Montero #482 Maf vs #399 Evo8 Maf?

[coppersmith]

So i got screwed by one of the long time members on here (cornbread) that told me he sold me a evo8 maf but it turns out to be a montero maf, my question is am I going to be able to make the kind of power from using a montero maf as i would using a evo8 maf? I currently have a 2G maf and i really hope i can make more power from using the montero maf because if not i got screwed out of $160! thanks in advance

 

[jking29]

The only difference between the the Montero and Evo mas is the air horn on the front of the mas. The Montero mas has a air horn that covers a lot more of the honeycomb, and the Evo air horn is open to the whole honeycomb. I cut the air horn off and used epoxy to hold the honeycomb in and build up my own air horn on a Montero mas so that the whole honeycomb is exposed.

 

[coppersmith]

so is it necessary to remove the internals like u said or can it be left the same? also is the wiring on the #482 Maf the same as the #399 Maf?

Any input will be appreciated

 

[jking29]

The wiring for both is the same. You don't have to remove the airhorn, but it won't flow as much and will read a little different than an Evo mas. Removing the airhorn is really easy to do as it's just plastic. Look at the front of the mas (the side where the air filter attaches) and you will see a plastic piece that has a round hole the same size as the exit of the mas. You can see the honeycomb through the hole. If you flip the mas around and look through the exit, you can see that the honeycomb extends all the way out behind that plastic piece. I just took a dremel with a cut-off wheel and removed the plastic piece at the outside edges. Once that is done, the honeycomb can slide in and out of the mas then. I pulled it out, then put some epoxy around the inside of the hole where the honeycomb goes, and pushed the honeycomb back in. I let it cure and then taped over the honeycomb to keep epoxy out of it, and built up epoxy around the outer edge in layers. When I had it built up enough and it cured, I took a small bit with the dremel and created a smooth radius into the honeycomb and finished it off with a little sandpaper. You just want to smooth it out a little so the air flows into the honeycomb smoothly without turbulence. I don't have any before pictures, but I can snap you one tomorrow of the after.

 

[coppersmith]

ok thanks i would appreciate that

 

[jeffo]

I would NOT recommend removing the airhorn on a 3G #482 MAS. According to the Mitsu documentation I have, it flows IDENTICAL to the EVO #399 MAS. I think the other guy is confusing the #501 3G MAS, which is only rated at 210 liters/second. The #482 is good for ~500 HP, and is rated the same 240 liters/second as the EVO MAS. The #482 airhorn is already about as large as it can get, whereas the #501 covers ~20% of the opening.

 

[coppersmith]

I would NOT recommend removing the airhorn on a 3G #482 MAS. According to the Mitsu documentation I have, it flows IDENTICAL to the EVO #399 MAS. I think the other guy is confusing the #501 3G MAS, which is only rated at 210 liters/second. The #482 is good for ~500 HP, and is rated the same 240 liters/second as the EVO MAS. The #482 airhorn is already about as large as it can get, whereas the #501 covers ~20% of the opening.

so how much whp does the #399 support? i was told the #399 supported well over 600whp, is there any truth to this?
and have u ever heard of a #482 handling 550-600whp?

 

[jking29]

I would NOT recommend removing the airhorn on a 3G #482 MAS. According to the Mitsu documentation I have, it flows IDENTICAL to the EVO #399 MAS. I think the other guy is confusing the #501 3G MAS, which is only rated at 210 liters/second. The #482 is good for ~500 HP, and is rated the same 240 liters/second as the EVO MAS. The #482 airhorn is already about as large as it can get, whereas the #501 covers ~20% of the opening.

You know, now that you say that I believe it was a #501 mas. It is the mas that comes on the Montero, as that's where I got mine. I'll check tomorrow.

 

[jeffo]

I'm certainly not the best one to ask what the capabilities are of either MAS, because all I have is the factory documentation, and 500+ HP is well beyond anything documented by Mitsubishi. But, everytime I have seen an EVO MAS or a #482 MAS that has been on a car dyno'd over 500HP the screens get sucked in and distorted, which would worry me. And, if you take the screens out the MAS becomes unpredictable because the screens aren't there to straighten the airflow anymore, which isn't good either. That's why I use the 500HP figure.
Both the #501 and the #482 are used on Monteros. But, the #482 is used most often on the 3.5 liter Montero Sport, and the #501 was used on the 3.0 liter engines. The #482 was also used on the 3G Eclipse GTS which had a V6 with the variable induction (Cyclone-type) intake manifold.
Because of the huge airhorn blocking off part of the MAS inlet, the #501 covers a lower range of airflow, up to a maximum of 210 liters/second by their documentation. Mitsubishi did the same exact thing with the 2G MAS. They made versions for the twin turbo 3000GT that looked identical, flowed the same exact liters per Hz, but were built/tested to tighter tolerances than the #609, mostly tighter in their variation with temperature. Then, they made the same MAS, blocked off part of the inlet with an airhorn, and called it the #182 MAS, for lower HP applications.

 

[imdrax]

So how does the 501 compare to a 1g and 2g? What is the power rating l/s for a 2g? Will the 501 flow the same as a 482 once the airhorn is removed? I just got a 501 for dirt cheap and would like to run it as is with the airhorn if it flow like the 2g. I'm not going to make more than 300whp.

 

[imdrax]

Well I installed the #501 MAF today and with 560's had to pull out -30 across the board. That makes me think the 501 flows about the same as a 1G. I will hack the snorkel tomorrow and see if I can get the AFC closer to 0. I would still like the answers to my questions above.

 

[brian9397gsx]

yes as stated in the above posts its the smallest there was a write up on keydiver.com that detailed each individual mas. i just tried finding it but i think he took it down sorry that would of helped. but yeah the 501 is smaller than a stock 2g (609)

 

[imdrax]

OK thanks, I read through almost all the evo maf threads and couldn't find a definitive answer about the 501. I'm also trying to picture epoxying the honeycomb, should the epoxy be put on the outer part of the honeycomb? If someone has a picture of a modified 501 I would love to see it thanks.

 

[jeffo]

The #501 MAS flows ~5% more airflow across the board more than a 2G MAS for the same Hz. But, it is only rated by Mitsubishi at 210 liters/second, instead of the 2G rating of 240 liters/second. If you are pulling out 30% fuel you are removing way too much, IMO. A stock #501 with EVO 560cc injectors should be an almost perfect match. It is flowing 18% more air at idle than a 1G at the same Hz, and ~27% across the board at other Hz.
If you remove the #501 airhorn, you want to epoxy only the edges of the screen, not blocking off any of the airflow if possible, so that it will flow pretty much like the #482 or EVO #399 MAS. I would recommend trying to form the epoxy into some sort of a rounded airhorn, to smooth the flow of air into the MAS.
DSMChips.com | DSM ECU Chips Enchanced by Keydiver

 

[imdrax]

I thought that 30% was way too much as well, however with the AFC zeroed out the o2 was not cycling at idle and the o2 trim was sitting at 60%, the trim did not move until I was in the -20% range and then it slowly rose and the o2 began to cycle. Why do you think It took this much fuel to be removed in order for the trim to even out? I am running the stock regulator with a 255, but an aeromotive unit is in the mail. I think this may be my issue.

 

[jeffo]

Yes, idle AFR is one thing, but I wouldn't remove that same 30% across the board. FPR overrun mainly affects idle and light cruising, so you only want to apply it to the AFC LOW sliders, not the HIGH. Just drive the car around easy for a while and watch the fueltrims.

 

[imdrax]

My fault for not specifying, but the 30% I pulled out was from 1k-2k low. The rest of low is about -20 and high I left at 0. I won't be doing any WOT until I get the maf hacked and afpr installed. I will definitly post back after the afpr goes in. I will be leaving both my gm maf installed blow through and 3g maf and do back to back logging to see comparisons. For sone reason I think the maft is not correctly adjusting my hz readings.

So I had the 501 maf out today giving it a once over before I busted out the dremel and I noticed that there is a slight gap between the airhorn and the ridge of the base. I took out my hammer and small chisel, 2 whacks later it seperated perfectly. Just a heads up for those interested in doing this, no need for a dremel.

 

[mysticj]

Interesting.

 

[PieEyedPiper]

Sorry to but in, but I was curious if any of these MASs will accept the same K&N FIPK adapter as the 2g mas? Otherwise good info on the difference between the units.
Thanks.

 

[imdrax]

As far as I know the 2g/3g/Evo all share the same MAF mounting.

 

[97gst_spyder]

Sorry to but in, but I was curious if any of these MASs will accept the same K&N FIPK adapter as the 2g mas? Otherwise good info on the difference between the units.
Thanks.

Yes, I have The FIPK on my Evo 8 maf.

 

[PieEyedPiper]

As far as I know the 2g/3g/Evo all share the same MAF mounting.

Yes, I have The FIPK on my Evo 8 maf.

Very cool. Do any of them match up on the backside to a 2g mas? I'd rather not buy a new intake right now.

 

[97gst_spyder]

Not the evo 8.

 

[jeffo]

No, all the 3G and EVO8/9 MAS's have a 3 1/8" outlet, the same size as the stock 1G aircan. So, it makes it easy to use intakes designed for the stock 1G MAS, but tough to match up to an oval 2G intake pipe.

 

[604CruisinCroat]

How would the evo 8 mas w/dsmlink compare with say, a standalone or a speed density setup?