MAF ?
- Thread starter mustang2300
- Start date
-
Sponsors (?)
mr_woodster
Active Member
OIC...Maybe next time you should put "will a MAF off a 3.8 work on a 92' 2.3L." See the 91-93' 2.3L came stock with a MAF already but I'm not sure if a 3.8 snesor will work on a 2.3L. I do know a 94-95' GT MAF sensor will work on a 2.3L but it is a different design I'm sure than a 3.8. If it was me I would either just build a CAI for my 2.3L ( which I have) or find one for a 2.3L Ranger. Now I have also heard of a Civic CAI that is very close and bolts on with very little mods to it.
mr_woodster
Active Member
As far as i know a 3.8 MAF wont work unless recalibrated. Mass air's are calibrated for the type of injectors they are metering for ....atleast that is my understanding.
I mean a 14lb injector like whats on a 2.3L can handle up to a 150 hp and some of the older 3.8L was around there I think 
mr_woodster
Active Member
griffinzein said:
Maybe, im not sure if the connectors differ though...
Pro-hawk : not sure either...never payed much attention to ford's n/a injector ratings. On the other hand i have yet to find anyhting useful on a 3.8...so i would be supprised if i started here
Stinger
Founding Member
It won't work, period.
Mafs aren't calibrated for a given injector size either, no matter what people or companies try to tell you.
Mafs aren't calibrated for a given injector size either, no matter what people or companies try to tell you.
mr_woodster
Active Member
Stinger said:
care to educate ? Also you stating that makes alot of manufactures-magazines and the MAF public mis-educated (which wouldnt be a first btw
) 
i4power
Founding Member
griffinzein said:
The intake is un-restrictive enough now. I would suggest looking into a head porting job, a different cam (A237 or Ranger), and exhaust mods. The intake piping doesn't really matter anyways.
ok you musta missed what i said, ive had everything flow tested and my MAF is the most restrictive part of my intake track. and my cam is a stage 3 racer walsh my heads are ported and i built a custom intake, and before you compare port size to maf size, you have to remember that there are 4 intake ports and if they open at 5000 times a minute (5000 rpms) that adds up to running 3 and 79/100 valves opened constantly (yes i me and a few friends spen 5 hours working out that math problem for my lil bros science project and he made an a so we were right on with the math) now since at 2500 rpms its equal to runing 2 and a half valves open constantly the MAF is already restricting air flow and choking my engine after 3000 rpms. we kooked it up to a ford diagnostics machine and "tricked" it into running with out the MAF and it ran fantastic until it hit the rev limit at about 6200. every one on here seems to look at flow rates on one cylinder and forgets that there are 3 more to contend with. my head flows 180 cfm per cylinder and that adds up to 720 cfm all around, and at 5000rpms (due to a drop in flow caused by opening and closing of valves) it flows 600 cfm, well the stock MAF flows around 300 cfm, now with my engine sucking 600 plus cfm how is a 300 cfm MAF not choking it? so what is a less restrictive MAf that i can use on my car? i heard a rumot that a 94-95 gt TB andMAF would work on my car is taht true?
i4power
Founding Member
griffinzein said:
Well damn, you didn't say THAT earlier!
I would check out engine managment system's such as SDS, which is speed density-based so you can get rid of the MAF, and tune the engine way better in the process. It's about $1100 though.
Stinger
Founding Member
Just a little FYI, you should do some more math. Convert your 600cfm to lb/min. I bet you'll find you aren't flowing 600cfm after seeing what the lb/min to hp conversion factor is.
It's a way for manufacturers to sell an item and get the consumer to understand that it will work with whatever injectors on that particular engine (5.0 for example). Take that same maf and put it on a 2.3 with those same injectors and it runs like ****. How can a maf that is "calibrated for 19lb injectors" run like **** on a 2.3 when using 19lb injectors? Because it's calibrated to put out x voltage at y airflow...has nothing to do with the injectors.
mr_woodster said:care to educate ? Also you stating that makes alot of manufactures-magazines and the MAF public mis-educated (which wouldnt be a first btw
It's a way for manufacturers to sell an item and get the consumer to understand that it will work with whatever injectors on that particular engine (5.0 for example). Take that same maf and put it on a 2.3 with those same injectors and it runs like ****. How can a maf that is "calibrated for 19lb injectors" run like **** on a 2.3 when using 19lb injectors?
Because it's calibrated to put out x voltage at y airflow...has nothing to do with the injectors.
mr_woodster
Active Member
ah i see (said the blindman). So im taking it that there is a a few factors in a specific calibration. Trying to work this out in my head as far as a 2.3 goes. I know if you upgrade to larger injectors you change the value at which the computer factors pulse-width with (i think?). So the computer factors on the fly knowing the size of the injectors "x voltage at Y airflow" .
ok so in my mind ...any mass air that puts out a resonable (understandable) voltage that the ECU understands would work? Therefore the ECU is where the work has to be done if you do a mass air conv....am i some where close to something logical?
ok so in my mind ...any mass air that puts out a resonable (understandable) voltage that the ECU understands would work? Therefore the ECU is where the work has to be done if you do a mass air conv....am i some where close to something logical?
well i never said it was a racer walsh head now did i? i got the racerwalsh stage 3 cam and i do have a dual plug head, but i have done some extreme custom work on my engine.and yes ive dont the conversion to lbs/pm. and does anybody know whre i can find a tech article on MAF sensors and how they work. i can modify on efo my application if i know how they work. and how much voltage the 2.3 uses for a given amount of air flow.
