Re: MAF vs. MAP

["Bruce Plecan" <nacelp@bright.net>]

> How about a poll? All things considered, what's better, MAF or MAP?

This has been hashed over quite a bit.  About the lag of the MAF sensor
itself to air flow change, and time to stabilize, yada yada.
I'd always been a MAP fan myself, just having cut my teeth on it, and having
spent just so much time with them.
But, I can now see a little bit more clearly what is really going on.
It's primarily the early sensors that are most of the blame.
I changed my GN from a oem MAF to the late model sytle, with the translator,
and the difference is night and day.   You / I would never have expected
this much of a change.

Then we get into application.
  The wide ratio spacing of the 700R is just terrible, and couple that will
the weight of most F Bods, the engine load chacterists 1-2 is just as
different as night and day, and the only way to get thru that at WOT, IMO is
with a MAP system.
  Now, take and add several hundred pounds and close up the ratios a little,
and add a turbo, and the inherant advantages of the MAP are about gone.
Just the volume of the intake tract is enough to probably cancel the thermal
change to air flow, lag time.  (I also haven't even begun to do any WOT to
see where I am Air Flow wise, but if I don't run out of calibration, this
looks to be real doable).

The pi$$er (and that's just my opinion, SO far) with the MAF systems is the
way the Fuel is handled.  Personally, I think a RPM vs AF (air flow in
grams/sec), map more like the MAP systems run would be easier to work with.

Of course, this is just how I see things
Bruce

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from gmecm, send "unsubscribe gmecm" (without the quotes)
in the body of a message (not the subject) to majordomo@lists.diy-efi.org