[Shotimes] Which MAF is best?

[James White]

I guess that it just must be the '94-5's that respond to the LPM plus the
Ford 80mm MAF.

Don McKinnon and myself both have run the same set-up and when I compared my
20-70  second gear times to Don's they were similar.

I had to take the LPM and 80mm MAF out to pass our tight emissions test and
after passing, my "but dyno" was disapointed with the stock 55mm MAF, so I
went back to the 80 and LPM.

I am guessing, but after seeing a lot of conversation on these lists, and
talking to a number of SHO owners, I think that the best combination would
be:

A) 3.2L block
B) 3.0L heads
C) 3.0L cams (or maybe stage I cams)
D) big bore intake - extrude honed
E) matched intake and exhaust ports
F) 80mm MAF (either Ford or another)
G) a custom programmed chip (LPM or another?)
I) Hi flow "Y" pipe (PP or SHO Shop?)
J) What else?

Should be good for 300-320 motor HP?

But how long would this combination be good for before something like the
rod bearings go to lunch?  20k? 50k? 100k?

Jim White - greensho@crown.net
Valparaiso, Indiana
'93  5 SPEED   275k few mods
'95  5 SPEED   226k lots of mods
"double clutch"  it's good for both you and your SHO

----- Original Message -----
From: "Timothy Tyner" <shospeed@bigplanet.com>
To: <shotimes@autox.team.net>
Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 6:59 PM
Subject: Fw: Re: [Shotimes] Which MAF is best?


> Well then, here is the challenge I lay down to all SHO owners since it
seems
> I am the only one confident in the FORD 80mm and the LPM.  Show me a
> timeslip from a car with a 55mm or any ProFlow unit and no LPM with a much
> better 1/4 than a 14.5 and I will retract all I say about the LPM and 80mm
> MAF (on a full weight NA car of course).  I find it hard to believe that
my
> car is the ONLY one having success with an LPM and FORD 80mm.
>
> Toolman
>
> -------Original Message-------
>
> From: Darin Lind
> Date: Monday, November 25, 2002 6:36:52 PM
> To: Shotimes@autox.team.net
> Subject: Re: [Shotimes] Which MAF is best?
>
> I agree with ya there Ian. I ran an LPM program specifically for my
nitrous
> (less timing, more fuel) on my 90 SHO and what happened, but 4 melted
plugs
> due to pre-ignition on the first run. Went back to stock computer and
things
> were
> better. It's a crap shoot just like you said.
>
> And regarding MAFs and bolt-on mods, LPMs are pretty much a waste too
> for WOT power, you only risk losing power. The SHO is already optimally
> tuned
> @WOT from the factory - fuel, timing, etc. Vadim @ SHO Shop has even said
> this.
> Several years ago they made a posting where they took a stock 5-spd SHO,
an
> expensive
> MOTEC and a dyno for tuning, and the best they could muster was 1 measly
HP
> over stock,
> by actually LEANING out the fuel curve. And there is no need for an LPM
> with any bolt-on
> mods, that's what the MAF is for. It detects the additional airflow and
you
> get more fuel from the
> factory program accordingly.
>
> I once brought my SHO to Don Mallinson's old dynojet, and we got the
> following:
>
> stock 55mm = 197hp
> ford 80mm + LPM = 195hp
> ford 80mm + stock program = 200hp
> Don's Pro-M 77mm + stock program = 201-202hp.
>
> The 80mm has a different voltage curve, so the air/fuel ratio should not
be
> optimal,
> yet with the 'required' LPM 'correction' it ran slower. That is pretty
> sorry. I tried another
> LPM program with the same result. I've heard similar results from 80mm MAF
> owners.
> So I think it's a bad idea to get a MAF that relies on an LPM, get one of
> the Pro-M models...
> unless you want to spend some bucks to custom tune it - to probably get
back
> to the same
> power levels as you would get with the Pro-M + stock computer.
>
> Darin
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: <ianf@eden.rutgers.edu>
> To: "Timothy Tyner" <shospeed@bigplanet.com>
> Cc: <Shotimes@autox.team.net>
> Sent: Monday, November 25, 2002 3:43 PM
> Subject: RE: [Shotimes] Which MAF is best?
>
>
> > I am not sure which turbo SHO that you are referring to. There is one
> > that is well known (Jeremy Prine's) and then there are a few other
> > project cars out there as well. If I recall correctly, Jeremy has been
> > trough a lot of LPM reburns, dyno time and at least one engine. Quarter
> > mile times have nothing to do with safe A/F mixtures, reliabilty via
> > tuning and other factors such as drivability, etc. I believe this all
> > started because I stated that there might be a connection between poor
> > LPM tuning and spun rod bearings due to detonation. I still maintain my
> > views that LPM programming is too much of a crap shoot for the average
> > SHO owner who is looking for a plug and play answer to unleash hidden
> > horsepower.
> >
> > Ian
> >
> >
> >
> > > When turbo'd SHO's are running 13.1's with only an LPM for tuning (for
> > > years), and when my NA 95 runs 14.5's with only an LPM for tuning
> > (for three
> > > years and 50k miles, first and only burn), I can not see the need for
> > the
> > > Apexi (which is much more than $300 last I checked). Not saying one
> > is not
> > > in my future, just that the LPM can do wonders if the guy knows what
> > he is
> > > doing. I am surely not going to remove an LPM to replace it with an
> > Apexi,
> > > but if I was starting from ground up, I would consider one.
> > >
> > > Toolman
> _______________________________________________
> Shotimes mailing list
> Shotimes@autox.team.net
> http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes
> .
>
> [demime 0.99d.1 removed an attachment of type image/gif]
> _______________________________________________
> Shotimes mailing list
> Shotimes@autox.team.net
> http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes