well. i have a 1986 Pontiac Firebird parts car with the 2.8 FI and im getting a TPI setup(minus maf and air ducting) for my car. will the MAF work. or is it a different connector

(ps. i did not get this car for the TPI swap im doing. i got it for alot of misc. stuff i need for my car, im not that stupid)

------------------
RED82TA5.7L

1982 Pontiac Trans Am
Cross-Fire Injected 5.7l V8
New TH350 Raptor with a shift-kit, 2600 stall torque converter, Eldebrock TES Headers, 3" Hooker Cat-Back.
Mods: 1.6 Proform Roller Rockers, electric fan, Corvette 5.7L computer chip, K&Ns, MSD 6A Ignition Box, MSD Conductor Spark Plug Wires .
Audio: JVC Kameleon CD deck, Jenson 4x6 front, Eclipes 6x9 rear, 2 10" mTx T4000 powered by a mTx 200watt amp.
Black Powder Coated 1990 16x8 Formula Wheels with 245/50/ZR16 Perelli P7000, 1.5" Jamex Lowering springs(pics are before lowering springs, ill get new ones soon).
For Pictures go to
http://www.geocities.com/red82ta57l/mycarpics.html

A cool Trans Am site with Message Boards http://www.transamgta.com

[This message has been edited by RED82TA5.7L (edited August 18, 2001).]

 

No, sorry but it isn't only the connector that is different. The V-8s used an analog output signal from the MAF, while the V-6s used the digital output MAF (like the newer LT1 and LS1 engines).

------------------
Later,
Vader
------------------
"Get UP - Drop the bombshell!"
Adobe Acrobat Reader

 

Incidentally, if you but a new MAF, check out one of these:



It is a Wells/Conrad SU145 MAF, the last MAF you'll buy. You can thank me later...

------------------
Later,
Vader
------------------
"Get UP - Drop the bombshell!"
Adobe Acrobat Reader

 

is there a site. where can i get it. and how much is it?

thanks

------------------
RED82TA5.7L

1982 Pontiac Trans Am
Cross-Fire Injected 5.7l V8
New TH350 Raptor with a shift-kit, 2600 stall torque converter, Eldebrock TES Headers, 3" Hooker Cat-Back.
Mods: 1.6 Proform Roller Rockers, electric fan, Corvette 5.7L computer chip, K&Ns, MSD 6A Ignition Box, MSD Conductor Spark Plug Wires .
Audio: JVC Kameleon CD deck, Jenson 4x6 front, Eclipes 6x9 rear, 2 10" mTx T4000 powered by a mTx 200watt amp.
Black Powder Coated 1990 16x8 Formula Wheels with 245/50/ZR16 Perelli P7000, 1.5" Jamex Lowering springs(pics are before lowering springs, ill get new ones soon).
For Pictures go to
http://www.geocities.com/red82ta57l/mycarpics.html

A cool Trans Am site with Message Boards http://www.transamgta.com

 

Why go with a Wells MAF ?? More Flow or Better Reliability? Or Both?

 

WOW! This IS an old thread. I'm glad to see that some people are using the SEARCH feature.

To answer your question, yes - both.

The original design Bosch MAF sensor uses a heated wire filament to dissipate heat energy to the intake air in order to measure it. The Wells and other types that don't use a hot wire use a thick-film sensor, which is basically a metal oxide plate bonded to the back of an IC. the hot wire is basically the size and shape of an incandescent light bulb filament, and is just as fragile. The thick film is just as accurate, but a lot more durable and forgiving.

Also, since the hot wire type is so sensitive to air flow direction and the heat generated by the electronics package heat sink, the sensing element is placed inside a smaller sampling tube mounted inside the MAF housing. This sampling tube obstructs air flow to some extent.

Another problem with the hot wire is that quite a bit of current is required at higher intake flows to maintain the sensing element temperature at 75°C above the incoming air temperature. A thick-film type uses a lot less electrical energy. This isn't so much an operational issue, but the higher current handled by the electronics package on a hot wire type requires that the control semiconductors are mounted to a heat sink to keep them cool. This heat sink is also exposed to the intake air stream, creating a further restriction. It was actually a somewhat clever design by Bosch, since the amount of hot wire current is almost directly proportional to the intake air mass. At higher flows, there is more air flowing to cool the electronics, and at lower flows, the electronics don't generate as much heat, and therefore require less cooling. Too bad they placed the heat sink so close to the sampling tube and didn't increase the size of the housing.

The thick-film type has no such heat sink to obstruct intake flow.

Another issue with the hot wire sensor is the frail nature of the sensing element. There is a screen placed in the inlet tube of either type MAF to create a minor disturbance in flow and break up laminar air flow patterns. This assures an accurate measurement of intake air at any flow. On the hot wire type, there is a second screen placed in the discharge end of the housing, not necessarily to provide better sampling, but to help protect the sensing element from sonic shock waves created in the induction system (that "howl" or "roar" you hear under the hood at WOT). Without the screen, the sensing element can be subjected to impulses from this phenomenon and lean backfire, which can destroy the fragile hot wire.

The thick-film type is not susceptible to this type of damage, so an outlet screen is not necessary nor used. This also aids in overall air flow capacity.

Here's a visual comparison:



Additionally, the Bosch sensor used a round wire screen material at each end of the MAF housing for these purposes. The Wells MAF uses a flat metal matrix (like a honeycomb) that effectively breaks up laminar airflow but allows better overall flow than a round wire screen.

And just for a little more flow, the Wells SU-145 inside diameter is larger than the Bosch/GM 14094712. The stock MAF housing has a round I.D. that measures 70mm, while the Wells MAF has a slightly oval shaped I.D. that measures 70mm in one dimension and 73mm in the other. That's not a great deal of difference, but coupled with the lack of a sampling tube and heat sink fins, the lack of these internal obstructions make the Wells MAF flow up to 156 SCFM more than the Bosch MAF at the same 28" WC differentials.

Both the thick-film sensor and flat metal matrix "screen" on the Wells MAF are the same design as the parts used on the Hitachi MAFs for LT1 and LS1 engines. I wonder where they got that idea from...

 

MAF sensors on 2.8 V6 Fbody cars are the same on the v8 cars as well my 85 2.8 V6 had a V8 MAF sensor on it

 

did you actually read this post before you posted? because you're absolutely wrong and the rest of the post reflects the correct answer.

 

yes lol. man this post is old. tpi is already in.... been in for almost a year. i bought a new maf sensor from a local proformance shop

 

I just recently replaced the MAF on my car. And I can tell you that your statement is dead wrong. They look different inside. You can connect a 2.8L MAF to a V8 but it will not run the car correctly at all. I saw how my car ran with that. It wasn't pretty.

 

where can i get that wells maf sensor?