? about maf sensor & tb

[ssp.interceptor]

.

 

[94Eddie]

Also, making a super custom intake will not gain you any more ponies than opening up your stock airbox and putting a quality filter in. May actually hurt you by throwing off your MAM if not done right.

I know that's not what anyone wants to hear when they get an itch and a bright idea, but that's the truth.

Many times there is a big difference in what people want to hear and what they need to hear.

 

[ssp.interceptor]

.

 

[jah81592]

^^^^Exactly, you are correct. You are not listening Nick. Ask any reputable tuner and they will tell you that even with a calibrated meter you will need the slopes and min injector pulse width as well as the delta p and voltage offsets corrected in the tune. The hardware changed so the data needs to change. Dont hand me that garbage they run like stock. I have tuned thousands of vehicles with calibrated meters and can prove that data needs to be changed. For your information a calibrated meter doesn't change the above information. Calibrated meters cannot compensate for airflow altered into and out of the engine. You are absolutely incorrect! By the way i do own a dyno and I can back up all my information with data. If you lost power and torque going from a 65 to 70mm throttle body then there is a problem. And the original post i replied to was about throttle bodies and not runner length-two different comparisons. I know one will ride on the other but with a throttle body change only 5mm for example won't lose what you say it will. Just like the 2011 5.0L's (which by the way i have a ton of experience) you can add a 95 or 100mm throttle body (stock is 80mm) an there isn't ANY losses down low. You need to get up to the new millenium and learn the facts. As a matter of fact I would recommend you call Sean at Pro-M and ask him the same question. I guarantee you he will tell you that tuning would be recommended.-j

 

[94Eddie]

Why would an aftermarket meter need tuned any more than a factory stock meter? Think about it. Ford installs millions of MAF meters and they all work fine with the stock programming of the computer. They don't do a custom tune for every vehicle rolling off the assembly line. The MAFs they install at the factory work within acceptable parameters. Also, the computer has the ability to adjust the tune for driving habits etc. Are you saying companies like Pro-M, C&L and even Ford (they sell aftermarket performance MAFs) can't calibrate a MAF properly to work as well as a stock unit? If they can't then how can Ford install millions of stock MAFs in all types of vehicles without having major tuning issues? If what you say is true then every car needs a tune to run properly even if it is bone stock. We all know that this isn't true.

One thing I have learned over the years is to be reflexively skeptical of people pushing parts and/or services for things they see financial gain from their purchase. I am not saying these people are dishonest but they have a built-in bias toward the use of a certain good or service. I have no doubt you are knowledgeable regarding tuning but this doesn't mean you are always right either. As I stated above, logic doesn't support some of your statements. I know that my personal experience doesn't either.

Lastly, the OP isn't modding a car from the "new millennium." It is a 1997 vehicle with a basic 1997 engine. It will have to obey the same rules as any other engine from that era.

 

[ssp.interceptor]

.

 

[ssp.interceptor]

.

 

[rocket 5979]

Why would an aftermarket meter need tuned any more than a factory stock meter? Think about it. Ford installs millions of MAF meters and they all work fine with the stock programming of the computer. They don't do a custom tune for every vehicle rolling off the assembly line. The MAFs they install at the factory work within acceptable parameters. Also, the computer has the ability to adjust the tune for driving habits etc. Are you saying companies like Pro-M, C&L and even Ford (they sell aftermarket performance MAFs) can't calibrate a MAF properly to work as well as a stock unit? If they can't then how can Ford install millions of stock MAFs in all types of vehicles without having major tuning issues? If what you say is true then every car needs a tune to run properly even if it is bone stock. We all know that this isn't true.

One thing I have learned over the years is to be reflexively skeptical of people pushing parts and/or services for things they see financial gain from their purchase. I am not saying these people are dishonest but they have a built-in bias toward the use of a certain good or service. I have no doubt you are knowledgeable regarding tuning but this doesn't mean you are always right either. As I stated above, logic doesn't support some of your statements. I know that my personal experience doesn't either.

Lastly, the OP isn't modding a car from the "new millennium." It is a 1997 vehicle with a basic 1997 engine. It will have to obey the same rules as any other engine from that era.

Have you not read any of the technical points that were already posted? I suggest that you re-read them if it hasn't sunk in by now. Give Pro-M a call and find out for yourself since you are so skeptical of the tuning required to PROPERLY recalibrate everything back into equilibrium after changing the MAFS for a different one of other than OEM spec. Sure a vehicle will "run" after replacing the OEM MAFS with a recalibrated aftermarket one, but the question is how WELL will it run? Are the load and VE tables correct, are the WOT AFR's all over the place or are they just dead lean?

The computer does not have "the ability to adjust for driving habits" as you put it with regards to all AFR's. The computer does have adaptive learning that but is only applied at part throttle closed-loop fueling which is when the ECM also uses data from the stock narrow-band O2 sensors to keep AFR's around stoich 14.64:1. Even then adaptive learning can only learn so far of a percentage of long term fuel trim correction before it simply cannot adjust anymore. I have seen short term fuel trims thrown off by 30%+ fuel with just the change of a CAI, let alone a MAFS. I can assure you that your ECM won't win the battle of dialing closed-loop AFR's into spec when they are that far out. Once you go wide open throttle, which is where your focus usually is for power gains, then your ECM commands open-loop fueling and references airmass data directly from the MAFS transfer function table to ensure that it is requesting the proper amount of fuel so that actual WOT AFR's match commanded AFR's. Adaptive learning does not compensate for this, which means that it will not be able to learn around a rich or lean condition at WOT. The ECM's on vehicles are not intuitive. For everything to function properly the ECM needs to be TOLD how to interpret the data, because it simply doesn't have the capacity to do it for itself. The newer ECM's are getting closer to that with full wideband sensors becoming more common, but even then they still aren't there. So in answer to your assumptions that the ECM can just automatically readjust itself to all the conditions caused by using a MAFS of differing spec than OEM, I would have to say that you are mistaken.

While a 1997 MY vehicle, such as the OP's is not an extremely new vehicle it still uses OBD-II and has an EEC-V ECM. The tune is substantially larger in filesize and complexity than your EEC-IV stuff. Since I get the impression that you haven't really tuned on anything with OBD-II or CAN technology then I would surmise that you are playing quite the guessing game. The difference is that 1997 was in a totally different era of tuning than your 89 Mustang. OBD-I versus OBD-II, EEC-IV versus EEC-V and I could go on.

Eddie it is plain to see that you lack the capacity or willingness to comprehend what James and I have been talking about so there is no point in trying to further educate you on this. I honestly don't know why I even chose to write this post but it is hard to just turn off my natural inclination to educate the ignorant. Your hard headed attitude clearly clouds your judgement and prevents you from progressing beyond what is a grade-school understanding of custom tuning. If I have to explain to you the finite abilities of something as basic as adaptive learning then I can tell that I am not conversing with a truly experienced fellow custom tuner; but rather someone who twisted the distributor on his Mustang once or twice and probably raped the base fuel table of his "custom tune" to get AFR's into check. You sir, seriously need to educate yourself quite a bit more on the subject-matter before posting as if you were a person exhibiting expertise. If you want to call the necessity of custom tuning after replacing an OEM MAFS with an aftermarket one "snake oil" then be my guest. Don't come complaining to anyone when other people make more horsepower, more safely, with better driveability because they chose the smart route instead of doing half-assed mods like replacing an OEM MAFS with a recalibrated aftermarket one without doing a proper ECM tune afterward.

I also find your insinuation that James is only trying to "push parts/services for financial gain" to be preposterous and insulting towards a well respected vendor here. I know you put that nice disclaimer afterwards but anyone can read between the lines there to see your true meaning. Do you know why people like James have a following on this forum and others? Because he is honest, does good work, and actually cares about his customers. I started out as a customer of his about 7 years ago. There were more than a few times where I had mentioned planning on buying a mod from him only for him to recommend that I didn't need to purchase it for whatever reason given. He could have taken the easy way of financial gain and just sold it to me but he didn't. Since then I have also become his friend and then later for a while we were even business associates as well. Out of anyone else on this forum I can probably vouch for James' ethics the most. Impeccable would be the adjective I would use to describe him, and I am willing to bet many other long-time members on here would agree. So , whether you throw a disclaimer in there or not, you are barking up the wrong tree when you slyly suggest that James is grouped in with other performance business owners who only care about pushing parts for profit.

 

[ssp.interceptor]

.

 

[94Eddie]

Have you not read any of the technical points that were already posted? I suggest that you re-read them if it hasn't sunk in by now. Give Pro-M a call and find out for yourself since you are so skeptical of the tuning required to PROPERLY recalibrate everything back into equilibrium after changing the MAFS for a different one of other than OEM spec.

I didn't have to call anyone. I found the following on C&L's website and it is referring to their CAI kit for the 2010 Mustang GT:

This upgrade package can be installed either "by itself" when ordered as a "no tune" system, or in conjunction with a performance computer re-calibration (using a Diablosport manufactured C&L Predator tuner), which enhances performance further through increased timing and revised throttle body mapping. At 1,137 CFM flow capacity, the C&L system flows 42% MORE than the factory (800 CFM) assembly.

Now tell me, is C&L practicing deceptive advertising or not? They specifically state that "no tuning" is necessary if you order the proper kit. Keep in mind that we are talking about what is needed and not what you recommend. As for Pro-M, I read through their website and they discussed all the various calibrations they provide to cover various CAI configurations and filter types. They never mentioned that a custom tune is required for their MAFs to work properly. Are they practicing deceptive advertising too? This is from their web site for two meter types:

The Pro-M 75mm Chrome Flanged Bullet is a direct replacement for the 94-95 Mustang (Forth Generation / Fox-4 / SN-95), 94-96 5.0 and 5.8 trucks, and any other Ford vehicle originally equipped with a 70mm flanged housing.

The Pro-M 75mm Chrome Flanged Bullet is a direct replacement for the 94-95 Mustang (Forth Generation / Fox-4 / SN-95), 94-96 5.0 and 5.8 trucks, and any other Ford vehicle originally equipped with a 70mm flanged housing.

The Chrome Flanged Bullet features a more modern sampling element than was originally used on the production meters, and our calibration process results in a meter with a tolerance three times tighter than the OEM.

The 95mm Flanged Mass Air Meter is a direct replacement for 03-04 Cobra Mustangs, 01-03 Lightning trucks, and Harley Davidson trucks. The 95mm can also be used in the 85mm applications.


Their meter descriptions say nothing about custom tuning being required to use their MAF meters. I am not inferring that more power won't be made through tuning as this is possible and probably likely. I also know that not all the power gains seen from custom tuning are made through MAF recalibrations but through timing advance etc.

To recap, I still see no proof that a custom tune is required when swapping out a MAF or even installing a CAI kit. I agree that power gains can be made through custom tuning but it is not required for the engine to run as good as it did when stock when the MAF is swapped or a CAI is installed. You can wade into the tuning weeds as far as you want but this discussion between us about whether a custom tune is required when swapping to an aftermarket MAF. I don't need a dissertation on modern engine tuning, just a "yes" or "no" will suffice.

 

[ssp.interceptor]

.

 

[94Eddie]

IMO, tunes become increasing critical the more mods that get added on. Just changing a MAF and some intake tubing isn't going to deliver hardly anything performance wise unless the stock inlet is extremely restrictive. Get into the TB or further and things can change rapidly regarding a tune becoming a requirement. Even with an archaic EEC-IV computer I have seen the stock programming of the A9L cover any number of mods. They may not make the most power possible but the car is more than sufficiently tuned to be driven and raced.

My issue in this thread is similar to yours. The OP is asking for what he is required to do if certain mods are installed. There is a big difference between required and recommended, IMO. Installing an aftermarket MAF and/or CAI on an otherwise bone stock engine isn't likely to cause much of a problem from my experience. The OP seemed as concerned with knowing what he needed to do than what a person recommended him to do. If he had been told to install the MAF and/or CAI tubing, clear out the computer and drive it for a week or two and look for tuning issues to show. Then if he had performance issues to go get a tune. Then tell him that installing a larger TB will increase the chance he will have problems and will likely lose low end power without a tune, I would would have been fine with it. I don't think telling him he won't lose power and he will definitely need a tune if he installs even a MAF is not giving him honest and/or accurate advice. installing a MAF and CAI on a stock Explorer and driving it isn't going to make his engine explode. In that situation he has the luxury of driving it to know if he has to have a tune or it runs fine for his needs.