[Shotimes] Re: 76mm MAF with 19# injector calibration

[Cohiba]

I would suggest calling C&L and asking to talk to Lee to make sure you get
the information from the source, but what what I understand, and by what you
call tell just looking at the different MAFs, the 80mm Ford MAF or stock
55mm will probably have the highest pressure drop, the C&L should have very
little pressure drop, and according to Lee, has the highest maximum cfm of
any of the available MAFs for SHOs.  He did not give me specific numbers
from their flow-bench test, but he said if programming with and LPM or EEC
Tuner, to use the voltage curve from a stock 86-93 Mustang 5.0, if using the
"yellow" tube, or use stock SHO voltage curve for the "clear" tube.

The C&L 76mm MAF is designed to mimic the stock voltage curve, by keeping
air mass and velocity passing the hot wire equal to stock curve, while
decreasing pressure drop and smoothing the air flow.  They are not designed
to exactly follow the voltage curve, they are designed to reduce the voltage
curve by a percentage to make the mixture a little bit leaner than stock.
This is the same technique used by SuperChips and HyperTech for their EEC
"chips."  Using the yellow sample tube with a 76mm C&L on a SHO will mimic
the voltage curve, but will be adjusted towards the rich side, which may
decrease power (unless, like me, you use nitrous to burn that extra fuel),
however HP should also be opened by the smoother air flow and reduced
pressure drop.  As for what the SHOtimes website has to say about these MAF
creating a "linear" effect on the curve, that is simply not true, or if it
is, I have never seen the flow-bench results to prove it.

The going price on a brand new C&L 76mm starts at $140 for just the housing.
They are usually more, because the Mustang owners like to have the C&L
"power tube" which is basically a metal tube to go between the MAF and TB,
which has a built in nitrous-bung.  Those usually cost around $170.  I got
this particular 76mm for $20, brand new, which is why I decided to give it a
try.  So far, it's the best MAF I've ever had on either SHO.

I understand being skeptical, but so far, it has worked great for me, and
I'll try to get some dyno test results to back it up.  If I had unlimited
resources and money, I'd buy a 90mm Lightning MAF, have it flow-bench
tested, then use Jason King's SCTuner to set the exact flow bench results to
my SHO with the 90mm MAF.  That would be a nice intake.  Of course, then I'd
need ported TB, intake, heads, and probably a bigger displacement engine...
okay, so I guess what I'm saying is that with unlimited resources and money,
I probably wouldn't be driving a SHO.  But for the money, this setup seems
to be the way to go.

Gary
http://users.superford.org/cohiba




----- Original Message -----
From: "Alan Fanning" <Awfanning@earthlink.net>
To: "SHOtimes" <shotimes@autox.team.net>
Sent: Saturday, October 19, 2002 11:33 AM
Subject: [Shotimes] Re: 76mm MAF with 19# injector calibration?


> I don't want to make this sound like I'm harassing you, or dissing C&L,
> because that's not my objective. What I'm trying to say is that the reason
> one upgrades a MAF is (usually) to free up some of the horsepower lost due
> to pressure drop thru a stock intake. Achieving proper A/F ratio with the
> replacement MAF is necessary, but not sufficient, to achieving this end.
You
> still have to have lower pressure drop through the MAF for it to be an
> improvement over the stock setup.
>
> Now, I have no doubt that a C&L 76mm MAF will flow better than a Ford 55mm
> MAF, but the comparison to a Pro-M MAF, for example, is not obvious.
Since
> I, and others, are trying to build a database of info on aftermarket
MAF's,
> it would be handy to have comparable flow data rather than hp claims. As
an
> example of the latter, I was on the phone with Scott in the tech support
> group at Pro-M yesterday. When he told me swapping out the stock 55mm MAF
> for one of their 75mm Bullet's with cone filter would add 22 hp to a stock
> SHO I just about fell out of my chair. We should be so lucky!
>
> It's hard for me to imagine that anyone developing a new MAF sensor would
> not test it on the flow bench at some point. This is standard procedure
for
> intake systems - hell, the 1-barrel carb on my F150 was flow tested before
> and after it's recent rebuild.  If they haven't done this it's a little
> puzzling as to why not.
>
> By the way, without individual calibration of the MAF, there is also a
> question as to how close the OEM electronics were set at the factory (or
> whether it has changed by, say, the sensor being dropped on the floor).
>
>     Alan
>
> PS What's the retail/street price on a new C&L 76mm MAF?
>
> > Lee seems to know his physics and his MAFs, so you might call it a crap
> > shoot, but the only variable should be the consistency of the stock MAF
> > sensor.  I, for one, am very happy with the setup, however I will still
do
> > my own air/fuel tests on the wideband O2 sensor as soon as I can, and
post
> > the results.
> >
> > Gary
> > http://users.superford.org/cohiba
> _______________________________________________
> Shotimes mailing list
> Shotimes@autox.team.net
> http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo/shotimes