Can I say Screw MAFT and tune with SAFC?

[HighPSI TSi Guy]

1. Since when is the correction increment the only thing a tuning device is judged by?

2. You can adjust it in 1% increments, with soem creative use of the knobs.

3. Show me a situation where a 1% airflow change is really that much better than a 2% change. I guarantee you that 99% of the people using these products, and 99.9% of the roads and tracks these cars are driven on, will not notice the difference 1% of fuel makes.

With the other changes that occur (heat soaking, injector dead time, VE changes, etc), a 1% increment in tuning is not something to be concerned with.

Your glorious VPC tunes the whole damned curve with one knob. Now THAT is precision.

i have found a matter of 1-2% to make a good difference many times.. where 5% is way too much and 1 isin't enough.. tuning a 14b near stock car is WAAAAAY different than tuning a decently modded car with a decent sized turbo on it. 1% can be the difference between lean knock and no knock. 1% can be the difference between rich break up and smooth acceleration. 1% can determine which timing map you land in. so 1% doesn't matter? looks to me like it does.

as for the VPC, yeah i know, and that's why i'd use a SAFC with a VPC, though that is irrelavent since we're not discussing the VPC.

 

[HighPSI TSi Guy]

You claimed that the SAFC was neede to tune the MAFT, which may be true in your case because you are running the older version.

at least be consistant.. you just admited what you argued against to the death before.. version 2 is out so you can finally admit fault in version 1.x now i guess :laugh:

What bugs?

the ones that will be found by consumers and then denied until a fix is found just like all the previous bugs.

 

[JohnTSI]

Hell with the new Maft setup we are runing now the only reason the maf is on the car is so it can be blow through. The keydrivers chip compensates for the 720s and the safc does the fine tuning. Car still has shifting problems but riunning 11.0@132 is kinda hard to dispute it works. Hell the car doesn't even have a oxygen sensor at all and gets better gas milage than a lot of the cars on this board.

 

[kpt4321]

i have found a matter of 1-2% to make a good difference many times.. where 5% is way too much and 1 isin't enough.. tuning a 14b near stock car is WAAAAAY different than tuning a decently modded car with a decent sized turbo on it. 1% can be the difference between lean knock and no knock. 1% can be the difference between rich break up and smooth acceleration. 1% can determine which timing map you land in. so 1% doesn't matter? looks to me like it does.

My experience says that the differences in condition (like I stated, changes in intake temp, heat soaking, boost changes with temp, load, and gear, etc) make a big enough difference from pull to pull that 1% in tuning isn't a huge deal.

In fact, I am sure of it.

1% of fuel is about a point of A/F ratio at full boost on pump gas. Make a bunch of pulls on the dyno and I guarantee you that from one pull to the next it will move around by that much without tuning.

The effect 1% of airflow has on timing is smaller than a degree of advance. Are you telling me that you set your timing advance with half degree precision?

Besides, LIKE I SAID: For a really good tuner, if you indeed are one, you will notice the difference between 1% and 2%. However, the majority of the people on the road have enough other things to deal with that such problems are not a concern at all.

 

[kpt4321]

at least be consistant.. you just admited what you argued against to the death before.. version 2 is out so you can finally admit fault in version 1.x now i guess :laugh:

Find where I said that the 5% resolution of the MAFT was better than the 1% resolution of the SAFC. Good luck, that's something I never said.

I always maintained that even the older version of the MAFT had a good enough precision to get most setups running well enough to a point that the majority of the people using them wouldn't be able to do any better. That's all. I never claimed that you could tune it more precisely.

The new version fixes the precision problems.

A lot of the really fast guys use a VPC, coupled with a 5-knob AFC or a GCC. I don't know about the AFC, but I do know that the 5-knob AFC is adjustable in 2% increments.

You tell the guys running 125+ mph drag cars that their tuning setups don't ave enough precision. Really.

the ones that will be found by consumers and then denied until a fix is found just like all the previous bugs.

What previous bugs? There was a problem with the wiring in each individual car, where the baro temp would be fixed, but that issue was never designed nor was it due to the MAFT itself.

It's no buggier than something like the SAFC, and it's definately cleaner than the VPC.

Not to mention something like the EMS, which is regarded as an awesome tuning tool, yet motors have been lost because of early timing bugs.

I love how people ignore the problems with the VPC and the ECU, but you're concentrating on focusing on what doesn't even really matter on the MAFT.

How about you go harass VPC and EMS users for a change?

 

[Blk_99gst]

Thanks for kind words though.

No problem, just paypack for:

You opinion isn't worth shit...

 

[HighPSI TSi Guy]

Find where I said that the 5% resolution of the MAFT was better than the 1% resolution of the SAFC. Good luck, that's something I never said.

I always maintained that even the older version of the MAFT had a good enough precision to get most setups running well enough to a point that the majority of the people using them wouldn't be able to do any better. That's all. I never claimed that you could tune it more precisely.

The new version fixes the precision problems.

A lot of the really fast guys use a VPC, coupled with a 5-knob AFC or a GCC. I don't know about the AFC, but I do know that the 5-knob AFC is adjustable in 2% increments.

You tell the guys running 125+ mph drag cars that their tuning setups don't ave enough precision. Really.

most of them actually don't use the knob kind they use the kind with the buttons. hell even so 2% is a lot more precise than 5%

What previous bugs? There was a problem with the wiring in each individual car, where the baro temp would be fixed, but that issue was never designed nor was it due to the MAFT itself.

It's no buggier than something like the SAFC, and it's definately cleaner than the VPC.

Not to mention something like the EMS, which is regarded as an awesome tuning tool, yet motors have been lost because of early timing bugs.

I love how people ignore the problems with the VPC and the ECU, but you're concentrating on focusing on what doesn't even really matter on the MAFT.

How about you go harass VPC and EMS users for a change?

I am aware of the bugs with the EMS and that is why i don't have one, it's still very buggy and i don't trust it to run my car

 

[kpt4321]

No problem, just paypack for:

C'mon man, don't quote half of what I said.

The problem is, you were trying to make a point about the necessity of a SAFC, even though you have the older version of the MAFT.

That's like saying you need a SAFC to tune a GCC, because the knobs on your GCC are broken.

You always have good information, and you do a great job here. Don't take one comment the wrong way, please.

 

[kpt4321]

I am aware of the bugs with the EMS and that is why i don't have one, it's still very buggy and i don't trust it to run my car

Here you go again.

1. Why aren't you throwing shit in people's faces every time an EMS question comes up?

2. You're overracting again. The intial bugs of the AEM EMS have been worked out, why wouldn't you trust it to run your car? Dre trusts it to 500 whp on pump, and so do plenty of other high horsepower cars.

 

[kpt4321]

most of them actually don't use the knob kind they use the kind with the buttons.

Oh, and by the way: If by "they" you mean the fastest 4G63 powered car in the country, the BR RWD car, they you'd be wrong. They used a VPC + GCC combo, which is 2% increments.

But, I'm sure that it didn't work very well, and the SAFC would have been much superior.

Not to mention the fact that to this day, Dave still recommends that combo, not the VPC + SAFC combo. Go tell him that the 1% increments of the SAFC are far superior to the GCC's 2% increments.

 

[STECARS]

Obviously you didn't read my post moron. I already HAVE the safc installed from before the maf-t days. So I can either (A) go back to using the safc which I never had problems with. or (B) Pay an extra 30 dollars for the new 2.01 version, of which when I signed up for it was a 3 month wait. Now apparently their is no wait. So now I ask you, which one is more cost effective?

Maybe eventually I'll get the latest maft-t chip, but I haven't had a good experience with my maft-t or with Mike from fullthrottlespeed. Clipping resistors for baro fixes, really bad idle which a lot of other 2g's experienced on the old yahoo board, orginally 3 month wait for the new chip. Maybe I'll wait until all the bugs in 2.01 are ironed out, so that when 2.5 or 3.0 versions come out, I don't have to pay another 30 dollars to upgrade yet again.

Exactly spend $30 for new chip and sell afc for $200+ profit.
Hmmm sounds very cost effective to me........

 

[HighPSI TSi Guy]

Oh, and by the way: If by "they" you mean the fastest 4G63 powered car in the country, the BR RWD car, they you'd be wrong. They used a VPC + GCC combo, which is 2% increments.

But, I'm sure that it didn't work very well, and the SAFC would have been much superior.

Not to mention the fact that to this day, Dave still recommends that combo, not the VPC + SAFC combo. Go tell him that the 1% increments of the SAFC are far superior to the GCC's 2% increments.

notice i said "Most" not "all". the difference between 2% and 1% is MUCH different than the difference between 1% and 5%.

as for the EMS i am aware the bugs have been fixed but i am giving it a little while before i decide i trust it fully, not to mention i don't even really need it yet. as for throwing a fit about people asking for EMS help, i don't think you'll find a post where i actually told someone they needed it.

 

[16g-95gsx]

I personally do not like the MAFT, I feel the barbaric ways that most people use it to tune their cars is utter crap and only leads to inefficient tuning and a non-linear power band in the end. At difference air velocities the stock MAS and the GM MAF will read differently. I feel because of this, it is too difficult to get a perfect tune for linear power across all throttle positions and airflow velocities, and therefore as High PSI said, the MAFT should be used as a calibration tool to get the GM MAF to be calibrated to read identical to the stock MAS, and then a device such as the Safc should be used to do fuel corrections. Now argue with me.

Also, why should a person such as myself have to pay 30 dollars for a new version of the product? I have my MAFT permanently hard mounted in my car, and it is unable to be removed, so now what is a guy to do? I just dont see why I should be forced to pay an additional 30 dollars when I already paid for 200 dollars worth of small circuitry.

 

[kpt4321]

I feel the barbaric ways that most people use it to tune their cars is utter crap and only leads to inefficient tuning and a non-linear power band in the end.

What does that even mean?

How is the powerband any less linear than with a SAFC, or a GCC?

At difference air velocities the stock MAS and the GM MAF will read differently.

Again, can you please clarify what you are trying to say? If you have the same air density and the velocity changes, then the total airflow is changing, and therefore the signal from the MAF (or MAFT, or VPC) is going to change. I'm not quite sure I understand what you are trying to say.

I feel because of this, it is too difficult to get a perfect tune for linear power across all throttle positions and airflow velocities

A tune across all airflow velocities? Seriously, what the heck?

and therefore as High PSI said, the MAFT should be used as a calibration tool to get the GM MAF to be calibrated to read identical to the stock MAS

Then you're just plugging it in and not touching the knobs.

and then a device such as the Safc should be used to do fuel corrections.

You do realize that taking 10% of airflow out at 5000 rpm on the SAFC is the exact same thing as taking 10% of airflow out on the MAFT, right? As in, you understand that they both modify the airflow signal in the exact same manner?

The only thing that is even debatable is the correction precision (as HighPsiTsiGuy and I have been discussing) and the load basis. That's it.

Also, why should a person such as myself have to pay 30 dollars for a new version of the product? I have my MAFT permanently hard mounted in my car, and it is unable to be removed, so now what is a guy to do? I just dont see why I should be forced to pay an additional 30 dollars when I already paid for 200 dollars worth of small circuitry.

You're joking about this, right?

For the new version of the SAFC, you need to pay $300. Yet, 30 dollars is too expensive?

It doesn't matter where you have it mounted, you pull off the cover, pull the old chip out, and put the new chip in. That's it.

Let's see you upgrade to a SAFCII with that little cost and that little effort.

"Small circuitry"? Why is 200 dollars too much for small circuitry, but the 200-300 dollars you spent on a SAFC isn't? I don't understand this logic one bit. Is it because the SAFC has a shiny blue screen, so you are ok with it costing more?

Every tuning device (SAFC, GCC, VPC, MAFT, SAFR, ITC) has about the same amount of small circuitry. I guess 200 dollars must be too much for all of them?

 

[kpt4321]

notice i said "Most" not "all". the difference between 2% and 1% is MUCH different than the difference between 1% and 5%.

Why is the difference between 1% and 5% even in question here? The MAFT no longer adjusts in 5% increments.

If you're going to use the old version of the MAFT for your arguement, should I use the old version of the SAFC? IIRC, that was 2% increments too.

We're talking about the difference between 1% and 2%. That's all.

You said it was not precise enough. I gave examples of why this is not true, and even pointed out the case of a certain very fast DSM that tunes using 2% increments.

Not to mention the fact that I already stated that with a little creative use of the MAFT knobs, you can change it in 1% increments, if you really feel it is necessary.

 

[HighPSI TSi Guy]

The MAFT no longer adjusts in 5% increments.

i did not realize the new version could do 2%. i stand corrected on that.

If you're going to use the old version of the MAFT for your arguement, should I use the old version of the SAFC? IIRC, that was 2% increments too.

I disagree. old version of the SAFC would be SAFC, not the knobs. SAFC2 would be compared to a 2.0 version of the MAFT, since they are both current production models.

as for the precision, using the dials to tune in a baseline and then fine tuning with SAFC is more precise because it is adjusting from a smaller number thus 1% is less adjustment.

If the MAFT can do 2%, then i suppose that precision is acceptable, however my OPINION stays that the SAFC is a much better tuning tool than the knobs due to ease of use, convenience (real time adjsutability), the data readout/peak hold (yes i actually make use of those on occasion), and more points of adjustability.

 

[kpt4321]

If the MAFT can do 2%, then i suppose that precision is acceptable, however my OPINION stays that the SAFC is a much better tuning tool than the knobs due to ease of use, convenience (real time adjsutability), the data readout/peak hold (yes i actually make use of those on occasion), and more points of adjustability.

Good to see we are starting to be in agreement.

The screen and such of the SAFC is definately a bit easier to see/use, although it does have its downsides as well. I sort of like the slealthy look of a MAFT, although you could hide a SAFC just as well.

I have extended my MAFT's harness into the driver's compartment, which gives me the real-time adjustment that you need when tuning. In reality, it's no more wiring than any other tuning computer install.

Peak hold and data is a nice feature; most of the stuff you can see on the SAFC (and more) just just have my logger displaying and peak holding, but the unmolested airflow feature is nice for a 1g.

I honestly don't think the more points of adjustability makes that much of a difference; how often do you tune such that the setting in between two other points isn't roughly halfway between them anyway? You have a general tendency to get a smooth curve, you just need to change the height and slope of it.

 

[Squackdiddy]

I have extended my MAFT's harness into the driver's compartment, which gives me the real-time adjustment that you need when tuning.

What did you need to do this? the 6ft thing?

 

[Sayajin]

I am also quite interested in what equipment is needed in order to do this.


-Sayajin

 

[GSntncT]

What did you need to do this? the 6ft thing?

I'm getting ready to do the same thing.

 

[STECARS]

I am also quite interested in what equipment is needed in order to do this.


-Sayajin

6 ft extension for $17.99

http://www.fullthrottlespeed.com/Dy...121727-EVEREST-QWYUA86&Cc=&ic=050MAFEXT6&tpc=

new chip $30

http://www.fullthrottlespeed.com/Dy...1727-EVEREST-QWYUA86&Cc=&ic=050DSMMAFTUP&tpc=

 

[Blk_99gst]

6 ft extension for $17.99
http://www.fullthrottlespeed.com/Dy...121727-EVEREST-QWYUA86&Cc=&ic=050MAFEXT6&tpc=

From their website:
"6ft extension of the GM side of the Translator harness. 1 end male, the other female. Use when you need more flexable mounting position."

So that just connect the translator to the gm maf. Then what do you do with the 2g maf side/output of the translator. Do you solder those wires right to the ecu inside the passenger compartment? If so, then how many do you need to tie into? RPM, airflow, baro, temp, power+, power-; those are the ones I can think of off the top of my head. Any others?

 

[STECARS]

From their website:
"6ft extension of the GM side of the Translator harness. 1 end male, the other female. Use when you need more flexable mounting position."

So that just connect the translator to the gm maf. Then what do you do with the 2g maf side/output of the translator. Do you solder those wires right to the ecu inside the passenger compartment? If so, then how many do you need to tie into? RPM, airflow, baro, temp, power+, power-; those are the ones I can think of off the top of my head. Any others?

I really cant help yea there, but call up mike he'll explain.
he's a great guy
he really doesnt have good communication skills. .......

 

[kpt4321]

What did you need to do this? the 6ft thing?

Nope.

I went to radioshack and bought some long wire with a bunch of conductors in it, it may have been telephone wire or something. Then I just cut and soldered all the connections.

It did't take me more than about an hour, including all the routing and such.

 

[kpt4321]

I know where not supposed to do this but.......

Then why did you do it?