MAF calibration>after descreen and port
)
03-18-2005, 09:19 PM
#2
Moderator
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Central Florida
Posts: 12,605
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
I don't think "porting" is such a good idea.
But, if I were going to do such a thing I would first get
a good set of logs that show MAF frequency, MAF g/sec,
MAP and RPM. From that you'd want to poly-fit the
(g/sec)/(MAP*RPM) function and the (RPM*MAP)/
MAF Hz functions and their inverses.
Then when you've gone and messed with the MAF you
can put it back on, repeat the logging exercise, and see
how the MAF frequency and flow results have stepped
off from the MAP*RPM (speed density) airflow. Get the
MAP*RPM to point at the new MAF frequency, and see
what it also points at for the old g/sec. There's your
new cal. Repeat for all of the steps in the MAF table
unless you can work out something slicker in Excel.
Like the inverse MAPRPM/Hz function would let you
make a vector of oldgsec(newMAPRPM(Hz)) points
if you could do the fitting. Or something.
Then again you might just get a Z06 MAF, which is
bigger than any ported F-body MAF will ever be, and
just use the straight table.
But, if I were going to do such a thing I would first get
a good set of logs that show MAF frequency, MAF g/sec,
MAP and RPM. From that you'd want to poly-fit the
(g/sec)/(MAP*RPM) function and the (RPM*MAP)/
MAF Hz functions and their inverses.
Then when you've gone and messed with the MAF you
can put it back on, repeat the logging exercise, and see
how the MAF frequency and flow results have stepped
off from the MAP*RPM (speed density) airflow. Get the
MAP*RPM to point at the new MAF frequency, and see
what it also points at for the old g/sec. There's your
new cal. Repeat for all of the steps in the MAF table
unless you can work out something slicker in Excel.
Like the inverse MAPRPM/Hz function would let you
make a vector of oldgsec(newMAPRPM(Hz)) points
if you could do the fitting. Or something.
Then again you might just get a Z06 MAF, which is
bigger than any ported F-body MAF will ever be, and
just use the straight table.
03-18-2005, 09:24 PM
#3
Originally Posted by jimmyblue
I don't think "porting" is such a good idea.
But, if I were going to do such a thing I would first get
a good set of logs that show MAF frequency, MAF g/sec,
MAP and RPM. From that you'd want to poly-fit the
(g/sec)/(MAP*RPM) function and the (RPM*MAP)/
MAF Hz functions and their inverses.
Then when you've gone and messed with the MAF you
can put it back on, repeat the logging exercise, and see
how the MAF frequency and flow results have stepped
off from the MAP*RPM (speed density) airflow. Get the
MAP*RPM to point at the new MAF frequency, and see
what it also points at for the old g/sec. There's your
new cal. Repeat for all of the steps in the MAF table
unless you can work out something slicker in Excel.
Like the inverse MAPRPM/Hz function would let you
make a vector of oldgsec(newMAPRPM(Hz)) points
if you could do the fitting. Or something.
Then again you might just get a Z06 MAF, which is
bigger than any ported F-body MAF will ever be, and
just use the straight table.
But, if I were going to do such a thing I would first get
a good set of logs that show MAF frequency, MAF g/sec,
MAP and RPM. From that you'd want to poly-fit the
(g/sec)/(MAP*RPM) function and the (RPM*MAP)/
MAF Hz functions and their inverses.
Then when you've gone and messed with the MAF you
can put it back on, repeat the logging exercise, and see
how the MAF frequency and flow results have stepped
off from the MAP*RPM (speed density) airflow. Get the
MAP*RPM to point at the new MAF frequency, and see
what it also points at for the old g/sec. There's your
new cal. Repeat for all of the steps in the MAF table
unless you can work out something slicker in Excel.
Like the inverse MAPRPM/Hz function would let you
make a vector of oldgsec(newMAPRPM(Hz)) points
if you could do the fitting. Or something.
Then again you might just get a Z06 MAF, which is
bigger than any ported F-body MAF will ever be, and
just use the straight table.
um..straigt table...meaning dont change the MAF table at all?? or plug in #'s from a ZO6 table???
03-18-2005, 10:03 PM
#4
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Mission, TX
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by soundengineer
um..straigt table...meaning dont change the MAF table at all?? or plug in #'s from a ZO6 table???
It's calibrated for the flow of the Z06 intake tract...
03-18-2005, 10:21 PM
#5
Moderator
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East Central Florida
Posts: 12,605
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
Personally I prefer the 6.0 truck table, it puts things a little
richer and gave me pretty nice trims. I descreened a truck
MAF that I got for $40 or so, off eBay. Poor man's Z06.
http://home.cfl.rr.com/jimmyblue/MAF...s_20040914.xls
richer and gave me pretty nice trims. I descreened a truck
MAF that I got for $40 or so, off eBay. Poor man's Z06.
http://home.cfl.rr.com/jimmyblue/MAF...s_20040914.xls
03-18-2005, 10:29 PM
#6
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Mission, TX
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sweet! Thanks again Jimmy, I'll try that! TXHorns is supposed to help me with the tune this week, maybe I can find one for that by then...
I'm selling my 02 Sims for $50, that should cover it...
-Chris
I'm selling my 02 Sims for $50, that should cover it...
-Chris
