What options for larger MAF?

[ratio411]

88 5.0 HO
GT 40 intake w/1" spacer
65mm TB
(Explorer intake/TB)
No EGR/cats/AIR
Stock E7 heads and HO cam.
MAC headers and free flowing exhaust.

My question is about the MAF, it is stock, and has a tiny bottleneck compared to our SN95's MAF or some GM MAFs I am used to.

Ignoring the fact that the heads and cam will ultimately limit the engine, will a bigger MAF help anything? I figure it must since the opening is so small compared to the rest of the intake and exhaust bolt-ons which are very free-flowing.

Ideas?
Thoughts?

How hard is it to convert to SN95 MAF?
Are there any stock units that are free'er flowing?

Thanks!
Dave

 

[ratio411]

I forgot to mention that I just installed 4.10 gears, and now the car seems to run out of breath at a lower RPM than with the 2.73 gears. I just want to improve the breathing to the best possible with stock heads/cam.

 

[jrichker]

The MAF body and sensor are designed to match each other. Therefore you can't swap sensors between different part number MAF bodies and maintain proper calibration. The assembly is designed to match the computer’s internal program, and swapping a different MAF can upset the computer's calibration.

The only other MAF that is a one for one swap for a 93 and earlier 5.0 Mustang is the 94-95 Mustang MAF.

94-95 Mustang GT MAF - $40-$100. It is 70 MM instead of the stock 55 MM on regular stangs built prior to 94. It uses a slip on duct on the side that goes to the throttle body and a 4 bolt flange on the other. You need a flange adapter to fit the stock slip on air ducting that goes to the air box. Wiring plugs right in with no changes. *1 *2

Once your replacement 70MM MAF is in place, disconnect the battery for about 10 minutes. When you reconnect the battery and start the engine, the computer will relearn the settings for the new MAF.

*1.) Metal flange adapter Kurtz Kustomz Motorsports, Inc. KKM Buy the TR70 for $44.95. Or spend some time on eBay looking for one that may fit.

*2.) MAF & sensor interchange
The 94-95 Mustang 5.0 MAF & sensor is also found on:
1995-94 Mustang 3.8L F2VF-12B579-A2A,
1994-92 Crown Victoria 4.6L F2VF-12B579-A2A,
1995-94 Mustang, Mustang Cobra 5.0L F2VF-12B579-A2A,
1994-92 Town Car 4.6L F2VF-12B579-A2A,
1994-92 Grand Marquis 4.6L F2VF-12B579-A2A,
Evidently the –A1A, -A2A, AA, etc. on the end of the part number is a minor variant that did not change the operating specs. You should be able to ignore it and have everything work good.

 

[ratio411]

Great info!

I was hoping that the SN95 MAF was possible.
It looks so much less restrictive than the early MAF.

Looks like I'm going to the pick-a-part.

 

[Mustang5L5]

I snagged an sn95 maf for $5 at junkyard, and bought the adapter listed above. Was a 5 minute swap. Noticed a difference!

 

[wythors]

I installed a 76mm C&L on my Saleen. The car has a Tmoss-ported intake, cat-back and underdrive pullies. The MAF made a very noticeable improvement in throttle repsonse and breathing.

 

[Chrome_Rust]

I snagged an sn95 maf for $5 at junkyard, and bought the adapter listed above. Was a 5 minute swap. Noticed a difference!

Mike,
Isn't your car still SD?

Just asking...

Charlie

 

[Mustang5L5]

It is, but I bought the stock airbox and such for a mass air car, so I had to put a meter in. So even though it wasn't hooked up, going from the 55 to 70 netted an improvement that I did notice. So there is a restriction there

 

[ratio411]

Thanks guys!
I figured that had to be the case... I can't even see how they call the old one a 50-something MM, because the thing necks down to a 30-something bottleneck inside.

It can't do any good for the 65mm TB we have on there.
And now that we have 4.10 gears, any contribution the small hole makes to torque is useless.

We are picking up an SN95 MAF today.
I'll add what we experience here later.

 

[ratio411]

Picked up a used SN95 MAF today.
There was a wrecked SN95 with a cold air kit that was mangled in the wreck, but the flange to bolt on the MAF was still straight, so I grabbed that too.

I cut off the flange, leaving just enough tube to plug into the MAF hose and put a clamp on it.
So, there was no need to buy any sort of adapter.

The car still runs great with the SN95 MAF, so I figure it is functional.
It is raining, so we haven't put high rpms on the engine yet to see if it spins a little harder.
I am sure my son will get around to it pretty quick though, and let me know.

I figure it should add maybe 200 rpm of useable spin, but we'll see.

The next bottle neck outside the engine is the stock accordian tube going from the TB to the MAF.
It was originally an SD part, so it necks down pretty good before the MAF. It is still bigger than the stock MAF, but not the SN95. So I might start looking at the aluminum air intake tubes in the Sport Compact isle at the parts house. You can buy individual elbows and parts to piece together a custom tube.

 

[tomdalrymple]

I have an Grantelli 70 or 75 mm MAF that is calibrated for 19 lb injectors. According to the data logging I'm doing via a Moates Quarterhorse, with the mods my engine has, the MAF is maxed out at 4,500 RPM's. In other words, the voltage signal put out by the MAF doesn't change after 4,500.
Will the 94-94 mustang GT 70mm MAF be able to read the increased flow? I'm needing to buy a new MAF to go with some 24lb injectors, and wondering if this would be an adequate solution. Also, is the 94-95 maf a better more accurate unit, or is it just newer?

 

[ratio411]

The SN95 MAF advantage in my mind is that it is 70mm.
The earlier Fox MAFs are rated at something like 52mm, but actually neck down smaller than that inside.

We haven't really felt a difference now that the larger MAF is on, but the car definately hasn't experienced any adverse affects. Still runs awesome.

Now the remaining bottleneck outside the engine is the tube between the TB and MAF.
It necks down small too...