I've been reading up on this and did a search and read through some old posts.

From what I understand, MAF is a better system that allows for ease of tuning, but the type of MAF system used in the third gen f-bodies was just a really bad setup. The computer was slow and it couldn't adjust quickly enough, which makes the speed density setup a more reliable system between the two.

My question is, has this problem been addressed at all by the aftermarket?

Does anyone make a chip and/or new MAF that will fix the limitations of the third gen MAF setup?

Or would you have to go to something a lot more custom like the megasquirt or something.

Mathius

 

I dont know that I'd call MAF better, its different and has its pluses and minuses, just like SD does. About 10,000 SD guys will now come in here and tell you its better, ignoring that it is sensitive to changes that MAF is not. Just an inherent downside.
The MAF computer is not slow, well the 85 ones are but I would not suggest one of those to anyone. Because of how the MAF reads the flow and how SD reads the flow, SD reacts quicker to what the engine is doing. The MAF system somewhat purposely adds delay. The idea is the MAF is wanting to read steady state and the SD is wanting to read every blip on the chart. I would not call a SD setup more reliable either. The main issue I can see with a MAF system like we have on thirdgens is the sensor size and the default range of the meter as GM programmed it. Most of us, the range will never be an issue, its just the sensor size. You will likely get a better idle with SD, but IMO thats about it. I've been making just as much HP with the MAF as a bunch of local SD guys before they added more tricks to their engines and intakes. The current programming and tune I'm running is nothing fancy, straight GM programming with some modifications to table values. I've run a modified GM code with a different range and a modified MAF and honestly its not worth the effort for most people. Just between the stock tables adjusted for your motor and proper adjustment of the PE v RPM table my o2's are just where they need to be at part throttle and WOT. But if you want, you can run SD, spend the time to tune it, and it'll run real good as well. Different strokes.

 

Not even GM has a better or worse opinion. I think that back in 2001 or 2002 GM went back to MAF for a few models.
the only drawbacck is that darn hot sensor in the intake for MAF. remember that it maens mass air flow so if your moving forward the computer works well. not so good if your sitting still - no air flow.
MAP uses air pressure but the computer takes more for tuning.
if you have to buy one I would get MAP only because there are more of them around and parts are easier to get.
i have a map.

 

Don't really care to get into the whole debate about which is better, but both of these replies contain statements which I believe to not contain a bit of reality.



Please take these comments with a grain of salt.

 

yeah, mass air flow still takes measurements on the vacuum produced by the engine yeah?
so the air is ALWAYS passing through/over the sensor.
as madmax said, same difference, its not like you're going to see some dramatic difference in HP/TQ, and isn't that what its really all about.

“America is all about speed. Hot, nasty, bad *** speed”. -Eleanor Roosevelt

 

When ever the engine is running it is taking in air and the MAF meter measures that air. It has nothing what-so-ever to do with whether the car is moving or not.

 

GM went back to MAF *and* MAP combined starting in 1994 with the LT1. In 1993, GM still used MAP only on the LT1's.

And the engine is sucking in air and the MAF is reading that air no matter if the vehicle is moving or not. You might want to think about that some more.

 

i mispoke i stand corrected.
but i still like sd - im not found of that darn hot wire than can burn out.

 

If I was anyone reading the reply I quoted, I'd take that with a lot more than a grain of salt.

Ignoring the code and just looking at the sensor itself, its a slow reading device. Thats why nobody uses a hot wire element to read airflow anymore, they are using thick film elements because they respond faster to airflow changes. But of course, you should read that with a grain of salt since the guy with no actual statement about either of the two systems or how they work says so.