? what do you perf. gm maf/ or 2g maf and afc 2

[AWD~SLEEPER]

im looking in on getting a fmic with the 3 " gm maf and trans. is the gm maf better than 2g maf with afc. can i get the same tuning from the gm maf as i can from the afc. any reply would help make my choice. thanks!!!

 

[Tallen]

I prefer the GM-MAF because it is incorporated into my plans of getting a DSM link. A SAFC would be just a waste of $ for me.

 

[JiveMasterT]

i think hes asking if the gm maf would be a good alternative to an AFC... i also have the same question because i dont know jack about tuning and a gm maf seems like a set it and forget it alternative.

 

[kpt4321]

The GM MAF is a better air meter than the 2g MAF, and the MAFT V2.0 (which will be released very soon, within a few weeks) is a better tuning device than a SAFC.

 

[AWD~SLEEPER]

hay the v2.0 where can i get it when it coms out.

 

[kpt4321]

http://www.fullthrottlespeed.com

 

[nine5raptor]

www.fullthrottlespeed.com

when it comes out...

you beat me but mine is bigger

 

[slowpokin699]

whats gonna be better with the version 2.0? can you point me to a good description of the new product?

 

[nine5raptor]

Kyle is beta testing it still, but one of the main things if finer tuning adjustments.

 

[kpt4321]

Let's just say it eliminates all need for a SAFC when tuning with the MAFT (Finer steps and a WOT adjustment mode with rpm intervals).

More details will be avaliable shortly. Just be patient.

 

[JiveMasterT]

does this allow you to use bigger injectors to?

 

[slowpokin699]

well all versions of the maft enable you to compensate for bigger injectors... the thing about the safc is that you can use a map sensor instead of the throttle position (as you all may know) could you do the same with the maft? i havent tried using a map sensor with the safc yet but it sounds good to me which is why i'd want to stick with that to tune.

 

[kpt4321]

The MAFT uses airflow (with rpm reference) to decide which load knob to use, which is similar (possibly better) than using TPS or MAP on the SAFC.

 

[c5chris]

This sounds something to consider. I did not go with the MAF-T V1.3 coz of some mixed reactions around it (voltage issue, no fine tuning option w/o AFC).

Keep us posted when it comes out.

 

[kpt4321]

The voltage issue has been fixed, I guess it was something to do with the ECU in the car or something. I don't know.

 

[Mike Licht]

Here is a link to the 2.08 instructions posted on our tech board
2.08 HERE

Mike

Please feel free to use the forums for questions if you like

 

[HighPSI TSi Guy]

the following are the only advantages of the MAFT over the 2G MAF:

1 - bling bling
2 - flows more than an unhacked 2G MAF

the tuning ability is minimal, it is enough to "get by" but realistically an SAFC is needed with it.

if you don't plan on making over 600whp the 2G MAF is plenty

 

[nine5raptor]

Why do you continue to insist that an afc is needed with the maft??

Don't give tech advice unless you have first-hand knowledge of the subject.

IT IS NOT NEEDED. Plenty of us tune just fine without one. 20 psi on pump 92 with 17 degree advance everyday on my car shows the maft alone is sufficient to tune. Many others are the same. When version 2.08 comes out here soon, an afc would be pointless to have on top of it.

 

[Tyler_Baker]

If your strapped for cash like myself, I would go with a 2G MAS, and a regular SAFC. IMO I think the SAFCII was a little waste of my money seeing as the knock function is completely useless. If I had the dough, no doubt in my mind I would have gone for the GM MAF.

 

[nine5raptor]

A gm maft setup can be cheaper than just an afc. It should definitely be cheaper than a 2g mas + afc.

 

[HighPSI TSi Guy]

Originally posted by nine5raptor
Why do you continue to insist that an afc is needed with the maft??

Don't give tech advice unless you have first-hand knowledge of the subject.

IT IS NOT NEEDED. Plenty of us tune just fine without one. 20 psi on pump 92 with 17 degree advance everyday on my car shows the maft alone is sufficient to tune. Many others are the same. When version 2.08 comes out here soon, an afc would be pointless to have on top of it.

please fool, i speak from nothing but experience. why don't you go back to your stock turbo elitest club of america and practice your calculation skills.

MAFT works, the car will run, but not optimally at all.

i don't care about a version that's not out yet, the man is asking about the version that IS out. so none of the "when this", "when that" bs. that's ricer talk.

hook your pile up to a wideband and have a look see and you'll know whats up.

you guys swing from the nuts of that product and i have yet to figure out why. it's not a bad product but it's not really a damn godsend like you guys treat it.

while you may get your experience by answering the same n00b questions on internet forums all day, some of us actually get real world experience with cars.

 

[anomalyinva]

I have seen 11 or 12 people who tried to get the MAFT to work on their cars. 3 of them still run it. It was not for lack of trying. The technology, for whatever reason, from what i've seen dosen't work very well. If you want to vent, well then I don't know what to tell you. The VPC is proven, though more expensive, and is what is on my car.

 

[anomalyinva]

Originally posted by HighPSI TSi Guy
please fool, i speak from nothing but experience. why don't you go back to your stock turbo elitest club of america and practice your calculation skills.

MAFT works, the car will run, but not optimally at all.

i don't care about a version that's not out yet, the man is asking about the version that IS out. so none of the "when this", "when that" bs. that's ricer talk.

hook your pile up to a wideband and have a look see and you'll know whats up.

you guys swing from the nuts of that product and i have yet to figure out why. it's not a bad product but it's not really a damn godsend like you guys treat it.

while you may get your experience by answering the same n00b questions on internet forums all day, some of us actually get real world experience with cars.

Well said, but the 3 or 4 people I know that have it well tuned, it DOES work well. There is NO reason why it shouldn't have worked on the other cars though. They are a fairly wide range of setups, from 14b up to 20g, but the 2 work on 14bs, and 1 works on a b16g. They were all hooked up the same way, white wire etc, we tried different wires, its just effin finicky.

 

[nine5raptor]

Originally posted by HighPSI TSi Guy
please fool, i speak from nothing but experience.

You seem awfully defensive of yourself. Only fools tout their own self-imagined superiority.
why don't you go back to your stock turbo elitest club of america and practice your calculation skills.

Likewise, go learn some grammar skills.


MAFT works, the car will run, but not optimally at all.

hook your pile up to a wideband and have a look see and you'll know whats up.


Go ahead and buy me one and I will gladly use it. Until then, not all of us are made of money and the logger works just fine for me. The wideband is not the end all, be all for tuning. It is merely another tool to be used.

 

[HybridAWD]

Originally posted by nine5raptor
blah blah blah

Im not even sure what to say about your comment on the wideband, how many people do you know that tune, and i mean really tune, without a wideband? Using a wideband in on road conditions will enable more accurate fuel tuning than narrowband. So using narrowband and the p-logger isnt gonna be as accurate. So basically it is the all end for tuning.... what gets more better than wideband?