MAF in front of turbo or after???
03-11-2007, 11:45 AM
#3
Launching!
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Cherry Point NC
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I had mine in front of the turbo for a while as a draw through system. The fueling consistency was great, BUT........
Everytime the blow off valve opened on a shift, it would go super duper rich for a second.
If I tried to go from boost to idle, like after a burnout, or after I crossed the traps, the engine would stall from being too rich.
After is better I think.
Everytime the blow off valve opened on a shift, it would go super duper rich for a second.
If I tried to go from boost to idle, like after a burnout, or after I crossed the traps, the engine would stall from being too rich.
After is better I think.
03-11-2007, 10:11 PM
#4
10 Second Club
iTrader: (27)
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 1,905
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by LT Malice
I had mine in front of the turbo for a while as a draw through system. The fueling consistency was great, BUT........
Everytime the blow off valve opened on a shift, it would go super duper rich for a second.
If I tried to go from boost to idle, like after a burnout, or after I crossed the traps, the engine would stall from being too rich.
After is better I think.
Everytime the blow off valve opened on a shift, it would go super duper rich for a second.
If I tried to go from boost to idle, like after a burnout, or after I crossed the traps, the engine would stall from being too rich.
After is better I think.
a recirculating BOV woulda fixed that. So is that the ONLY reason you didnt like it in front of the turbo? cuz im trying to figure out the same thing.
03-11-2007, 10:48 PM
#6
Launching!
iTrader: (3)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Cherry Point NC
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Snyper
a recirculating BOV woulda fixed that. So is that the ONLY reason you didnt like it in front of the turbo? cuz im trying to figure out the same thing.
My maf was placed 8" above the road and was taking alot of damage from road crap. The cable from the MAF to the PCM was really long and adding distortion. It didn't have a long straight run between the filter and the MAF, so it got turbulent airflow. It idled crappy and had alot of hiccups.
I converted to blow through for all around better running.
Trending Topics
03-12-2007, 10:08 PM
#9
Mine is in the center of the car, just behind the air-dam...probably no more than 10" off the ground or so. Air goes through the FMIC, makes a 90 into about 1.5' of strait pipe then into the MAF. Car runs great at all RPMs.
No road damage that I can see...
No road damage that I can see...
03-13-2007, 07:41 AM
#13
Originally Posted by brad8266
I didnt even think anyone ran a MAF on a turbo car anymore, especialy with the nice new SD operating system enhancements out there.
still there are many people running very streetable setups that are SD tuned.
thanks Chris.
03-13-2007, 11:32 AM
#14
FormerVendor
Originally Posted by chuntington101
i heard one tuner say that he found it better on a supercharged car to run a blow through MAF than go SD. he said it was the fact that you know what PSI a supercharger will be making at any given RPM at WOT, you dont with a turbo!
I disagree with that. In my opinion SD is always the best solution for a forced induction car.
03-13-2007, 01:05 PM
#15
I run a MAF and it works great...of course, I'm not surpassing that magical 500hp mark. I would prefer SD in some circumstances, but don't you have to re-tune the car every time the weather changes?
IMO, if it's a daily driver < 500rwhp, I say stick with the MAF. If it's an FI track car...go with SD.
IMO, if it's a daily driver < 500rwhp, I say stick with the MAF. If it's an FI track car...go with SD.
03-14-2007, 02:51 AM
#16
Originally Posted by INTMD8
I disagree with that. In my opinion SD is always the best solution for a forced induction car.
just your coment just goes to prove that SD is really the way to go!
Chris.
