Generation III External Engine LS1 | LS6 | Bolt-Ons | Intakes | Exhaust | Ignition | Accessories
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Apparently the MAF is a big restriction

Old Sep 13, 2010 | 05:29 PM
  #21  
PowerShift408's Avatar
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (44)
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,741
Likes: 1
From: Bowling Green, KY
Default

Guys, there is nothing to argue about. He removed the MAF and picked up power as evidenced by his times. There is no way to argue with results.
Reply
Old Sep 13, 2010 | 10:43 PM
  #22  
got-a-ls1's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,438
Likes: 0
From: earth
Default

Originally Posted by Viper
Interesting. I'm looking at my logs (85mm MAF, 90MM TB, FAST90) and I'm also seeing 95-96 with one or two 97's. Maybe I'll try the SD tune again sans MAF.

More interesting notes. I just looked at logs from 2007 when I was running an LS6 intake, stock TB and a 2002 Z06 85mm MAF and they all show 98-99.

I know I'm getting 4.63v at WOT and HPTuners shows 100% tps so not sure what to make of this new data.
well that is weird... is there anywhere in your logs where you were logging with key on and engine off to see what the map was reading? maybe the weather was drastically different?
Reply
Old Sep 13, 2010 | 10:59 PM
  #23  
got-a-ls1's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,438
Likes: 0
From: earth
Default

Originally Posted by PowerShift408
Guys, there is nothing to argue about. He removed the MAF and picked up power as evidenced by his times. There is no way to argue with results.
thanks man! I think next time im at the track im gonna do a run with torque management back to full to see how much difference there is... im curious how much that helped even though i dont think it was much.
Reply
Old Sep 13, 2010 | 11:07 PM
  #24  
PowerShift408's Avatar
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (44)
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,741
Likes: 1
From: Bowling Green, KY
Default

Originally Posted by got-a-ls1
thanks man! I think next time im at the track im gonna do a run with torque management back to full to see how much difference there is... im curious how much that helped even though i dont think it was much.
And not only was it that, you picked up trap speed which is the #1 indicator of horsepower.
Reply
Old Sep 13, 2010 | 11:48 PM
  #25  
got-a-ls1's Avatar
Thread Starter
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (12)
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,438
Likes: 0
From: earth
Default

exactly... i was happy with droping .25 but the 2.5mph made me even happier cuz thats horsepower
Reply
Old Sep 14, 2010 | 09:45 AM
  #26  
jimmyblue's Avatar
Moderator
iTrader: (11)
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 12,604
Likes: 7
From: East Central Florida
Default

A screened 75mm MAF produced about the same pressure
drop as the stock lid w/ silencer, when I was doing "ghetto
flowbench" testing 7-8 years back. A descreened MAF I could
not measure, and I had a resolution of about 1/8"H2O.
Reply
Old Sep 14, 2010 | 08:47 PM
  #27  
HoLLo's Avatar
TECH Junkie
iTrader: (17)
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,161
Likes: 0
From: Rapid City, SD
Default

Just because some stock piece is "good for xxxHP" doesn't mean freeing that restriction won't help a free a few HP.

Think of exhaust, You can take X Muffler and replace it with Y muffler, and gain 10rwhp, does that mean that X muffler isn't capable of an extra 10rwhp if the motor gains 50hp with some other mods?
Reply
Old Sep 15, 2010 | 02:45 PM
  #28  
Seit's Avatar
Teching In
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Default

I have
SSRA+ CAI w/ MAF 74mm (stock).....The gain was 2.8 tenths

So what would the gain with MAF 85mm?
SSRA+ CAI+ MAF 85mm =2.8+?
Reply
Old Sep 16, 2010 | 09:33 AM
  #29  
thunderstruck507's Avatar
11 Second Club
iTrader: (18)
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 8,358
Likes: 27
From: Northwest AR
Default

Originally Posted by jimmyblue
A screened 75mm MAF produced about the same pressure
drop as the stock lid w/ silencer, when I was doing "ghetto
flowbench" testing 7-8 years back. A descreened MAF I could
not measure, and I had a resolution of about 1/8"H2O.

Are you saying the removal of the screen was a reduction so that the MAF was no longer producing a measurable restriction?
Reply
Old Sep 16, 2010 | 04:25 PM
  #30  
Viper's Avatar
12 Second Club
20 Year Member
Photogenic
Photoriffic
Shutterbug
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,909
Likes: 3
From: Cleveland, OH
Default

"You need to check the key on engine off MAP reading at the time you log to really know how much it changes. I highly doubt the 5 mm difference in size will effect the performance.

Here in Southern Michigan I may see 98 kPa on one day and only only drop to 96 at WOT, others days I may see higher or lower. The barometric pressure changes the readings.

To the OP, if you have a 78 mm stock MAF than you should absolutely see a gain."

Yep, looking at my logs the ones from 2007 were in May whereas this years logs are from August. I'll try the key on thing.

To the post above, I'd like to hear more from jimmyblue on the subject too.
Reply
Old Sep 16, 2010 | 04:37 PM
  #31  
Element's Avatar
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,575
Likes: 2
From: WV
Default

I don't think it's the effective ID of the MAF that acts as a restriction, it's the screen, especially with heads/cam or more cubes.
Reply


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:19 PM.