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

[Kirk Doucette]

Yep, We did 32 tests on the dyno in a single day with a Gen 1 and 10 runs
with My Gen 3

Tested  A factory Gen 1 and 2 MAF, A stock Gen 3 MAF, My GEN 3 MAF, C&L Mafs
different air filters, different LPMs, and even changed the Y pipe out with
the PP plus pipe.

Testing was done on a 91 Mocha, after a LONG day,  results were pretty
clear,  The C&L 76 and a 80 were tested, both had 2 sample tubes and it
caused the car to run in the area of 18-1 on the AF meter.. The LPM's were
just plain junk, it cost the car HP and TQ. The PP pipe was the single
largest gain for a bolt on Item.

Then we tested the Ford Mafs, the 80mm from the conti with the stock
electronics from the SHO were transferred into it and I think it was around
a 5-7 hp gain, the Stock GEN 3 added 1 more to that and Mine (gutted and
some flow bench work) added another 2.  AGAIN all were tested with the stock
electronics from the 91 SHO.  We also tested the K&N filter vs the S&B
filter, the S&B gave it 1 more HP over the k&N 1 hp gain.

On my Gen 3 my MAF also worked the best, and the S&B showed the same 1hp
gain. The C&L MAF while very nice to look at are not for the SHO, Lee needed
my code for my electronics and it is the same as the Cobra Mustang 99 and
up, so he sent me the sample tubes for that electronics box and it fell on
its face and leaned out so much both my meter in the car and the one at
NEDYNO were pegged lean. I still ran it just to see but as suspected it did
not do well at all..

Mark if your interested in borrowing My 3 gen MAF for testing you can, Mike
has it now on his LS testing it and a CAI I made for him. He hasn't dynode
yet but he said it "feel" like a huge different in the mid range area.

Kirk J Doucette
Stormtrooper
97 White

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Nunnally [mailto:manunnal@netheaven.com]
Sent: Sunday, October 20, 2002 5:03 PM
To: shotimes
Cc: Kirk J Doucette
Subject: Re: [Shotimes] Re: 76mm MAF with 19# injector calibration

> 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, while
decreasing
> pressure drop and smoothing the air flow.
> It's not "tricking the EEC", it's just math and physics.
> Hope this makes sense... it does to me...

    I understand how the EEC uses the MAF data, my question with it, and any
of the other older MAF's designed for the SHO/Mustang that used different
sample tubes for either/or, was always why, when from the factory both were
looking for the same data set.
    All the dyno stuff I've ever seen reported over the years on the list,
etc, was any MAF with different sample tubes (mustang/SHO) always ran better
and made more power when using the "mustang" sample tube.  This always made
sense to me, since both EEC's were looking for the same MAF curve/data
anyway.

I understand trying to run a lower voltage curve (or higher depending on
what you are trying to achieve) but the EEC seems to be sensitive to more
than just injector pulse width based on MAF signal (also spark advance,
etc).  Running nitrous, I'm not sure I'd want to vary too far from a stock
MAF curve.

Didn't some of the SHO guys who hang around NE Dyno (kirk?) test a whole
slew of V6 MAF's sometime?  I thought I remember some C&L units test to?  Do
you have any test results to share?

mark