Hello!

[andy quaas]

Its seems that the concept of MAF is better.  The problems include MAF
sensor restrictions and less available tuning params.

I have a 7730 that would work well for me.  Maybe you should look into
using a 7730/MAP with a 7749 prom?  I like that idea because there is a
real nice prom editing program already out there (that doesn't cost
$3000).  The 749 code has allownaces for turbos, too, but i don't know
how all that turbo stuff works (knight rider had turbo boost, right?).

Andy

--- Frederic Breitwieser <frederic.breitwieser at xephic.dynip.com> wrote:
> > Yes... Used from '86 to '89 (I have one for my '89
> TPI).
> 
> Okay ;)
> 
> > Curious... The 165 is a MAF based ECM. Yet, you'll
> be using big cubes.
> > Would it not be better to use a 730 ECM and start
> with the 90-92 TPI MAP
> > tuning? If you're really planning on pumping air,
> you'll likely max out
> > a '86-'89 MAF sensor pretty quickly...
> 
> For my engine, 431 stroked cubes and 10lbs boost max,
> I was
> hoping it was okay.  I still don't "get" which is
> better,
> MAP or MAF for my boosted application.  Its going to
> start
> off N/A until its tuned and running right, then
> upgraded to
> turbocharging.  Actually, its because I need the
> truck so
> I'm going to stage things to make tuning and
> troubleshooting
> easier.
> 
> I'm still struggling with the MAF/MAP decision.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Frederic Breitwieser
> Bridgeport, CT 06606
> 
> http://www.xephic.dynip.com
> 1993 Superchaged Lincoln Continental
> 1989 500cid Turbocharged HWMMV
> 1975 Dodge D200 Club Cab (soon to be twin turbo 440)
> 2000 Buick GTP (twin turbo V6)
> 

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com