Any proof a Ported MAF will cause A4 tranny problems?
11-26-2002, 01:29 PM
#21
TECH Addict
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 2,593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Any proof a Ported MAF will cause A4 tranny problems? I see no direct connection between the two. All the tranny tables in LS1 edit are based off of load or tps% or temp. There is nothing in there linking it to MAF signal, Mhz, or Gm/sec. If you think it is connected, disconnect your MAF and cruise around in speed density mode and see if your tranny still works? I'll bet it does.
11-26-2002, 02:45 PM
#22
TECH Regular
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: the moon
Posts: 414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Any proof a Ported MAF will cause A4 tranny problems? </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I see no direct connection between the two. All the tranny tables in LS1 edit are based off of load or tps% or temp. There is nothing in there linking it to MAF signal, Mhz, or Gm/sec. If you think it is connected, disconnect your MAF and cruise around in speed density mode and see if your tranny still works? I'll bet it does. </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Forget speed density mode.As long as the maf is working we don't need to think about that.That is for maf failure.
Your "load" is based off of tps and map and maf flow.
When you reduce maf flow your reported load to the pcm will be reduced at wot.
The pcm uses a calculated torque parameter for all sorts of things.
Reducing the maf flow reduces the amount of torque the pcm "thinks" the motor is making.
There is no direct maf flow to trans pressure table.
It is affected indirectly.
We have been able to electronically alter maf flow by ANY % for several years now.
I know what is effected when you reduce the maf flow with stock tables in the pcm.
You can sit here and argue about it, or do this.
Just monitor your trans pressure control solenoid duty cycle or amps. That is what controls your line pressure.
.1 amp is max pressure and 1.1 amps is minimum.
Now just reduce your maf flow at wot enough and watch the solenoid change the pressures.
We have known about this for years now.
Like I said though,if the engine breathes well enough with a ported maf, then the flow will be high enough to work along with the stock tables and the trans will still get full line pressure.
If you have ls1 edit, just raise the pressure at the lower loads/torques and your all set.
Steve
<small>[ November 26, 2002, 02:48 PM: Message edited by: SJH ]</small>
Your "load" is based off of tps and map and maf flow.
When you reduce maf flow your reported load to the pcm will be reduced at wot.
The pcm uses a calculated torque parameter for all sorts of things.
Reducing the maf flow reduces the amount of torque the pcm "thinks" the motor is making.
There is no direct maf flow to trans pressure table.
It is affected indirectly.
We have been able to electronically alter maf flow by ANY % for several years now.
I know what is effected when you reduce the maf flow with stock tables in the pcm.
You can sit here and argue about it, or do this.
Just monitor your trans pressure control solenoid duty cycle or amps. That is what controls your line pressure.
.1 amp is max pressure and 1.1 amps is minimum.
Now just reduce your maf flow at wot enough and watch the solenoid change the pressures.
We have known about this for years now.
Like I said though,if the engine breathes well enough with a ported maf, then the flow will be high enough to work along with the stock tables and the trans will still get full line pressure.
If you have ls1 edit, just raise the pressure at the lower loads/torques and your all set.
Steve
<small>[ November 26, 2002, 02:48 PM: Message edited by: SJH ]</small>
11-26-2002, 06:11 PM
#23
Teching In
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: mcallen,tx
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Any proof a Ported MAF will cause A4 tranny problems? i have stock ported maf ends. car shifts hard it might be because i have the hpp3 firm shiftness. i will still keep my ported maf <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />
11-26-2002, 06:49 PM
#24
TECH Fanatic
Thread Starter
Re: Any proof a Ported MAF will cause A4 tranny problems? [QUOTE] "Like I said though,if the engine breathes well enough with a ported maf, then the flow will be high enough to work along with the stock tables and the trans will still get full line pressure".
I can see what your saying; A heads/cam/headers car will not be effected at WOT, [but] how about partial throttle?
You may very well get low trans line pressure any time other than WOT. If this is the case, it dont sound good to me!
QUESTION: Do you think just de-screening a stock MAF would be a problem, or would you keep the screen on too?
Ron,
I can see what your saying; A heads/cam/headers car will not be effected at WOT, [but] how about partial throttle?
You may very well get low trans line pressure any time other than WOT. If this is the case, it dont sound good to me!
QUESTION: Do you think just de-screening a stock MAF would be a problem, or would you keep the screen on too?
Ron,
11-26-2002, 07:22 PM
#25
TECH Addict
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 2,593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Any proof a Ported MAF will cause A4 tranny problems? Is the low line pressure because of the ported MAF or the lean condition it creates? What if instead of modifing my MAF table to compensate for the extra air, I adjust it by changing injector offsets? Is the ported MAF the problem or the misinterepeted load situation? Basicily it sounds like any modification to the car with out proper retune would cause tranny problems. Do they make a manual valve body for the A4 yet? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" />
11-26-2002, 08:23 PM
#26
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Murphy, TX
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Any proof a Ported MAF will cause A4 tranny problems? </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by felton316:
<strong>Is the low line pressure because of the ported MAF or the lean condition it creates?
</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It's due to altered MAF signal.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>
What if instead of modifing my MAF table to compensate for the extra air, I adjust it by changing injector offsets?</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">What extra air? A larger diameter MAF will only mean more air is ingested if the one being replaced was a restriction. Ours is not. IMHO, injector flow rates (not offsets) is the best place to address mixture across the board w/o side effects. I was surprised when LS1-Edit became available and everybody tossed their MAFT and then immediately turned around and replicated its function with the MAF table when other fuel tuning options were available.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>
Is the ported MAF the problem or the misinterepeted load situation? Basicily it sounds like any modification to the car with out proper retune would cause tranny problems. Do they make a manual valve body for the A4 yet? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The ported MAF directly causes the change in load. Anything that's a direct or indirect function of MAF signal (load and torque being the biggies) is out of whack unless the table is calibrated to correctly reflect the response of the sensor when used with larger diameter ends.
Kimchee, the biggest source of error is the increase in diameter of the ends. The removal of the screen itself does slightly increase effective cross section but not to the same extent that most ported ends do. If I hadn't already removed my screen I'd keep it. The difference is not enough to motivate me to go looking for an unmolested one though.
<strong>Is the low line pressure because of the ported MAF or the lean condition it creates?
</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">It's due to altered MAF signal.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>
What if instead of modifing my MAF table to compensate for the extra air, I adjust it by changing injector offsets?</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">What extra air? A larger diameter MAF will only mean more air is ingested if the one being replaced was a restriction. Ours is not. IMHO, injector flow rates (not offsets) is the best place to address mixture across the board w/o side effects. I was surprised when LS1-Edit became available and everybody tossed their MAFT and then immediately turned around and replicated its function with the MAF table when other fuel tuning options were available.
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"><strong>
Is the ported MAF the problem or the misinterepeted load situation? Basicily it sounds like any modification to the car with out proper retune would cause tranny problems. Do they make a manual valve body for the A4 yet? <img border="0" title="" alt="[Big Grin]" src="gr_grin.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">The ported MAF directly causes the change in load. Anything that's a direct or indirect function of MAF signal (load and torque being the biggies) is out of whack unless the table is calibrated to correctly reflect the response of the sensor when used with larger diameter ends.
Kimchee, the biggest source of error is the increase in diameter of the ends. The removal of the screen itself does slightly increase effective cross section but not to the same extent that most ported ends do. If I hadn't already removed my screen I'd keep it. The difference is not enough to motivate me to go looking for an unmolested one though.
11-26-2002, 09:34 PM
#27
TECH Addict
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 2,593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Any proof a Ported MAF will cause A4 tranny problems? </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif"> IMHO, injector flow rates (not offsets) is the best place to address mixture across the board w/o side effects </font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">My bad... I've been playing with LT1-Edit too long <img border="0" title="" alt="[Sad]" src="gr_sad.gif" />
This problem currently doesn't affect me (M6 guy), just trying to learn for the future. I did scrap the `ole MAFT when I got LS1-Edit. I did modify my MAF table but only by 7%. Looking at atap scans of before and after modifing MAF, it looks as though the same flow rate (at WOT) was measured before and after, but my Ltrims did change at cruise.
<small>[ November 26, 2002, 09:37 PM: Message edited by: felton316 ]</small>
This problem currently doesn't affect me (M6 guy), just trying to learn for the future. I did scrap the `ole MAFT when I got LS1-Edit. I did modify my MAF table but only by 7%. Looking at atap scans of before and after modifing MAF, it looks as though the same flow rate (at WOT) was measured before and after, but my Ltrims did change at cruise.
<small>[ November 26, 2002, 09:37 PM: Message edited by: felton316 ]</small>
11-26-2002, 10:02 PM
#28
TECH Addict
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: TEXAS
Posts: 2,593
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Any proof a Ported MAF will cause A4 tranny problems? I keep getting different answers from different people. Here is a link to the ls1-edit archive, where Ken Kelly said that the MAF signal was never converted to the trans tables, that it only referenced the MAP signal.
www.ls1edit.com/pipermail/ls1edit/20021110/003874.html
Still confused <img border="0" title="" alt="[Confused]" src="images/icons/confused.gif" />
www.ls1edit.com/pipermail/ls1edit/20021110/003874.html
Still confused <img border="0" title="" alt="[Confused]" src="images/icons/confused.gif" />
11-26-2002, 10:21 PM
#29
On The Tree
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Any proof a Ported MAF will cause A4 tranny problems? SO what if i got ported MAF ends and sued the predator to up the line pressure? is thats whats causing the tranny problems for some guys or is it something else? it seems they provide a good hp gain but tranny failure isnt wqorth the extra hp.
11-26-2002, 10:30 PM
#30
Launching!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Monterey Park, CA
Posts: 268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Any proof a Ported MAF will cause A4 tranny problems? I have a GMAF with a superstroker and no trannie problems. My trannie guy physically altered and increased the line pressure with Transgo shift kit, and drilling out the valve body.
BTW, I did have the same GMAF on my stock engine for 4 years. (Got it when it just came out when everyone was debating if it was Calibrated). No problems at all during all those years. Now it is on my superstroker.
Leo
<small>[ November 27, 2002, 12:56 AM: Message edited by: pedaltothemetal ]</small>
BTW, I did have the same GMAF on my stock engine for 4 years. (Got it when it just came out when everyone was debating if it was Calibrated). No problems at all during all those years. Now it is on my superstroker.
Leo
<small>[ November 27, 2002, 12:56 AM: Message edited by: pedaltothemetal ]</small>
11-27-2002, 12:29 AM
#31
TECH Regular
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: the moon
Posts: 414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Any proof a Ported MAF will cause A4 tranny problems? Paul, look at the ls1 edit trans edit section.There's your proof of the connection between maf and trans.It's the "Base shift pressure vs torque table".
A ported maf tells the pcm the motor is making less torque.
Less torque, if the table is left unaltered, means the pcm commands less pressure.
Now even with a ported maf, if you flow enough air to get readings of 300ft/lbs of torque you'll be fine.So a heads/cam ls1 probably won't have a problem.
But there is not 1 bit of doubt about this connection.You can also observe it with atap and monitor the pressure control solenoid duty cycle with the different mafs.
In any case a few minutes editing that table should take care of any problems.
Steve
A ported maf tells the pcm the motor is making less torque.
Less torque, if the table is left unaltered, means the pcm commands less pressure.
Now even with a ported maf, if you flow enough air to get readings of 300ft/lbs of torque you'll be fine.So a heads/cam ls1 probably won't have a problem.
But there is not 1 bit of doubt about this connection.You can also observe it with atap and monitor the pressure control solenoid duty cycle with the different mafs.
In any case a few minutes editing that table should take care of any problems.
Steve
11-27-2002, 08:57 AM
#32
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Murphy, TX
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Any proof a Ported MAF will cause A4 tranny problems? </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by felton316:
<strong>I keep getting different answers from different people. Here is a link to the ls1-edit archive, where Ken Kelly said that the MAF signal was never converted to the trans tables, that it only referenced the MAP signal.
www.ls1edit.com/pipermail/ls1edit/20021110/003874.html
Still confused <img border="0" title="" alt="[Confused]" src="images/icons/confused.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yes, and you'll note he didn't reply to my second post about how TAP cells were indexed. Some portions of the service manuals describe them as being indexed by calibrates shift torque values, other places by TPS.
<strong>I keep getting different answers from different people. Here is a link to the ls1-edit archive, where Ken Kelly said that the MAF signal was never converted to the trans tables, that it only referenced the MAP signal.
www.ls1edit.com/pipermail/ls1edit/20021110/003874.html
Still confused <img border="0" title="" alt="[Confused]" src="images/icons/confused.gif" /> </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Yes, and you'll note he didn't reply to my second post about how TAP cells were indexed. Some portions of the service manuals describe them as being indexed by calibrates shift torque values, other places by TPS.
11-27-2002, 09:02 AM
#33
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Baton Rouge
Posts: 1,894
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Any proof a Ported MAF will cause A4 tranny problems? </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by SJH:
<strong>So a heads/cam ls1 probably won't have a problem.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">No heads or cam on my wife's car. I ran them on my car before heads and cam with no problems, or no problems after heads and cam. We ran them on Angie's car before and after heads and cam, no problems. Not to mention countless other local customer cars with no problems. The first time we started seeing this as an issue when when people started complaining about a certian torque converter, which is not on the market any longer, having problems. The problems were then blamed on MAF ends. And I'll leave it at that.
Paul
<strong>So a heads/cam ls1 probably won't have a problem.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">No heads or cam on my wife's car. I ran them on my car before heads and cam with no problems, or no problems after heads and cam. We ran them on Angie's car before and after heads and cam, no problems. Not to mention countless other local customer cars with no problems. The first time we started seeing this as an issue when when people started complaining about a certian torque converter, which is not on the market any longer, having problems. The problems were then blamed on MAF ends. And I'll leave it at that.
Paul
11-27-2002, 09:03 AM
#34
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Murphy, TX
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Any proof a Ported MAF will cause A4 tranny problems? </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by felton316:
<strong>
This problem currently doesn't affect me (M6 guy), just trying to learn for the future.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I guess this drifts off topic, but don't think that the A4 management code is the only thing that's adversely impacted. Stuff like TCS and AHS that consider torque values can also be affected.
<small>[ November 27, 2002, 09:04 AM: Message edited by: ToplessTexan ]</small>
<strong>
This problem currently doesn't affect me (M6 guy), just trying to learn for the future.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">I guess this drifts off topic, but don't think that the A4 management code is the only thing that's adversely impacted. Stuff like TCS and AHS that consider torque values can also be affected.
<small>[ November 27, 2002, 09:04 AM: Message edited by: ToplessTexan ]</small>
11-27-2002, 09:11 AM
#35
TECH Apprentice
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Murphy, TX
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Any proof a Ported MAF will cause A4 tranny problems? </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Paul @ Thunder:
<strong>
The first time we started seeing this as an issue when when people started complaining about a certian torque converter, which is not on the market any longer, having problems. The problems were then blamed on MAF ends. And I'll leave it at that.
</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">As an FYI, my observations about tinkering with MAFs predate those issues. Moreover, not being an F-body guy, I was unaware of that whole mess until well after the fact. As a general rule, I usually get in trouble when I assume that I have only one problem. Perhaps that was the case there...
<small>[ November 27, 2002, 09:12 AM: Message edited by: ToplessTexan ]</small>
<strong>
The first time we started seeing this as an issue when when people started complaining about a certian torque converter, which is not on the market any longer, having problems. The problems were then blamed on MAF ends. And I'll leave it at that.
</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">As an FYI, my observations about tinkering with MAFs predate those issues. Moreover, not being an F-body guy, I was unaware of that whole mess until well after the fact. As a general rule, I usually get in trouble when I assume that I have only one problem. Perhaps that was the case there...
<small>[ November 27, 2002, 09:12 AM: Message edited by: ToplessTexan ]</small>
11-27-2002, 10:06 AM
#36
Re: Any proof a Ported MAF will cause A4 tranny problems? </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Paul @ Thunder:
<strong>I've had them on my wife's 2000 TA for over 3 years now with a Vig 3200. Never any converter or transmission problems. Theory is good, proof is a whole other ballgame. I'll keep running mine.
Paul</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Agree 100% with Paul.
2 different A4 cars, both had Whisper ported ends on them. Zero tranny problems related to MAF ends line pressure issue.
Did have a flexpalte come apart.. but I think you'll have a hard time linking that to MAF ends <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
<strong>I've had them on my wife's 2000 TA for over 3 years now with a Vig 3200. Never any converter or transmission problems. Theory is good, proof is a whole other ballgame. I'll keep running mine.
Paul</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Agree 100% with Paul.
2 different A4 cars, both had Whisper ported ends on them. Zero tranny problems related to MAF ends line pressure issue.
Did have a flexpalte come apart.. but I think you'll have a hard time linking that to MAF ends <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
11-27-2002, 01:33 PM
#37
TECH Regular
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: the moon
Posts: 414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Any proof a Ported MAF will cause A4 tranny problems? the topic of this thread was will it cause tranny problems?
Well maybe , maybe not.
All I am saying is yes, it does indirectly cause less line pressure to be used by the pressure control solenoid.Now can that hurt a trans?
I think the guys who may get into the most trouble with one would be wet n20 users.
I ran around for about a year and a half with a ported maf and my 98 trans still works good.
When I began lowering MAF reported flow big time for 42lb injectors with stock programming, that is when it became very noticable and would actually slip on the shifts.
I have always a had a trans go kit installed .
I am over 650hp at the flywheel now also so it appears no long term damage was ever caused by it.
But to me this is all ancient history now, with ls1edit available.
Steve
Well maybe , maybe not.
All I am saying is yes, it does indirectly cause less line pressure to be used by the pressure control solenoid.Now can that hurt a trans?
I think the guys who may get into the most trouble with one would be wet n20 users.
I ran around for about a year and a half with a ported maf and my 98 trans still works good.
When I began lowering MAF reported flow big time for 42lb injectors with stock programming, that is when it became very noticable and would actually slip on the shifts.
I have always a had a trans go kit installed .
I am over 650hp at the flywheel now also so it appears no long term damage was ever caused by it.
But to me this is all ancient history now, with ls1edit available.
Steve
12-10-2002, 04:20 PM
#38
TECH Addict
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Plainville,MA
Posts: 2,850
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Any proof a Ported MAF will cause A4 tranny problems? </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by SJH:
<strong>the topic of this thread was will it cause tranny problems?
Well maybe , maybe not.
All I am saying is yes, it does indirectly cause less line pressure to be used by the pressure control solenoid.Now can that hurt a trans?
I think the guys who may get into the most trouble with one would be wet n20 users.
Steve</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">U hit the nail right on the head Steve ! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
N2O guys will be looking for replacment A-4's all day if using ported maf ends without tuning on big wet shots ! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="gr_eek2.gif" />
<strong>the topic of this thread was will it cause tranny problems?
Well maybe , maybe not.
All I am saying is yes, it does indirectly cause less line pressure to be used by the pressure control solenoid.Now can that hurt a trans?
I think the guys who may get into the most trouble with one would be wet n20 users.
Steve</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">U hit the nail right on the head Steve ! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="gr_images/icons/wink.gif" />
N2O guys will be looking for replacment A-4's all day if using ported maf ends without tuning on big wet shots ! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="gr_eek2.gif" />
12-10-2002, 07:46 PM
#39
Teching In
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: mission
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Any proof a Ported MAF will cause A4 tranny problems? why does it create damage for a4's and not for m6's? i have a manual and was thinking about descreening the maf...would this be bad?
12-10-2002, 10:14 PM
#40
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Pensacola, FL
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Any proof a Ported MAF will cause A4 tranny problems? All you have to do if you want to run a larger MAF is get an aftermarket MAF that is 'calibrated' for the additional size.
When you use home ported or aftermarket ends with stock calibration, that is when you run into problems.
Dave
When you use home ported or aftermarket ends with stock calibration, that is when you run into problems.
Dave