MitchR

[quote]Originally posted by McRat:
<strong>
Starting in 2000, the stock fuel curves are leaner to achieve SuperLowEmissionsVehicle rating SLEV.
</strong><hr></blockquote>

I would have to ABSOLUTELY agree with this ! I'm suprised more people don;t mention or realize this. On my 2001, just adding a Lid and Filter and FRA caused pinging. I had tried MAf Ends and it really pinged bad. A MAFT helps eliminate most pinging if I use the stock MAF but still can't help with the ends. For some reason though, my car felt faster with the MAF ends on at high RPM/speeds - it was pinging but definitely felt stronger ??? It has me stumped.

Patrick, Did you notice any advantage in mid RPM range ?

Should I waste money on a PACE VV screened MAF ?

Thanks,
Mitch

Poltergeist

Well here's something else to throw into the whole MAF confusion. The 2002 Camaro's are coming with a 85mm MAF stock from the factory. I personally went out and measured mine one night with my caliper to verify. It does have a screen also. Is this another LS6 part on the LS1 like the intake? Did they decide to screen it to keep the F-Body below the Corvette? Does anyone know what the standard Corvette is running as opposed to the Z06? I don't know what size the standard Corvette is using or if it's screened or not for 2002. Hmmm

We are trying to set up a dyno day here around January and I was hoping to transfer my MAF to an earlier LS1 just to see what would happen. Maybe McRat's or someone else there with a stock 75mm MAF. Could be interesting to see.

RyanJ

Pol...neat lid thing. <img src="gr_stretch.gif" border="0"> your MAF is the same as everyone else though, sorry.


Ryan

LS1 JAY

[quote]Originally posted by RyanJackson:
<strong>Pol...neat lid thing. <img src="gr_stretch.gif" border="0"> your MAF is the same as everyone else though, sorry.


Ryan</strong><hr></blockquote>
I agree, the '98-'02 MAF's are all the same I have checked my '98 with a friends '02, but I do know people who have gained with a 85mm MAF! why? I have no idea but in my case it worked as well, it just seems that some cars respond well to the 85mm MAF where as some gain nothing and others even loose HP we may never know why!
<img src="gr_eek2.gif" border="0">

AgaveCorvette

I've tried to tell people this, and tried to tell people this.

Thanks for reporting what you found. :thumbup:

Colonel

Jay and everone else...

INCREASED TIMING AND A LEANER MIXTURE are the reasons that some cars see a gain with a MAF whether it be 75mm or 85mm or whatever. That's kinda the point of the results Patrick gave. Airflow is not signifigantly restricted at the MAF sensor.

Yes, that means you could get the same with a MAFT or by careful porting of the stock MAF sensor.

As I reported in an earlier thread, we saw no gain on the dyno between a standard size GMS and the 85mm GMS on my MTI 422. The intake manifold inlet is too small to take advantage of larger MAF sensors.

How much can the intake manifold inlet be ported? It's often been said that it's very little. Anyone tried it and measured before and after? Maybe a 3mm increase would be worth it if combined with a highly ported throttle body and a large MAF sensor.

What about the new Holley intake manifold? Can it's inlet be hogged out?

franches

I have measured a MAF out of a 2000 and one out of a 2002 and they are different sizes. The 2002 has a 85 mm one stock.

franches

But hey, if everyone else says they are the same then maybe they are. I could of measured wrong. Who knows?

kewlbrz

Mabey not the F-bodies, but the Corvettes since 2001 have come with the larger diamter truck MAF.

Black Sunshine/ 00SS

iTrader: (1)

If you want to get real results, run it at the track, get some consistent times, then switch, and drive down the rd a few timea, then run again, go by the slips you get after your second run after switching MAF's. There is a learning period. F@&k the dyno, go to the track. <img src="graemlins/gr_punch.gif" border="0" alt="[fight]" />

MitchR

Colonel,

Can I assume then that if I have a Stock MAF minus screeen and a MAFT that my money would be better spent on a ported TB instead of an 85MM MAF ??

That is the assumption at least that I have made.

Thanks,
Mitch

pedaltothemetal

This is great info for the MAFT.
That just shows you if you use the MAFT, you can make any size MAF perform equally well. The diameter of the MAF ends would only come to play when more air is needed for your application if indeed the MAF diameter becomes the rescriction.

Leo

Poltergeist

Ryan, your right. I just went out to remeasure my MAF and prove you wrong. <img src="gr_emb.gif" border="0"> Before I measured the inlet side of the cover, not the side up against the MAF. That's what I get for trying to do something late at night. <img src="gr_sad.gif" border="0">

Colonel

[quote]Originally posted by MitchR:
<strong>Colonel,

Can I assume then that if I have a Stock MAF minus screeen and a MAFT that my money would be better spent on a ported TB instead of an 85MM MAF ??

That is the assumption at least that I have made.

Thanks,
Mitch</strong><hr></blockquote>

I'd also remove the center divider, port, and polish the stock MAF sensor. Adjust it back out with the MAFT. Then, port the TB yourself or buy one already ported (my MTI ported TB looks SWEET!)

[ December 16, 2001: Message edited by: Colonel ]</p>

Patrick G

iTrader: (14)

A ported throttle body is always a good idea. Even on my stock '00 WS6, the MTI ported TB made 4 extra rwhp...same dyno...same day (within minutes of the baseline run). Looks like the TB is more of a flow restriction than the MAF. Unless your motor responds to more timing or altering the a/f ratio, you will go just as fast with the stock unported MAF.

pedaltothemetal

I have also noted the screen on MAF's are not much of a restriction since the diameter is much larger than the MAF ends to conpensate for the screen's restriction unless you port your MAF and then the screen has to be removed or it will be a restriction. Much like a Catalytic converter is much larger than the exhaust pipe to compensate for it's exhaust restriction, but the stock size cat may not be large enough if you add longtubes. All of you already know the engine is just a pump, and to get the most flow, you have to take care of restriction on both sides of the engine. Experimentation is the only way to find where it is and as this thread shows, the MAF is already sufficient in size and not really the restriction for this particular experiment with this particular component combination.
So I really appreciate Patrick for sharing his findings. The MAF will be one less place I will look for more HP in my combination. I have the GMAF which is large enough for the Colonel, and I know I'll never get that much rwhp.

Leo

[ December 16, 2001: Message edited by: pedaltothemetal ]</p>

Marty

Not trying to bash but I would not get the MTI tb. When I bought mine they just grabbed one they had lying around. About a week after I noticed my car idled at 800-1000 and called MTI and asked why. They said they had no idea and for me to come in. So I did and they said there was nothing wrong withthe TB that would affect the idle. Well after this I looked at it myself and it had a huge hole bored in the Blade. So I called them and told them this and what did they say....."oh we didn't do that,,,,you must have". So now my car idles at 1000 all the time and every one in the street scene says "I must have a cam cuase why would I have the Blade drilled". Unless you have at least 3000 to spend MTI won't give ya the time of day. <img src="gr_images/icons/mad.gif" border="0">

MitchR

[quote]Originally posted by Patrick G:
<strong>A ported throttle body is always a good idea. Even on my stock '00 WS6, the MTI ported TB made 4 extra rwhp...same dyno...same day (within minutes of the baseline run). Looks like the TB is more of a flow restriction than the MAF. Unless your motor responds to more timing or altering the a/f ratio, you will go just as fast with the stock unported MAF.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Patrick/Colonel:

Thanks for the great info, it kinda reinforces what I had already thought on the subject. I was going to use my $50 MMS rebate on one of his Ported TB's. I may at some point get a Pace VV MAF as the price ain;t too bad, but I'll wait a while on that mod and get some other proven stuff first.

Mitch

Colonel

Marty, when was this?

I think there are many people who would disagree with your statement about MTI only catering to those spending major money.

Marty

[quote]Originally posted by Colonel:
<strong>Marty, when was this?
Colonel- It was less than a year ago.

I think there are many people who would disagree with your statement about MTI only catering to those spending major money.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Like I said, I am not trying to bash. The things I said were from my own personal experience. And I do agree that there are many people who always say MTI this MTI that, but I think its kinda strange I live in houston and have never met any of them. Like I said, all these MTI fans have either strokers or h/c. Now as far as that stuff goes MTI very well MIGHT be the best,but for something like a tb I would say go elsewhere.

No hard feelings,
Marty <img src="graemlins/gr_angel.gif" border="0" alt="[angel]" />

[ December 17, 2001: Message edited by: Marty ]</p>