twogts4us
15 Year Member
Thanks for setting em straight bro!jstreet0204 said:
BillFisher, where are you getting this info?!?!
How does this dyno look?
- Thread starter comatose
- Start date
BillFisher, where are you getting this info?!?!
twogts4us
15 Year Member
Crzyhrse said:
Hahaha - you are still clueless. I told you those C&L MAFs were junk...you don't even know what you have. (Oh, and do you really believe Mustangs must only be dynoed and tuned on a Mustang dyno?)
Crzyhrse
Active Member
(Sigh) First of all, all the Dyno's in my area are all Mustang Dyno's. Never been on a Dynojet. The C@L's are junk? Mine works fine. How are your C@L's working for you? Oh, I forgot, your too stupid to get them to work right so you have 2 OF THEM sitting on your shelf collecting dust. NICE PURCHASE!! 
Jag-off.
Jag-off.
jstreet0204
Active Member
Crzyhrse said:
Your stocker was an 85mm also, although I think the center section on the 85's may only measure 80. They also upped the injector size to 22lbs around mid 02 as well so that may have had something to do with it. As far as the C&L being junk, well they just tend to cause more problems than they are worth. They are hard to tune, and they are not as accurate as the stock meter. They tend to make power by leaning the mixture out, which is not the right way to do it. That doesn't mean your car won't run fine with it, it could just run better with the stock meter and a good tune. They stock meters are really good, and since they went up to 80mm, they really aren't a restriction on a anything running less than about 370 rwhp.
Give Me TP
Member
Mine has a C&L 85 mm MAF housing and runs perfect, but did require a custom Predator tune to get the A/F ratio down to a safe level.
Give Me TP
Member
twogts4us said:Hahaha - you are still clueless. I told you those C&L MAFs were junk...you don't even know what you have. (Oh, and do you really believe Mustangs must only be dynoed and tuned on a Mustang dyno?)
Try backing up the statement "I told you those C&L MAFs were junk" with numbers rather than a dip***** idiot flag.
Alright, I'm depressed now03WhiteGT said:
. I'm not sure why mine is so much lower, but I'm sure there could be many factors. I noticed your A/F steadily dropped to about 11.0, on mine it was fairly constaint at 12.5 from about 3000 and higher. Isn't 11.0 a little dangerous? Forgive me if I'm wrong, I'm still learning here 
Is yours an auto? I am under the impression that autos sap a bit of horsepower and torque...
trinity_gt
10 Year Member
comatose said:Alright, I'm depressed now
The lower the number, the "safer": air/fuel equals that ratio: 11.0:1 is less air per unit fuel (richer) than 12.5 or 13.0:1. 03WhiteGT might have a few more ponies available to him if he were to dyno tune it and lean it out a tad. But 12.5:1 is fine too.
Autos do sap more power than standards, perhaps 3 to 5% or so more power.
Give Me TP
Member
trinity_gt said:
Well, then I will live with the results. Mine is an auto, so that might explain part of the drop. I'll dyno/tune again later down that road once I replace the plenum, headers, x-pipe, cams, and injectors. I want to do a few transmission upgrades too.
Thanks everyone for their input, this site rules!!!
twogts4us
15 Year Member
Other than leaning the motor out, what does the C&L MAF do? And, as you add other upgrades, the C&L MAF will continue to complicate the tuning. The OEM MAF is a sophisicated, sensitive device. You throw that engineering out the window by putting a more free flowing bore around the stock electronics.Give Me TP said:
comatose said:
see, what people, like yourself don't realize is that the maf is Just a sensor telling the computer how much Oxygen is coming into the engine, the stock one works great untill you are making enough power/airflow to "peg" it. Most aftermarket mafs only trick the sensor to make the computer lean out the fuel slightly.
also, if i were asking for suggestions on how my dyno looked, i would be thanking people for thier advise, esspecially when they have the same type of car you do and have made more power.
this will make you really sad. . . my 98 makes that much power, with more tourque on the stock maf
Give Me TP
Member
twogts4us said:
There are no numbers in your reply.
I don't use a C&L MAF, I use a C&L MAF housing. A good-looking billet piece too I might add. Any performance mod complicates the tuning, whether or not a C&L MAF housing is included. Regardless of having put a more free flowing 85mm bore around the stock electronics I have an A/F ratio just below 13 across the board, which isn't considered lean by most opinions.
forpit2000gt
Founding Member
without seeing the a/f with the dyno, how can anyone tell that it is a MAF problem??? He is also using a Pro-M, not a C&L. I Bought a C&L and they are not as tuner friendly as the Pro-M but they do work fine, especially in a bolt on application. How many pulls did they make? who set up the program? What grade fuel are you running. What was the timing?
I still say that you are not far from what you should have. My 2000 was a little more with H-pipe, flows and K&N, but I aslo have a manual trans. 99-00 not really comparable to 03-04, the newer cars make a little more hp with the same mods.
I still say that you are not far from what you should have. My 2000 was a little more with H-pipe, flows and K&N, but I aslo have a manual trans. 99-00 not really comparable to 03-04, the newer cars make a little more hp with the same mods.
Joel's98GT said:see, what people, like yourself don't realize is that the maf is Just a sensor telling the computer how much Oxygen is coming into the engine, the stock one works great untill you are making enough power/airflow to "peg" it. Most aftermarket mafs only trick the sensor to make the computer lean out the fuel slightly.
also, if i were asking for suggestions on how my dyno looked, i would be thanking people for thier advise, esspecially when they have the same type of car you do and have made more power.
this will make you really sad. . . my 98 makes that much power, with more tourque on the stock maf
What a jerk. People like myself? What does that mean? I asked a simple, one worded question that required a simple, non attacking answer. Try answering a newbie's question without belittling him. I posted praise a day or two ago thanking everyone for their help, go back and look since criticizing others on their forum etiquette is so important to you. I started this thread to look for input on what might be wrong or where improvement is needed, not to bow down to every faster car than mine (and I know there are many). Congratulations, your car is faster & a '98, you are the man. Take a second & remember what it was like when you were new to the scene & thirsty for knowledge.
forpit2000gt said:
Yeah, I though my Pro-M was ok. To answer your other questions, they made 8 pulls, adjusting the timing & A/F ratio several times. They ended up settling with the stock timing because the car seemed to make less horsepower with the timing advanced/retarded. A tuner her in Columbus, Ohio set it up, larzracecars.com. I'm running 91 octane.
Thanks forpit2000gt, it's good to see friendly, helpful people around here.
jstreet0204
Active Member
Give Me TP said:
The biggest problems I've heard of with the C&L is yes they tend to run lean, and I thought I remembered you posting that you had to tune to correct the lean condition. The other problem is I believe that they don't supply a transfer curve with the unit, but instead charge for it. Aftermaret MAFS are not held to the same standards as oem MAF's and usually have more voltage fluctuation. Nearly all MAFS can be tuned for WOT but what most people don't understand is that is only half the problem. The MAF is the most critical sensor in the entire system. If the transfer curve isn't very close to perfect, the eec will constantly be trying to correct itself during closed loop operation. Transfer curves can be dialed in for aftermarket MAFs but this usually takes hours if not days of road tuning to get it perfect, and dyno tunes usually focus on the WOT tuning only. Whether or not the MAF caused the fluctuation in the original posters dyno, I don't know. My only suggestion was to make sure he has the proper transfer curve in the EEC, since they are not plug and play as some manufacturers would like us to think.
Here is some good info on the subject written by some very knowledgeble people.
http://forums.modulardepot.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=25092&perpage=20&highlight=MAF%20replacement&pagenumber=1
http://forums.modulardepot.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=14764
Similar threads
