GM translator at ECU+ and flash?
GM-MAF translator at ECU+ and flash?
I have a very good flashed ECU (EcuTek) and as I'm going now to modify my stock turbo with 4" inlet, I'm planning to upgrade to the following:
4" inlet pipe and eliminating the stock MAF
GM 3" MAF as a blow through on the IC pipe
ECU + for the GM MAF translation and for fine fueling tuning if necessary
My question is if anyone tried this setup?
And mainly if the use of ECU + to translate the GM MAF will retain my fueling maps in the original way that I have now on my EcuTek flash, and I will not face a problem of the need of building new fueling maps because of this modification?
Basically I wonder if this setup will be pnp and will give me my " good old" fueling maps from my flash ECU?
I will appreciate your experience and I know MalibuJack have great knowledge about that so I will be happy to know MalibuJack opinion.
4" inlet pipe and eliminating the stock MAF
GM 3" MAF as a blow through on the IC pipe
ECU + for the GM MAF translation and for fine fueling tuning if necessary
My question is if anyone tried this setup?
And mainly if the use of ECU + to translate the GM MAF will retain my fueling maps in the original way that I have now on my EcuTek flash, and I will not face a problem of the need of building new fueling maps because of this modification?
Basically I wonder if this setup will be pnp and will give me my " good old" fueling maps from my flash ECU?
I will appreciate your experience and I know MalibuJack have great knowledge about that so I will be happy to know MalibuJack opinion.
Last edited by RanEvo; Oct 12, 2006 at 02:20 PM.
There's a coupl'a people who've tried the GM 3" in blow-through mode. I'll let them say how it's working for 'em.
Fueling should be close-to no change from what you have now, and certainly any changes are easy to make with the ECU+. The GM MAFs are, like any MAF, not 100% consistent from device to device, so there's no way to guarantee "perfect" maps, no matter how perfect my software is.
Tom
Fueling should be close-to no change from what you have now, and certainly any changes are easy to make with the ECU+. The GM MAFs are, like any MAF, not 100% consistent from device to device, so there's no way to guarantee "perfect" maps, no matter how perfect my software is.
Tom
I saw this thread today.. I really cannot answer specifically how close the ECU+ is with the GM meter since I"m using different electronics. On my car, the airflow curve with my electronics was "a little different" but the ECU+ made it easy to adjust slightly to make it dead on and hit the right load cells.
What you see here is my v3 upper intercooler pipe setup with my GM 3" LT1 sensor and Granatelly 3.5" Billet housing. This gives me the least restriction with the least compatibility issues with the ECU+
I will be using the ECU+ as my MAF Translation and removing my older setup.. Hopefully I will have Dejontool create a new upper pipe for me built to spec to accomodate the 3.5" housing without transitions and larger diameter than 2.5"
I need a lower portion of an upper intercooler pipe though, since I have to mate this with the buschur lower portion, and would prefer to remove the entire buschur UICP setup and set it aside.
Jack
I will be using the ECU+ as my MAF Translation and removing my older setup.. Hopefully I will have Dejontool create a new upper pipe for me built to spec to accomodate the 3.5" housing without transitions and larger diameter than 2.5"
I need a lower portion of an upper intercooler pipe though, since I have to mate this with the buschur lower portion, and would prefer to remove the entire buschur UICP setup and set it aside.
Jack
