Where are they getting that number from? I'm a dummy. Went back and reread your post. I see how they get it.
I found a chart from another board that gives a flow rating of 70.5 lb/min for the CEA 6262. Is there a way of calculating lb/min to cfm.
-
Rich, I think Indy was a lot more interesting when the cars topped out between 160-180....now it looks like slot car racing to me. Also, there used to be more disparity in the cars, it seems :)
I never really liked open wheel racing. And NASCAR pretty much died for me when Cale Yarborough retired. Drag Racing lost my interest when Lee Shepard got killed(Reher-Morrison isn't to far from my house and I used to pass by Paul Peyton's chassis shop when it was on little road in Arlington).
I do laugh at people who think they need an aftermarket computer. I guess not really laugh but feel sorry they don't know any better on their 12 sec car. If you are in the 9s, hey goin fast ain't easy.
I do my car stuff like I do my investing and don't put money into stuff I don't understand.
-
That is a very wise move on your part, Rich. Magic is not for everyone and that is why so many are unhappy. they did not understand what they bought :)
-
1lb/min x 14.472...so I'm getting roughly 1020 cfm's.
-
1020x.69 gives a HP of 703
-
Steve...here's what you're looking for. This is from Patrick Rubio just before he left Precision. Wish he was still there.
Mine's rated at 675 at the flywheel. Where are they getting that number from? I'm a dummy. Went back and reread your post. I see how they get it.
I found a chart from another board that gives a flow rating of 70.5 lb/min for the CEA 6262. Is there a way of calculating lb/min to cfm.
Brad, there are formulas on line to do that...catch is lbs/min is density and you need to know pressure and temperature at a minimum to get into the ball park and humidity to be correct as I recall.
Try it another way, there are formulas online that will calculate wheel hp from your mph at the line and the car weight...They seem to work okay but are factored a bit as they ignore drag which costs you a little. Joe has a chart on gnttype that is pretty real world. For computing hp vs mph.
Somewhere before I got led in circles, I was going to make the point that if your car made 675 hp, I would guess that you would run about a 10.2 at 132-134 mph. BUT, you are not trying to push the car because you are wise enuf to like to race every week end instead of building motors and the rest of the drivetrain. :)
I would guess as you pumped the boost up enough to get into this area, you find the car flattening out and not going faster no matter how much boost you added at that point.. I would bet money that if you would get closer to the theoretical suggested by your turbo specs if you pulled the maf tube off the turbo and let the air enter directly into the bell and the car would pick up instead of flattening out.
For most of us, this is a theoretical discussion because we are not hard core racers because we pay for our own parts. I have seen cars go faster just with a bigger filter that just not restrict the air flow any....at lower boosts with large turbos....tho
There is a large gray area between what can be done and what most of us actually do. That does not contradict theory...just the size of our balls
-
Using the Wallace Racing Calculator from my ET and MPH...this is what I get.
HP from ET is 578 at the flywheel and 520 at the rear wheel.
HP from MPH is 627 at the flywheel and 564 at the rear wheel.
Vehicle weight of 3520 is included in the calculation. Discuss amongst yourselves.
-
Steve...you're correct as usual. Air density, temperature all factor into it. Gave myself a headache reading up on all the formulas.
-
and that sounds about right to me for your current performance. If you go any faster, you will need a cage....so even if you dare to go where man has never gone...it ain't gonna happen, I suspect.
You need to go fix Dan's car. I bet he will try it! LOL
-
Steve, I don't know what's wrong with Dan Kellers car. Boost is at 29.7 with high gear 02's in the 750's. His car weighs 4,000 with him in it. Best he's done is 11.5 at 121 on a 1.7x launch. PTC spec'd race convertor, roller cam, Champion heads, 6262 and alky. He's currently fighting a high BLM problem.
-
Cam installed correctly?...do the logs show a gain of rpm in third gear or are the graphs flat whether he shifts at 4400 rpm or 5400 into third?
Leak down test?
-
Only thing I can think of is the ring gaps are wrong. No oil out the breathers...bu t no leak down test has been done. Engine is fresh. I'm working 6 days a week...and I haven't got the time.
-
Steve, I don't know what's wrong with Dan Kellers car. Boost is at 29.7 with high gear 02's in the 750's. His car weighs 4,000 with him in it. Best he's done is 11.5 at 121 on a 1.7x launch. PTC spec'd race convertor, roller cam, Champion heads, 6262 and alky. He's currently fighting a high BLM problem.
Jason told me that high blm could be a leak in the intake or piping. 121 is good mph. im guessing he has stock gears, what size/height tire? might need something taller to "let it eat".
-
10's are tough to come by with a 1.70 launch.
-
Steve, I don't know what's wrong with Dan Kellers car. Boost is at 29.7 with high gear 02's in the 750's. His car weighs 4,000 with him in it. Best he's done is 11.5 at 121 on a 1.7x launch. PTC spec'd race convertor, roller cam, Champion heads, 6262 and alky. He's currently fighting a high BLM problem.
Jason told me that high blm could be a leak in the intake or piping. 121 is good mph. im guessing he has stock gears, what size/height tire? might need something taller to "let it eat".
It can also be a leak on the exhaust side LOL
-
We lined up to race back in April at our local track. I let my foot out of it at the 1/8th and he was way back. Got back to the pits, and he had blown the PCV line off. I reinstalled it...but the BLM's stayed pegged at 142. I couldn't see any other lines blown off it...so who knows. I'm off the week of the 20th...hopeful ly I can stop in then and get a close look at it.
-
This has been a very educational thread and I can confirm the results regarding a change in pipe size like I said previously my buddy went from 3" tubing to 4" and he ended with a couple extra psi on his first test run. He removed a 3.5" MAF and a Z06 card MAF in 4" housing and all 4" tube. It was kinda funny he said "man my car was pulling great with the 4" pipe" then looked at the boost gauge it was at 24 not 22 where he had set it for the old set up. I like my GEN2 translator and a simple way to learn how to tune lots of adjustability with the extender G chip. If I could start again I would probably go with the SD2 set up as you have even more adjustability. I probably would have been overwhelmed at first but it look pretty cool.
In the Procharger world a restrictive air filter can really slow a combo down. I have a 3.5" pipe leading to a huge filter; because it can probably even contribute to belt slip if it is fighting air flow.
-
Mike brings up a good point. Anyone made back to back runs with the air filter on...then removed?
-
In the old days, there was a lot of discussion on filters. The consensus of guys like Conley, Yaklin, Chuck, etc was the bigger the better. Remember the ATR kit with the big long filter in front of the radiator?
As discovered above, many don't understand that turbos are great at pushing air but they literally suck at sucking air and the longer the inlet pipe, the worse they get. With regard to pipe, we have two choices...bigg er diameter or shorter length.
Now, we get to the filter...it's obvious that greater surface area presented, the less restriction we should have..the downfall to the ATR filter was the filter area was big but the pipe was really long...tended to offset one another.
The Nine inch K&N filter is a convenient size but bigger is better and a 12" filter with a rounded base and an inverted velocity cone on the end instead of a flat rubber end will flow a heck of a lot more air on a four inch pipe making it easier for the turbo to suck air in and get it moving quickly.
It's not without reason that many of the serious turbo race cars run the filter mounted directly to the turbo...I suspect it also serves to smooth the air entering the turbo and allows the the turbo to start spooling quicker and faster...
Again, one has to be pushing the limits to see the difference, I would guess. I don't recall any numbers and I suspect most people that did this made it in conjunction with a total set up.
-
I believe that the standard 9" K&N is good to about 900 cfm so a 6262 that is being used in it's sweet zone is probably being restricted by the filter to some degree.
Lotsa good articles online about filter sizing with turbos
-
Again I can't copy & paste it screws it up everytime??
Rich just run a direct fused power wire to the ECM & you never lose the chip settings. I have a track Kill Switch & this way is cheap & easy to do.
Sadly, the axis is out of stock and full throttle is running a $10 off on the regular translator. I think this is a sign to just take the 5% off and go that route. I will just have to deal with reprograming when the battery is disconnected like the rest do. I did see the plugs are different. I guess the translator takes care of that.
Rich I forgot to respond before but I have a Kill Switch for the track so what I've done is run a separate fused power line direct to the ECM so it never loses memory. Easy, cheap & it works.
-
So a regular translator seems to be the way to go. Not real worried about loosing the tune, just thought it might be cool to twist the dials. In all reality I just need to save the $30 and put in the order. I just a cheapskate, plain and simple.
I did order some hoses and a transition to install the 3" lt1 maf.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/231631060971?_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT (http://m.ebay.com/itm/3-Ply-Reinforced-3-quot-3-25-quot-Silicone-Straight-Reducer-Intercooler-Coupler-Hose-/231307078333?txnId=1322353869013)
http://www.ebay.com/itm/231307078333?_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT (http://m.ebay.com/orderDetails?itemId=231631060971&txnId=1322357404013)
And pulled the trigger on a translator from full throttle. Goodness, $19.89 for shipping. I guess I can't pick it up any cheaper.
As above lots of good info in this thread . Keep it coming.
I'll do a air filter and open pipe comparison when the new maf goes in.
-
Get 4-ply hoses. 3-ply suck.
-
Ok
-
As above lots of good info in this thread . Keep it coming.
I'll do a air filter and open pipe comparison when the new maf goes in.
Assuming you have a smaller turbo and a 9" filter, you won't be able to move enuf air to see a difference, I think.
Also, it may screw up the smooth air flow to the maf and it might run rougher....I guess that would depend upon what smoothing features or built into the maf.
:)
-
Steve...what in the blue hell are 'smoothing' features? :)
-
Those screens I think
-
in the stock maf, it was the pair of screens in front of the element plus the inverted cone behind them. If you took one out which most did to get more flow, it might run a bit rougher, but not much. If you took both screens out, it would run like crap-unless you had a ME chip and then you could take both screens out plus the cone and significantly increase the flow.
If the air does not flow properly across the sensor, it will read erratically and not give the right answer.
-
software?
-
If you are asking if the reason they did not work for most guys is software...the answer is yes
-
Daveismissing. Remember Norbs had some fukn MAF the size of a frisbee...and it required software. Do you remember the name of it.
-
The only MAF with a USB port?
might have been this one:
http://www.andersonfordmotorsport.com/abaco-performance-mass-air-flow-meter-97mm/ (http://www.andersonfordmotorsport.com/abaco-performance-mass-air-flow-meter-97mm/)
-
I could be wrong, but I'm thinking that it was made by Granatelli motorsports?
https://www.granatellimotorsports.com (https://www.granatellimotorsports.com)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZjIhUIqMCI (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZjIhUIqMCI)
-
I thought it was the ABACO
" They can be re-flashed to change calibration and programmed to hold 10 calibrations. They work on multiple makes of frequency and voltage-based autos and utilize a built-in digital response filter to eliminate much of the "noise" without sacrificing response time to airflow changes. These DBX meters work great with draw-through or blow-through applications and their multi-sensor design allows the meters to be installed in any configuration, at any clock rotation, without signal deterioration. Abaco DBX mass air meters are made from extruded aluminum, not plastic, for strength and durability and are designed with an easy plug-in for USB cable hookup to your PC. You'll be impressed with their crisp throttle response, stable signals, and unparalleled drivability, plus the included free software allows you to custom-tune fuel curves to grow with your performance. So, are you ready to be impressed? Bolt on Abaco DBX mass air meters and kick up the horsepower on your ride. "
-
Dave I'm pretty sure it was the ABACO 97 mm adjustable unit. One thing about Norbs, he always went BIG & I guess the Spaghetti Wiring Nightmares eventually drove him Nuts! I think that Granatelli was trying to sell Stock replacement units but I guess that never worked out for them? :chin:
-
ABACO sounds right...think it was 5 inch. Little known fact. Norbs had Eric burn a 5.7 street chip for it...and the S1 engine was in it at this point of time. Norbs twisted the key...and it fired up...and ran like a top. Unfortunately. ..it never got track tested.
Speaking of Norbs, I learned something watching him dial in the idle fuel on XFI. Norbs was always a stickler of running everything lean...includi ng idle fuel. Anyway...when he leaned the idle fuel out it began to idle rough...when he richened it up a tad...it smoothed out. It your idle BLM's are little rich...don't worry about it. Mine sit at 118...and I sleep just fine at nite.
-
In all of my MAF based systems I use large cell screens to improve the signal across the sensor. Laminar air flow is better than turbulent.
http://www.saxonpc.com/100mm-cells-for-100.html (http://www.saxonpc.com/100mm-cells-for-100.html)
-
234-1001
-
I had salespeople try and sell me that stuff to use between/into/out-of cooling fans.
Supposed to be especially effective between "seriesed" fans
-
I had salespeople try and sell me that stuff to use between/into/out-of cooling fans.
Supposed to be especially effective between "seriesed" fans
There is an issue with bad signals using the LS3/7/9 card-style MAF if they are placed near bends as the airflow does not get to straighten out in time. Causes some wonky readings. I have logged proof of the improved smoothness across the sensor when running these large cell screens. Most fools in the LS-world just try clocking the MAF after then bend trying to find a cleaner signal. Nope. Dumb. Not impressed.
I'll give up a few cfm for a smooth running vehicle.
-
We have some flow sensors for compressed air that ask for a couple of feet of straight run before and after to be usable.
-
What size do I order for the 3" lt1. I think it is 83mm but I'm not sure. I'll measure, but I don't see that size listed. Good thing they do custom sizes, or maybe the 73 or 75 size. What about the cell size?
http://www.saxonpc.com/100mm-cells-for-100.html (http://www.saxonpc.com/100mm-cells-for-100.html)
-
The 4:1 or 5:1 will be fine. I believe you want the cells at 3/16". Definitely measure the ID of your MAF.
-
I guess I'm not understanding the ratio thing. I looked at the link in the page but all it is is a picture of some columns. How does this equate to the size of the cells?. I guess there has a size difference and a picture would be better for me. I'll have to do some interwebz searching. Maybe I can find a pic.
Thanks for the link. I hadn't even thought of such a piece. Good stuff!
-
snag a box of straws from McD's and fire up your hot glue gun.......
-
So does this mean I should install a screen on my 4" pipe with card MAF?
-
I get what a screen is and how it straightens the air. I just didn't understand the aspect ratio. Maybe that is how long you make the straw before you glue em together. The longer the straighter but also the more drag as there is more surface area to cause the friction. Also smaller straws would cause more surface area.
-
My translator has arrived. now waiting on some cool new hoses and might be waiting longer as Mike advised to get four ply instead of three ply. I also ordered some t bolt clamps, a new denso o2 sensor and a nifty chinesium o2 socket and thread chaser set. Im not a big fan of the chinesium tools but that it seems is all there is these days.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/262072722159 (http://www.ebay.com/itm/262072722159)
http://www.ebay.com/itm/311360326565 (http://www.ebay.com/itm/311360326565)
http://www.ebay.com/itm/301949948416 (http://www.ebay.com/itm/301949948416)
http://www.ebay.com/itm/301950608299 (http://www.ebay.com/itm/301950608299)
-
Chinesium Good one! :cheers:
-
I'm kind of a tool aficionado but with my limited budget and the snap on and matco guys don't stop by the house I rarely buy any these days.
I did take some pix of the maf screen on the cardone piece Jason loaned to me.
(http://s25.postimg.org/q6o2es9kv/WP_20160604_18_49_02_Pro.jpg)
(http://s25.postimg.org/6dbym2w73/WP_20160604_18_49_12_Pro.jpg)
-
A quote from Eric on card style MAFs. 'Using a blade style is very inconsistent and highly dependent on intake plumbing, turbulence etc.'
-
I saw that, but I think with that air straightener Mike posted it could still be a viable option.
I'm waiting on the transition hoses I ordered . Got the 3" and the t bolt clamps. Got the borrowed lt1 and regular translator. Car running but just not giving full 255.
-
Couplings arrived today so ya know I was out there puttin in the new to me maf. Didn't order enough t clamps and the straight coupling I ordered for the turbo to tube was too big so I left the stock one on for now. We drilled and threaded a hole for the temp sensor in the pvc piece and went to town with the couplings and clamps. Got her in and the switches flipped and turned. Ran good at low boost. Most importantly it went to 255. Idles at 07 so I'm not sure about that. Blm and int went to 128 for both. I unplugged the orange wire so it could start from scratch. I'm just hoping it cures the long cranking to start in the am.
(http://s25.postimg.org/9xeknyy67/WP_20160613_22_07_22_Pro.jpg)
Back to eBay for some four layer hose and some more t clamps.
Thanks for all the help.
-
sure you hear the pump run in the morning when you turn the key on....
-
If you rotate your MAF 180*, it'll look better and keep the sharp corners away from the hood liner along with hiding the wire.
-
I get the hoses and T bar clamps at a local Freightliner dealer. Just saying if ya need them quick
-
As you know I rarely do anything quick, but that is a good suggestion. And they are open 24 hrs in our area.
Started a little easier this am. Seems more peppy. My son said it didn't pull as well last night but u have the boost down. We will have to spin the rod on that thing and see how that goes
I had it down like that Earl, but the wires looked close to the belt. I put the convoluted tube on it to clean it up. Will revisit tonight. I want to tape the ends and make sure nothing is rubbing.
Might go to the painless wire thing tonight in conjunction with the power tour they are having facility tours. We will see what time I get done with work today.
-
Perhaps I have mine clocked at 90 with the wires facing down....
..I really need to open my hood again and finish tuning my car... :)
-
I got back under the hood last night. Changed out the O2 sensor and taped off the end of the tube at the maf connector. Didn't look like I was rubbing on the hood pad. When I get the turbo to tube coupling and clamps ill see what I can do with the earl brown suggestion.
Over all running better. Pulls hard. Haven't goofed with the boost yet as it is hot. Been studying up on alcohol injection. Gotta get the a/c going before that. Got out the vac pump but couldn't find the gauges. I'll keep looking. I'm always digging for something.
-
All right. This tank of gas picked up an additional 2-2.5 mpg so between the maf and the O2 and the O2 was only in part of the tank I'm hoping to get another .5-1 mpg gain on this next tank to get us up to 19-20 mpg. I feel that is pretty good for a cool guy car. Haha
I found the gauges but that's in a different thread.
-
all righty then. I came on a situation today where we were discussing the need to decrease fuel and this particular unit has fuel pressure in the 47-48psi range. The tt chip already has 20% out and still seems rich. So it was suggested that one might use the translator feature to lessen the fuel and was decided to drop it 6%. But I wondered what is lessened 6%. It obviously doesn't control pressure. Is it the duty cycle that gets trimmed back?
TIA
-
I'm assuming you pulled 20 percent fuel from low gear. Fuel pressure line off should be as per Erics instructions. I don't make any fueling adjustments till I know what my 02's are on the default settings at WOT at the 1-2 and 2-3 shift points...and at the traps.
-
Check the tuning notes.
http://turbotweak.com/translatorinstructions.pdf (http://turbotweak.com/translatorinstructions.pdf)
-
The unit we were discussing has a fancy new dw300 pump and the lowest it could go was to 47psi with vac hose off. Even with the chip adjustment 20% out the O2 was over 800 wit on the run so we believe I to be rich. So it was decided to pull 6%ore fuel out with the translator. I was just wondering what it was pulling 6% out of. I was guessing it was the injector cycle.
Also contemplated was drilling out the return fittings to try to lower the base pressure but the owner decided to try the translator and see how that works out.
-
The chip probably controls the duty cycle but the Translator probably gimmicks the maf reading
-
Gimmick is right, Steve.
-
Also contemplated was drilling out the return fittings to try to lower the base pressure but the owner decided to try the translator and see how that works out.
The right way to do it.
-
Not sure of the financial situation but I like the Racetronix kit. -8 feed, -6 return braided line with sender, adapter fittings for stock fuel rail and inline filter. Have you guys ever looked inside of the stock fuel lines?
-
The old "drill out the return line fitting" trick has been around a long time. Don't remember if I read it on GNTTYPE or one of the old monthly mags from maybe Kenne Bell?
-
Drilling out the stuff was way before the interwebz. I drilled out the tank sender when I put the red armstrong pump in. Not because it had too much pressure but to maximize flow.
-
I think Earl did a write up on TBS years ago about that trick but it's also been around a long time.
-
Yeah, it was the ''hot to put in a fuel pump'' article where I showed the size decrease. It was right out .100" in diameter chocked off. Flow area was right at 1/2 if memory serves.