stock maf to 70 mm maf :S

[5.0TailPipeHump]

Ok i just swaped my stock maf to a 70 mm maf , the computer # on the 70 mm is F2VF-12B579-A2A, before all this i disconnected the battery and cleaned up the sensors on the 70 mm maf, pluged everything back in reconected the neg battery terminal fired it up , apon starting the car i noticed rpms climbing up and down then it settled down, is this just the learning part for the computer ?

Then i hit the road , now my car is stock at the moment but iv seem to lose abit of low end pull and abit of jerking for about a second when stepping on it then its all good. is there somthing i missed , i feel like putting the stock one back on before i get into some better mods. Is this the proper chip #F2VF-12B579-A2A​

thanks if any reply.

 

[vristang]

That should be right...
Give the ecu time to learn; about 50 miles should be plenty.
Be cautious with WOT for now.

Just to verify...
What is the catch code of your ecu?
You have 19Lb injectors? an orange color?

Pull your diagnostic codes and see what the computer says...

jason

 

[RacinNdrummin]

Use your stock MAF sensor in the 70mm housing. I cut and ported my 70mm housing and ran both sensors and the stock one in the 70mm housing worked much better.

 

[vristang]

Use your stock MAF sensor in the 70mm housing. I cut and ported my 70mm housing and ran both sensors and the stock one in the 70mm housing worked much better.

Please specify your ecu and injector size...



what part of the evergreen state are you from?
jason

 

[HISSIN50]

Use your stock MAF sensor in the 70mm housing. I cut and ported my 70mm housing and ran both sensors and the stock one in the 70mm housing worked much better.

Just because it appears to work, I'm not sure I'd recommend it to others.
The F2 sensor should stay in the 70 mm housing.

And I'd not port or do anything else to either housing. With a 70, you have to be putting down some stout numbers to peg the meter anyhow.

 

[5.0TailPipeHump]

Hmm , the housing came outta a 94 3.8 thunderbird , it mounts just as the stock 1 would , it has the 3 bolts that mount to the plate on the passengers side , i belive the cv had 19 lbs injectors and i also have 19 lbs , i just took it for a test drive and it seems fine now , apon starting it will climb up in rpms then settle down after 20 seconds or so to around 750 rpm,

the exaust note sounded different aswell but i think that was the cause of a high idle,I managed to get a pic of the sensor #​

Would i lose any performance from switching to this 70mm,

I dont think i ll be switching my stock sensor into a bigger housing , i was doing abit of reading and was told that this was a no no, other than that should i go ahead and put my 55mm housing back on and wait till i get somthing bigger and better,

Thanks again guys​

Oh and the sensor came outta a 92 crown vic and the housing from a thunderbird , the only difference was that the thunderbird had the 3 mounting holes for my bracket on the passengers side and the crown vic had what looked like a plate wich bolted up to the air box. they were both 70 mm

 

[vristang]

The fact that you're using a 92 Crown Vic MAF tube is a variable, which I can't address, as I have never seen one.
It is entirely possible that there is a difference between the Mustang 70mm tube and the 92 CV tube, even if it isn't visible.
Again, I'm not sure on that though...

Do you have the 70mm Mustang tube?
It would be worth a try if you have it laying around.

If you aren't happy with how the car is driving, then the stock 55mm unit is a reasonable backup plan.

jason

 

[ninety15.0]

I also agree that swapping the electronics into a bigger housing is not the right answer. Not only are you unsure of the calibration for the CV electronics...but changing the housing size may also effect how the piece meters air. Especially at slow idle speeds.

 

[RacinNdrummin]

Please specify your ecu and injector size...



what part of the evergreen state are you from?
jason

Stock A9L/19lb'rs... Custom modified CFI AFPR...

Kent

Just because it appears to work, I'm not sure I'd recommend it to others.
The F2 sensor should stay in the 70 mm housing.

And I'd not port or do anything else to either housing. With a 70, you have to be putting down some stout numbers to peg the meter anyhow.

It worked fine, even with the hack job porting and smoothing on the MAF, with a little adjusting of the FP it worked even better. The 70mm in stock form isnt much bigger than the stock 55mm, the sample tube post is a huge restriction. And as far as the F2 sensor staying in the 70 housing, if your under warranty sure, but if your into trying a few things (and obviously there is risks associated with it) than sometimes you can get things to work better even though they werent "designed" for that specific application. Not to be an ass, as its not my intention to, but have you ever tried it?? You may say you never would want to risk it, and thats fine, a lot of people agree with that, but that also means your out of the info loop and you really shouldnt be commenting on it.

 

[vristang]

Stock A9L/19lb'rs... Custom modified CFI AFPR...

Kent



It worked fine, even with the hack job porting and smoothing on the MAF, with a little adjusting of the FP it worked even better. The 70mm in stock form isnt much bigger than the stock 55mm, the sample tube post is a huge restriction. And as far as the F2 sensor staying in the 70 housing, if your under warranty sure, but if your into trying a few things (and obviously there is risks associated with it) than sometimes you can get things to work better even though they werent "designed" for that specific application. Not to be an ass, as its not my intention to, but have you ever tried it?? You may say you never would want to risk it, and thats fine, a lot of people agree with that, but that also means your out of the info loop and you really shouldnt be commenting on it.

I realize you aren't trying to be rude, and that you like the results you ended up with...
However,
You did take a risk with your motor, and it looks like you are still taking a risk, as you haven't mentioned checking the AFR with a WB O2...

I've played with a couple MAF meter setups, but never with the combo you have proposed...
Generally speaking... Mismatched setups aren't going to end well.

I'm making these comments more for the guy reading along, considering trying some oddball MAF/MAS setup.
Not so much for you, as you have already decided to take the risk...

I have a couple more questions...
Do you have before and after power numbers?
What do you feel the gain was with the ported MAF setup?
You haven't checked AFR with a WB, correct?
The sensor you have on the ported housing is marked 'F1ZF' ?
What did you have to set your fuel pressure to?
Can you elaborate on the following...

Custom modified CFI AFPR...

I have been adding to a list of 'oddball' MAF setups to try once my motor is running, and this setup has been added to that list...

I hope my list of questions isn't intimidating or taken offensively,
jason

 

[5.0TailPipeHump]

Update , car seems to be running fine now , i belive it just need a run of 30 km or so , other than that it feels good . , i know this is nothing great of a mod but its a start. thanks guys.

 

[RacinNdrummin]

I have a couple more questions...
Do you have before and after power numbers?
What do you feel the gain was with the ported MAF setup?
You haven't checked AFR with a WB, correct?
The sensor you have on the ported housing is marked 'F1ZF' ?
What did you have to set your fuel pressure to?
Can you elaborate on the following...




I hope my list of questions isn't intimidating or taken offensively,
jason

I dont have before and after power numbers and the maf was put on at the same time I took my factory airbox off and ran a large cone filter, but there was a definate in SOTP power over the stock setup.

I did not check with a WB, but I suspect it was running more lean, it was definately more crisp. I was running 15* timing and I never heard any detonation so i doubt that that setup on an otherwise stock engine would have any destructive results.

The sensor was the stock 91 maf sensor (f1zf I believe is correct from memory, it definately was an f1 something, but I since have sold my maf setup due to me setting up the MS, i cant be sure)

I ran my FP at 42psi, it was 38psi with the stock regulator.

The CFI AFPR is just what it sounds like. The CFI FPR (found on CFI tb injection) is adjustable from the factory and bolts onto the stock fuel rail. The only thing you need to do is add a vacuum nipple (the CFI setup doesnt use vacuum to adjust FP) and pop off the little cover on top and put a little jb weld in the top of the allen screw to keep it from leaking.

I dont take anything offensively unless it was obviously meant that way. I was expecting to get flamed for this anyway

 

[vristang]

I dont take anything offensively unless it was obviously meant that way. I was expecting to get flamed for this anyway

Cool
I still want to suggest caution for others wanting to try this...
Sooner or later I will give it a whirl.


Thanks for answering all my questions...
It does help.


42/38 is a 10.5% increase in fuel pressure.
The stock ecu has an adaptive range of 12.5%...
This suggests that the proposed MAF change (post-ported 70mm MAF, with F1ZF sensor), was outside the range of the ecu's adaptive capability.
More specifically, the proposed meter ran lean by greater than 10.5%, assuming 42psi was the minimum pressure required, AND that the adaptive was dead on before the swap... (which is a BIG assumption...)

Interesting stuff for sure...
jason

 

[RacinNdrummin]

Cool
I still want to suggest caution for others wanting to try this...
Sooner or later I will give it a whirl.


Thanks for answering all my questions...
It does help.


42/38 is a 10.5% increase in fuel pressure.
The stock ecu has an adaptive range of 12.5%...
This suggests that the proposed MAF change (post-ported 70mm MAF, with F1ZF sensor), was outside the range of the ecu's adaptive capability.
More specifically, the proposed meter ran lean by greater than 10.5%, assuming 42psi was the minimum pressure required, AND that the adaptive was dead on before the swap... (which is a BIG assumption...)

Interesting stuff for sure...
jason

Well Like I said before, I didnt have a WB to make sure everything was accurate, But it did run fine without any FP adjustment (no detonation, Nice crisp thr. response, etc.). The adjustments I did seemed to help at little after I finally got the AFPR on. Unfortunely I twisted off my oil pump shaft about a week after I installed my AFPR, so I didnt have a large frame of reference, but the Maf was on the car a good six months with no problems before the FP adjustment.

 

[vristang]

Unfortunely I twisted off my oil pump shaft about a week after I installed my AFPR, so I didnt have a large frame of reference, but the Maf was on the car a good six months with no problems before the FP adjustment.

I guess I mis-understood...

Which makes things even more interesting...