Diy: Large Bore Direct Fit Maf Sensor Housing, Courtesy Of Saab
04-29-2008, 10:33 AM
#11
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Western PA
Posts: 2,087
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vehicle: 2001 Tiburon
QUOTE (Bullfrog @ Apr 29 2008, 11:29 AM)
Will moving to a bigger MAF mess with any calculations about the amount of air that is possible to move through the tube and how the ECU calculates it?
That doesn't count as a concern?
04-29-2008, 10:36 AM
#12
Moderator
^^ Very good point. I was about to buy one based on the fact that it can flow more air, but the limited diameter of the pipe and the sensor in the middle is what causes the correct readings to take place...
Then again, most people say our cars run pig rich, so it might be beneficial to have an increase like this. 20% may be a bit much. Any thoughts?
Then again, most people say our cars run pig rich, so it might be beneficial to have an increase like this. 20% may be a bit much. Any thoughts?
04-29-2008, 10:41 AM
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 333
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vehicle: 2002 Hyundai Elantra
QUOTE (JonGTR @ Apr 29 2008, 11:29 AM)
I can't believe none of you addressed the concern that you will be leaning the hell out of the car during open loop. (Closed loop will compensate)
Going from 2.5" to 3" just gave you 20% more UNMETERED air. You must have a fuel tuner in addition to this mod.
Going from 2.5" to 3" just gave you 20% more UNMETERED air. You must have a fuel tuner in addition to this mod.
that was my first thoughts as well. Why would you do this without a fuel tuner? Foolish IMO.
04-29-2008, 10:52 AM
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Western PA
Posts: 2,087
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vehicle: 2001 Tiburon
just need someone running stock exp for a CAI and get them a wide band. Good theory though.
I wonder if the mega squirt people could compare fuel maps with running the two, i dont know how many people out there have theres already.
I wonder if the mega squirt people could compare fuel maps with running the two, i dont know how many people out there have theres already.
04-29-2008, 11:24 AM
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 898
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vehicle: 2011 Kawasaki ZX6R
I have a wideband but its not hooked up yet. I'm waiting on some headers but I could try this out when I get them.
I could get some avg. readings from as is, and then find one of these and get some avg. reading after. Could be a few months before I get teh headers though. I'm still saving money to help my family move back to canada.
I could get some avg. readings from as is, and then find one of these and get some avg. reading after. Could be a few months before I get teh headers though. I'm still saving money to help my family move back to canada.
04-29-2008, 11:29 AM
#17
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Western PA
Posts: 2,087
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vehicle: 2001 Tiburon
I would think having a complete stock would be even better to test this as we would only have 1 or 2 variables. Stock with a bigger MAF pipe and a bigger MAF pipe on a CAI.
Im wondering if we should make a new thread about this and continue.
Im wondering if we should make a new thread about this and continue.
04-29-2008, 11:55 AM
#18
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: London, Ontario
Posts: 898
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vehicle: 2011 Kawasaki ZX6R
^^^ I agree and disagree at the same time.
It would be better to have both variable as in a stock vehicle and a modded one. At the same time I belive all is needed is the modded vehicle. The reason I think that is because the modded engines are made to flow better already so they have been slightly leaned already. Adding this would affect a modified engine more than stock for the fact it was already flowing more air.
If we can determine its safe to run this modification on a modded tib then It should by default be safe for a stock tib right......
It would be better to have both variable as in a stock vehicle and a modded one. At the same time I belive all is needed is the modded vehicle. The reason I think that is because the modded engines are made to flow better already so they have been slightly leaned already. Adding this would affect a modified engine more than stock for the fact it was already flowing more air.
If we can determine its safe to run this modification on a modded tib then It should by default be safe for a stock tib right......
04-29-2008, 12:53 PM
#19
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Western PA
Posts: 2,087
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vehicle: 2001 Tiburon
I see your logic, let see what other minds have to say, as i agree with you.
I have a feeling that the fuel table is like a bell curve and that this would only help in certain situations. Although this would be a 20% more air across the board, so it may help the whole way across.
I have a feeling that the fuel table is like a bell curve and that this would only help in certain situations. Although this would be a 20% more air across the board, so it may help the whole way across.
04-29-2008, 01:18 PM
#20
Guest
Posts: n/a
QUOTE (JonGTR @ Apr 29 2008, 10:29 AM)
I can't believe none of you addressed the concern that you will be leaning the hell out of the car during open loop. (Closed loop will compensate)
Going from 2.5" to 3" just gave you 20% more UNMETERED air. You must have a fuel tuner in addition to this mod.
BTW, the XG uses a larger MAF, probably also 3", and also houses the AIT sensor with it. So splicing it into your stock wiring will make things cleaner.
Going from 2.5" to 3" just gave you 20% more UNMETERED air. You must have a fuel tuner in addition to this mod.
BTW, the XG uses a larger MAF, probably also 3", and also houses the AIT sensor with it. So splicing it into your stock wiring will make things cleaner.
The sensor that came out of the SAAB unit was the same design, same number of leads, and same length as the Beta and Alpha:The sensor leads were on the same level (in relation to the sensor housing) on all three models. It was also made by BOSCH. If I have it, I will take pictures of it and possibly get a part number. Additionally, the Alpha MAF is the same physical size (sensor itself) and it reaches to the bottom of it's MAF tube, (It's smaller) whereas the BETA unit doesn't go all the way to the bottom of it's MAF tube: The SAAB unit leaves a little more "unmetered" (and I use that term loosely, as only a thin slit on the PCB actually meters the air) area than the BETA one, which respectively has more of a gap than an Alpha sensor.
These things don't measure the DENSITY of the air, just the rate it flows at. Otherwise, why would it have an upstream intake temperature sensor?
It's like comparing adding additional current from a source (the load will only draw what it needs) vs adding more (or less) voltage (the load will be overpowered or underpowered) without a series of clipper diodes to prevent overcharge (such as on an alternator regulator).
I wouldn't worry about extra "unmetered" air: There's just more "current" rushing unobstructed into the engine.
*EDIT* In addition, air flows unrestricted in the middle of the passge it finds itself in, as is clearly evident in basic head porting techniques (also, it is the principle of the Venturii in carburation technology)
wink1.gif