Best MAF?
BOSS APPROVED!
Trending Topics
08-24-2007, 07:39 AM
#8
Originally Posted by 1QUIKWS6
Before NE1 comes out with how shitty the SLP 85mm MAF is:
That's what I run with the stats in my sig - no problems...
That's what I run with the stats in my sig - no problems...
When you did before and after dynos with the old maf and new maf respectively what were the differences in horsepower? Just because you have an aftermarket maf does not mean you needed it.
08-24-2007, 07:44 AM
#9
TECH Addict
iTrader: (61)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 2,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No before dyno numbers with stock MAF. Didn't really say that I NEEDED an 85mm MAF but I was upgrading to Fast90/NW90 setup, and at the time had a 85mm TS&P lid - I wanted same size MAF to match rest of inlet ducting and wanted one with plastic one piece body - didn't want to change MAF ends.
My reply was just to state for all that say the SLP MAF is crap that I have had no problems with it for years and #'s with setup are respectable - had it been on the other style dyno and not using the heavy 17x11 TTII wheels the #'s would have been even higher.
My reply was just to state for all that say the SLP MAF is crap that I have had no problems with it for years and #'s with setup are respectable - had it been on the other style dyno and not using the heavy 17x11 TTII wheels the #'s would have been even higher.
08-25-2007, 11:55 PM
#13
Originally Posted by 1QUIKWS6
No before dyno numbers with stock MAF. Didn't really say that I NEEDED an 85mm MAF but I was upgrading to Fast90/NW90 setup, and at the time had a 85mm TS&P lid - I wanted same size MAF to match rest of inlet ducting and wanted one with plastic one piece body - didn't want to change MAF ends.
My reply was just to state for all that say the SLP MAF is crap that I have had no problems with it for years and #'s with setup are respectable - had it been on the other style dyno and not using the heavy 17x11 TTII wheels the #'s would have been even higher.
My reply was just to state for all that say the SLP MAF is crap that I have had no problems with it for years and #'s with setup are respectable - had it been on the other style dyno and not using the heavy 17x11 TTII wheels the #'s would have been even higher.
I am with you. For sure I wasn't trying to start anything.
08-26-2007, 10:49 AM
#16
TECH Addict
iTrader: (61)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 2,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I didn't say that anyone had started anything - it just seems that everytime the subject of 85mm MAF's come up, a bashing fest of SLP products ensues.
And for all those that say stock MAF is good enough - and there are no gains with 85mm MAF - I didn't personally have dyno #'s before and after - but Tony Mamo did back in 2004:
He did a before and after test
BEFORE=78mm TB/75mm MAF
AFTER=90mm TB/85mm MAF
Engines tested had no other changes other than above and included a FAST intake for both (and AFR heads of course). He estimated that this engine had been thru over 200 dyno pulls to optimize the parts combo.
"With no other changes (including the benefits of the FAST intake for both), going from a heavily massaged, ported 78mm throttle body/75mm mass airflow combo to the 90/85mm setup was good for 10 hp and 10 lb-ft it all adds up"
I would say that he is definitely a source that knows what he's talking about - not just some chatter that has been agreed upon because someone one day decided to voice their opinion and everyone else took it as gospel after being repeated over and over.
And for all those that say stock MAF is good enough - and there are no gains with 85mm MAF - I didn't personally have dyno #'s before and after - but Tony Mamo did back in 2004:
He did a before and after test
BEFORE=78mm TB/75mm MAF
AFTER=90mm TB/85mm MAF
Engines tested had no other changes other than above and included a FAST intake for both (and AFR heads of course). He estimated that this engine had been thru over 200 dyno pulls to optimize the parts combo.
"With no other changes (including the benefits of the FAST intake for both), going from a heavily massaged, ported 78mm throttle body/75mm mass airflow combo to the 90/85mm setup was good for 10 hp and 10 lb-ft it all adds up"
I would say that he is definitely a source that knows what he's talking about - not just some chatter that has been agreed upon because someone one day decided to voice their opinion and everyone else took it as gospel after being repeated over and over.
Last edited by 1QUIKWS6; 08-26-2007 at 11:00 AM.
08-26-2007, 10:59 AM
#17
TECH Addict
iTrader: (61)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 2,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BTW, that was a quote from the January 2005 issue of Corvette Fever Magazine in an article entitiled Power Hungry. Where they were reviewing Tony's 483 hp C5 LS1 at the time.
If you go to AFR's website - there is a wealth of info on building LS1 engines to get them to run around the 500hp mark N/A, or look at any posts by Patrick G.
If you go to AFR's website - there is a wealth of info on building LS1 engines to get them to run around the 500hp mark N/A, or look at any posts by Patrick G.
08-26-2007, 06:18 PM
#19
Originally Posted by 1QUIKWS6
BTW, that was a quote from the January 2005 issue of Corvette Fever Magazine in an article entitiled Power Hungry. Where they were reviewing Tony's 483 hp C5 LS1 at the time.
If you go to AFR's website - there is a wealth of info on building LS1 engines to get them to run around the 500hp mark N/A, or look at any posts by Patrick G.
If you go to AFR's website - there is a wealth of info on building LS1 engines to get them to run around the 500hp mark N/A, or look at any posts by Patrick G.
Galen
