Supra Forums banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts
G

·
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I notice that 99% of people that go single don't keep the MAF and a very few do...
What are the pros and cons of keeping it..?

Which way is more reliable for daily driving..?
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
4,400 Posts
pros...you get rid of a big restriction
cons...eh i dunno, you probably spent money to do so, and by allowing more air into the engine you increase the chance of worse gas mileage?? :D
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
When you take the MAF off you have to install a VPC... but supposly the vpc is better used when you have bigger injectors.
Im not upgrading my fuel system.
Do you guys still recomend taking the MAF out even when Im not going to push over the 500rwhp...?
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
4,400 Posts
You will still see a gain. Or well put it this way, I have never heard of a loss in power. VPCs help at even BPU levels, What turbo are you going to? TS04? pt58?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
532 Posts
mohd was the one who used dual maf sensors. if im not mistaken.
 

·
Old School
Joined
·
4,108 Posts
aznsupra said:
mohd was the one who used dual maf sensors. if im not mistaken.
You're mistaken. Single MAF, E-manage w/pressure sensor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
136 Posts
Re: maf

MACH1nTTcoupe said:
Mohd put down about 64x on a single MAF about 3 weeks ago
Actually, that number was recently bumped to 685! From Mohd's post on the MKIV list: "Darin, I recently dynoed at 30psi on the blitz injectors, it put down 685 rwhp & 650 tq, injector duty cycle maxed at %72- 74 ( 1 maf + e-manage)."

Mohd's quite a whiz with the e-manage set-up, and his are very strong numbers for any type of set-up, especially considering he uses a .81 A/R housing. He's kind of put the "MAF restriction theory" out to pasture.

Bob G.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
4,400 Posts
Eh, I obviously don't know nearly as much as he does, and it's awesome what hes doing. But are you telling me that if he removed the MAF he wouldnt see a power gain? I have a hard time believing that.
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #12 · (Edited)
Re: Re: maf

BobG said:
Actually, that number was recently bumped to 685! From Mohd's post on the MKIV list: "Darin, I recently dynoed at 30psi on the blitz injectors, it put down 685 rwhp & 650 tq, injector duty cycle maxed at %72- 74 ( 1 maf + e-manage)."

Mohd's quite a whiz with the e-manage set-up, and his are very strong numbers for any type of set-up, especially considering he uses a .81 A/R housing. He's kind of put the "MAF restriction theory" out to pasture.

Bob G.
Not so much theory IMO; almost any high HP vehicle that started out MAF has gone to speed density, been proven time and time again. It's a restriction in the intake, plain and simple. Sure, you can make a lot of power on a MAF, Turbobuick guys have gone 8's on their stock one, but if all out power is your goal, removing that restriction should be a major goal. Also, most MAF's max out at about 500-600hp, losing resolution and control of fuel & timing isn't such a good idea.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
532 Posts
Lagtime said:
You're mistaken. Single MAF, E-manage w/pressure sensor.
thanks, i stand corrected. those are pretty amazing numbers thru the stock maf. why is he so secret about it, seems this is a better and much cheaper alternative to the vpc and aem set up. any dyno charts or info on his setup.

kev
"hopefully going for 6xx hp the alternative way"
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,109 Posts
aznsupra said:
thanks, i stand corrected. those are pretty amazing numbers thru the stock maf. why is he so secret about it, seems this is a better and much cheaper alternative to the vpc and aem set up. any dyno charts or info on his setup.

kev
"hopefully going for 6xx hp the alternative way"
Look 7 posts up, under my name
 

·
Old School
Joined
·
4,108 Posts
aznsupra said:
thanks, i stand corrected. those are pretty amazing numbers thru the stock maf. why is he so secret about it, seems this is a better and much cheaper alternative to the vpc and aem set up. any dyno charts or info on his setup.

kev
"hopefully going for 6xx hp the alternative way"
No secrets:

http://www.mohdparts.com/supra/index.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
136 Posts
LYTLdiablo said:
Eh, I obviously don't know nearly as much as he does, and it's awesome what hes doing. But are you telling me that if he removed the MAF he wouldnt see a power gain? I have a hard time believing that.
You may be correct, however, I’m not sure anyone believes that to be a sure fact any longer

For proof, check out the Supra dyno numbers on Steve Vache's website. Mohd has stronger numbers than any of comparably equipped cars that are running either a VPC or AEM.

It's been an interesting progression the past couple of years, compared to "in stone" beliefs from only five or six years ago: First there was the “MAF restriction above 500 WHP”, then came the “log manifold restriction above 500WHP”, then the “HKS Type S restriction above 500 WHP”. Amazingly, Mohd was using all the above equipment, yet he hit 685.

Sure there will be a ceiling (and Mohd thinks he's currently in that range at 685), but considering not many (if any) Supras running stock cams and the T04R/.81 combo have ever equaled his numbers, I personally don't believe there would be much of an improvement (if any) by doing away with the MAF.

Bob G.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
136 Posts
Re: Re: Re: maf

smeagol said:
Not so much theory IMO; almost any high HP vehicle that started out MAF has gone to speed density, been proven time and time again. It's a restriction in the intake, plain and simple. Sure, you can make a lot of power on a MAF, Turbobuick guys have gone 8's on their stock one, but if all out power is your goal, removing that restriction should be a major goal. Also, most MAF's max out at about 500-600hp, losing resolution and control of fuel & timing isn't such a good idea.
Of course Brian, you are correct in that our MAF will have a max point (see my last post). I should have been clearer, and stated that the number isn't 500 WHP as once imagined.

As I mentioned in my last post, Mohd believes he's bumped up against the upper limit at 685, but his number is substantially higher than the limit once held as "fact".

Bob G.
 

·
Old School
Joined
·
4,108 Posts
Re: Re: Re: maf

smeagol said:
Also, most MAF's max out at about 500-600hp, losing resolution and control of fuel & timing isn't such a good idea.
E-manage adds a MAP sensor to meter fuel after the MAF voltage is max'd out.

If you don't want/need a raised rev limiter the e-manage + stock MAF + e-manage MAP sensor works very well.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,054 Posts
I hope to go single in 04 (thinking Induction Motorsport). A small single because driveability and good throttle modulation is a primary concern in that my focus is DE track events. So 480 to 500 rwhp with good powerband and torque is the ticket. I would think (and hope) that with the stock ecu and maf on a small single reliability will be pretty good. Less crap to monkey with and yes while some people really love to tinker, the more complicated the more likely things will go wrong. When I have $350 to $500 plopped down to run on a track having "issues" on track days is a real bummer that I want to avoid. My idea of fun is not being under my car on hot paddock asphalt while hearing everbody else out there hauling ass. So that would at least be one good reason in my opinion.
Barry H.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top