LT1-LT4 Modifications 1993-97 Gen II Small Block V8
View Poll Results: What is the best way to go for the MAF?
Granatelli MAF
32
11.85%
MAF Ends
22
8.15%
Descreened Stock MAF
97
35.93%
Bone Stock MAF
119
44.07%
Voters: 270. You may not vote on this poll

Granatelli vs MAF Ends vs Descreened Stock vs Bone Stock

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 04-08-2010, 08:04 PM
  #101  
TECH Enthusiast
 
Smoke Em's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: RI
Posts: 723
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts

Default

i run a Granatelli MAF on my car with no issue, with no tune. i haven't had any issues but i have heard that aftermarket maf really screw with the car sometimes. i would leave the stock one on, if anything just descreen it
Old 04-08-2010, 08:23 PM
  #102  
TECH Fanatic
 
pillarpod's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: South Dakota
Posts: 1,776
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

i have a Grandsport MAF, and this thread is 5 years old
Old 04-08-2010, 10:58 PM
  #103  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (26)
 
1961ba427's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Milledgeville, GA
Posts: 1,909
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by pillarpod
i have a Grandsport MAF, and this thread is 5 years old
Revived OLD threads are great reading for some of us Newb's who wouldn't have gotten the information otherwise. I'm using a stock MAF that was already descreened when I got my 97 SS, but have a spare one with the screen still in. I do know descreening the MAF on my old 89 Formula 350 TPI car worked great. I picked up over a tenth in the 1/8th and almost 2mph that was repeated backed up/tested on an extremely consistent car. Maybe not revelant to LT1/LS1??? IDK, but I think it should be okay if you run a good filter.
Old 04-09-2010, 08:28 AM
  #104  
BTC
TECH Fanatic
 
BTC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lansing, MI via Bowling Green, KY, Dalton GA, Nashville, TN & Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,745
Received 17 Likes on 15 Posts

Default

I've always been told that whatever the Granatelli MAF does is better accomplished via a tune. I've also heard that they make tuning difficult. I figure if you stick with a stock MAF and get a tune, you're going to save yourself some money, not to mention all of the additional benefits you might receive from a full tune. I don't know what a Granatelli costs, but a mail order tune is around 150 bucks.
Old 04-09-2010, 09:38 AM
  #105  
11 Second Club
iTrader: (1)
 
96capricemgr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 11,975
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 12 Posts

Default

To those who think the Granatelli is a good thing. Please DOCUMENT a result and some testing to show how the gain was achieved. Was the stocker a restriction? Was the Granatelli faster to read changes? What was the mechanism by which is made a MEASURED positive difference?


As BTC alluded too, aftermarket MAFs sometimes lie to the pcm to correct overly rich factory WOT tuning so if their lie is about the right amount to get the AFR right you might actually see a gain, BUT you spent $300 to correct the AFR when for $150 you could have had a tune correct AFR, adjust the spark and other drivability benefits like shift points for an A4. In that case it is still a really bad idea because you spent twice as much for half the gain.

Ed Wright shared his MAF findings with us some time back on an over 500rwhp car he found single digit gains in eliminating the "restriction" of the MAF so it is NOT a restriction on a stock car the way Granatelli would have you believe.
Old 04-09-2010, 10:07 AM
  #106  
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (23)
 
FASTFATBOY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Mobile Ala
Posts: 4,860
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

Ed told me a 85mm Z06 style maf was worth 4-5 rwhp in a back to back test. Thats 10 ish at the flywheel, 10hp for 100 bux, pretty cheap to me.
Old 04-09-2010, 01:29 PM
  #107  
11 Second Club
iTrader: (1)
 
96capricemgr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 11,975
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes on 12 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by FASTFATBOY
Ed told me a 85mm Z06 style maf was worth 4-5 rwhp in a back to back test. Thats 10 ish at the flywheel, 10hp for 100 bux, pretty cheap to me.
So you are now suggesting a 50-60% drivetrain loss
OK let's assume that was a typo and move on.

At what power level??

Does the ZO6 produce the gain by finer resolution, faster reading, reduced restriction or some other factor???


The ZO6 is finer resolution which I could see helping, within our pcms hertz range the ZO6 sensor maxes out at like 360gps where the stocker is 470ish. Since 360gps is pretty easy to exceed if the 4-5rwhp is at peak I guess we would have to assume it is a restriction reduction since above 360gps with the ZO6 sensor is basically tuned speed density but that still leaves the question of at what power level was this tested? If it was Ed's old 500+rwhp setup it may not do anything for a heads/cam car, but if it was a bolton car then that is significant.
Old 04-09-2010, 07:12 PM
  #108  
TECH Veteran
iTrader: (23)
 
FASTFATBOY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Mobile Ala
Posts: 4,860
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts

Default

Originally Posted by 96capricemgr
So you are now suggesting a 50-60% drivetrain loss
OK let's assume that was a typo and move on.

At what power level??

Does the ZO6 produce the gain by finer resolution, faster reading, reduced restriction or some other factor???


The ZO6 is finer resolution which I could see helping, within our pcms hertz range the ZO6 sensor maxes out at like 360gps where the stocker is 470ish. Since 360gps is pretty easy to exceed if the 4-5rwhp is at peak I guess we would have to assume it is a restriction reduction since above 360gps with the ZO6 sensor is basically tuned speed density but that still leaves the question of at what power level was this tested? If it was Ed's old 500+rwhp setup it may not do anything for a heads/cam car, but if it was a bolton car then that is significant.

So you are assuming drivetrain loss is a fixed percentage

Yes on his 500rwhp setup, why would it not help any other setup? A Stock Z06 is 346 inches, you reckon those engineers found something YOU dont know??

Just because it doesnt show a peak HP number on a chassis dyno has nothing to do with making the car quicker.

Here is what I can tell you and I proved it on a chassis dyno. I took a head cam Six speed SS LS car raised the bottom of the lid 1.5 inches off the core support and it picked up 20 lb feet of tq from 2500 to 4500 rom and 10 hp down there....at peak it was the same. You reckon that car was any quicker??

Did I change the MAF? No, but what I did do was make it easier for the car to breathe at lower rpms. This car made 450 to the wheels. Do you think a bigger MAF and tubing makes it easier for the car to breathe? ANYTHING you can do to make it easier for the car to breathe will make it quicker.

Tell you what you do, run down the street with a clothes pin on your nose, first with a straw then with an equal length piece of water hose then tell me.



See here for your other questions www.fastchip.com
Old 04-09-2010, 08:29 PM
  #109  
TECH Fanatic
iTrader: (5)
 
97Z28SS's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 1,290
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts

Default

EDIT: Never mind "What about the 85mm Z06 maf, anything to be gained there?"



Quick Reply: Granatelli vs MAF Ends vs Descreened Stock vs Bone Stock



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:14 PM.