Some pics added

 

has anyone tried this on a evoIX yet?

 

I ran the MAFT on my 2G. I think the similarities are close enough that my experiences should be pretty relevant.

I ran a 3" and eventually a 3.5" sensor in my UICP. I ended up with the UCIP setup on this page on my site. On a 35R sized turbo (IIRC) it was worth a 300-400 drop in boost threshold. I'd have to dig through some old posts of mine to find the exact details.

I believe it was MalibuJack that mentioned having to calibrate the MAFT. This is absolutely correct. The simple way to do it is to leave both sensors installed so the restriction and turbulence etc through both sensors doesnt change between pulls, just swap the connectors and get some logs. I took a log at idle, and a full WOT pull in third. Make idle airflow match, and make peak airflow match. This will get you in the ballpark. You can take it a step further and calibrate via AFR across the whole RPM range if you have a hard on for things like that. Also double check the temp and baro outputs. When the MAFT first came out for the DSMs ~3-4 years ago we had a hell of a time fighting a 25% difference in output that was traced back to the Baro output. A simple artificial voltage source to the ECU of the correct value that I tried fixed the problem. I'm sure FT has taken care of this, but keep your eyes open just in case.

 

Will do thanks for the heads up. I do know that FT does lock in the temp and baro signals. 80f for the temp and I cna remember the voltage for the baro meter.

 

On the DSM parts, it was 3.9 volts, which resulted in just about 30"hg. For some reason, some ECUs ended up getting a different voltage from the MAFT, while the MAFTs when bench tested showed the right voltage. Very odd. Output ended up around 24"hg IIRC. A quick look at your logger will verify that everything is as it should be. And again, I highly doubt they still have any issues like this, but it's good to be aware of it just the same. Enjoy.

 

Alright by looking at some old MAF based logs the value of the baro reading were anywhere from 100-103 over a course of 3 months using MJ's mitsulogger. Now with the MAFT being locked in for baro I get a reading of 99. Pretty darn close IMO and it's something sure I can work with.

Also the temp is supposed to be locked in at 80F and the logger comes in almost perfect at 80.06F. This isnt going to worry me at all since I truly believe I have the best FMIC on the market for cooling.

Forgot to add that the MAF hz at idle was right at 37hz, just where it always was.

 

How much did the setup cost? I always wanted to do it because my car idles ok, but I wish it was a lot better with the new turbo and hard pipe air intake. Would this help smooth my idle out? I know an AEM speed density would allow it to idle great, but I wasn't looking to go down that road for awhile. This seems like a cheaper alternative....

 

Sounds like everything is working correctly! I would also now take a comparison log at WOT to ensure the AFR will end up where it is supposed to be, as well as timing. I would try to log mass flow if your logger provides that option, since with different baro and temp readings, Hz will vary for a given mass flow rate.

 

I plan on never going to an AEM unless my ECU takes a dump for some reason.

But to give a rough idea of the cost
translator box -$199
UICP - $140ish i think
MAF- $35
Intake -$80ish
Tial BOV - had it left over from the maftpro days but I think it cost me $200 or so, its been a while
Small battery kit - I went with the AMS kit, although I like Buschur products the AMS would be a bit better for adding on to it plus its $20 cheaper. $239 shipped

Tuning probably around $200-300 depending on if i want to get road tuned and then jump on a dyno or just do it all on the dyno.

So yeah we are in the AEM price range, but I think moving to the AEM wouldn't be a wise choice for me since I like to tinker and there isnt a tuner I trust within throwing distance from here I wont be moving to an AEM ever.

 

WOT pulls are a few days out since my meth pump is in the mail and my EBC is awaiting install as well. So running an open wastegate might be fun but the motor needs to stay intact for a little bit longer


Actually the logger clips at 1609 I think, but I usually look at the the loading and if its consistent though each pull, should work itself into a vertical "V". I try to log as much as I can or just for the heck of it without doing pulls, usually log on the same road, same time of day to see on how consistent the car/tune really is, but with different driving styles . I have about 8-10 hours of all sorts of different driving over the last few months.

 

I still think this is cheaper then switching to an AEM unit. AEM's typically run $1200 then you have to add the cost of a tune, map sensor, etc.... so in the end it might actually cost close to $1800-$2000 to get your car running right.
This is an excellent cheaper alternative for those who want to run big cams and turbos on the stock ecu. Plus there's other benefits such as smoother idle, boost leaks dont affect AFR's, VTA bov's can be ran w/ out ill affects, and you can still pass emissions cause your still on the stock ecu; which is a huge + for most of us.

I will personally be going w/ a similiar setup as malibujack on my IX:
1. ECU+
2. 3" GM blw through MAF
3. 280 cams
4. 880 injectors
5. gt35
6. meth

 

oh yeah - nice setup

 

Thanks.

I still very curious on how well the ECU+ runs. I think each system has their pros and cons but having Ecuflash has to be the best thing about it. If it wasn't for this program I would have never done this and went straight to an AEM.

Im starting to get back into the tuning my own car but still want Jestr there so optimize everything.

 

looks very nice but coat that manifold!!!!

 

No. Good to hear from you again.