A performance GM MAF? SUpposed to add horses? WTF

[98spydert]

No, not a shot, just an observation.
Wow this thread has gotten lost. Someone find it please..

 

[boostedinaz]

The Granetalli (sp) MAF works great and is proven to make more power on a GM vehicle. They do this by not only make a cleaner path for air but also altering the electrical signal to the ECU. The thread title assumes that this MAF it self will add power to our application. It will not do that. A stock GM MAF with the screen removed will be more than enough for all but the highes HP cars.

I see no point in discrediting a product when no one has personal experiance with it. So many people do this on the net and it snow balls from there until a product is deemed horrible when in fact it is just stupid people.

Are the claims true??? Yes, for GM cars.

Will it work with a MAFT on a DSM??? No.

What MAF shoudl I use???? The stock MAF that is listed in a thread that shows all the MAFs that are compatible with the MAFT.

Back on track and actual factual answers from a user not just and internet jockey.

Michael

 

[98spydert]

Finally a real answer.

I'm thinking it would "work" with a MAFT though. If the signal differs from the stock map, you could theoretically alter it right back to normal with the MAFT so it would "work." Obviously there's no reason to do this but it would be functional. Any flaws in my theory? Besides the fact that it's a dumb idea

 

[boostedinaz]

No flaws in the theory, but it would be hard unless you knew what they did to it i the first place. You could just play with it by trial and error, but like you said its a bit dumb, but a good idea if you have the time.

Michael

 

[kpt4321]

Finally a real answer.

I'm thinking it would "work" with a MAFT though. If the signal differs from the stock map, you could theoretically alter it right back to normal with the MAFT so it would "work." Obviously there's no reason to do this but it would be functional. Any flaws in my theory? Besides the fact that it's a dumb idea

I think I gave that same answer on page one.

Unless you have a way to edit the MAFT's conversion formula and/or conversion table, you won't be able to recalibrate it for the new MAF.

 

[SummerWolf]

Uh, wel when my buddy runs with the stock maf descreened pulls around we swap out to the Granatelli and he runs again (within ten minutes of each other) and he dropped 2 tenths with damn near the same 60 ft.....

he also said it seemed like it ran better on the highway after the track

granted there are variables but thats a 4.3 S-10 with 3 inch exhaust headers, a T-56 swap, 4.10 gears, efans, and a K&N FIPK, and hes pretty consistent....and he didn't use nitrous on those two runs.

I dunno. everyone else with the S-10's either say they make a slight difference or none.

It makes the air move faster around the sensor (held in by wires rather then the stock thick metal pieces)

but it doesn't matter, cause it won't work with a dsm apparently and I'd be concerned enough not to try it

 

[SummerWolf]

And seriously, what the hell does that mean?

More airflow around the sensor means the computer has to keep up with it, thats what I was meaning

 

[pinknuggit]

Uh, wel when my buddy runs with the stock maf descreened pulls around we swap out to the Granatelli and he runs again (within ten minutes of each other) and he dropped 2 tenths with damn near the same 60 ft.....

he also said it seemed like it ran better on the highway after the track

granted there are variables but thats a 4.3 S-10 with 3 inch exhaust headers, a T-56 swap, 4.10 gears, efans, and a K&N FIPK, and hes pretty consistent....and he didn't use nitrous on those two runs.

I dunno. everyone else with the S-10's either say they make a slight difference or none.

It makes the air move faster around the sensor (held in by wires rather then the stock thick metal pieces)

but it doesn't matter, cause it won't work with a dsm apparently and I'd be concerned enough not to try it

i belive you, but there's really no need for anymore explanations and examples of this maf used on GM cars because [sarcasm] this is a DSM forum and we can't mention any other car besides the dsm [/sarcasm]. I wouldn't want you to make 98spydert upset and have him cry to mommy some more!! :laugh:

just kidding... for real... :laugh: no really i'm just kidding! really!!! take my post with a grain of salt, please.

for all of you with 3" stock gm mafs, is there any downside to removing the screen? i've been tempted to do it to mine because it has a few bent honeycombs.

 

[SummerWolf]

no theres no downside. go ahead and tap that thing out. its a common mod on gm vehicles too

 

[pinknuggit]

i'll definately have to give that a try!

 

[kpt4321]

Uh, wel when my buddy runs with the stock maf descreened pulls around we swap out to the Granatelli and he runs again (within ten minutes of each other) and he dropped 2 tenths with damn near the same 60 ft.....

he also said it seemed like it ran better on the highway after the track

granted there are variables but thats a 4.3 S-10 with 3 inch exhaust headers, a T-56 swap, 4.10 gears, efans, and a K&N FIPK, and hes pretty consistent....and he didn't use nitrous on those two runs.

I dunno. everyone else with the S-10's either say they make a slight difference or none.

Ok, I am starting to get aggravated.

Is this S10tuners.com? No.

Do you know WHY that MAF makes an S-10 go faster? No.

Can you come up with any information that will prove that that MAF will do the same thing in a DSM? No.

Can I come up with reasons NOT to use it in a DSM? Yes, I already have.

Stop telling us it kicks ass in a S10. I know a guy who put a 13g turbo on his 3000GT VR-4 and it got way faster, I guess everyone should use 13g turbos then huh?

It makes the air move faster around the sensor (held in by wires rather then the stock thick metal pieces)

Greater cross-sectional area will actually decrease the air speed.

 

[kpt4321]

More airflow around the sensor means the computer has to keep up with it, thats what I was meaning

You still don't make any sense.

How does more airflow mean the computer has to "keep up" with it?

When you have more airflow, it doesn't start sneaking up behind the ECU, yelling in its ear, and then running into the engine before the ECU can do anything about it. The air isn't hiding in a dark alley waiting to sneak in a back door where the ECU can't see it.

Regardless of the total mass airflow, the ECU gets the same signal rate from the MAF, and it has to do the exact same calculations with take the same amount of time. The only difference more airflow makes is you get a bigger number from the fuel calculation, and different numbers from timing.

Is it harder to keep up if I make you add 20 +20 than if I make you add 10 + 10? No, I think not.

 

[kpt4321]

no theres no downside. go ahead and tap that thing out. its a common mod on gm vehicles too

Ok, you are banned from this thread.

It DOES have a downside, if there was no downside to removing it then why would GM install it in the first place?

The screen is there for two reasons: the straighten the airflow and make the disribution more linear over the cross-sectional area of the MAF, and to protect the wiring from anay damage that could be caused by derbis (primarily number 1).

When you remove the screen you will change the AFR of your vehicle due to changing the reported airflow, you will throw the calibration of the MAF off slightly, and you could cause drivability problems.

 

[boostedinaz]

Ouch reading that hurt. Thats some good ownage.

Michael

 

[98spydert]

no theres no downside. go ahead and tap that thing out. its a common mod on gm vehicles too

i'll definately have to give that a try!

You're both idiots. Do us all a favor and stick to cluttering up the newb forum.





ktp, is the alteration to the airflow signal linear from this maf? (edit: or any "performance maf" simalar)

 

[pinknuggit]

you wish i was a noob!

how old are you? i'm going to guess 17..

you haven't contributed anything at all to this thread except calling me an idiot.



if anyone thinks that a performance MAF does not add performance to the vehicle it was intended for, then call granatelli or email them. I'm sure they will give you an explanation.

You guys can sit there and argue the physics of a performance maf vs. a stock maf and how it works until you are red in the face. The point is that it is proven to add power to the vehicle it was designed for. Period.

The only thing that brought up GM Cars was someone's input on how they are proven to make power on GM cars.

I will take the honeycomb out of my MAF sensor because about 10% of the honeycomb is bent.

 

[98spydert]

you wish i was a noob!

You're so right, I spend all my time wishing you were a n00b!

how old are you? i'm going to guess 17..

um... far from it.

you haven't contributed anything at all to this thread except calling me an idiot.

At least my contribution was accurate.

if anyone thinks that a performance MAF does not add performance to the vehicle it was intended for, then call granatelli or email them. I'm sure they will give you an explanation.

We'll go with "Who cares?"

You guys can sit there and argue the physics of a performance maf vs. a stock maf and how it works until you are red in the face. The point is that it is proven to add power to the vehicle it was designed for. Period.

Now you're an idiot and obviously not paying attention to the thread.

The only thing that brought up GM Cars was someone's input on how they are proven to make power on GM cars.

Again, "Who cares?"

I will take the honeycomb out of my MAF sensor because about 10% of the honeycomb is bent.

Good on ya

 

[98spydert]

Moderator, strike down from above and close this. He got his answer.

 

[rarson]

Wow, so many useless replies. In case anyone wants to actually talk about automotive performance...

If the tuning is adjusted to compensate for the change in airflow signal, I see no detrimental effect for modding the MAF in the way that Granatelli does. It's clear that, from the experiences of other, that the GM MAF doesn't need the "straightening out" effect like the stock MAF does; after all, it is a hotwire MAF and not a Karman-vortex. Case closed on that one. And I don't think it's going to be filtering anything; the airfilter's got that one covered.

I'm not saying you're not making valid points, because there's some good stuff there, but there's more to it than what you said. Mike Licht, the creator of the translator, has provided flow numbers showing the increase of removing the screen and the restriction in the MAF ends. He even stated that removing the screen probably wouldn't hurt the accuracy of the MAF, either. I believe that info is in the NABR archives.

Anyways, I agree that it's not a wise thing to mod the MAF without the necessary means to compensate. Probably not quite as bad with the GM MAF as the modding that used to go on with the stock 2g MAF though.

I really hate generalized, groundless comments stated as "facts" like "More airflow around the sensor means the computer has to keep up with it". There's nothing remotely close to technical about that statement, but now some poor sap that doesn't know any better is going to read it and think it's true.

 

[pinknuggit]

At least my contribution was accurate.



We'll go with "Who cares?"


Again, "Who cares?"

you and i both said the exact same thing, only with different words!!!! hahahaha!!!! duhhhrrr!!

Obviously you care because you were the only one to make a big hissy fit about it all.. :laugh: you even broke down every single sentence in my last post!! :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

 

[98spydert]

Kid, stop crying. I obviously don't care so get over it, grow up, and have a nice day

 

[pinknuggit]

i'm not crying, i'm laughing!!! at you!!! :laugh: :laugh:


calling Me a kid.. :laugh: if you only knew... :laugh:


how old are you by the way? (just wondering)

 

[SummerWolf]

I was just providing information based on experience...obviously none of you have experience with a Granatelli, I was saying how it worked.

And one of the first free mods to ANY GM with a MAF is to descreen it. It is not there to move air around the sensor it is there to block anything from hitting the sensor....but thats what the air filter is for.

If you have more air moving around the sensor the computer has to compensate for that somehow, thats what I mean by that. It has to compensate by adjusting timing, fuel etc. does that make sense to you!?!?! And thats also why the MAF makes an S-10 go faster is because the computer compensates for the added airflow.

And sorry I'm not a newbie. I've owned two s-10's and have been moderator for several S-10 forums. Sorry I have experience with this product and GM mafs in general and was telling you what my experience and the experience of other S-10 owners have been. It seemed valid in a thread about a GMS where someone said it was a crock to begin with.

There are two sides to every coin, some people say descreen the MAF some say don't but it is a mainstay free mod with GM MAF equipped vehicles.

 

[SummerWolf]

Oh, and I was one that said I'd hesitate to use it cause I didn't think the MAF T would translate it right!!!!

I never said it would work in a non gm vehicle, just sharing experience....

 

[pinknuggit]

yeah.. i think everyone forgot what the real topic of this thread was... the granatelli mas... you can't talk about the granatelli mas without mentioning GM vehicles.

these dsm people who have had no experience with it come on here and bash it, therefore experienced people like you and i shovel out our knowledge based on first hand experience, only to get shunned. I got called a noob too! :laugh: real mature..

I think it's kind of funny how you can definately tell the younger posters who have not had first hand experience with the subject of topic. Subjective opinions rock!!!