MAF Sensors 87-93

[Batterystang]

Alright, here is the problem. The stock MAF Sensor for a 89 Mustang does not work with my C&L unit. But I'm told its the same sensor for all A9L computers. But I did some looking, and at autozone there is a different OEM # sensor for 91-93's with an A9L.

Here are the 2 numbers.

This is the one that doesnt work.

"CARDONE 74-9502 #E9ZF 12B579-AA, F1ZF 12B579-AA, F1ZZ 12B579-A, AFH55-03, AFH55-03B"

Here is the other one.

"CARDONE 74-9509 O.E.M. #F1SF-12B579-AA"

Should I just spend another 90$ and try this sensor? What do you guys think?

 

[VG30DE]

I use a 95 MAF element in my C&L right now, and have used the 93 and a 91.... And I used a 89 for my A9L swap in my lincoln a couple years ago..so thats crap. Something's wrong.

What exactly do you mean by "it doesnt work"??

 

[Batterystang]

With the sensor plugged in, the car hesitates, and if you keep revving it up, it will cut out completely. With the sensor unplugged, it runs, but extremely rich.

 

[65ShelbyClone]

Did you try the stock meter and electronics after trying the C&L? Is your C&L new or used? I went through this with a used C&L where the guy lied and told me the tube was for 19s, but was actually for 24s so it ran lean.

 

[Batterystang]

The C&L use to run perfect.

Im going to try clocking the Meter, and getting a Ford Spec Sensor. I heard the autozones sensors have problems...

 

[Matts89LX5.0]

thats weird, i've never had that problem....all maf sensors are the same from 89-93

 

[Black1987Stang]

thats weird, i've never had that problem....all maf sensors are the same from 89-93

and if u cross reference numbers for other cars youll see the same sensor fits many other cars......im running my car with a maf from a V6 Taurus, runs normal as before.

 

[Batterystang]

Yes I noticed that this sensor is for many vehicles.

Air may not be flowing through the sensor, plus a weak output from the crappy autozone sensor may be causing my problems.

 

[vristang]

thats weird, i've never had that problem....all maf sensors are the same from 89-93

Only exception is the 93 Cobra.

I would like to hear how this works out.

By the way, when you unplug the MAF you force OL, so it should be running ruch at that point.

Have you pulled the codes?

jason

 

[stang&2Birds]

A C&L is a ****shoot. You take custom-tuned electronics that were custom-tuned for a specific MAF-body and put those electronics in, IMHO, a poorer made MAF-body. So, you end up with the same luck as if you play the instant lottery.

If you have a Tweecer, and about 200hrs of free time , you can get a decent MAF curve for a C&L. The other option is to get it flow tested. That's about ?~$150?. But, you still have the C&L MAF design that can bite you when the pressure changes, when the temp changes, and so on.

The 94/95 MAF is a better design. The LMAF is even better. You can get the Grantelli (sp?) MAF tuned for 19's, 24's, etc . IMHO, either that MAF or an LMAF with a chip is the best bet.

With an C&L, you take the stock electronics off (some random) OEM MAF.

ProM (pro flow) does a "decent" job of tunning the MAF/electronics to be "close" to stock. Of course, for best results, the flow sheet values should be entered into a custom chip.


IMHO, any "GM MAF" is still far better than the "Ford" MAFs. But, even the Fox MAFs are "not horrible". The older vane MAFs were a joke from day one.

 

[vristang]

If you have a Tweecer, and about 200hrs of free time , you can get a decent MAF curve for a C&L. The other option is to get it flow tested. That's about ?~$150?. But, you still have the C&L MAF design that can bite you when the pressure changes, when the temp changes, and so on.
.

I have a TwEECer and the MAF Transfer from C&L seemed VERY close to ideal. I have been able to make more improvements in driveability by messing with the Injector settings, than by messing with the C&L MAF Transfer.
I'm not necessarilly disagreeing, just throwing out my personal experience. I know some have had trouble with C&L meters, but I haven't heard of any TwEECer issues with C&L's (inspite of C&L not doing much to support us tweecers).

I am curious though how the C&L MAF design can be influenced by pressure and temp changes?
I've just never heard of this concern. Can you elaborate?

jason