any chance an lt1 maf sensor could work with a maf tpi system off an '86?

 

As I understand it, they work completely different and are not inter-changeable.

But, in all honesty, it isn't necessary. The only problem with the 3rd Gen MAF system, is that a big inch motor/high revver causes the MAF to max-out while in WOT. It's the only area where the MAF has an issue.

However, there is a simple solution, adjust the eprom for add extra fuel when in P/E (WOT). I did this years ago for a buddy's 383 that maxes his MAF at 3,800 rpm (but his engine runs well pass 7,000 rpm). It's a fast and effective solution.

In fact, IF you could "inter-change" an LT1 MAF, I would have spent far more time rescaling the MAF tables (as our ECMs are still only 8 bits which gives a maximum of 255 possibilites) - than it took to adjust the WOT P/E tables to add extra fuel to compensate for the maxed out MAF.

 

The earlier frequency based ECMs used the period, and not the frequency to read in the MAF signal. The signal from an LT1/LS1 MAF is actually a series of pulses, and cannot be read in directly by an ECM. The only function of the pulses is to trigger the timer capture and pulse counter within the PCMs.

You could, however, use an aftermarket digital converter that converts the pulsetrain into an analog 0-5V signal that could be read by one of the later MAF TPI ECMs. If you set the converter up right and scale the injector constant down by some ratio, you can, in fact, trick the ECM into seeing flowrates above 255 gms/sec. The only real issue is the poor resolution. The A/D and stock code doesnt have very good resolution and this can effect P/T and idle performance.

I used an LS1 MAF with a frequency to voltage converter and an ECM, and now a PCM with the MAF plugged directly into one of its outputs, and there is a world of difference in how each runs. Using the frequency directly yields much better resolution in fueling, better in fact then what the injector drivers can achieve. Rather then 5-8% error at idle, the error is only a few 10ths of a percent, which gives a much smoother running motor with no surging.

 

If you were asking because of reliability instead of scaling:

https://www.thirdgen.org/techbb2/sho...threadid=44937

 

i was pretty much just wondering because of cost and size, the lt1 mafs are much shorter and would be easier to work into a cold air intake because of restrictions on space, and they're cheaper too.