Everyone with ported MAF ends
Everyone with ported MAF ends What did you do or learned how to do now from all the posts to get your car in tune from ported ends??
I know when I had mine on the LTRIMS were around +20ish
what can you do to get them down to -3 or so??
I just dont like the IDEA of maxing my MAF table out to get them close to zero
I know when I had mine on the LTRIMS were around +20ish
what can you do to get them down to -3 or so??
I just dont like the IDEA of maxing my MAF table out to get them close to zero
TECH Apprentice
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
From: Salisbury, Md
Re: Everyone with ported MAF ends Reduce your injector flow rate table. If you skew your maf table too far you will loose timing. I did, but as soon as I changed my injector flow rate table and put my maf table back to stock my timing jumped right back up.
Re: Everyone with ported MAF ends </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by DailyAluminumBlock:
<strong> Reduce your injector flow rate table. If you skew your maf table too far you will loose timing. I did, but as soon as I changed my injector flow rate table and put my maf table back to stock my timing jumped right back up. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">wouldnt you increase the IFR table to flow more fuel to richen the car up?
<strong> Reduce your injector flow rate table. If you skew your maf table too far you will loose timing. I did, but as soon as I changed my injector flow rate table and put my maf table back to stock my timing jumped right back up. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">wouldnt you increase the IFR table to flow more fuel to richen the car up?
Staging Lane
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
From: Newport, Michigan
Re: Everyone with ported MAF ends I re-calibrated the MAF table with LS1Edit to get ris of +22% LTFTs. I have had no drivibility problems (M6) and I am pulling 28* timing at WOT.
The idle is smooth and steady with a 218/218 cam.
I dont know what you mean by "maxing out the MAF table".
The idle is smooth and steady with a 218/218 cam.
I dont know what you mean by "maxing out the MAF table".
Re: Everyone with ported MAF ends </font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by Doc99SShome:
<strong> I re-calibrated the MAF table with LS1Edit to get ris of +22% LTFTs. I have had no drivibility problems (M6) and I am pulling 28* timing at WOT.
The idle is smooth and steady with a 218/218 cam.
I dont know what you mean by "maxing out the MAF table". </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">ok say my LTRIMS are roughly 20
Say I mult the MAF table by 120 to get them to zero, wellll it wont let me because I guess the MAF doesnt let you tune that high??
I think the highest I can Mult the whole MAF table by is 118%
<strong> I re-calibrated the MAF table with LS1Edit to get ris of +22% LTFTs. I have had no drivibility problems (M6) and I am pulling 28* timing at WOT.
The idle is smooth and steady with a 218/218 cam.
I dont know what you mean by "maxing out the MAF table". </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">ok say my LTRIMS are roughly 20
Say I mult the MAF table by 120 to get them to zero, wellll it wont let me because I guess the MAF doesnt let you tune that high??
I think the highest I can Mult the whole MAF table by is 118%
TECH Addict
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 2,593
Likes: 0
From: TEXAS
Re: Everyone with ported MAF ends You do not want to multiply the entire MAF table by the same percentage. The graph is not a straight line, so when you increase everything by 118%, some parts of the table are going to be affected more than others. Also, the the IFR is done the opposite of the MAF table. You want to decrease the IFR to flow more fuel. I think that number represents the time between pulses, so by decreasing it you're adding more fuel.
When I put my ported MAF it made my Ltrims +5, so I tweaked my MAF table. I started off by multiplying the values from 1500-6000Hz by 108%, then started to decrease the % the higher I moved up in the Hz, until it finally got to 100%. It made the curve much smoother and didn't garbage up the high end of the MAF table.
If you have to adjust the MAF by a large amount, then I would try tweaking the IFR so the MAF will not be too far off.
When I put my ported MAF it made my Ltrims +5, so I tweaked my MAF table. I started off by multiplying the values from 1500-6000Hz by 108%, then started to decrease the % the higher I moved up in the Hz, until it finally got to 100%. It made the curve much smoother and didn't garbage up the high end of the MAF table.
If you have to adjust the MAF by a large amount, then I would try tweaking the IFR so the MAF will not be too far off.
Trending Topics
Re: Everyone with ported MAF ends </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> You do not want to multiply the entire MAF table by the same percentage. The graph is not a straight line, so when you increase everything by 118%, some parts of the table are going to be affected more than others. Also, the the IFR is done the opposite of the MAF table. You want to decrease the IFR to flow more fuel. I think that number represents the time between pulses, so by decreasing it you're adding more fuel.
When I put my ported MAF it made my Ltrims +5, so I tweaked my MAF table. I started off by multiplying the values from 1500-6000Hz by 108%, then started to decrease the % the higher I moved up in the Hz, until it finally got to 100%. It made the curve much smoother and didn't garbage up the high end of the MAF table.
If you have to adjust the MAF by a large amount, then I would try tweaking the IFR so the MAF will not be too far off. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Thanks alot for the info!!
<strong> You do not want to multiply the entire MAF table by the same percentage. The graph is not a straight line, so when you increase everything by 118%, some parts of the table are going to be affected more than others. Also, the the IFR is done the opposite of the MAF table. You want to decrease the IFR to flow more fuel. I think that number represents the time between pulses, so by decreasing it you're adding more fuel.
When I put my ported MAF it made my Ltrims +5, so I tweaked my MAF table. I started off by multiplying the values from 1500-6000Hz by 108%, then started to decrease the % the higher I moved up in the Hz, until it finally got to 100%. It made the curve much smoother and didn't garbage up the high end of the MAF table.
If you have to adjust the MAF by a large amount, then I would try tweaking the IFR so the MAF will not be too far off. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Thanks alot for the info!!
LS1 Tech Stories
The Best V8 Stories One Small Block at Time
6 Common C5 Corvette Failures and What's Involved In Repairing Them
Pouria Savadkouei
Retro Modern Bandit Pontiac Trans AM Comes With Burt Reynolds' Autograph
Verdad Gallardo
Top 10 Greatest Cadillac V Series Performance Models Ever, Ranked
Pouria Savadkouei
Top 10 Most Powerful Chevy Trucks Ever Made!
Hennessey's New Supercharged Silverado ZR2 Has 700 HP
Verdad Gallardo
Coachbuilt N2A Anteros Is an LS2-Powered C6 Corvette In Italian Clothes
Verdad Gallardo
Awesome K5 Blazer Restomod Comes With C7 Corvette Power
Verdad Gallardo
10 Camaros You Should Never Buy
10 LS Engine Myths That Refuse to Die
Verdad Gallardo Staging Lane
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
From: Newport, Michigan
Re: Everyone with ported MAF ends When I re-calibrated my MAF table, I did not multiply thru by the amount of the LTFT across the entire table. This is not the way to do it.
You have various fuel cells. There is a unique LTFT value for each fuel cell, also these fuel cells can be linked to specific ranges of the MAF table.
In order to re-calibrate my MAF table, I broke the table into three ranges of frequency and treated each ranges separtely. The top range (8,000Hz and above was multiplied by 104%, while the idle (and just off idle range (1500 to 3000Hz) was multiplied by 115%. I am typing these numbers by memory, so they be off a bit.
If you multiplied thru by 120%, you did it all wrong (IMHO), unless of course, every LTFT value in each fuel cell was +20%. Even then, I would have mutiplied thru by 115% for my first attempt because I am a little conservative on my changes.
You have various fuel cells. There is a unique LTFT value for each fuel cell, also these fuel cells can be linked to specific ranges of the MAF table.
In order to re-calibrate my MAF table, I broke the table into three ranges of frequency and treated each ranges separtely. The top range (8,000Hz and above was multiplied by 104%, while the idle (and just off idle range (1500 to 3000Hz) was multiplied by 115%. I am typing these numbers by memory, so they be off a bit.
If you multiplied thru by 120%, you did it all wrong (IMHO), unless of course, every LTFT value in each fuel cell was +20%. Even then, I would have mutiplied thru by 115% for my first attempt because I am a little conservative on my changes.