How Fast w/stock mass air meter ?
- Thread starter qwknuf6
- Start date
I'm sure there are lots of folks faster than me.......no screens, no cone....very common for those who use Steve's ME chip...my guess, low 10's even 9's
we have a Stage motored car here that has gone 10.6 at 129 (not well tuned) with Steve's chip & mod stock MAF....he has switched to MAFless tho
we have a Stage motored car here that has gone 10.6 at 129 (not well tuned) with Steve's chip & mod stock MAF....he has switched to MAFless tho
SITHV6
Move against the Jedi 1st
- Joined
- Sep 21, 2002
BOY AM I BEHIND!....
The stock MAF sensor as far as i read was only good for masuring out 255 grams of air per second...how this translates to a bottleneck of sorts I'm at a loss, thus all the tech talk of Translators and trans +'s. But now ppl are going MAF SENSORLESS!??? This sound intriguing...please elaborate on how this set up works and will DFI do the same thing?
The stock MAF sensor as far as i read was only good for masuring out 255 grams of air per second...how this translates to a bottleneck of sorts I'm at a loss, thus all the tech talk of Translators and trans +'s. But now ppl are going MAF SENSORLESS!??? This sound intriguing...please elaborate on how this set up works and will DFI do the same thing?
Re: BOY AM I BEHIND!....
In oem form the MAF is calibrated to read as high as 255 gm/sec..
BUT,
with so much as an air filter change you lose that accuracy.
As you modify things the MAF calibration gets worse and worse, and that's why you have to buy different chips. What most of the chip guys do is figure the MAF is close enough or will get folks by enough to be able to drive the car that they don't mess with the MAF tables.
The tables have a correction based on rpm, that allows for extra fuel.
It's not the best setup in the world, but it's good enough for some guys to run really quick with it.
There are some problems Software and Hardware wise in the stock ecm. That's where the Translator, and MAFless ME shine.
Either of these two systems avoid the inherit problems of the stock stuff.
Changing to a Translator and moving the MAF so that it's a blow thru is another option.
M Pitts several years ago documented that with no other changes removing the MAF in his car was like 15 HP but that was in a draw thru setup. You need to go thru the GNTtype archives for the original claim.
In oem form the MAF is calibrated to read as high as 255 gm/sec..
BUT,
with so much as an air filter change you lose that accuracy.
As you modify things the MAF calibration gets worse and worse, and that's why you have to buy different chips. What most of the chip guys do is figure the MAF is close enough or will get folks by enough to be able to drive the car that they don't mess with the MAF tables.
The tables have a correction based on rpm, that allows for extra fuel.
It's not the best setup in the world, but it's good enough for some guys to run really quick with it.
There are some problems Software and Hardware wise in the stock ecm. That's where the Translator, and MAFless ME shine.
Either of these two systems avoid the inherit problems of the stock stuff.
Changing to a Translator and moving the MAF so that it's a blow thru is another option.
M Pitts several years ago documented that with no other changes removing the MAF in his car was like 15 HP but that was in a draw thru setup. You need to go thru the GNTtype archives for the original claim.
Re: mass air flow
ya let us know about this susp.?
Originally posted by odell4o8
my friends dave poppy and mark jackson still use mass air flow meters , stock ones, they both go in the 9.40 range. small stage motors, what makes me mad they both go 129 60 ft times. with different rear supension than most buicks use,, oc
ya let us know about this susp.?
rear sup,
well i hope their setup is not secret, i have adj, uppers and south side lowers, and affco adj, 540, worth of adj, up and down, and ady, qa 1 fronts, and i cant go as good as they do in 60 ft, mark has a 3.25 rear, 400 trans, and he foot brakes the car, poppy and mark uses a bracket welded or bolted to the rear housing next to rear wheels, stock gas rear shocks, with air bags, most of time no air in them, the body moves down on launch as normal, frame hits this adjustable snubber about 2 inches on right side one on left. i saw dave go 129 60 ft and 6.04 @ 114 in eight, usually i can go 5.90 in eight with 1.40 to 1.48 60 ft i told them its not fair that i have a lot of money in my supension and they have better 60 ft times, they both have 70 series turbo, dave uses a streched stock location innercooler, mark made his cooler, mark has m@a heads that he ported himself, and stock intakes. these guys always impress me. a lot more than some low 8 sec, cars do. they are both great guys and im proud to call them my friends, oc.
well i hope their setup is not secret, i have adj, uppers and south side lowers, and affco adj, 540, worth of adj, up and down, and ady, qa 1 fronts, and i cant go as good as they do in 60 ft, mark has a 3.25 rear, 400 trans, and he foot brakes the car, poppy and mark uses a bracket welded or bolted to the rear housing next to rear wheels, stock gas rear shocks, with air bags, most of time no air in them, the body moves down on launch as normal, frame hits this adjustable snubber about 2 inches on right side one on left. i saw dave go 129 60 ft and 6.04 @ 114 in eight, usually i can go 5.90 in eight with 1.40 to 1.48 60 ft i told them its not fair that i have a lot of money in my supension and they have better 60 ft times, they both have 70 series turbo, dave uses a streched stock location innercooler, mark made his cooler, mark has m@a heads that he ported himself, and stock intakes. these guys always impress me. a lot more than some low 8 sec, cars do. they are both great guys and im proud to call them my friends, oc.
