FW: MAF Upgrad

[lkurek at smtpgate.anl.gov]

     Now this is a cool idea!
     
     I could get an elbow (tee) fabricated that has one MAF going off to 
     the left, and another to the right, with dual K&N's hanging off either 
     side. Sure would look nice and run much better....
     
     Now, how would we go about building this "interface" box? I would 
     assume all it would take is some circuit to do a simple averaging of 
     the MAF sensor output (assuming it is a rising voltage type circuit). 
     If it was a wave output, wouldn't you have to synchronize and add the 
     two frequencies together to generate a sum?
     
     Just wondering....
     
     TTYL!
     
     Larry Kurek


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: FW: MAF Upgrad
Author:  <diy_efi at efi332.eng.ohio-state.edu> at Internet
Date:    2/23/98 1:33 PM


     
How about running two MAF sensors in parallel?
I'm sure you'd need some kind of happy box to interface the two 
and send out an integrated signal.  If there were enough interest, 
this could be a source of income for somebody ...
     
 Dave
     
 ----------
From:  Peter Fenske
Sent:  Monday, February 23, 1998 4:42 AM 
To:  diy_efi at efi332.eng.ohio-state.edu 
Subject:  Re: MAF Upgrad
     
Hi Larry
     
I have looked at using the LT1 maf on my 86 MAF. 
The LT1 is FM vs the 86 Bosch analog.
     
Several people have used the Porsch Mafs bigger but mucho dollaro 
And it is just a small matter to modify correction a wee bit.
     
The LT1 FM is possible since the V8 TPI code has an appendage 
left over from the V6 FM maf. Most of the freq handling code 
is there. The tables would have to change a bit.
     
However with the 89 with Vats there is a wee problem. 
The Vats freq measuring pin is used by the V6 to measure
maf frequency. So you would lose your Vats a terrible thing.
     
Anyways the software is quite a mess. Just saying it could be 
done..
     
And MAP ain't too bad.
     
In addition there is provision for N-alpha in the code 
Ie rpm and tps. This is the backup code section
for the Maf
     
later:peter
     
>
>      MAF is a better system theoretically than a MAP system. The reason   
for
>      this is that you are MEASURING airflow/density rather than   
calculating
>      it. In practice, a MAF system is harder to package and there is an   
     
>      inverse relationship between peak airflow potential of the MAF and   
its
>      accuracy. The stock GM 3" sensor (i.e. 85-89 TPI) is fairly   
inadequate
>      for a healthy motor (325+hp)...it just won't flow enough air. If I   
     
>      could somehow get a late model 3.5" MAF to work with my 89
>      harness/computer....that would probably be best...but I have no   
clue
>      if/whether this would work.
>
>      TTYL!
>
>      Larry Kurek
>