a MAF too small

CSH-HQ nacelp at jvlnet.com
Sat Jul 24 16:59:48 GMT 1999


Can I ask why not use MAP??.
Bruce


>I don't think the Ford MAF is the same. Best Products (Pro Flow), who makes
>most of the big Ford aftermarket MAFs, sells a MAF for the 1986-1989 GM
>applications. It uses one of their 75 to 80 mm "bullet" MAFs and an adapter
>box to convert the signals. I am not sure what the box does exactly (didn't
>take it apart etc.). You will also set a burn off circuit code with this
>because the Fords don't use a burn off cycle.
>
>We have tried installing one (of the Pro Flow MAFs) on a heavily modified
>420 CID twin turbo Corvette but have not been able to get it to work yet.
>We were also using one of their controller boxes (to modify the MAF signal)
>and a MAF calibrated to half scale (with the injector cal set to 25
>lbs/hour but 50 lb/hr injectors installed in the vehicle).
>
>Jason
>
>
>At 01:26 PM 7/23/99 -0500, you wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> The 1986 to 1989 Corvette, Camaro and Firebird use a Bosch MAF sensor that
>>> is a 0 to 5 Vdc sensor not a frequency type sensor (like that used on the
>>> 1994 and newer Corvette, Camaro and Firebird).
>>>
>>
>>If that's the case, then that sounds just like the sensor used on the
>>mustangs, which is a bridge type sensor, and if memory serves, is made by
>>bosch as well.  I _know_ that the two sensors are not identical (I had an 89
>>mustang and currently own an 89 vette), but if the connectors can be adapted,
>>that may be the best way to go, i.e. switching to a ford maf meter... the
>>housings are both cylindrical, and the connector side on both can be faced in
>>any direction.  I would also bet that the response curves are very close to
>>one another, so basically all you have to do is call jegs or summit and get a
>>large ford maf (75-80mm) with the right calibration tube for your injectors;
>>splice in the right connector, and voila!  Smooth idle and no peaking values,
>>and the computer doesn't have to be reprogrammed.  This works very well on
>>fords, no reason why it shouldn't work on gm ecm's.
>>
>>Daniel
>> 
>




More information about the Gmecm mailing list