Thanks for setting em straight bro!jstreet0204 said:Stock MAF on 99-01 is 80mm, and 85mm on 02-04.
Crzyhrse said:How can a GT have a 85mm MAF and a Mach 1 only has a 80mm MAF stock? My C@L is an 85mm MAF.
Crzyhrse said:How can a GT have a 85mm MAF and a Mach 1 only has a 80mm MAF stock? My C@L is an 85mm MAF.
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?)
Alright, I'm depressed now03WhiteGT said:Heres mine with current mods.
Mac X-pipe and Flowmaster Dumped.
4.10 gears
Everything else stock. She made 256 / 291 with U/D pulleys, T/A and CAI.
comatose said:Alright, I'm depressed now. 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 said: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.
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:Try backing up the statement "I told you those C&L MAFs were junk" with numbers rather than a dip***** idiot flag.
comatose said:why?
twogts4us said: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.
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
forpit2000gt said: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.
Give Me TP said: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.
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?