MAF vs SD Stock Internal???
MAF vs SD Stock Internal??? i was wondering if anyone had done any comparison of MAF vs SD power output in a bolt on F-Body?
i see a lot of upside to SD tuning with big cams and power adders, just wanted to know if anyone had feedback for a bolt on application before i decided which way to go.
-Thanks
i see a lot of upside to SD tuning with big cams and power adders, just wanted to know if anyone had feedback for a bolt on application before i decided which way to go.
-Thanks
i can't find anything about it doing a search.
were the comparisons dyno only or were track results also experimented with? jsut wondering if there is a difference at speed with any of the available air intake systems like the FTRA i have on my car now.
were the comparisons dyno only or were track results also experimented with? jsut wondering if there is a difference at speed with any of the available air intake systems like the FTRA i have on my car now.
There is no HP gain going from a good Closed loop/maf tune to a SD tune. You go to SD for Cams with alot of overlap or boosted situations for more control.Thats a simple break down.
TECH Enthusiast
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 620
Likes: 0
From: Katherine N.T Australia
Its been proven many many times over that SD tuning provides better overall power and much better throttle response. I was always hesitant to the claims till I retuned a car SD from its previous MAF tune. Seat of the pants the car was a different animal.
Trending Topics
so many different answers that your just going to gave to test it urself. this post will start a big sd vs maf war. put your car in sd mode get your VE tables on point and see how you like it. then plug your maf back tune it and see how u like it. thats what im doing. my car is currently in SD mode and throttle response is better. however thats because im tuning it to get it that way. once im done i'll take it out of SD and tune the MAF. if i don't like the results then i'll just stick to SD.
either way tuning the VE tables is pretty cool if you ask me.
either way tuning the VE tables is pretty cool if you ask me.
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
TECH Fanatic
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 1
From: Sunny London, UK
Power is virtually the same, the argument is that as mentioned increased throttle response and transitions are smoother.
MAF is the easier and lazier way to tune, plus takes into account variations in engine wear, mods etc, hence why the OEM's use it. Anyway not arguing, just observing
MAF is the easier and lazier way to tune, plus takes into account variations in engine wear, mods etc, hence why the OEM's use it. Anyway not arguing, just observing
This is a debate that will long forever be argued. People claim that the MAF is a restriction, I run a STOCK MAF less screen in an LT1 Forced Inducted application. Car puts down 648 RWHP on pump gas and up to 722 RWHP with fast gas and a little more boost. You will hear from someone about the power gains or so called seat of the pants response. A lot of time people add a mod and want to believe they feel the car with a quicker acceleration, but go to the track and find different. Of course there are times that this and certain other mods do make a difference. Just like the TB airfoil that came out for the LT's. I tested them on the dyno and saw 0-2 HP gains but have read where someone posted that they gained 30 RWHP!!!
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Power is virtually the same, the argument is that as mentioned increased throttle response and transitions are smoother.
MAF is the easier and lazier way to tune, plus takes into account variations in engine wear, mods etc, hence why the OEM's use it. Anyway not arguing, just observing
MAF is the easier and lazier way to tune, plus takes into account variations in engine wear, mods etc, hence why the OEM's use it. Anyway not arguing, just observing
This weekend am hoping to do a HSV dyno day and currently in the middle of tuning the car for SD and closed loop. As I am there if there is a spare booking I can ask to do a 2nd run with my MAF installed.
My plan is to scale the MAF this week prior to the run then revert to SD tune for the run but would be interested to see any comparisson.
Of course the issue in dyno runs is how the AT effects things so it may not be representative.
I may look at going back to MAF full time and closed loop but as it is my mpg isnt much worse off in OLSD just with emissions etc I might just go maf cl but disable ltft
i talked to one of the guys at HPTuners today and i think what i am going to do is jsut continue to program with the MAF until i have all or at least the bulk of my bolt ons together, and then i will go to the SD and see what if any difference there is in the results.
HPTuners only charges one credit for the custom operating systems and the package to purchase the software comes with 8 credits anyway. it is worth a try since it is costing me any extra anyway.
BTW, real time tuning is friggin fun as hell.
HPTuners only charges one credit for the custom operating systems and the package to purchase the software comes with 8 credits anyway. it is worth a try since it is costing me any extra anyway.
BTW, real time tuning is friggin fun as hell.
