Why did I post that? The reason is that I don't know everything. I said "good post" because he's right. It's okay to be wrong you know, and admit defeat.

 

if you buy a maftrans and tactrix cable, you'll have a good tunable blowthrough setup for a decent dollar.

 

Then please edit your incorrect post. Before MJ posted it, we all knew that was the case anyway. I'm not sure why you posted it to begin with.

 

the ECU+ and 3" GM MAF is actually my favorite option.. Especially since it has so many other great features.. I'm stuck with older electronics because of the sensor I chose to use. Historically I've had better results with the Ford sensor over GM sensors, but they both work really well with the technology thats out there.

 

Ignore my previous post for the people that read it before I deleted it! I learned something new today! I did not know what I was talking about.

 

Don't sweat it, you live and you learn..

 

this is what the setup currently looks like.. I'm running a GT35R and the intake is 4" and had no provision for recirculation anyway.

https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...lowthrough+maf

This is the thread that shows the evolution of the unit I was working with.. the good, bad, and ugly of it.. Plus 2 generations of pipes..

 

Will boost response improve with VTA assuming you have the proper set-up? Thanks.

 

The improvement is generally due to increasing the spring pressure to keep the valve closed longer and firmer, this isn't a quality of any particular method (VTA or recirculating) But increasing spring pressure is a tradeoff, the tradeoff is compressor surge.

This is what many people who VTA on the stock MAF don't realize, that in order to keep the car from stalling at idle and part throttle, you have to significantly increase the valve seat pressure in the blowoff valve so it doesn't open under light loads..

The result is compressor surge (Bucking or stumbling at part throttle) when boost rises faster than the engine can utilize it.. or RPM Rising between shifts at lower loads and part throttle shifting.

The proper way to adjust a blowoff valve is that you only need enough spring pressure so the boost pressure and spring pressure can keep the valve closed when there is an imbalance or differential (when the turbo spools and there is a delay in the boost source providing enough pressure to the BOV) but this is also the reason it needs to be recirculated, since under the proper circumstances the valve will open and vent.

Stock and smaller aftermarket turbos show these qualities more often than larger turbos (which typically use larger and stiffly sprung valves like the Tial) because spool is more prone to build quickly at part throttle. Generally I like Tial valves, but I wouldn't recommend using it on a stock turbo car with the heavy spring it comes with.

Look at it with this analogy, if you were to sneeze, your mouth is open in time for the air to rush out.. what happens if your mouth was too slow to open, or didnt open enough, or you covered your mouth.. Your ears pop..

My point is, regardless of whether you recirculate or not, using aftermarket hardware to allow it, its essential to properly adjust the valve. It should be spring stiffly enough to stay closed most of the time at idle (high vacuum means it will sometimes open at idle though) as that should be just enough spring pressure to allow it to assist the boost source in keeping the valve closed against the pressure in the pipe. (you only need a few PSI difference holding the valve closed, than the inside pressure, for the valve to stay seated and leak free)

 

malibu jack maybe you can piece together a kit and sell it to us, running a 35r on a stock ecu without the factory (restrictive) sensor is awesome!!!

 

You already have a few options out there..

1) ECU+, GM 3" MAF, Dejontool Upper intercooler pipe
2) MAFTPro, (either speed density or using a GM or Ford MAF)
3) MAP-ECU (speed density)

The one thing they all have in common is the total cost to get going is about the same.. I think the MAFTPro is least expensive, the MAP ECU being next. The ECU+ has the best logging and a bunch of other upcoming features that make it worth the purchase price just to have the unit.

the Hardware I'm using was manufactured by ProFlow/Best Products, Inc. under the Pro-M label, its no longer available and although some of the engineers of the original best products company have reconstituted as PMAS, I cannot recommend it until they actually have product available for sale. Again, you can use the Dejon upper intercooler pipe or build your own.

There is no "plug and play" solution, however I think I have found the Summimoto part number that associates with the connector (both male and female sides)

 

I've been following MJ's threads for a while and its easy to say "let me have what your running!" He will tell you that there is no easy way to get his current setup to run as well as he got it too without his knowledge and expertise. Even if i had all the tools i would still fly him to my town to have him make it run right!

 

FWIW I'm probably one of very few people who have been using a blowthrough MAF setup on an Evo with no problems.. Because of the price and people very quick to jump on the AEM EMS, there has been very little focus on these sorts of solutions. This conversion took on some new life when people started realizing that OBD-II is an unavoidable requirement if you want your car to be legally registered and inspected in most states.

If possible, I would encourage using some form of MAF over a speed density conversion as all speed density systems do have a few drivability quirks most obvious if you live in areas that have large variations in weather.

 

BAHAHAHA, you posted this just before I posted my caveat! LOL

I do think thanks to ECU+ and MAFTPro that this conversion has gotten alot easier to get working right. Cracking open the ECU also opened a new world in getting good drivability and understanding cause and effect relationships. So I'm fairly confident that someone with some time and energy can get their car to run as well at this point. 2 years ago I would have said otherwise because it took me a few months to get the kind of drivability I wanted using the tools that were available.

 

I know i was just laughing about that as well.