331 Stroker HP Expectations

EDIT:

I agree that the meter is undersized.

Click to expand...

As I think about it, that's just an assumption. We'd need to see the OP's volumetric efficency, RPM at max power and the meter's flow sheet to make the call or whether or not the meter's maxed out.

I'll agree with one important point that you make after restating simply:

There's no such thing as a 'calibrated' meter.

By that I mean, taking a an A9L in combination with a 'calibrated' meter and any size injector other than 19s is an exercise in frustration.

Have I built a meter before? Attempted yes. Not with a piece of PVC though. I was matching different electronics into other meter housings. The problem that I ran into was scaling. The meter output often wasn't repeatable from run to run. It probably had more to do with the shape of the housing vs. the shape of the various element housings but the point is that a QUALITY meter is designed, housing to element, to be accurate and repeatable.

What's more... I can safely say that I've pretty much run the gambit of meters on various applications. Some are MUCH more precise than others. There's a reason why sample tube meters have developed their reputation for being inconsistent. Some of the better meters... PMAS if def one of them. The Lightning meter and SCT meters are also pretty damned good. Why? They're consistent.


But I digress... Make yourself a homemade meter. Tune it with whatever your tuner of choice is using a dyno, wideband, what-have-you. You will likely discover the frustration that comes from dissimilar results from your wide-band/RPM data graphs.

You can have the best tuner in the world but if meter output is erratic, and/or unstable, you're pissing int he wind.

All that said... I can't honestly say that I've not seen success stories with a C&L. I've actually been part of making a few of them run pretty damned good. One instance was just a matter of reclocking the meter to change how air entered. A couple of other needed to have actual enclosures built around them to smooth out airflow. Others required changing the shape of the air tract both, before and after the meter housing. My point? They're consistently inconsistent. I attribute a lot of that to the 'one size fits all' approach to the interchangeable and user installed sample tubes. The other meters I've mentioned above, are bench flowed as assemblies. It's not often you'll find those types of meter so severely affected by the air inlet tract (although I've seen what I refer to as the 'good' meters need adjustment on that rare occasion).


It's kind of like buying the difference between a Walmart shotgun and something you might buy from Sharps.

By that I mean, taking a an A9L in combination with a 'calibrated' meter and any size injector other than 19s is an exercise in frustration.

Click to expand...

Amen. Preach it brother.

Have I built a meter before? Attempted yes. Not with a piece of PVC though. I was matching different electronics into other meter housings. The problem that I ran into was scaling. The meter output often wasn't repeatable from run to run. It probably had more to do with the shape of the housing vs. the shape of the various element housings but the point is that a QUALITY meter is designed, housing to element, to be accurate and repeatable.

What's more... I can safely say that I've pretty much run the gambit of meters on various applications. Some are MUCH more precise than others.

Click to expand...

Since you've tried to build a Frankenmeter, I'll submit to your experience. However, conceptually its still difficult to believe. Example - If I took an oxygen sensor out of the stock headers and put it in some JBA headers and then told you that the sensor was now unpredictable; and then took the same oxygen sensor and put it in some MAC headers and told you that all predictability was back - you'd tell me I'm crazy. I will grant you that the comparison is poor due to the function of the sensors, transport lag, etc but I think you can see what I'm saying.

One instance was just a matter of reclocking the meter to change how air entered. A couple of other needed to have actual enclosures built around them to smooth out airflow. Others required changing the shape of the air tract both, before and after the meter housing.

Click to expand...

Having 3-6 inches of straight tubing in front and behind the MAF is mandatory as a good install - with any MAF. That or a screen in front of the MAF, a la the stock meter.

Is it possible that other filters may outperform a C&L when you just slap a filter on the front - sure. But that's not the meter's fault. (Clearly you have enough experience not to have done that, so not really an issue...)

Another issue to consider that I haven't seen until now is that the OP has a "tuned super chip". Assuming that the tuner knew what he was doing, the chip is tuned for the current C&L - throwing another meter on there is going to make it act up.

Good luck...

phutch11 said:

Another issue to consider that I haven't seen until now is that the OP has a "tuned super chip". Assuming that the tuner knew what he was doing, the chip is tuned for the current C&L - throwing another meter on there is going to make it act up.

Good luck...

Click to expand...

Yes... that does bring up another highly important matter. Where was this chip tuned? If it's an off-the-shelf, one size fits all, geeneral tune then it's definitely an issue. For a Fox at least, there is no such thing as an out of the box tune. OEM variances aside, the after market for our cars is incredibly inexpensive and they are of the age that even small mods stacked on top of other small mods add up to a general type of tune being useless.

To the OP: If the 'tuned' chip in your car was not tuned specifically for your car then it's useless. It may be close enough to allow you to start and run the car but every other aspect of drivability and performance will suffer greatly until that tune is tailored to YOUR specific vehicle/combination.

phutch11 said:

Since you've tried to build a Frankenmeter, I'll submit to your experience. However, conceptually its still difficult to believe. Example - If I took an oxygen sensor out of the stock headers and put it in some JBA headers and then told you that the sensor was now unpredictable; and then took the same oxygen sensor and put it in some MAC headers and told you that all predictability was back - you'd tell me I'm crazy. I will grant you that the comparison is poor due to the function of the sensors, transport lag, etc but I think you can see what I'm saying.

Click to expand...

I think where the problem lies is in the aerodynamics created by both the meter housing (whatever that may be... maybe even a piece of PVC), and the protrusion of the element within that housing.

Imagine for a moment, what the aerodynamic airflow might look like at say 200 CFM. Let's say that if we're able to see that air flowing through the meter housing and across the element, that it's smooth and that the proportionate amount of the air passing through the housing is also and smoothly passing through the sampling element.

Then we double the CFM. The airflow through the housing becomes more erratic. Any errors that we made in the housing design begin to show up. The turbulance within the housing begins to show signs of becoming erratic and uneven through the meter housing. We seeing a difference in the proportion of air between the element and the housing. Not a big deal though, we can scale for that.

We double it again. Though the proportions of air between the meter housing and element are increasing more, that not our real problem. The real problem is that the air within the housing is becoming so turbulent that the proportion keeps changing. We discover that at 800 CFM that the airflow within the meter housing is not smooth at all anymore. The whirls of air passing through the meter housing constantly change positions. Sometimes that fastest streams of air pass directly through the sensing element while at other times, it misses thee element completely. All of the little imperfections in our housing and the shape of our meter are causing vortices within the housing and across our meter. What more, the swirling effect along the housing wall are causing the element to meter air that not passing directly from the front to the back.

No biggie... we reshape the element and housing a little bit to decrease the erratic air at this CFM. Maybe we shroud the element a bit to cut down on some of those effects.

Oh wait... we just changed how air flows across the element for all the other CFM ranges as well. It's ok though... we'll just start over.

If he has a chip already in his car, he certainly should just pull it out, especially if the car wasn't dyno'ed tuned for it.

As far as all the technical info you guys are dropping on the meter, honestly none of it really matters to the laymen. I can appreciate the knowledge, but the end result is still the same.
Phutch, i think your engineering backround is causing you to look too deep into theory, and not enough into practicality.
Bottom line, drop a good pmas meter on the car and it's sure to make more power.
In a stock situation the pmas meters will give you around 10 more rwhp than a c&L, in a modded situation with a good engine you are looking at more like 20rwhp.
And is for sure to give you less idling problems.

$300 and ten minutes worth of work, compared to $250 for the tuning equipment, another $300 for a meter regardless, then add a wideband or dyno time to it, and you are at $1000, all to get similar, possibly worse results.

Sometimes it's not about how you play the game, it's about whether you win or lose.

The thing with purchasing the nice, proven meter now is that you don't have to try and chase down gremlins later.

+1 on the quality meter purchase! Been there, done that.

93gt331 said:

What about the issue with the cold air intake? I noticed that those PMAS MAF's have a different type of filter-side hook-up. Looks like they bolt up to the filter. I'd prefer to keep my filter inside the fender well instead of having it under the hood?

Thanks again to all that have posted.

Click to expand...

Can you provide a picture of your mass air sensor setup and filter?

Though I whole heartedly agree with having a great meter (reasons previously stated), I don't think that the problems you're having with the car dying at idle is caused by your meter. That is, unless you're getting a significant amount of 'fan-wash' into the meter at idle.

You should be able to achieve a steady idle regardless of your type of meter unless the air is so turbulent that the meter won't get a stabilized reading. My guess is fan-wash or a completely defective mass air meter.

By the way... I have a PMAS in one of my two Fox bodies and it's mounted in the fender. For that setup I ran the Anderson Ford Motorsport 4 inch N/A tube out into the fender well. There's a 45* elbow on the end of that with the meter and conical K&N. I also contructed a small sheet metal air-deflector and placed that infront of the air filter to reduce dirty air to the conical (this was the result of a slight surge problem I was having at cruise).

phutch11 made a good point during our discussion above about how the IDEAL setup would have some air tract length between the filter and the mass air meter. I totally agree. Having that length to smooth out air flow before hitting the meter is always a plus.

One of these days, I'll likely cut up that pretty Anderson intake tube so that I can mount the meter under the hood while leaving the filter out in the fender.


Nice numbers by the way.... I'm betting you have at least 20 more RWHP once you get the tune stabilized and squared away.

93gt331 said:

I prefer to go ahead and fix the root of the problem instead of trying to tune around it.

Click to expand...

That's a smart way of thinking, unfortunately there are many stangnet members that think tuning is the cure for everything. It's not, almost any combo will run damn near perfect without a chip.



Check out anderson ford motorsports for the power pipes like Ratz said.
That's what i used.
Goes into the fender in the hole just in front of the shock tower. BUT i had an 80mm, back when i got mine that was the biggest, so do your research on fitment, nothing is smoother than their pipes and they are ceramic coated.

As for hp, your numbers seem pretty low.
I've seen stock shortblock numbers just a few under that.
Me personally with your setup, i wouldn't be happy with anything under 375rwhp.
Custom cam along with a good meter may really increase your numbers too.
Your heads are already pretty good.

You can get the 75 TB if you like, i wouldn't consider it a requirement though.

Do NOT get 36's.
At your current power rate your 30's aren't even necessary.
In a NA setup, you can stretch 30's well in the 400rwhp range.
I know guys that have ran 30's up over 450rwhp running mid/high 10's NA.

Forget all the calculations you see, they don't translate the same into the real world use.
Too large of an injectors causes tuning and driveability issues.