Mass air flow

So after all of this I pose this question, does my 93 Mark8 have an air temparature sensor? If so is it possible it may suffer from heat soak? if so a relocation of this sensor to just behind the MAF would tell the computor it is reading denser air hence more fuel added. (sorry, this is a Harley trick. I'm just sayin')
 
Yes your car has a temp sensor. It is already located after the maf in the intake tube. The sensor will not be affected by some sort of heat soak. It is suppose to read the temp. If it works fine leave it alone. It is very important for the ecu.
 
kustomizingkid said:
You need to understand 2 things... an engine has an ability to pull in xx amounts of air... what mods like cams/exhuast/etc do is increase the efficiency of the motor using xx amounts of air...

The only mods that increase the amount of air that can go into the engine is boring and stroking... aka increasing displacement... Or if you run the engine up to a much higher rpm.

So yes if you built a 5.0+L 4v and revved it to the moon you might need a bigger maf... but no 4.6 4v needs a bigger maf.

Food for thought: My Mark pulls a MAX of about .850's load.... my Vic can pull .900's or so... that being said the Vic is using more of the maf's resolution which is a good thing... I would love to see my load numbers peaking at .950-.980... that would be awesome...
Click to expand...

Engines have this thing called Volumetric Efficiency (VE) There is another way to to get more air into the engine....Porting the heads for one and of course there is forced air induction, (turbo, supercharger)
 
FLTRX said:
Engines have this thing called Volumetric Efficiency (VE) There is another way to to get more air into the engine....Porting the heads for one and of course there is forced air induction, (turbo, supercharger)
Click to expand...

In my first two sentences I mention VE... and porting doesn't increase the amount of air the combustion chamber can hold, it increases VE...

Also you mention moving the IAT to get more fuel... this is an absolute hack way to get more, ummm, power?

If you looked at the Marks base fuel table you would realize that it needs less fuel, EVERYWHERE...
 
kustomizingkid said:
If you looked at the Marks base fuel table you would realize that it needs less fuel, EVERYWHERE...
Click to expand...


understatment of the century, unless you lke a 9.6:1 or a 10:1 AF.

Which might be fine for a 150 shot of nitrous or a 5-7PSI blower, but is too damned "fat for a NA car" for damned sure.

*shakes head*

Just say NO to uber-rich fuel tables.
 
kustomizingkid said:
In my first two sentences I mention VE... and porting doesn't increase the amount of air the combustion chamber can hold, it increases VE...

Also you mention moving the IAT to get more fuel... this is an absolute hack way to get more, ummm, power?

If you looked at the Marks base fuel table you would realize that it needs less fuel, EVERYWHERE...
Click to expand...

True story, it will increase how much air fills the cylinder..VE......If I had a fuel table I would look at it. What is wrong with hack? If it works I see no problem. There are no rules that state u must do things according to whom or whoever..........So tell me great one, how then and by what rule do I lean out the fuel table EVERYWHERE?
 
FLTRX said:
True story, it will increase how much air fills the cylinder..VE......If I had a fuel table I would look at it. What is wrong with hack? If it works I see no problem. There are no rules that state u must do things according to whom or whoever..........So tell me great one, how then and by what rule do I lean out the fuel table EVERYWHERE?
Click to expand...

How, with a proper tune, and the rules.... they are well established from years and years of combustion engine research...

Here is the stock fuel table for a 98...

0.89844 0.89844 0.89844 0.89844 0.84375 0.84375 0.82031 0.82031 0.75000 0.75000
0.89844 0.89844 0.89844 0.89844 0.89844 0.85156 0.85156 0.85156 0.75000 0.75000
0.92188 0.92188 0.92188 0.92188 0.89844 0.89844 0.89844 0.89844 0.78125 0.77344
0.95313 0.95313 0.95313 0.95313 0.95313 0.95313 0.95313 0.95313 0.71875 0.71875
0.92188 0.92188 0.95313 0.96094 0.96094 0.96094 0.96094 0.96094 0.85156 0.75000
0.92188 0.92188 0.95313 0.99219 0.99219 0.99219 0.99219 0.85156 0.85156 0.75000
1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 0.89844 0.85156 0.85156 0.75000
1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 0.89844 0.85156 0.85156 0.75000

This thing is pig rich...
 
By the way, mine is a 93 Mark 8. Do the fuel tables run about the same? How then do you lean out the table if it rich?
 
When you have no up here who can tune it....By a chip for an obdI? Which chip do you recommend?
 
FLTRX said:
By the way, mine is a 93 Mark 8. Do the fuel tables run about the same?
Click to expand...

not exactly the same, but very close... and still very very fat.

I used the sct proracer software and chip and chip burner for my 95 obd1 mark 8.

for the ford platform its the best solution available...and has the best support for the ford pcm.

IF i were tuning my 95 today and not 5 years ago, I would go with the moates quarterhorse solution because it offers datialogging for obd1.

but dont think Moates is gonna be a "cookie cutter solution" it's gonna require alot of knowledge to pull it off.

if I were just beginning in tuning I'd stick with the SCT stuff.
 
FLTRX; said:
573609 Which chip do you recommend?
Click to expand...

sct 6600 switch chip, holds 4 tunes switchable on the fly with the optional 25.00 switch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 204 (members: 0, guests: 204)
Back
Top