Sorry that is very... wrong.. the size of the housing greatly affects the resolution of the meter. grainy resolution from a sensor meant for a 55mm housing in a 90mm housing will not do you any good. The modern slot style sensor are much more accurate, the OEM have had a movement to HZ based metering over a 5v analog signal the HZ based will never run out of headroomI don't think bigger hurts much. Keep in mind, the meter has to have an accurate reading at idle with almost no air going through it. That's not going to change much on the cross sectional area of the meter.
I actually do not know much about tuning. I admit it. As I understand it, the resolution on the factory meter is good, but the response time is not. Does that makes sense? It seems to vary from one tuner to another. One tuner wants you to have a Ford factory meter, and then the next tuner is upset because you don't have an SCT3000. I don't know what to tell you. I know that in the before time, when actual computer tunes were rare, everyone just bought a big Pro-M or CNL meter, and it worked fine.
Kurt
Sorry that is very... wrong.. the size of the housing greatly affects the resolution of the meter. grainy resolution from a sensor meant for a 55mm housing in a 90mm housing will not do you any good. The modern slot style sensor are much more accurate, the OEM have had a movement to HZ based metering over a 5v analog signal the HZ based will never run out of headroom
Will the '94-'95 Thunderbird 3.8L or 4.6L naturally aspirated MAF work in 89-93 Mustangs? It looks like no flange adapter is needed and I think it's also a 70mm unit.
I don't think bigger hurts much. Keep in mind, the meter has to have an accurate reading at idle with almost no air going through it. That's not going to change much on the cross sectional area of the meter.
Sorry that is very... wrong.. the size of the housing greatly affects the resolution of the meter. grainy resolution from a sensor meant for a 55mm housing in a 90mm housing will not do you any good. The modern slot style sensor are much more accurate, the OEM have had a movement to HZ based metering over a 5v analog signal the HZ based will never run out of headroom
Has anyone taken a T-Bird 70mm housing and put a '94-'95 sensor in it?
I've read that the housing internals are the same but it's the internet sooo...
So much focus is given on optimum air measurement at WOT, that the fact that both meters are able to get accurate measurements at idle is ignored.
The smaller the engine the less air is moved through the orifice at idle. A 90mm on small cube motor can and has caused sampling issues at or just above idle. I'm not sure why anyone would want to do this though... Well, besides JoeBut yeah, his WOT pulls were just fine
There becomes a point where it just makes more sense to go SD.
I've read that "theory" too.
From what I've read, the t-bird and Sn95 70mm housing are the same except the t-bird has couplings on both sides, and the SN95 MAF is flanged.
Both electronics are designed for the 70mm housing, and the internals look identical, so in theory swapping the 94-95 sensor (because it's been confirmed to work with the A9L) over to the t-bird/cougar housing should work.
If that works, would it also work to take the stock foxbody maf sensor out of the stock 55mm housing and put it into the Tbird housing?
10-4No. The sensor is designed to work with a specific diameter housing. If you look on the stock electronics, it will have a number with “55” on it which refers to 55mm housing.
The sn95/tbird electronics have a 70 on the electronics
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?