how much hp before maxing MAF
From what I can see, the best reasons to go with a GM MAF, in blow-through configuration, are to make tuning easier (the factory MAF doesn't work so well with BIG cams), eliminate the more restrictive factory unit, and to allow for a larger air filter assembly.
Every MAF has an upper resolution limit. As for what it is with the factory KV type MAF, I'm not sure if that has been resolved.
A blow through setup requires a MAF translator box, and of course, some fabrication work. For a factory turbo car with mild cams and such, I wouldn't see this as a priority item.
A blow through setup requires a MAF translator box, and of course, some fabrication work. For a factory turbo car with mild cams and such, I wouldn't see this as a priority item.
Talking to someone who had used the gm maf as just a blow thru found yes it did work great but it also got dirty very fast and he would have to clean it like every week. Otherwise his car ran like it had bad spark plugs in it, etc.
But he did say it worked great. Hopefully this same someone will finish up his work on the stock ecu speed density conversion patch.
But he did say it worked great. Hopefully this same someone will finish up his work on the stock ecu speed density conversion patch.
The stock MAF maxxes out at about 3100hz (puts you on the last load column at any rate) so the amount of power you have that HZ flow is dependent on things like displacement, turbo size, head flow, cams, etc.
The going number for Mustang dynos seems to be about 440whp where it gets to the "edge" and maybe a little more past that. I havent seen where that number ends up on a Dynojet for 100 sure, but it would be interesting to see a car like 9sec9 or one of the CBRD cars make a quick jaunt to a dynojet and see for sh%^s and giggles...if it was practical.
Smogrunner did make 580something but his was completely on the last load table from 23psi up so while its possible it wasnt the safest way to do it. That was on a GT35 as well. These cars I mentioned before arent running the peg limit the whole time to the best of my knowledge so they might be a little bit better average of power and retaining tuning control.
The going number for Mustang dynos seems to be about 440whp where it gets to the "edge" and maybe a little more past that. I havent seen where that number ends up on a Dynojet for 100 sure, but it would be interesting to see a car like 9sec9 or one of the CBRD cars make a quick jaunt to a dynojet and see for sh%^s and giggles...if it was practical.
Smogrunner did make 580something but his was completely on the last load table from 23psi up so while its possible it wasnt the safest way to do it. That was on a GT35 as well. These cars I mentioned before arent running the peg limit the whole time to the best of my knowledge so they might be a little bit better average of power and retaining tuning control.
Trending Topics
CBRD's 2.3 stroker with a modified 35R pegged the 2-byte load on the factory MAF, factory ECU, on 93 octane at 499.7 wheel horsepower on our Mustang Dyno.... not the safest... but it was our car and we wanted to see what the absolute limit was... needless to say, we found it... hehehe
CBRD's 2.3 stroker with a modified 35R pegged the 2-byte load on the factory MAF, factory ECU, on 93 octane at 499.7 wheel horsepower on our Mustang Dyno.... not the safest... but it was our car and we wanted to see what the absolute limit was... needless to say, we found it... hehehe
yeah,
as charlie said..... we were flowing ALOT of air...
load was pegged at 379.... no 2 byte at the time... but charlie had my logs... we posted them..
499whp on our dyno is 600ish on a dynojet on pump gas..... the control wasnt the best... we had some issues with the gt37R turbo and big cams with a tial VTA bov, but the car rarely stalled.
TED B has a good point, GM maf would be a good idea, then i think you could do a bit more...
we are trying to max another one out, as we hit 440whp recently again on a stock ecu car... and I think I can hit 485-500 with it... ill post some 2 byte then.
cb
as charlie said..... we were flowing ALOT of air...
load was pegged at 379.... no 2 byte at the time... but charlie had my logs... we posted them..
499whp on our dyno is 600ish on a dynojet on pump gas..... the control wasnt the best... we had some issues with the gt37R turbo and big cams with a tial VTA bov, but the car rarely stalled.
TED B has a good point, GM maf would be a good idea, then i think you could do a bit more...
we are trying to max another one out, as we hit 440whp recently again on a stock ecu car... and I think I can hit 485-500 with it... ill post some 2 byte then.
cb
Account Disabled
iTrader: (38)
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 9,319
Likes: 1
From: Virginia Beach, Virginia
for what it's worth 2ybte load on my car was ~ 330kpa @ 30psi on 93 octane, DLL showed ~ 535awhp. I put a bead of epoxy around the edge of the mas honeycomb to make sure the 35R didn't digest it and the load shot up to 380kpa..it stays there pretty much from spoolup until I let off the gas. It hasn't posed any tuning problems though.
I have a buschur stage 3 head on the way to replace the stock head and I have buschur bf272 cams to go in to replace the hks 280's I'm using now. I suspect that I'll be able to make considerably more power at the same boost levels going forward.
I have an AEM EMS kit sitting here on standby just in case I find a limit on the stock ecu that keeps me from hitting my goals.
I have a buschur stage 3 head on the way to replace the stock head and I have buschur bf272 cams to go in to replace the hks 280's I'm using now. I suspect that I'll be able to make considerably more power at the same boost levels going forward.
I have an AEM EMS kit sitting here on standby just in case I find a limit on the stock ecu that keeps me from hitting my goals.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
senate6268
Lancer Engine Management / Tuning Forums
91
Dec 26, 2022 12:20 AM











