Can anyone tell me what kind of results to expect from an aftermarket mass air flow sensor?

 

Depends on which aftermarket MAF you are looking at.

 

well, that was going to be my next question... which one is the best for the money?

 

The best and only aftermarket Maf Sensor is the WELLS SU-145.
A better design/flow then the stock one. It uses a film element instead of the hot wire and only has one screen. It is a direct drop in replacement requiring no modifications for the 305/350 TPI.
Now the bad news they are not readlly available at your local parts store. The last info on price was $154 + S/H.

 

Don't expect too much of a gain. Unless your making serious power, then spend your money on something else. i've seen many tests that show very little or no gain with a larger MAF.

 

Warning. I got a wells and I still have a code 33 problem. I'm not sure what the problem is yet but the wells might not be as compatible as people say.

 

How about a new stock MAF sensor with the screens removed! Equals + 100 CFM

 

ok, thanks guys... I guess I won't spend my money on an aftermarket MAF

 

Does anybody know if TPIS is still selling the modified version with the screens removed and the heatsink machined?

 

Supposedly the stock Wells still flows more CFM than the modified TPIS which I think is the Bosch.

I could be wrong.

P.S.--I'd still remove the screen from the Wells!

 

Why???It still flows more then your ECM can adjust for. That one screen can be left alone, in my opinion....

 

My Mustang gained an assload of horsepower through a new MAF. I'd say about 10 genuine seat of the pants horses.

It was a Granatelli 75mm...but I paid out the wazoo for it.
But anyways, if you or anyone else does decide to get one...I HAVE TO WARN YOU.

When/If they ask you if it's going on a stock intake or cold air...TELL THEM COLD AIR. They're two very different types of MAF's...and if you get the stock intake-type like I did, and try to convert the car to a cold air setup...you will throw a check engine light at WOT and lean the car out up top. I know this for a fact. I put a homemade CAI on and a week later pulled it off cause I kept throwing MAF codes. Checked my spark plugs and they were all white. Now the car runs funny cause I fouled all the plugs, but I don't have the time to spend 5 hours trying to get my f#%&!ng spark plug wires off. MSD's are damn near impossible to remove...just like they're damn near impossible to install.

 

Why would I still modify it by removing the screen, because I learned many years ago, it's in the basic "hot rodders creed"--never leave anything stock--everything must be massaged/modified--even if it doesn't do anything!!!

 

what exactly is so diff about aftermarket MAFs anyways? i'm still a bit new to cars.. but i just dont see how it can increase horsepower...

 

The key to making any motor especially a skinny block chevy run good, is to make it breath! The more air you can pack in the combustion chamber--the more gas you can pack in as well (at the correct air/fuel ratio). When the rest of the engine is tuned to take advantage of this, you make more horsepower. It is similar to being able to run a larger carb. If the MAF can only pass 650 CFM and the Wells unit can pass 750 CFM, theoriticaly you can make more horsepower. Now whether you can take advantage of the larger air flow is another matter!

 

And additionally many aftermarket MAF's have more accurate and more sensitive sensor materials. IE, they respond more quickly to air flow changes, etc., and this improves the engine's response somewhat. Certain MAF's are redesigned differently too.....to take a better sampling of the airflow. For example, a high flow MAF will respond better to a cold air intake, if it's designed for it, because it'll be in a better location to pick up airflow.

(As I mentioned on a previous post...) On a Mustang for example, an MAF designed for a stock intake assembly has the sensor piece in the very top of the MAF. If you hook up a CAI to this, the airflow is so erratic that the MAF can't get a proper sample and it doesn't work right. But if you have an MAF meant for an intake, it will usually place the sensor element in the middle of the MAF, so it'll pick up the most accurate reading.

 

A bigger MAF has jut got to increase power over the stock Bosch unit; screens or no screens.

The stock GM MAF is dinky compared to a stock Ford MAF, and it is widely known that the stock MAF is a restriction for a stock Ford 5.0.

I think the problem lies in the lack of sophistication in the GM computer setup. The Ford ECIV system is probably the best ever devised. I'm seriously thinking about converting my Z28 to an ECIV system. I'm already running Ford injectors, and this will allow me to use Ford MAF sensors, which are widely available. I'll grab an '89 5.0 AOD computer (most agressive calibaration) and wiring harness and then build my own harness with all the right connections and swap the sensors as needed. The system basically tunes itself after that, which is what makes it so great. I read a chip shootout article once that basically determined that more power was gained from simple mechanical tuning than any aftermarket chip, basically rendering chips unecessary for this system!

 

EEC-IV IS a good system.....it's a little trickier to pull codes on it though..... The only downside to the system, that I've noticed, is that it doesn't like to tell you of problems. My EGR valve has been frozen shut...had been like that for around 6 months. Never got an EGR code once, even though the EGR never even worked. And when I adjusted my AFPR a little too rich....I was running so rich I was pouring smoke behind me all the way down the interstate, and I never got an O2 code. And these cars have DUAL O2's.

But the computer does take very well to modification. I've got a cam, roller rockers, heads, full exhaust, a new upper and lower intake, a new MAF......and the computer is still BONE STOCK. Not even a custom chip. And it runs just fine.

 

The stock Bosch maf on a tpi car is 77mm...that is a lot bigger than a stock mustang maf... .that is y a mustang will see a bigger hp increase...most after market mustangs mafs are around 77-80mm anyway

 

its true that the stock hole on a GM maf is bigger than the stock one on a 5.0, but a 75mm stang maf has only a slight electronics intrusion into the flow area the Bosch is full of stuff. BTW Nixon1 you should have considered a pro-M or even the Vortech/C&L (I prefer the Vortech/C&L due to its user calibration with the sample tubes).

There are in my opinion no aftermarket TPI MAF's. Only shameful shams sold originally by Texas Autotronics (similar to the the wells) and now the wells. Both are only even barely compatable with a TPI. The code 33 and 34 problems with both are well documented around this board. I have seen alot of it myself in person. There sadly is no replacement for a real Bosch (expensive) with the screens removed and the fins cut off. There is a member here called Ski or something like that he has a 406 with MAF and refuses to change to the speed density and runs 11's N/A. Considering the data we have recieved over the years about how the restriction and flow is perportionate to the max HP you can make is not only blown away by his car. But also by the Nascar guys which overcame restrictor plates with a simple cam swap. Just something to consider.

 

B4Ctom1 -
Ski_Dn_it was banned and so was corkvette. I still think he could have made more power with a Speed Density setup. Why do you think all DFI's are speed density?

But back to topic, I've never had good luck with any aftermarket MAF on a TPI motor. The one's that I've found to work the best are the AC delco, and Bosch MAF's with screens removed. And even the Bosch sometimes threw a code.

Just my $.02

 

stupid question, but why would you want an aftermarket MAF?

also, can a MAF be bad without throwing codes, and how can you tell if it needs replacment?

 

oh I do agree, but the point was lost; that if he can make it work on a bigger motor with nice heads, then alot of guys with a few bolt ons can do well.


yeah I always considered the Bosch and AC delco one in the same but I am in full agreement...

Also sorry Nixon1 I forgot the Granatelli MAF's for fords are Pro-M's. I forgot that they have a product exchange. Pro-M sells Granatelli MAF's for GM's and Vice versa. http://www.pro-flow.com

 

You dont have a MAF sensor on your car Steven.

 

Lol no problem man.....I'm sick of that Granetelli anyways. Yeah, it's a good design, but it won't work with a cold air intake, and it cost an arm and a leg. ($290 at the local speed shop whose prices are almost always comparable with Summit or JEGS) I think I got taken to town on that one...but I "needed it" for the Dyno run the next day, which I didn't get because I was too far down on the list.

 

Ebay it and get a vortech or C&L, and I dont know what the heck happened to pro-m thier link dont work and I cat find a listing on google

 

I ran a Pro-M on my old 5.0, and the housing cracked when I tightened down the clamp for the elbow. I don't like how they are plastic. A friend of mine runs the C&L meter on his Cobra and I love its quality. They also offer that cast intake piece to replace the factory rubber one, which is bad for flow.

DFI and most aftermarket EFI systems are speed/density because they are simpler to build, and cost less to get running (no expensive MAF to buy). I still feel MAF systems are superior because they actually measure the incoming flow and density, as opposed to making educated guesses like a speed/density system.

 

It's all a matter of preference.. SD systems ARE accurate, but only up to a point. The more air going in, the less accurate speed density calculations are. That's why people like to convert back to MAF for supercharger applications...because with that much boost, the SD system can't get the numbers right anymore without being tweaked with or modified itself...

 

This is what i have been working on in my spare time. check it out....it works, i just haven't driven with it on

of course we still have the 255 limit

http://www.team3rdgen.com/modules.ph...iewtopic&t=677