maf's and hp/flow

Discussion in '1994 - 1995 Specific Tech' started by blksn955.o, Apr 9, 2006.

  1. "The following link will tell you the HP that a flow number can give. Just simply stating a flow number is not enough. It has to work with AFR to determine HP."-86gt/Clint

    some of the flow numbers on the maftransfer -from clints EA program and others.


    MAF ------------- volt. ------------------ flow kg/hr
    03 cobra ------- 4.7961 -------------- 1528.076
    ------------------- 5.0046 -------------- 1740.758

    w4h0 ----------- 4.75 ----------------- 802.15
    --------------------5 ---------------------924.73
    ex.--------------------------------------------------------4.8974--805.091kg/hr--293 hp N/A

    j4j1 --------------4.6001 -------------- 711.62
    --------------------5 ----------------------875.07

    frpp 70mm------4.7678 --------------1319.515
    ------------------- 5 ---------------------1540.121

    99GT ------------ 4.75 ---------------- 1080
    ------------------- 5.00 ---------------- 1170.6
    ex.--------------------------------------------------------400hp seems to be the limit N/A




    90mm LMAF----------------------------
    ex.--------------------------------------------------------1425kg/hr--403 hp S/C

    ex.--------------------------------------------------------0780kg/hr--310 hp N/A


    pro-M 80mm-----------------------------
    ex.1--------------------------------------------------------4.1--920kg/hr (final5.0)
    ---------------------5.0----------1497.12------------450rwhp rich cal. 42's boost w/o fmu (starman)

    ---detail look at the stock MAF's-------------------------------------------------------------------

    The whole MAFtransfer from tweecer- x=volts, y=kg/hr

    94-95 GT W4H0 processor, CBAZA family-


    1998 GT DBZ2 processor, CRAI8 family-


    2000gt JRX0 processor, CVAF1 family-


    94-95 cobra J4J1 processor, CBAZA family-


    96-98 cobra LLX3 processor, CDAN4 family-


    01 cobra MSE3 processor, RUAF2 family-


    03 cobra-note-only has 29pts at this time


    ---aftermarket maf transfers----------------------------------

    Pro-m 80mm---blower combo, 42lb inj., no fmu, richer cal for boost--made mid 400rwhp**note 29pt**

  2. attached is a graph of the 94-95gt, 94-95cobra, 96cobra, 98gt, 00gt, and 01 cobra maftransfer. It is based on the kg/hr of flow. I hope to add a x and y table for ease of reading soon as well as add the 03 cobra and Lmaf flow to the graph.

    Attached Files:

  3. MAF ------------- volt. ----------------flow
    99GT ----------- 4.75 ---------------- 1080
    ----------------- 5.00 ---------------- 1170.6

    thanks jstreet0204

  4. Seems to me the sig combo would not use but about 50 to 60% of a Lightning curve :shrug:

    That would not be as accurate as one that used more of the curve if you ask me :shrug:

  5. that is why I am thinking one of the larger 4.6 stock mafs but not the LMAF may be a better option.

    The 99+ GT maf has a good bit more airflow over the 94-95 maf, 250-300 more with the 99maf may be a better fit.

    I want to look at the 96-98 4v mafs max airflow still though.
  6. 90mm LMAF.......1425kg/hr at 403 hp S/C

    C&L73...............0780kg/hr at 310 hp N/A

    from 86gt/clint
  7. The kg/hr seemed low to me when I first saw it.

    I looked at one of my old dlogs and

    [email protected] rpm I showed about

    4.1 maf volts
    920 kg/hr


    I only put down 293 hp

    Thoughts or Comments :shrug:

  8. Well, it is a C&L73 meter and not a stock maf housing.

    I wonder if since the C&L fools the eec with the sample tube if the log shows a squed number:shrug:

    I was thinking the same thing...

    WOW 4.1 at 920, you got within 4 of the total flow .899 volts before the max volts.
  9. The above data was with my current ProM 80 meter and 65 tb.

    When I was running the stock maf & tb the maf volts were at 4.9xx something and I forget the kg/hr.

    I'm not sure the peak kg/hr values we see in our dlogs mean a whole lot when we compare them to each other's combos. If you're too fat on the highend, those values are gonna be inflated. Fuel table settings, high speed enrichment, and the like can effect those values.

    What were your thoughts when you said

    "WOW 4.1 at 920, you got within 4 of the total flow .899 volts before the max volts"?

  10. I thought that was the hp and stock maf.

    Yes, the maf can get inflated I am just looking to get some kind of list that would be a rough est. of flow and what hp people have been able to get out of that maf.

    Another thing I was thinking about as far as the 73C&L flow being low for the was from clint(EA guy), and maybe he used his hp est. tab in EA to calc. the hp...if so then that would be more than likely flywheel hp and that 310 would be like what 245-265 rwhp? I need to ask him to make it clear.
  11. I was not thinking too clear I guess :bang:

    You are right ablout Clint most likely using fwhp :)

    I did search out a very old 2nd gear blast to give you an idea about air flow when I was using the stock stuff.

    [email protected] rpm I showed

    805.091 kg/hr
    4.8974 maf volts

    Hope that can be of some help to you :D

  12. cool, I will add that info to the list. You dont happen to remember your HP with the stock setup do you?

    I just asked clint on the "new" eec forum about the numbers...he said that it was with EA, but that he put down 306 on the dyno...:shrug: . I am asking to see if he has an idea on why the kg/hr are so low for the power he is making.
  13. Those last values were from the sig combo just as you now see it.

    I do wanna point out I had raised the maf voltage value to 4.9999 volts with the scalar.

    The other values were from the same sig combo but with the larger maf/tb.

  14. updated--list

    If anyone wants to double check the numbers as I was not 100% sure what some of the strat. names were on some of the 4.6 stuff.
  15. realy--updated list.

    any comments, other than the fact I feel like I have OCD or a sckitzo-disorder of some kind right now.
  16. Greg

    I feel I was somewhat confusing about how I gave you the data and I'll try and clear it up ...... I hope :rlaugh:

    The ProM80 data I gave you is as follows:

    4.1 maf volts will give a reading of 920kg/hr with the parts in the sig combo.

    There are three exceptions to that data from the sig when talking about the above data.

    1) The tb was upgraded from stock to FRPP 65mm
    2) The maf was upgraded from stock to ProM 80mm
    3) The sig rw hp/tq numbers don't reflect the upgraded tb & maf.

    I feel the larger tb & maf might be worth 10 to 15rwhp but I have no hard data so that is just a guess :shrug:

    Another thing worth noting here is that Maf is able to deal with more air flow which is obvious considering the maf voltage given is only 4.1 for the kg/hr value stated above. That value was given simply because, that is all the air flow my na combo will produce :)

  17. oh, ok so the hp data given was from the stock MAF and T-body.

    the data given was a volt. and kg/hr reading off your new MAF but you dont have any hp numbers yet with that new combo of MAF and T-body.

    I thought you had a 70mm throt.? I have been planning on getting a 65-70 polished t-body along with whatever stock 4.6 MAF I end up with to complete the combo. 65mm being able to be had from FRPP that comes with all new sensors has been very tempting, and 70 as a close second.

    Thanks for the input Grady, I hope this info can be good for showing people the diff. in curvs, and flow. The biggest reason I added the whole maftransfer is I really have not seen them listed together and find myself loading and unloading diff. programs when I want to look and compare them. I fig. this topic would be the best place to just put all that number mumbo-jumbo.
  18. Correct :nice: Just as the sig reads :)

    Correct again :nice:

    Yes it is a 65mm tb from Ford. I got it WAY before everybody had jumped on the bigger is better bandwagon...... that is everybody except Mike :rlaugh:
    These days I would have to say ...... I'd go bigger.

    The fox tb conversion is still unproven to flow better ...... to me that is ...... but that is another story ;)

    Your quite welcome Greg :D

    Again, sorry I presented things in a mixed up kinda way :(

    The info you have gathered up here is just great :hail2:

    Many members will benefit from it :banana:

  19. yeah, what I have seen about the 70mm t-body "looks" nice and would be as large as I would go, the FRPP 65 is just a great deal with installed sensors though. I am tore between the two 65mm FRPP, or edlb. polished 70mm.

    I too am not sold on the fox swap, other than it looks better/cleaner. If not for the fact most people change the size from the stocker from what I have seen and that makes it a hard comparo deal for me. I was realy wanting to give it a try stock for stock but my explorer intake is a non-internal EGR model and I want to keep the EGR so that is not a direction I want to go at all now.

    Thanks for compliments on the topic, I hope to add the cobra transfers in the next day or so, I have been tossing around the idea of making a graph/table in excell or something to give alittle better visual without the scroll(sp?) that messes up the page copy/screen copy/whatever its called of the tweecer software to get all the info in the transfer.
  20. I do understand what your saying :D

    Those screen shots are more work than one would first think until you post up a few of them :fuss:

    If you wanna put up the whole curve, you gotta combine several shots and that is just too much work with the edit process of crop, combine several into one, and yada, yada, yada :nono: