A performance GM MAF? SUpposed to add horses? WTF

[98spydert]

Wow, give it a rest.

 

[kpt4321]

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.

Sure, but how do you suggest that the tuning be adjusted? The MAFT doesn't have high enough resolution, necessarily, to work with a MAF with a totally different curve than the stock piece.

Unles you're editing the code on the ECU level, it's not going to happen. Even if you are, it's going to be a pain.

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.

Case closed? Please, tell me why a hotwire MAF doesn't need linear distribution of airflow.

The answer, of couse, is that it does. If the airflow is not distributed across the area of the MAF properly, the reading will be off, period. The screen helps with this linear distribution.

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.

Yes, it increases flow. So does removing the MAF entirely.

It also has downsides, like I mentioned above.

"Probably won't" hurt the accuracy isn't good enough for me.

 

[boostedinaz]

To run the Granetalli will be more work than it is worth. You have to find out from them what they do to the MAF and hope they tell you. Not likley. Then you have to go into the actual code of the translator and compensate for what they have done. All this for what maybe a few horses if that. Not worth it at all.

The screen in the MAF does alot of things. The most important is the air flow but it also keep debris from killing the wires. I have seen a few times when a piece of filter or maybe just a small rock has found its way in the intake tract. That mesh kept not only the MAF alive but also the motor.

Since we have so many people that are faithful to the General then I perpose a dyno sention. The first pull will be with screen in, the second with the screen out. When the power levels come back the same we will tell you to put it back in to be safe and then you can post in here some facts as opposed to just thoughts.

Michael

 

[leakyfaucet]

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.

As already mentioned, I'm willing to bet that one reason it makes more power is because it sends less signal, therefore leaning out the A/F mixture.

The screen in the MAF does alot of things. The most important is the air flow but it also keep debris from killing the wires. I have seen a few times when a piece of filter or maybe just a small rock has found its way in the intake tract. That mesh kept not only the MAF alive but also the motor.

I can't agree more. Every time I check, my 5.0 has a leaf or two right in front of the screen. Useless? Far from it. Car companies usually don't spend money developing unnecessary products. It's not like they're out to lose money.

 

[rarson]

Sure, but how do you suggest that the tuning be adjusted? The MAFT doesn't have high enough resolution, necessarily, to work with a MAF with a totally different curve than the stock piece.

Unles you're editing the code on the ECU level, it's not going to happen. Even if you are, it's going to be a pain.

I'm sure that good results could be had with DSMLink. I realize that's not an option for everyone though.

And yes I agree that hotwire MAFs need linear distribution but in the area that most people install a GM MAF on their DSM, the IC piping is already going to be packed with air... air distribution isn't going to be linear anyway (there will be higher velocity in the center of the stream versus at the edge of the pipe wall, due to friction).

Basically, from the experience of others, what I've observed has shown me that hotwire MAF's are less susceptible to air metering problems when removing the screen, and this is based partly on Mike Licht's testing. So I admit, I could be wrong. I'm just going off what I've heard.

It's nice to see some actual tech information being discussed in this thread though.

 

[kpt4321]

I'm sure that good results could be had with DSMLink. I realize that's not an option for everyone though.

I agree, somewhat. DSMLink's MAF compensation table would probably allow you to get it to run right.

But at that point, what have you acomplished, you know? I guess that MAF will flow better tha a regular 3" MAF.... but why not just go to the 3.5" MAF? If the 3.5" MAF is a retriction, you have other problems to deal with.

It's nice to see some actual tech information being discussed in this thread though.

Are you trying to say that using results from an S-10 isn't tech information? :laugh: