VZ MAF vs MAF-less Edit.

[alexcs]

Hey dudes.

Im considering getting an edit, and was leaning towards mafless, but a couple of things have caught my attention.

Apparently, the MAF in the VZ is quite improved over previous series, so my question is would there be minimal gain in going mafless over maf in a VZ SS, or would it still be worth it?

Has any tuner or similar out there compared a MAF to MAF-less edit on the same VZ car on the same dyno? Probably not, but would be good to know.

A MAF edit would be preferable in terms of waranty and insurance, but not at the expense of moderate power gain if i went MAF-less. Anyway, hopefully someone will know.

Cheers fellas.

[GM-IRON]

I am runing a VZ Maf on my VYII ss ute.
Its got a medium sized cam and my experience with it has been very positive.
I did run Mafless but was never 100% happy with the overall refinement in the tune.
The ute was tuned by 2 respectable tuners but I must be too particular.
The VZ Maf is also bigger than the original one. Its 85mm compared to 75mm on the older ones.
The is the need to do some wiring modifications as this particular Maf incorporated the IAT in the maf instead of runing a separate sensor.
This is only my opinion and I know that the experts will tell you other ways.
Anyway, it suits my purpose and I am not one to follow crowds. I like reaching my own conclusions.
But it might not be suited to your likes.

Cheers,
GM-IRON

[alexcs]

when you talk of refinement, what do you mean exactly?

additionally, are you running a maf tune with the vz maf? what sort of power increase did you find?

[GM-IRON]

Silly me, I just realised that you have a VZ SS ute ence you already got the good Maf.
Its hard to pin point where the lack of refinenment is preciselly.
basically its an all round thing, where I found inconsistancy in my every day driving, sometimes it could be the idle, but mainly I found tht the ute didn't behave the way a modern injected vehicle should.
Like said, I run a medium sized cam and I didn't see any out right power gain by going with the VZ maf, but more to the point, I din't loose power going from malfless to Maf tuned.
Another good thing to come out of it was fuel consumption.

Cheers,
GM-IRON

[alexcs]

its all interesting, i wonder if any tuners or similar had had good results with MAF VZ's

[Uncle Tone]

I didn't see any out right power gain by going with the VZ maf, but more to the point, I din't loose power going from malfless to Maf tuned.
Another good thing to come out of it was fuel consumption.

Cheers,
GM-IRON

Grant (MNR-O) runs a VZ maf and tunes his own car with VCM suite. He runs high twelves on the quarter, and makes around 230rwkw by memory, unopened.

I run a maf as well (a ported maf, not a VZ spec) and the flow rates are about the same. Still a restriction, though. The concensus as far as I have heard is that the VZ maf costs you about 5 rwkw at the top end, but as a trade off it measures the air going in much more accurately than in Speed density mode, so improvements in economy, idling and general driveability abound. Worth 5 rwkw as far as I'm concerned.

[Wonky]

I have my car (VZ SS) booked in for maf edit next week. When I was emailing a few places around my area for prices and other info (saying I was pretty sure I only wanted a maf edit) one well known and respected tuner told me not to go for mafless unless you had cam/head changes. He said the relatively minor increase in power was offset by potential difficulties in smoothness and increased fuel consumption. (I hope I have correctly paraphrased the gist of what he said - don't have access to that email at the moment.)

[cyal8r]

Have a look at www.ls1.com.au they claim 243.3rwkw for a maf tune and 258rwkw for a mafless tune both on stock VZ SS I know witch one I'd be choosing.

[Ricko]

If you have done a search you will realise that most here will say a maf tune is for those who can't tune very well, but as someone who doesn't tune i can't really comment on that.

What i do know is i've had both in my car (from the same tuner) and my MAFLESS tune has 20rwkw more power (with the advantage of an OTRCAI) and far better throttle response.

Fuel economy, idle, and general driveability all remain the same.

[Bully]

I got a maf tune done by the ls1edit.com.au boys (thanks tuna & doughy) on my vyII clubsport with the only mod being cat back exhaust. What can I say, 248 rwkw, much much smoother shifts (its an auto), heaps improved driveability & economy. The reasoning for me going with a maf tune was similar to your saga, the mrs was paranoid about voiding our warranty, explained this to martin & he came up with the goods for us.
Also, I dont think insurance companies discriminate between mafless or maf tuned cars, I would reccomend getting it listed on your policy as these companies will stop at nothing to get out of paying a claim, it didnt add any extra to my insurance policies but there are heaps of other threads about insurance.
Good luck whichever way you do go

Greg

[facts]

Hey dudes.

Im considering getting an edit, and was leaning towards mafless, but a couple of things have caught my attention.

Apparently, the MAF in the VZ is quite improved over previous series, so my question is would there be minimal gain in going mafless over maf in a VZ SS, or would it still be worth it?

Has any tuner or similar out there compared a MAF to MAF-less edit on the same VZ car on the same dyno? Probably not, but would be good to know.

A MAF edit would be preferable in terms of waranty and insurance, but not at the expense of moderate power gain if i went MAF-less. Anyway, hopefully someone will know.

Cheers fellas.
I know of two VZ utes that have been tuned Maffless from APS they were close to 250KWRW due to the internals of VZ engines are completly different and that was stock headers.

[alexcs]

id love for anyone to verify changes to the engine over VY models, but i really cant see it. the adelaide dynos seem very happy, and anywhere respectable in sydney is dynoing vz ss utes at about the same as vy's, so really i doubt there been much change apart form a computer tickle for 5fwkw

[SV8VY]

I have the Vy and had a maff tune for quite a while and just did a maffless.
I went to WSID last Wed and got the same times I did with the maffles tune. (to the tenth!)
Top speed is still the same also.
I did notice though that when the revs are up there it seems to spin more in second at the strip so I bought some drag radials and will go out again next Wed to see if there is any diference.On the street it seems to lack a little power at start off but when it reaches the power curve it steps out sideways :)
Fuel consumption seems a little better also.

[alexcs]

who did you get it done with?

ive been hearing some great things about dicks real time mafless, i wonder if anyone with a VZ LS1 has paid a visit to Dicks yet?

let me know.

[facts]

id love for anyone to verify changes to the engine over VY models, but i really cant see it. the adelaide dynos seem very happy, and anywhere respectable in sydney is dynoing vz ss utes at about the same as vy's, so really i doubt there been much change apart form a computer tickle for 5fwkw
APS are about the only work shop that has to VZ engines apart and on there benches I seen one big difference fully floating pistons and rods standard.

[alexcs]

what does that mean in stupid peoples terms :P

[SV8VY]

who did you get it done with?

ive been hearing some great things about dicks real time mafless, i wonder if anyone with a VZ LS1 has paid a visit to Dicks yet?

let me know.
Mine was done at C&V.
I have noticed shifting has more kick to them and chirps in 3rd at the strip where it didnt do that before also :)
I have to say though I must be fair with myself as I have changed the suspention for circuit racing instead of drags since I went out last...so the set up is probably too hard for the strip.
In my opinion Con does a fantastic job both maffless and with maff.
You just tell him what you want and he will tell you exactly what to expect with the mods you have done or are doing.

[Ken]

I am runing a VZ Maf on my VYII ss ute ...snip... Its 85mm compared to 75mm on the older ones.
The is the need to do some wiring modifications as this particular Maf incorporated the IAT in the maf instead of runing a separate sensor.
...snip GM-IRON

We now have a plug-in patch loom that allows a 85mm VZ MAF to be used on a pre-VZ vehicle without any wire-snipping, and uses the integrated IAT sensor ... the only thing then required is a change of the MAF frequency table in the tune.
Patch loom = $66, complete kit ~$400.
:)

[facts]

We now have a plug-in patch loom that allows a 85mm VZ MAF to be used on a pre-VZ vehicle without any wire-snipping, and uses the integrated IAT sensor ... the only thing then required is a change of the MAF frequency table in the tune.
Patch loom = $66, complete kit ~$400.
:)
APS have the Maff kit for $330. inc with no frequency change required. :D

[VooDoo]

APS are about the only work shop that has to VZ engines apart and on there benches I seen one big difference fully floating pistons and rods standard.

Actually quite a few workshops have had VZ's apart. Not to mention tuning them without a strapon chip. You dont need to push the APS barrow so hard mate. They were sponsors here till recently and your pimping them isnt doing them any favours, if they want coverage maybe they can look at sponsorship again. Go look through your last posts. Most are pimping APS in some way. Maybe your just Peter come back under a different name.

[facts]

Actually quite a few workshops have had VZ's apart. Not to mention tuning them without a strapon chip. You dont need to push the APS barrow so hard mate. They were sponsors here till recently and your pimping them isnt doing them any favours, if they want coverage maybe they can look at sponsorship again. Go look through your last posts. Most are pimping APS in some way. Maybe your just Peter come back under a different name.
Not Air Power Systems, APS. They may be come sponsors. Strapon hay some one needs some loven Barrow! :lol:

[Gareth@Willall]

Actually quite a few workshops have had VZ's apart. Not to mention tuning them without a strapon chip. You dont need to push the APS barrow so hard mate. They were sponsors here till recently and your pimping them isnt doing them any favours, if they want coverage maybe they can look at sponsorship again. Go look through your last posts. Most are pimping APS in some way. Maybe your just Peter come back under a different name.

I think the APS he is refering too are affiliated with G&D in someway. (notice I said I THINK ;) ) They had a cam and H/C ute at the Nats and the logo is not the same as Air Power Systems. Must admit its a good way of confusing people :rolleyes:

Maybe in future 'Facts' should refer to them with there non abbreviated name ;)

[VooDoo]

Doesnt matter which one, he pimps em with every breath. If they were a sponsor i wouldnt mind so much but making big claims in threads with no proof and pimping a non-sponsor poor form on any forum.

[MNR-0]

Either way, the VZ MAF is a worthwhile upgrade for a VY or earlier. They work exceptionally well as proven by my last 12.83s pass at Calder, with air filter. The VZ MAF is not a serious enough restriction at bolt-on levels. The only reason I can see for MAFless is the OTRCAI.

[VZSS350]

who did you get it done with?

ive been hearing some great things about dicks real time mafless, i wonder if anyone with a VZ LS1 has paid a visit to Dicks yet?

let me know.

Rung Dicks last week and he is still waiting for some chips from the States which should be here any day now. These will allow him to tune the VZ using real time. I didn't ask about Maf v's Mafless with the VZ, thought I'd give him time to sort it out once he starts tuning a few VZ's.

Cheers

[Ken]

APS have the Maff kit for $330. inc with no frequency change required. :D

Now that's a pretty good trick ... on two levels ...

1 - Unless the kit has some extra electronic wizardry included, it is hard to understand how an increase in air-flow can be implemented without editing the tune ... :confused:

2 - The Holden dealer price for the genuine components (MAF sensor, air-box adaptor, clamps, intake duct) adds up to more than $330 inc, and the patch lead is not cheap to make. Perhaps APS are using an alternative to the genuine Holden components? :eek:

:driving:

[RIDE:42]

Doesnt matter which one, he pimps em with every breath. If they were a sponsor i wouldnt mind so much but making big claims in threads with no proof and pimping a non-sponsor poor form on any forum.

sic him voodoo :lol:
goodboy :D

[MNR-0]

Now that's a pretty good trick ... on two levels ...

1 - Unless the kit has some extra electronic wizardry included, it is hard to understand how an increase in air-flow can be implemented without editing the tune ... :confused:

2 - The Holden dealer price for the genuine components (MAF sensor, air-box adaptor, clamps, intake duct) adds up to more than $330 inc, and the patch lead is not cheap to make. Perhaps APS are using an alternative to the genuine Holden components? :eek:

:driving:
I have seen the Harrop VZ conversion kit and it looks more factory than factory. Quality stuff.

Now I would double check the APS kit before buying. It must be a MAF with a KNOWN MAF cailibration. The VZ is KNOWN. Unless you recalibrate the MAF you are wasting time and money. It could be an SLP 85mm or something similar. Whatever it is, make sure you are supplied a KNOWN MAF cal.

[alexcs]

Rung Dicks last week and he is still waiting for some chips from the States which should be here any day now. These will allow him to tune the VZ using real time. I didn't ask about Maf v's Mafless with the VZ, thought I'd give him time to sort it out once he starts tuning a few VZ's.

Cheers

well id be happy to be the guinea pig for a realtime vz mafless tune.

(ie: GIVE ME A DISCOUNT!! :))

[Bully]

Guys dont forget that the GTS is MAF-less from the factory. Both of my cars have maf tunes but all the research I have read is that you get alot more response & better driveability from a mafless tune. But I am no tuner, so really you would need to speak to some of the pros to get a definite answer.

[Martin_D]

Who would spend money upgrading their MAF? This is a concept that would have to win some kind of Darwin award for backwards thinking.
Its 2005, and not one single quick LS1 that I know of retains the bloody thing. The only folks that talk up MAFs are the home tuners that cant get away without them.

[PJK]

Hey dudes.

Im considering getting an edit, and was leaning towards mafless, but a couple of things have caught my attention.

Apparently, the MAF in the VZ is quite improved over previous series, so my question is would there be minimal gain in going mafless over maf in a VZ SS, or would it still be worth it?

Has any tuner or similar out there compared a MAF to MAF-less edit on the same VZ car on the same dyno? Probably not, but would be good to know.

A MAF edit would be preferable in terms of waranty and insurance, but not at the expense of moderate power gain if i went MAF-less. Anyway, hopefully someone will know.

Cheers fellas.


Don't know if you've seen This Article (http://www.carcraft.com/techarticles/24549/) before, but it gives a pretty good unbiased rundown on the differences between MAF & MAF-less. From reading it, I would assume that you SHOULD be able to get a more accurate tune with the MAF in place, providing that it doesn't create a restriction in the intake system, which unfortunately it does.
Therefore if a VZ MAF flows better than a VY, you should be able to come closer to a the performance gain of a MAF-less tune while retaining the MAF

Hope this helps

[alexcs]

it would seem from this thread and countless others, that if the tuner knows what theyre doing, a MAF-less tune would be the way to go even with a better flowing VZ MAF.

Sounds like experience and competence count for a lot in the tuning business, and if I took it to Sams or Dicks or G&V, i would get back a well tuned MAF-less car with more power everywhere.

in terms of warranty, what is the pipe swapping thing you mafless guys do before you take it for a service or warrant claim? I am hopefully going to swap to a more understanding dealer in the near future, but im stuck with the mob at pennant hills who seem to enjoy being arseholes :)

thanks for all the responses.

[facts]

Facts, are you aligned with this APS? If so, who/what are they? Genuine question, just trying to work out who is who. ;) I'm a good customer of theres, I seen there AD in the Street Machine & Street Commodore mag and never looked back.
Maffless tunes you could talk all day every body thinks expert, most bolt on cars don't do any quicker numbers on the track but they do on the dynos (who knows).One thing after a maffless tune just check your fuel economy if its done correct it should be similar.
EFI live has a live tune feature that maps the fuel table spot on at all throtle positions naturaly asporated or forced induction and APS Frankston & Peter STAR are the only ones that I know have that program.:D

[BlueVZSS]

Who would spend money upgrading their MAF? This is a concept that would have to win some kind of Darwin award for backwards thinking.
Its 2005, and not one single quick LS1 that I know of retains the bloody thing. The only folks that talk up MAFs are the home tuners that cant get away without them.

Plenty of quick ones in the US with MAF in place aren't there?

[Martin_D]

Plenty of quick ones in the US with MAF in place aren't there?

Yep, there are even plenty quicker in the US without the MAF now too. Glenn must have told his mate in America that mafless is the way to go, and now most of the better US tuning houses are tuning this way.

[BlueVZSS]

Yep, there are even plenty quicker in the US without the MAF now too. Glenn must have told his mate in America that mafless is the way to go, and now most of the better US tuning houses are tuning this way.

Seems to be one thing that the Yanks have picked up from us. It seems that GM still believe in the MAF though.....new MAF for VZ....do they get the Darwin Award for 2004/5? :confused:

[Martin_D]

If Holden were an 'end user' and spent their own money upgrading to a bigger MAF....then sure they would. Other than that, whats your point?
Dont tell me, you are considering upgrading from a VZ MAF to a plug in VZ MAF kit and I have hurt your feelings?

[BlueVZSS]

If Holden were an 'end user' and spent their own money upgrading to a bigger MAF....then sure they would. Other than that, whats your point?
Dont tell me, you are considering upgrading from a VZ MAF to a plug in VZ MAF kit and I have hurt your feelings?

Not even vaguely contemplating upgrading the MAF, just tossing up whether to keep it or not. Less hasles for a number of obvious reasons if it is in there. I would be happy with the sort of figures that you are getting with a MAF tune. Don't worry, you haven't hurt my feelings, I've got a hide like a Rhino so you are unlikely to upset me.

[Martin_D]

Hey, fair enough, your car, your choice!

[VooDoo]

I'm a good customer of theres, I seen there AD in the Street Machine & Street Commodore mag and never looked back.
Maffless tunes you could talk all day every body thinks expert, most bolt on cars don't do any quicker numbers on the track but they do on the dynos (who knows).One thing after a maffless tune just check your fuel economy if its done correct it should be similar.
EFI live has a live tune feature that maps the fuel table spot on at all throtle positions naturaly asporated or forced induction and APS Frankston & Peter STAR are the only ones that I know have that program.:D


ROFL.

The fact they sell it commercially must mean nobody has bought it except APS huh. Get a grip. EFI Live is in a lot more places that you could know. There is more to tuning than "live tunes" and a lot more ppl with that ability these days.

For someone that thought an ad in a $7 magazine looked pretty, you sure think your an expert these days. How many times have you been to the track? You have run both mafless and MAF tunes to compare?? How many cars did you use to base that statement on? From that fountain of knowledge you seem to have you must have been a member for what 3-4 minutes??

Go do some reading and learn something before making up BS. There is enough to keep you occupied for months and you will actually learn something

[APS Fston]

ROFL.

The fact they sell it commercially must mean nobody has bought it except APS huh. Get a grip. EFI Live is in a lot more places that you could know. There is more to tuning than "live tunes" and a lot more ppl with that ability these days.

For someone that thought an ad in a $7 magazine looked pretty, you sure think your an expert these days. How many times have you been to the track? You have run both mafless and MAF tunes to compare?? How many cars did you use to base that statement on? From that fountain of knowledge you seem to have you must have been a member for what 3-4 minutes??

Go do some reading and learn something before making up BS. There is enough to keep you occupied for months and you will actually learn something

Thanx Voodoo for your kind words. Im one of the directors at APS Service Centre Frankston, and I am considering becoming a sponsor of LS1.com .

Thanx facts for speaking highly of us. Now that I am a member, I can speak for myself and on behalf of APS. We look forward to racing against other workshop and individuals . Remember boys this should be good fun, and not turn into a pack of bitching women. :box:

PS. Buy the tune tool yourself if you think you're an expert!

[motomk]

As GarethSS has indicated, this might not be the same APS that some of you have had discussions with.
Yes, they have the same name but I think you will find they are in a different location. Perhaps APS Fston can clear that up???
Please keep the thread civil otherwise it will be padlocks at forty paces.

[ratter]

I work around the corner from the boys at APS in Frankston and have seen first hand some of the results they have been getting with and without the MAF
If it was of no good, why do think GM would put it there in the first place? just to waste a bit of money?
By tuning it with the Maf in place, you may not get any more top end horsepower, but it should be more driveable through out the rev range and get better fuel economy. Now I know most here arn't chasing economy, but who would knock back good power and some sort of economy rather than good power and sh#t economy.
I think some tuners tend to delete it from the tune because it can throw in more variables/tables into the tune and they either carn't work around it or tend not to to make tuning quicker.
Also keeping the MAF in place is 1 less possible problem that can be avoided if you get pulled over by the cops, if they see the MAF is gone, they will know it has been tuned and it would probably not meet EPA requirements.

APS only had 2 trips to the drags so far, Micks ute has a cam etc, he drove it into the 11's the first time he had ever driven down the strip, not just first trip in this car, but his first ever pass.
His brother Rob has a unopened ute which run 12.8's the tuning weekend before the LS1 nationals and ran 12.1's at the nationals complete with all body panels, passenger seat etc, the only difference from street useage was open pipes and different tyres. I'm sure it may have gone into the 11's if some of the extra weight was taken out like some others had done to get their figures.

Not bad for any newcomer

APS have both LS1 edit and EFI live programmes to work with and I beleive are getting better results on MAF tunes and Fly by wire throttles using the EFI live.

As I said earlier in the post, I do not work with them but around the corner from them and have seen the results myself on and off the dyno and also down the strip. I think they have done a good job, pretty quickly considering how long it has taken others to get similar results.

If you doubt any of their ability, don't argue on the net, Give Mick a call on
03 9783 8300 and speak to him.

[ratter]

As GarethSS has indicated, this might not be the same APS that some of you have had discussions with.
Yes, they have the same name but I think you will find they are in a different location. Perhaps APS Fston can clear that up???
Please keep the thread civil otherwise it will be padlocks at forty paces.


They are in frankston and not the other APS (air power systems) they operate as APS (Automotive Performance Services) have been in buissness for approx 10 years I think

[VooDoo]

Thanx Voodoo for your kind words. Im one of the directors at APS Service Centre Frankston, and I am considering becoming a sponsor of LS1.com .

Thanx facts for speaking highly of us. Now that I am a member, I can speak for myself and on behalf of APS. We look forward to racing against other workshop and individuals . Remember boys this should be good fun, and not turn into a pack of bitching women. :box:

PS. Buy the tune tool yourself if you think you're an expert!

Welcome to the site APS. I have no probs with ppl using fact. A new member coming on here and posting info and pimping non-sponsors is not the way to win any friends and if anything, will put ppl off that business. Companies that still try and sell outdated products such as ported/larger mafs, SS Inductions CAI, Unichips and other snake oil products for the LS1 generally dont last long here. The membership is very educated on the negitive aspects / poor value of these products. Its a good idea for newer members to have a good read here before making claims as they can and will get shot down pretty quickly for posting BS.

Just because someone buys a new tool doesnt mean they become an expert with it. I dont claim to be an expert (unlike Facts), but i do know what many others have done, what has worked and what doesnt and how other ppl have been talked into buying products that dont improve performance but do lighten their wallets.

(Yes i realise your not the same company as Air Power Systems).

[APS Fston]

Thanks Voodoo, you seem to know it all.With members like you why would any bodie want to be sponsors of the forum.Well I spoke today of being a sponsor,thanks for saving my money. I look forward to spending more time on the dyno and at the track where the BS as you say stops :D

[markone2]

By tuning it with the Maf in place, you may not get any more top end horsepower, but it should be more driveable through out the rev range and get better fuel economy. Now I know most here arn't chasing economy, but who would knock back good power and some sort of economy rather than good power and sh#t economy.
.


How extraordinarily odd…… :confused: Like many others here I have gone from a Maf tune to mafless for two reasons….More Power and increased midrange grunt ( read drivability ), with the improved economy an unexpected bonus from the superior Mafless tune
It becomes quite amusing reading of some participants undying devotion to there Maf tunes without so much as a single drive of a Mafless tuned car…
I could run for hours with this one but I would be wasting my breath…with opinions now coming from participants I suspect do not even own a Gen111… I’ll let the time slip section do the talking…that’s were all BS stops

[alexcs]

Thanks Voodoo, you seem to know it all.With members like you why would any bodie want to be sponsors of the forum.Well I spoke today of being a sponsor,thanks for saving my money. I look forward to spending more time on the dyno and at the track where the BS as you say stops :D


i wonder if these three are the same person?

facts, ratter and this guy. ill let them :box: on and see what happens :)

[ratter]

Not doubting your horsepower or time claims at all, but did the tuner tell you why it makes more power without the MAF?
I assume the Maf tables are all adjustable like any other tables in the programming, so if set up for power, how could it restrict power gains unless it was too small causing a restriction, but then you could run a 90mm MAF.

Surely the more sensors on the motor, the more info the computer can receive to make it as best as possible if tuned correctly. may be you tuner just sticks to the Mafless tunes to make it easier for themselves.

Not trying to sh#t stir, just trying to find the real cause of why some guys choose to tune without the maf

[ratter]

i wonder if these three are the same person?

facts, ratter and this guy. ill let them :box: on and see what happens :)


I don't know who facts is, but I know I'm not APS Fston, but I know the guys there :D

[PJK]

Thanks Voodoo, you seem to know it all.With members like you why would any bodie want to be sponsors of the forum.Well I spoke today of being a sponsor,thanks for saving my money. I look forward to spending more time on the dyno and at the track where the BS as you say stops :D

Jeez Voodoo - looks like your in the Sh1t :D

But I tend to agree with you Voodoo - there are sponsors on this forum that contribute truckloads of free information / advice thereby earning the trust and respect of the forum members, many of which become customers of the sponsors.

APS Fston - your decision to not become a sponsor is your business, however it would seem that it has been influenced by a lively discussion between a long term member and a new member (also customer of yours). If you're going to base your decision on this then that seems a bit narrow minded. Remember that nobody here has been attacking APS, just challenging what Facts has been saying - its just healthy discussion.

[VooDoo]

Im always in the shit PJK.

You need to earn trust not expect everyone to believe whats writen just because someone said it was a "facts". There are some of the best tuners in Australia here already with years of proven results. As a consumer, i have researched, spoken to tuners, read every thread here plus done over 100 runs down the blacktop. I dont profess to know everything but what i do know is the existing sponsors know their stuff. If someone comes on here, sprouting info that is different to what has already been proven and every single post pimps a non-sponsor then im going to say something.

I have no issues with APS in any way. They havent earnt the trust of the members here and as others have found, just because you become a sponsor doesnt guarentee you will gain that level of trust in the future. Runs on the board, proof of ability and accountablity will.

[CarlFST60L]

12.1 upopened with maf, shit, thats pretty impressive :cheers:

thats pretty close to the record

[Bully]

I work around the corner from the boys at APS in Frankston and have seen first hand some of the results they have been getting with and without the MAF
If it was of no good, why do think GM would put it there in the first place? just to waste a bit of money?
By tuning it with the Maf in place, you may not get any more top end horsepower, but it should be more driveable through out the rev range and get better fuel economy. Now I know most here arn't chasing economy, but who would knock back good power and some sort of economy rather than good power and sh#t economy.
I think some tuners tend to delete it from the tune because it can throw in more variables/tables into the tune and they either carn't work around it or tend not to to make tuning quicker.
.

As I stated earlier, if the maf is such a brilliant piece of engineering excellence, then why the hell does HSV's flagship performer, the GTS, use a MAFless tune???
I'm no expert & dont make out to be, but when guys that are as well respected as Street Tuna (who has tuned my clubsport & will be doing a mafless tune on my ss in the next few weeks) says something, you should take notice.

[PJK]

From what I understand, when the MAF is removed, the airflow information provided by the MAF is instead supplied by sets of values in tables in the ECU. These values would have to be calculated/estimated by the tuner, which is where their knowlege comes in to play.
What I don't understand is how can values that are calculated/estimated by the tuner be better than actual values supplied by the MAF meter.
Is this because the MAF supplies innacurate data or what? Just trying to understand.

[Uncle Tone]

What I don't understand is how can values that are calculated/estimated by the tuner be better than actual values supplied by the MAF meter.
Is this because the MAF supplies innacurate data or what? Just trying to understand.

There are heaps of people willing to say that mafless makes more power, porting a maf or replacing it with an 85mm maf is a waste of money, you get more torque, etc etc, but I'm yet to read a post that can accurately describe exactly how this comes about. Is it purely because of the physical restriction of the maf itself, or something more?

Consider the following:

Standard maf car....gets a maf tune. makes X amout of power.
Same car, gets a mafless tune, but with the maf unplugged, not removed.
Will this engine make more power with the mafless tune in this situation?
If so, why and how?

Just for the record, I don't know. Thats why I'm asking. :D

[RedCV8R]

I'd like to thank PJK, just read the article in your link. My interest in the great MAF vs MAF-less debate is because I am looking at buying "edit" software to have a ago at it myself, I've seen the VE table for GTS (Maf-less) and the table for a similar engine with MAF. I wouldn't even attempt the MAF-less tune without a dyno and lots of time on my hands. Tweaking the MAF tune a little is something I feel comfortable with and will probably be attempting soon.
My thoughts for what they're worth is that a MAF tune is more "forgiving" on the tuner, probably offers better drivability (although a good MAF-less tune may be just as good, maybe better) but for all out performance a good MAF-less tune has got to be better (less intake restriction).

If it sounds like I'm sitting on the fence, it's because I am.

[VFast]

There are heaps of people willing to say that mafless makes more power, porting a maf or replacing it with an 85mm maf is a waste of money, you get more torque, etc etc, but I'm yet to read a post that can accurately describe exactly how this comes about. Is it purely because of the physical restriction of the maf itself, or something more?

Consider the following:

Standard maf car....gets a maf tune. makes X amout of power.
Same car, gets a mafless tune, but with the maf unplugged, not removed.
Will this engine make more power with the mafless tune in this situation?
If so, why and how?...

Good point Uncle Tone, I think everybody would like some clarity on this matter...

[Ricko]

Is'nt there times that the VE tables get the say over the MAF as to air flow calcs etc? and much of these times are at WOT?

http://www.hptuners.com/forum/YaBB.pl?board=gmv8engine;action=display;num=110191 7527

In this thread here Chris at HPTuners gives a good analogy of how the MAF and VE tables work, and goes on to say "The carmaker can be assured that for the majority of cases across wide operating conditions and applications the engine is performing to the standards required. And if optionally backed up by a decent transient model the whole thing can perform even better giving accurate transient contions (again with very little calibration work). ie. transients are short and generally so long as the transient "guess" is close to the mark once steady state returns (usually very quickly) the flowmeter takes over again (with a smoothed blending in and out)."

"again with very little calibration work" really says that car manufacturers put MAF's there in the first place so every car can cop the same basic tune and operate within acceptable limits, but ultimately if you want the best you can get, ditch the thing and go with a good tuner.

[MNR-0]

Lets consider street trim vehicles, where we all spend 99% of our time.
How much of a restriction do you think the air filter is compared to the VZ MAF?

The VZ MAF is a 1.5kPa restriction against a straight pipe according to Delco. How much HP is that worth? 1-2rwkw at best. Now bolt-on an OTRCAI and the restriction becomes less than a std. MAFless tune to the extent of 5-7rwkw on the Dyno

Consider you lose 1kPa per 100m of elevation. Simply travelling to Heathcote from Melbourne will cost you more WOT vacuum than the VZ MAF.

Also consider airflow is restricted by the poorest flowing part. The air filter is more a restriction than the MAF!

For an all out track car you would definately go OTRCAI to minimise any intake restriction, no matter how small.

For 99% of our driving under 3500RPM I dont believe you will feel any benefit of MAFless over VZ MAF. The MAF be more consistent and reliable over varying weather conditions and return better fuel economy as it is more sensitive to barometric pressure variations due to its operating principle.

Drive with an OTRCAI and air filter on the street, and you could lose performance as the air filter is smaller again.

For QTR mile times, its all about TORQUE. Since you make max. TORQUE from 4000-4500 on an LS1 and half the QTR mile is spent accelerating through 1st and half way into 2nd, your mid-range performance is more critical to pulling better ETs than peak HP. Since the differences between street trim VZ MAF and MAFless is insignificant at those RPMs there will be little difference in the ET overall, maybe a tenth.

Proof of this is the fact I run a VZ MAF, have never pulled my air filter and run 12.8-12.9s at 107-109MPH. All this with stock converter and bolt-ons on ordinary pump gas (no power adders). This equals the best performances of any Auto stock converter bolt-on MAFless OTRCAI car.

Peak HP means shit. Torque is everything. You make what you make and your Tune should be configured to maximise torque. The resultant HP is a by-product.

If VZ MAF owners are that worried about MAF vs. MAFless try what the Yanks have been doing for years and borrow your missus pantyhose and re-use your stock paper filter frame to make a drag filter.

[markone2]

[QUOTE=MNR-0]
For QTR mile times, its all about TORQUE. Since you make max. TORQUE from 4000-4500 on an LS1 and half the QTR mile is spent accelerating through 1st and half way into 2nd, your mid-range performance is more critical to pulling better ETs than peak HP.

and your shift points are????...truthfully now ;)

[MNR-0]

[QUOTE=MNR-0]
For QTR mile times, its all about TORQUE. Since you make max. TORQUE from 4000-4500 on an LS1 and half the QTR mile is spent accelerating through 1st and half way into 2nd, your mid-range performance is more critical to pulling better ETs than peak HP.

and your shift points are????...truthfully now ;)
I flog it at the track. I admit it. I dont mean to. :rolleyes:

1st gear is king to good QTR times in an Auto. Hold on to it as long as you can, because no matter how crappy the tune is, it will still beat the torque multiplication in all other gears at any RPM.

So Mark, I thought we were talking about MAFS here. Auto performance is a different topic and one I have always shared with you over a good PM. :D

[Uncle Tone]

The VZ MAF is a 1.5kPa restriction against a straight pipe according to Delco. How much HP is that worth? 1-2rwkw at best. Now bolt-on an OTRCAI and the restriction becomes less than a std. MAFless tune to the extent of 5-7rwkw on the Dyno

Consider you lose 1kPa per 100m of elevation. Simply travelling to Heathcote from Melbourne will cost you more WOT vacuum than the VZ MAF.

Also consider airflow is restricted by the poorest flowing part. The air filter is more a restriction than the MAF!

For an all out track car you would definately go OTRCAI to minimise any intake restriction, no matter how small.
I would love to see the results of a car equipped with OTRCAI and a maf.
Impossible, I suppose.......????


For 99% of our driving under 3500RPM I dont believe you will feel any benefit of MAFless over VZ MAF. The MAF be more consistent and reliable over varying weather conditions and return better fuel economy as it is more sensitive to barometric pressure variations due to its operating principle.

Drive with an OTRCAI and air filter on the street, and you could lose performance as the air filter is smaller again.

For QTR mile times, its all about TORQUE. Since you make max. TORQUE from 4000-4500 on an LS1 and half the QTR mile is spent accelerating through 1st and half way into 2nd, your mid-range performance is more critical to pulling better ETs than peak HP. Since the differences between street trim VZ MAF and MAFless is insignificant at those RPMs there will be little difference in the ET overall, maybe a tenth.

Proof of this is the fact I run a VZ MAF, have never pulled my air filter and run 12.8-12.9s at 107-109MPH. All this with stock converter and bolt-ons on ordinary pump gas (no power adders). This equals the best performances of any Auto stock converter bolt-on MAFless OTRCAI car.



So can we basically say that mafless tuned cars make the same HP and torque as maf tuned cars, if there was no airflow restriction created by the maf?

OR,

Can we say that if the maf was left in place but unplugged, and the car was given a mafless tune, the engine would be producing the same power as it would with a maf tune?

In short, is airflow the only factor that allows mafless tunes to make more power throughout the rev range?

Beautiful post, by the way, Grant. :D

[Nias]

I would love to see the results of a car equipped with OTRCAI and a maf.
Impossible, I suppose.......????


no results yet
http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Nias/p1010223.jpg

[MNR-0]

Ummmm. Nias. I want one. Now. Can you make a mould for the VZ MAF?

[Martin_D]

The MAF be more consistent and reliable over varying weather conditions and return better fuel economy as it is more sensitive to barometric pressure variations due to its operating principle.

Isnt barometric pressure evident as a direct offset to manifold pressure? Or have I been missing something all these years? :D
Easy Tiger!

[ratter]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the manifold opening on the Gen3 only about 75mm? if this is so that would be a bigger restriction than a 85 mm Maf.


If so I can't see how the maf would be a restriction, If you had the 90mm manifold fitted and a 90mm throttle body and required the airflow, i could see the Maf then being a problem, but then you could update to a 90mm Maf.



:D

[SV8VY]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the manifold opening on the Gen3 only about 75mm? if this is so that would be a bigger restriction than a 85 mm Maf.


If so I can't see how the maf would be a restriction, If you had the 90mm manifold fitted and a 90mm throttle body and required the airflow, i could see the Maf then being a problem, but then you could update to a 90mm Maf.



:DThe ristriction is inside the maff where the standard one has a honeycomb insert...at least the Vys anyway.You can port and polish them and remove this for better air flow but it is costly and better to use the $ for a mafless tune.

[APS Fston]

Hey guys, I might have been a bit hasty the other night. Reading the forum, I found the comments very interesting. One thing I have found, is that you need to prove your theories with equipment and at the track. We are fortunate to own a lot of equipment, or have access to equipment, ie, dyno, flow bench, tuning programs, etc, and as such we have been able to prove and improve our own theories. Im not saying we are experts, but like everyone else who's serious about racing, we are striving to raise the bar and be as fast as we can be.

Getting back to MAFless tuning, we all talk about restriction, but we put an 85mm throttle body on a 75mm manifold. Its a fact that MAFless tuning is giving higher RWkW ie, torque through the rev range, and is more beneficial with more engine modifications.
One other major thing to think about with MAFless tuning is a complete operating system change to your computer, which we offer here, and have been testing for the past few weeks since the nationals.
We will be at Calder Park this Friday night, to see the improvements after running a 12.10 with an unopened engine. (bolt on only)

A new operating system isn't your tune file. You will need to talk to your tuner, as I will with my customers.

Regards APS Frankston

[MNR-0]

Isnt barometric pressure evident as a direct offset to manifold pressure? Or have I been missing something all these years? :D
Easy Tiger!
Yeah, it is. But why derive a value when it can be metered directly. From a performance perspective I agree with you. But for part throttle stuff the MAF table delivers much greater resolution than 15-105kPa in 5kPa increments. Actual air density can vary by as much as 2-5g/sec within a 5kPa MAP range.

Being able to respond to these flucutations with more granularity will inevitably result in more precise fuel calculations hence less emissions.

For the benefit of others, this is my understanding of how MAF and MAP metering works:

A Manifold Absolute Pressure Sensor (MAP) Sensor monitors the changes in the intake manifold or vacuum pressure during various engine operating loads and sends a corresponding signal to the automobile’s computer. (source: http://www.kemparts.com/scripts/145.asp)

The MAP reading is not relative to ambient atmospheric pressure (barometric pressure). This information is used to derive the density of the air entering the combustion chamber. In conjunction with intake air temperature (IAT) sensor it is used in a complex formula when calculating the proper air/fuel mixture for the engine, especially at WOT since the system is not in closed-loop at that time.

Absolute pressure in the manifold is relative to a vacuum. Subtract approx 14.5 PSI to get relative pressure. When boost pressure in the manifold is shown as relative to atmospheric pressure, negative values represent partial vacuums in the manifold (which is what you are saying).

Thus, if you observe a MAP of 98kPa, MAFless derives there is less air than 1 atmosphere (101.4kPa or 1 Bar) and so adjusts the AFR accordingly, leaning it off.

Our cars have no way of directly measuring air density except via a MAF. The MAF is a direct map from sensor frequency to grams of air. The denser the air, the greater the MAF frequency of the heater element in the MAF sensor. Without a MAF, the VCM must derive air density based on a stored value for the mass density of air at 1 atmosphere.

Now I think MAFless works OK. It has for decades. But now we have a more accurate way of gauging air density my question is why would we want to go backwards?

If all you are concerned about is going flat out, then MAFless works fine. I question whether you have to remove the MAF unless it is a significant restriction, which it isn't on stock motors. That is the real issue - is it a big enough restriction to worry about. A few kilowatts down the QTR isn't going to amount to much.

Of course, this is within the metering limts of the MAF. Boosted cars have to run MAFless if they run more than 7PSI.

[STATIE]

:rofl:

Yeh - what he said :lol:

Sik-em Home Tuna :teach:

[STATIE]

Just out of interest - there are 93 words in that post of 7 letters or more.
No wonder I dont understand a f@#ken word of it. :lol:

[MNR-0]

Just out of interest - there are 93 words in that post of 7 letters or more.
No wonder I dont understand a f@#ken word of it. :lol:
For the benefit of STATIE:

daaah MAF is roight-on man. me n me mates will run 10s eaaasy wit it. i take u on anytime, anywhere man. muffless is goood too. me Maloo owns Mufless. owns u anytime. me dead sexy, u are crap.

[VX2VESS]

Yeah, it is. But why derive a value when it can be metered directly. From a performance perspective I agree with you. But for part throttle stuff the MAF table delivers much greater resolution than 15-105kPa in 5kPa increments. Actual air density can vary by as much as 2-5g/sec within a 5kPa MAP range.

Being able to respond to these flucutations with more granularity will inevitably result in more precise fuel calculations hence less emissions.

For the benefit of others, this is my understanding of how MAF and MAP metering works:

A Manifold Absolute Pressure Sensor (MAP) Sensor monitors the changes in the intake manifold or vacuum pressure during various engine operating loads and sends a corresponding signal to the automobile’s computer. (source: http://www.kemparts.com/scripts/145.asp)

The MAP reading is not relative to ambient atmospheric pressure (barometric pressure). This information is used to derive the density of the air entering the combustion chamber. In conjunction with intake air temperature (IAT) sensor it is used in a complex formula when calculating the proper air/fuel mixture for the engine, especially at WOT since the system is not in closed-loop at that time.

Absolute pressure in the manifold is relative to a vacuum. Subtract approx 14.5 PSI to get relative pressure. When boost pressure in the manifold is shown as relative to atmospheric pressure, negative values represent partial vacuums in the manifold (which is what you are saying).

Thus, if you observe a MAP of 98kPa, MAFless derives there is less air than 1 atmosphere (101.4kPa or 1 Bar) and so adjusts the AFR accordingly, leaning it off.

Our cars have no way of directly measuring air density except via a MAF. The MAF is a direct map from sensor frequency to grams of air. The denser the air, the greater the MAF frequency of the heater element in the MAF sensor. Without a MAF, the VCM must derive air density based on a stored value for the mass density of air at 1 atmosphere.

Now I think MAFless works OK. It has for decades. But now we have a more accurate way of gauging air density my question is why would we want to go backwards?

If all you are concerned about is going flat out, then MAFless works fine. I question whether you have to remove the MAF unless it is a significant restriction, which it isn't on stock motors. That is the real issue - is it a big enough restriction to worry about. A few kilowatts down the QTR isn't going to amount to much.

Of course, this is within the metering limts of the MAF. Boosted cars have to run MAFless if they run more than 7PSI.

your turn :D

had these old favourites on the subject in years gone by...

http://www.ls1.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=21735&highlight=maf

http://www.ls1.com.au/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=16994&perpage=20&highlight=maf&pagenumber=3

[alexcs]

ok so a few things ive gathered into a sort of ball:

the VZ MAF is 85mm

the gen3 TB is 75mm

any tuner worth his salt can ge tthe same performance out of a bolt on car maf or mafless.

assuming all of these points are true (and please correct if they arent, i need to know!) then i can be reasonably safe in thinking my ss ute with extractors,cats, catback and nothing else will benefit very little from a MAF-less tune over a MAF tune?

[MNR-0]

ok so a few things ive gathered into a sort of ball:

the VZ MAF is 85mm

the gen3 TB is 75mm

any tuner worth his salt can ge tthe same performance out of a bolt on car maf or mafless.

assuming all of these points are true (and please correct if they arent, i need to know!) then i can be reasonably safe in thinking my ss ute with extractors,cats, catback and nothing else will benefit very little from a MAF-less tune over a MAF tune?
Thats what I'm saying. Thats what Sams reported to say. Thats what EFI Dynamics has told me. Thats what CSV has told me. Thats what Autotechnique has told me. Thats what G+D was saying a year ago. Im sure if you ask STATIE he will say the same thing.

But there are others like TUNA and Delco that will disagree. That's what makes this world a fun place to live in. Freedom of choice.

In the end it's your car and your money.

Oh, and the 75mm MAF is a piece of junk. MAFless kills it for performance and responsiveness. 85mm MAF, on the other hand, narrows the gap considerably.

[Delco]

Thats what I'm saying. Thats what Sams reported to say. Thats what EFI Dynamics has told me. Thats what CSV has told me. Thats what Autotechnique has told me. Thats what G+D was saying a year ago. Im sure if you ask STATIE he will say the same thing.

But there are others like TUNA and Delco that will disagree. That's what makes this world a fun place to live in. Freedom of choice.

In the end it's your car and your money.

Oh, and the 75mm MAF is a piece of junk. MAFless kills it for performance and responsiveness. 85mm MAF, on the other hand, narrows the gap considerably.


Wow , dude , dont bring me into that debate , I HAVE ONLY EVER STATED THAT THE STD 75MM MAF IS A RESTRICTION , AND BACK IN THE DAYS WHEN NO CAR WAS FITTED STD WITH A 85MM MAF IT WAS MORE COST EFFECTIVE TO TUNE IT MAFLESS RATHER THAN BUY A 85MM MAF AND THEN TUNE IT.

Back to the subject though , only minimal gains are seen going mafless compared to a 85mm maf , going from a 75mm maf to a mafless tune is guge gains as would be going from a 75mm maf to a 85mm maf. Done lots of those conversions but I still prefer the mafless for the ease of air induction options.

[MNR-0]

Wow , dude , dont bring me into that debate , I HAVE ONLY EVER STATED THAT THE STD 75MM MAF IS A RESTRICTION , AND BACK IN THE DAYS WHEN NO CAR WAS FITTED STD WITH A 85MM MAF IT WAS MORE COST EFFECTIVE TO TUNE IT MAFLESS RATHER THAN BUY A 85MM MAF AND THEN TUNE IT.

Back to the subject though , only minimal gains are seen going mafless compared to a 85mm maf , going from a 75mm maf to a mafless tune is guge gains as would be going from a 75mm maf to a 85mm maf. Done lots of those conversions but I still prefer the mafless for the ease of air induction options.
Thanks Delco for chiming in and clearing that up.

[BLACK 346]

Would going from 75mm maf to 85mm maf require a tune touch up?

[MNR-0]

Would going from 75mm maf to 85mm maf require a tune touch up?
Yes. But no more than a recal of your MAF table, possibly some Dynamic Airflow calcs. and another AFR check. You should drive it around for 5 mins as the MAF drives all tranny/Engine torque calcs..

Its a very safe and innocuous thing to upgrade.

[BLACK 346]

Yes. But no more than a recal of your MAF table, possibly some Dynamic Airflow calcs. and another AFR check. You should drive it around for 5 mins as the MAF drives all tranny/Engine torque calcs..

Its a very safe and innocuous thing to upgrade.

Thanks mate :)

[juzzy]

Welcome to the site APS. I have no probs with ppl using fact. A new member coming on here and posting info and pimping non-sponsors is not the way to win any friends and if anything, will put ppl off that business. Companies that still try and sell outdated products such as ported/larger mafs, SS Inductions CAI, Unichips and other snake oil products for the LS1 generally dont last long here. The membership is very educated on the negitive aspects / poor value of these products. Its a good idea for newer members to have a good read here before making claims as they can and will get shot down pretty quickly for posting BS.

Just because someone buys a new tool doesnt mean they become an expert with it. I dont claim to be an expert (unlike Facts), but i do know what many others have done, what has worked and what doesnt and how other ppl have been talked into buying products that dont improve performance but do lighten their wallets.

(Yes i realise your not the same company as Air Power Systems).


Hey voodoo, look before you leap. You'll find a particular car of their's will run into the 11's on friday night (unopened), these boys DO know what they are talking about and have invested alot of time and money into LS1 development. They are two blokes with a good crew that just want to go fast, as one of the other members said, second time out and they run 12.1. Alarm bells are ringing willie!! Hope LS1.com.au doesn't miss out on a sponsor because of remarks that someone made. They spend alot of time on the dyno, computer and now on the race track to prove how good their package is. They come out of the blue and run numbers like that, they have to be doing something right.
People like you discourage others from making comments :bash: your a fool.

regards Justin

Wanna talk? do it on the track. :box:

Wasn't trying to steal thread. :(

[alexcs]

struth!

maybe you should calm down mate :). it would appear this forum operates on proven track and dyno results, if you guys are genuinely good at what you do and are interested in the LS1 community, then follow the same paths the other sponsors have and show us the results, talk about what you guys do, keep the bs to a minimum, and try to enjoy yourselves :)

[ratter]

Hey APS

What size are the MAFs you guys sell 85 or 90mm?
:D

[VooDoo]

Maybe we should let anyone just come here, pimp non-sponsors in every single post and make any claims they want. I wonder how many sponsers would stay. Their ability was never actually in question. Being pimped all over the forum was.

[ratter]

I thought the idea of a forum was so good and bad news can be shared by fellow members with similar interests.

It started because some guy is happy with their work and wanted to pass the information on so others can have a bit more choice in who they use to do work on their vehicles.
I'm sure if it was all bad, members would want to be warned and know to stay away from them.

I also understand the forum has sponsors which should be the first place for members to call if they are looking for some work, but at the same time they should look after the members with regard to price and quality of work.
I'd be a bit surprissed if the sponsors got upset with somebody else coming along and raising the bar to a new level, most these guys thrive on competition, which is why they are where they are and as respected as they are.

As far as being pimped all over the forum, isn't it only in this thread?

If all the members were to keep a closed mind in regards to what information can be passed along, it may stop the new guys like APS from becoming a sponsor.

Also getting a recommendation from Juzzy, would go a long way to helping other members, as I beleive he is pretty well respected here for what he has acheived.

I'm sure this post has gone far enough off topic and should now getting back to the original topic - to maf or not to maf


:D

[Uncle Tone]

only minimal gains are seen going mafless compared to a 85mm maf , going from a 75mm maf to a mafless tune is guge gains as would be going from a 75mm maf to a 85mm maf.

Delco, would it be safe to assume that if the 75mm maf was left in place, but unplugged, and the car was tuned mafless, that the power output would be the same as a maf tune?

[Delco]

Delco, would it be safe to assume that if the 75mm maf was left in place, but unplugged, and the car was tuned mafless, that the power output would be the same as a maf tune?

looks like you have finally latched onto the theory Uncle , it is the physical air restriction not the method of reading the air that is the problem .

That is why the 85mm maf goes a long way to fixing the problem , ideally a 100mm maf would make the maf vs mafless debate a no brainer.
A engine only needs fuel , air and then have them compressed in the right proportions to make power it doesnt care if it gets the proportions determined by a Maf or Speed density or Alpha N as long as it gets the right amounts of each.

[VXSS346]

Everyone asks, if the maf is 85mm and the TB is only 75mm, how can the maf be a restriction?
This is my unqualified opinion,
If you have a 100mm dia GTS mafless pipe (which is the minimum requirment with mafless, and nessesary for a direct comparison) and stick a 85 mm maf in it, it has to be a restriction does'nt it? Would'nt it slow the air down because it creates turbulance, therefore losing throttle response?
Also, would'nt it be better to have just the 75mm restriction (which is impossible to remove), rather than an 85mm restriction as well (which can be removed)?
Maybe it will only be a small difference, but its still a difference is'nt it?
As I said just my unqualified opinion. Any thoughts?

[alexcs]

yes this is all valid, but each piece has to be aimed at different power levels im asssuming.

if you only have bolt-ons, are the tuners seeing the 85mm vz maf as adequate, wheras a cam etc is requiring mafless to overcome the restriction? at what power range does a mafless start to become a realistic advantage in comparison with a) a 75mm maf and b) a vz 85mm maf?

[ratter]

, would'nt it be better to have just the 75mm restriction (which is impossible to remove), rather than an 85mm restriction as well (which can be removed)?



Why not replace the manifold with a 90mm manifold?


:D

[Uncle Tone]

looks like you have finally latched onto the theory Uncle , it is the physical air restriction not the method of reading the air that is the problem .

That is why the 85mm maf goes a long way to fixing the problem , ideally a 100mm maf would make the maf vs mafless debate a no brainer.
A engine only needs fuel , air and then have them compressed in the right proportions to make power it doesnt care if it gets the proportions determined by a Maf or Speed density or Alpha N as long as it gets the right amounts of each.

Thanks for that :D Looks like we have a definitive answer to that part of the debate with yours and Grant's input. :cool:

Do you think it would be safe to assume that in the same circumstances that both the maf and mafless tunes would produce similar torque throughout the rev range? I ask this because there was a point raised somewhere that mafless makes more torque down lower, therefore it relates to better times at the track. If this is so, how does the mafless tune accomplish this?

Considering all thats been discussed here, it would seem that an 85 mm maf equipped bolt-on car would be a better alternative to a mafless bolt-on car for everyone but the few people chasing that last tenth down the track, due to the mafs superiority as far as measuring airflow is concerned.

Of course, there is also the question of mafs in cam/head equipped cars, which obviously require more air. Again, is airflow restriction the only factor? Judging by your comments, it would seem that it is.

I wonder if a heavily cammed car would benefit from a maf, if the maf wasn't such a restriction to the increased airflow it obviously needs......????

Would a maf make a cammed car behave better at low revs?

This would be an interesting thing to find out!! :D

[EXECJIM]

Lets consider street trim vehicles, where we all spend 99% of our time.
How much of a restriction do you think the air filter is compared to the VZ MAF?

The VZ MAF is a 1.5kPa restriction against a straight pipe according to Delco. How much HP is that worth? 1-2rwkw at best. Now bolt-on an OTRCAI and the restriction becomes less than a std. MAFless tune to the extent of 5-7rwkw on the Dyno

Consider you lose 1kPa per 100m of elevation. Simply travelling to Heathcote from Melbourne will cost you more WOT vacuum than the VZ MAF.

Also consider airflow is restricted by the poorest flowing part. The air filter is more a restriction than the MAF!

For an all out track car you would definately go OTRCAI to minimise any intake restriction, no matter how small.

For 99% of our driving under 3500RPM I dont believe you will feel any benefit of MAFless over VZ MAF. The MAF be more consistent and reliable over varying weather conditions and return better fuel economy as it is more sensitive to barometric pressure variations due to its operating principle.

Drive with an OTRCAI and air filter on the street, and you could lose performance as the air filter is smaller again.

For QTR mile times, its all about TORQUE. Since you make max. TORQUE from 4000-4500 on an LS1 and half the QTR mile is spent accelerating through 1st and half way into 2nd, your mid-range performance is more critical to pulling better ETs than peak HP. Since the differences between street trim VZ MAF and MAFless is insignificant at those RPMs there will be little difference in the ET overall, maybe a tenth.

Proof of this is the fact I run a VZ MAF, have never pulled my air filter and run 12.8-12.9s at 107-109MPH. All this with stock converter and bolt-ons on ordinary pump gas (no power adders). This equals the best performances of any Auto stock converter bolt-on MAFless OTRCAI car.

Peak HP means shit. Torque is everything. You make what you make and your Tune should be configured to maximise torque. The resultant HP is a by-product.

If VZ MAF owners are that worried about MAF vs. MAFless try what the Yanks have been doing for years and borrow your missus pantyhose and re-use your stock paper filter frame to make a drag filter.


"Sickem" HOME/RACE/TRACK/STREET/RIVER/CREEK TUNER :lol:



Can you keep the topic in english for us MAFLESS dummies :lol:

[Delco]

Thanks for that :D Looks like we have a definitive answer to that part of the debate with yours and Grant's input. :cool:

Do you think it would be safe to assume that in the same circumstances that both the maf and mafless tunes would produce similar torque throughout the rev range? I ask this because there was a point raised somewhere that mafless makes more torque down lower, therefore it relates to better times at the track. If this is so, how does the mafless tune accomplish this?

Considering all thats been discussed here, it would seem that an 85 mm maf equipped bolt-on car would be a better alternative to a mafless bolt-on car for everyone but the few people chasing that last tenth down the track, due to the mafs superiority as far as measuring airflow is concerned.



Who says the maf has a superior airflow measurement , you have obviously never seen the unstable airflow signal the computer sees , a Speed Density tune done properly will have just a accurate airflow measurement - the special word is "done properly". A poor tune will be a poor result just the maf has more leeway for a slack tune.

[Uncle Tone]

Who says the maf has a superior airflow measurement, you have obviously never seen the unstable airflow signal the computer sees , a Speed Density tune done properly will have just a accurate airflow measurement - the special word is "done properly". A poor tune will be a poor result just the maf has more leeway for a slack tune.

I thought it was agreed that the maf measures air more accurately than SD mode.....?????

Maybe the airflow is unstable....and the maf is measuring it accurately... :D ;) :p

How does SD mode measure as accurately as a maf?

[VooDoo]

From my understanding (and im no tuner)

MAF's measure air flow
SD use MAP sensors to measure pressure.

Both use different methods to estimate the amount of air actually entering the engine.

Regardless of the size and type of MAF it will always disrupt the air flowing into the TB in some way. Using OTRCAI and/or Mafless, the air is moving smoothly and will have less disruption, this in turn improves throttle responce. As delco said, a correctly tuned engine using SD mode will have just as accurate airflow measurement with the added benifit of smoother airflow hence increasing performance.

Anyone see any holes in this ???

[alexcs]

no, but it would be good to know how much difference a maf v mafless form the same tuner, same dyno, same day there is on a)a stock car b)a bolton car c)cammed, headwork car.

if it turns out that for a and b, there is very minimal difference, then it may not be worth risking your engine waranty with a mafless tune. if there is a big difference, then there you go.

[Uncle Tone]

From my understanding (and im no tuner)

MAF's measure air flow
SD use MAP sensors to measure pressure.

Both use different methods to estimate the amount of air actually entering the engine.

Regardless of the size and type of MAF it will always disrupt the air flowing into the TB in some way. Using OTRCAI and/or Mafless, the air is moving smoothly and will have less disruption, this in turn improves throttle responce. As delco said, a correctly tuned engine using SD mode will have just as accurate airflow measurement with the added benifit of smoother airflow hence increasing performance.

Anyone see any holes in this ???

Yep. Doubtful that the maf would create an amount of turbulence that would significantly influence throttle response. It may create that turbulence at the very top end of the rev range (and we know power is reduced at the top with a maf) to the detriment of throttle response, but it isn't really relevant when you're standing on it already, is it?

How can SD be as accurate as a maf?

[spiv]

Yep. Doubtful that the maf would create an amount of turbulence that would significantly influence throttle response. It may create that turbulence at the very top end of the rev range (and we know power is reduced at the top with a maf) to the detriment of throttle response, but it isn't really relevant when you're standing on it already, is it?

How can SD be as accurate as a maf?

Throttle response is more a throttle input issue i.e. when you punch the throttle and the engine responds, Mafless is certainly more throttle responsive "IF" correctly tuned no doubt about it....

[Delco]

From my understanding (and im no tuner)

MAF's measure air flow
SD use MAP sensors to measure pressure.

Both use different methods to estimate the amount of air actually entering the engine.

Regardless of the size and type of MAF it will always disrupt the air flowing into the TB in some way. Using OTRCAI and/or Mafless, the air is moving smoothly and will have less disruption, this in turn improves throttle responce. As delco said, a correctly tuned engine using SD mode will have just as accurate airflow measurement with the added benifit of smoother airflow hence increasing performance.

Anyone see any holes in this ???

Correct , a MAF can be just as inaccurate as speed density.
The PCM takes a lot more than just the VE table into account when calculating the speed desnity equation , it has a very complete model for such things as wall wetting , cylinder distribution , calculated airspeed etc.

Speed-density systems calculate an air flow rate that approximates the flow rate at the intake ports. Air-mass sensor systems usually measure the air flow rate near the throttle.

Take the example I am working on today , it is a intercooled supercharged engine ( forget about the boost side of it at present though) on inital throttle crack the MAF sees a large in-rush of air , the engine doesnt see this so it has a inaccurate model of the air that is entering the cylinder , in this case a MAP sensor would give a instantanious fuel calculation that would be correct ( given that the engine has been tuned correctly ) but the MAF cant be tuned for these sorts of lag response.
This large in-rush of air during the throttle opening is often referred to as "manifold filling." During this time the flow rate into large manifolds can be several hundred percent higher than the flow rate at the ports

This happens but to a smaller degree on a engine that has the maf in the std place - there is always some lag of the signal , the Corvette and Fbody dont suffer as badly as their MAF is closer.

Put a cam into the equation and you have reverbaration sending the MAF haywire ( the map also suffers from this but at least it can be dampened out with filters).

Speed-density systems calculate air density in the intake using manifold pressure and temperature sensors and the perfect gas law , while a MAF uses an element that is heated a fixed amount above the air-stream temperature. A fast response bridge circuit is normally used to maintain the sensing element's temperature the proper fixed amount above the air-stream temperature. The amount of electrical current necessary to maintain the temperature difference is nonlinearly , The steady state analog output voltage as a function of air flow rate . Now this can very due to dirt on the wire , airflow vortex's around the wire due to turbulance ( the main reason the mesh is in the MAF is to help eliminate these by straightening the airflow but due to our airbox and intake design this is not always perfect)

It all comes down to we dont exist in a perfect world , both ways have there merits when done and sized correctly

[Uncle Tone]

Throttle response is more a throttle input issue i.e. when you punch the throttle and the engine responds,

My point exactly.

[VooDoo]

Yep. Doubtful that the maf would create an amount of turbulence that would significantly influence throttle response. It may create that turbulence at the very top end of the rev range (and we know power is reduced at the top with a maf) to the detriment of throttle response, but it isn't really relevant when you're standing on it already, is it?




Anything in the path of the air will slow it down and/or create turbulance regardless of the throttle position. Even something as simple as polishing/smoothing a TB has shown improvements. Having a honeycomb and sensor in the air path must slow the air to some extent right through the rev range. Removing it and having a 4" pipe there instead (or using a OTRCAI) has to improve the performance if the quality of the tunes are the same (MAF/MAFLESS)

[Uncle Tone]

Anything in the path of the air will slow it down and/or create turbulance regardless of the throttle position. Even something as simple as polishing/smoothing a TB has shown improvements. Having a honeycomb and sensor in the air path must slow the air to some extent right through the rev range. Removing it and having a 4" pipe there instead (or using a OTRCAI) has to improve the performance if the quality of the tunes are the same (MAF/MAFLESS)

All true, of course, for an engine that needs that amount of airflow. However going by what has been said in this thread so far, the airflow allowed by an 85mm maf is more than adequate for bolt-on applications, hence a maf can be utilized without a significant penalty to throttle response or horsepower, street or track.

[Delco]

All true, of course, for an engine that needs that amount of airflow. However going by what has been said in this thread so far, the airflow allowed by an 85mm maf is more than adequate for bolt-on applications, hence a maf can be utilized without a significant penalty to throttle response or horsepower, street or track.


Key word there is significant , to some people 5 kw is significant , to others 1kw is significant

[alexcs]

Key word there is significant , to some people 5 kw is significant , to others 1kw is significant

love to find out whether it is 1 or 5+ :)

[Uncle Tone]

Key word there is significant , to some people 5 kw is significant , to others 1kw is significant

Both are insignificant, to all except the person chasing that last tenth down the track, as was said before.

What is more of interest is the power and torque curve comparison between maf and mafless......from idle to redline. Is it the same? At what RPM will mafless start to show an advantage? How much of an advantage?

And is that advantage really of significant size to warrant getting rid of the maf, and all of its attributes as pointed out by Grant in his post?

[VXSS346]

Fair enough, 5kw's is not significant in a car with well over 200 rwkw's, but every little gain adds up to a big gain.
People on this forum buy all sorts of minor mods to get a kw here and a kw there.
Putting a second hole in the mcai probably would'nt gain 5 rwkw's but we've all done it.
In any case my reason for going mafless, was for better throttle response. Dyno's don't tell that story! As a standard car, throttle response was $&!t.

[VX11SS]

In a standard car is the throttle response bad because of the fact (particularly with the earlier series cars) that the tune was so rich, I know on off road bikes the leaner you go (to a degree) the better the response and usually the more power you make.
Is it not a fact that a lot of tuned/edited cars with or without mafs have better fuel economy and throttle response precisely because they have been "leaned" out in various parts of the throtle map?
So while I assume from a lot of peoples posts that a mafless car has great throttle response surely a car with maf and a good tune will have very similar response. We all seem to aknowedge the fact that there are less gains to be had on the later cars as these had better tunes along with exhausts etc basically the way the cars should have been in the first place. Holden/HSV wanted to be able to provide a power increase every year so de-tuned/restricted the engines, and with the VY11 HSV finally brought the power to the level it could/should have been in the first place.
Cheers Jay
PS I have no clue wether maf or mafless is the way to go but with a fairly new car why even contemplate losing your warrenty for a couple of kws. It seems a lot of other mods ie exhausts etc you may get awa with but a mafless tune?

[markone2]

. It seems a lot of other mods ie exhausts etc you may get awa with but a mafless tune?


Na :rolleyes: I refuse to believe that anyone here is that mechanically inept they are unable to attach a maf sensor back on there pipe at service time

[VooDoo]

I have had a mafless tune for quite a while, no issues with holden in any way. They know exactly what a mafless tune is and have actually arranged some pre-delivery on new cars. Its a more agressive tune. If you use 98ron fuel all the time its no more dangerous than the standard tune.

Not all dealers think this way but as ive said before, a good relationship with your dealer is worth many $1000's over the years.

[seldo]

There's any number of people on here who have started with a maf-tune and then gone Brazillian, (my car included) and I don't know anyone who would go back. Mybe one mitigating factor is that most have had it done by Powertorque, so they have no issues with a poor tune

[APS Fston]

Cold night at Calder and we had a great night both cars ran new PBs and both running Mafless with new operating system.
Red SSute unopened running 90mm Manifold, 90mm Throtle body and a OTRCAI its best time of the night was a 11.86 at 112mph and there was alot of people seeing our results.
The VZ is also Mafless with an OTRCAI but running a standard Throtle body (flyby wire) ran a 11.57 at 118mph, where hoping for better on that one alot more testing and Dyno work needed but still happy.
Mafless seems to be the way Boys and Girls.
Lets see what street use has to tell us running Mafless....
It was great night. :D

[VX11SS]

Na :rolleyes: I refuse to believe that anyone here is that mechanically inept they are unable to attach a maf sensor back on there pipe at service time
Whos talking service time, I was think more like oops just blown the motor/gearbox/radiator etc on the motorway, phone Holden for tow and fix up. on arrival at dealer ah Mr Bloggs you appear to have the maf missing from your engine, well I am afraid this has lead to the problems with your car AND i AM SORRY BUT YOU WILL BE PAYING FOR THE DAMAGE TO YOUR CAR AS YOUR WARRENTY HAS BEN INVALIDATED.
To be honest with you when people do have problems and have not F**** with their car its hard enough now as Holden probably dont like picking up the tab especially when people are out there modding the hell out of their car and when it goes wrong trying to get it covered up by warrenty.
I have no problem with modded cars as have had plenty in the past but would never expect the car company to pay for damage caused because I had modded and dragged the shit out of my cars, basically dishonest
Jay

[Bully]

In a standard car is the throttle response bad because of the fact (particularly with the earlier series cars) that the tune was so rich, I know on off road bikes the leaner you go (to a degree) the better the response and usually the more power you make.
Is it not a fact that a lot of tuned/edited cars with or without mafs have better fuel economy and throttle response precisely because they have been "leaned" out in various parts of the throtle map?
So while I assume from a lot of peoples posts that a mafless car has great throttle response surely a car with maf and a good tune will have very similar response. We all seem to aknowedge the fact that there are less gains to be had on the later cars as these had better tunes along with exhausts etc basically the way the cars should have been in the first place. Holden/HSV wanted to be able to provide a power increase every year so de-tuned/restricted the engines, and with the VY11 HSV finally brought the power to the level it could/should have been in the first place.
Cheers Jay
PS I have no clue wether maf or mafless is the way to go but with a fairly new car why even contemplate losing your warrenty for a couple of kws. It seems a lot of other mods ie exhausts etc you may get awa with but a mafless tune?
My service advisor actually reccomended that I go mafless, his reccomendation was based wholely and solely around the arguement I raised way back at the start of this thread... "GTS IS MAFLESS!!!!". I ended up going with the maf tune anyway after speaking with Tuna & explaining that the minister for financial warfare was worried about warranty & ended up with a nice 248 rwkw anyway, but the proof is in the driveability, not the stupid dyno figure which really doesnt mean anything except if you are at the pub bragging to your mates.
In the end, speak to your tuner & I'm sure that they will reccomend whatever is best for your situation.

[VooDoo]

I gained 61rwkw when i went mafless. Well worth the effort even if it did lose my warranty (Which I didnt). If the mods i do to the car cause a problem then i put my hand in my pocket to fix it (like the worn auto). A mafless tune isnt going to blow an engine unless its a REALLY bad tune, then you would claim it from your tuner.

[markone2]

A mafless tune isnt going to blow an engine unless its a REALLY bad tune, then you would claim it from your tuner.


Bugger :thump: you beat me to it........but its started me thinking what sort of tunes are being done across the tazman :eek:..........can we assume no Dealerships are offering customers the benefits of edit tunes pre-delievery in the land of the long white cloud?

[Uncle Tone]

I gained 61rwkw when i went mafless.

Is that from a standard car to mafless, or is that just from a maf tune to a mafless tune, i.e. just removing the maf?

[VooDoo]

Stock to Mafless. Many ppl i know when from a good Maf tune to a Mafless and in every case where even happier with the improvements. I didnt see the point in doing it twice as it was already proven better time and time again. Do a search here as there are many threads on this.

[Uncle Tone]

Stock to Mafless.

I gained 63 rwkw with a maf tune (ported) and 1.8 rockers, and the car already had 202rwkw stock, being a clubby.

[VooDoo]

yes, and your 100mph at the track proved it beyond any doubt. That conversation was done elsewhere. I dont think we need to bring it here as well.

If the best tuners in Aust tell you mafless is better and even APS who supplied the VZ maf has said in this thread that mafless is better, im happy to believe them. Im not saying MAF tunes are bad though, in some cases they have proven very good as well. Its your car, you do what you feel your happy with. The whole maf/mafless debate was over years ago really.

[Uncle Tone]

yes, and your 100mph at the track proved it beyond any doubt.
105mph now!! :D


If the best tuners in Aust tell you mafless is better and even APS who supplied the VZ maf has said in this thread that mafless is better, im happy to believe them. Im not saying MAF tunes are bad though, in some cases they have proven very good as well. Its your car, you do what you feel your happy with. The whole maf/mafless debate was over years ago really.

Everybody seems to say that mafless is better....but I'm still at a loss when it comes to why.

Considering that:

Maf and mafless offer the same horsepower and throttle response if the restriction factor is not considered (which can be overcome)

Maf can measure incoming air better than SD, (realtime measurement has to be better than a guesstimate) so the data would have to be more useful......wouldn't it?

So it would seem that mafless only has the upper hand because of the restriction factor, and the fact that you can use OTRCAI. I don't believe that mafless has the upper hand when it comes to airflow measurement accuracy, or even air density, and I think both may be important when tuning on the knifes edge.

I wonder if a maf needs to have a certain amount of pipe before it and after it to streamline incoming air for an accurate measurement? If not, then you certainly could put it in front of the TB and use OTRCAI.......but with that little filter I think any gains would be nullified........unless you took the filter off, which personally I wouldn't do.

[HOWQUICK]

105mph now!! :D



Everybody seems to say that mafless is better....but I'm still at a loss when it comes to why.

Considering that:

Maf and mafless offer the same horsepower and throttle response if the restriction factor is not considered (which can be overcome)

Maf can measure incoming air better than SD, (realtime measurement has to be better than a guesstimate) so the data would have to be more useful......wouldn't it?

So it would seem that mafless only has the upper hand because of the restriction factor, and the fact that you can use OTRCAI. I don't believe that mafless has the upper hand when it comes to airflow measurement accuracy, or even air density, and I think both may be important when tuning on the knifes edge.

I wonder if a maf needs to have a certain amount of pipe before it and after it to streamline incoming air for an accurate measurement? If not, then you certainly could put it in front of the TB and use OTRCAI.......but with that little filter I think any gains would be nullified........unless you took the filter off, which personally I wouldn't do.

like Voodoo says the debate was done years ago. The big mafs on the later cars spark up interest again and I think you have been given the answers there.

the opportunity is there to prove everyone wrong so knock yourself out...but be assured that that many have done more than think about what you believe are obstacles and have done more than just take a guess at the tune. ;) and think the filter is too small.

Good luck.

[VX11SS]

Sorry fellas I wasnt meaning that removing the maf would cause a problem, I was pointing to the fact that it would be an easy excuse for Holden to deny claim. In NZ, no you can not have any type of edit pre delivery or after if you want to maintain a warrenty, you could not even put headers on the ss models as Holden NZ would deem this a breech of Warrenty (I asked a couple of dealers about this when I had my VX11SS, who said no so I contacted various people at NZ Holden HQ who said no this would invalidate the driveline warrenty)
As for OZ, I would assume it is the dealer saying its ok, wonder how Holden Australia would react to the same question and would they pay out or void the warrenty on the car.
Cheers jay

[Martin_D]

105mph now!! :D

Now consider this...
109.68mph
stock cast headers, full stock Holden (not HSV) exhaust
stock rockers, manual trans
Mafless tune

Tells the whole story.

[alexcs]

the whole story would be concerning the difference between vz maf and mafless tunes in terms of low and midrange power and torque, but i guess we can skip back to the regular maf v mafless discussions :)

[spiv]

I thought that this MAF thing was well and truely dead and buried by now :confused:

Uncle Tone Put a decent cam in your thing and then see what happens to the MAF tune when it gets confused over manifold reversion....... :lol: The MAF can only sense airflow in one direction and cannot cope with reversion.

[alexcs]

another champ paying attention.

thanks mods, i guess you can close this one now.

[MNR-0]

Agreed. This is a dead issue. In the grand scheme of things VZ MAF or MAFless isnt going to make a hell of a difference. Depends on the setup and tune and what you want to do with your car.

I think this thread has been done to death.

[alexcs]

so youve missed the point as well.

i wanted to find out whether there is much difference on a fairly stock vz gen3 maf v mafless, nothing else. ive read 50 threads about maf v mafless in general already.

[markone2]

so youve missed the point as well.

i wanted to find out whether there is much difference on a fairly stock vz gen3 maf v mafless, nothing else. ive read 50 threads about maf v mafless in general already.


well you could ask the VZ owners who are running low 12's unopened ;).tis a good start

[alexcs]

not really...has anyone else read this thread through?

[COOKIE!]

not really...has anyone else read this thread through?


Alex start a new thread with a poll and just ask,

VZ MAF under 13sec
VZ MAFLESS under 13sec

And see which one has more simple.


And for the record MAFLESS kicks ass :booty: :booty: :booty:

[alexcs]

hmmmm.....

ill repeat the goal of this thread:

assuming you have a bolt on VZ (exhaust, perhaps diff) is there really going to be a marked difference in low to mid power and torque, ie FORGET about ET's.

anyone who has had an edit on their VX or VY and is using that as sole basis for their opinion, please dont bother, weve already had 20+ people chip in.

it was mainly a question to tuners and people closely associated to give their ideas about how close maf and mafless is now that the VZ had the 85mm MAF, and more concerned with driveability and power on the street, not aobut absolute ET's.

we already know mafless is best for ET's, not everyone goes drag racing though.

dont worry fellas, ive made up my mind, its jsut a little dissapointing people keep chipping in the same opinion thats been posted many times over in the same thread (let alone countless others)

thanks for those who took the time to respond properly, your advice is much appreciated. :)

[MNR-0]

assuming you have a bolt on VZ (exhaust, perhaps diff) is there really going to be a marked difference in low to mid power and torque, ie FORGET about ET's.
No

we already know mafless is best for ET's, not everyone goes drag racing though.
Thats why I answered No

Keep the VZ MAF. Save your bucks for other power mods.

[Uncle Tone]

Now consider this...
109.68mph
stock cast headers, full stock Holden (not HSV) exhaust
stock rockers, manual trans
Mafless tune

Tells the whole story.

What story?

How has a different car on a different day with a different driver (probably an experienced racer) have anything to do with anything?

Why don't you explain the story to us? :rolleyes:

And while you're at it, maybe you could explain why and how mafless makes better power.......

We know for a fact that maf tunes and mafless produce the same power if they are restricted equally (e.g. the maf left in when the mafless tune is done, but unplugged).

We have heard opinions that state that mafless makes better torque......How? Why? As someone posted before, motors need air and fuel in precisely the right amounts. If both tunes can deliver the right amounts of each, how does one make more power than the other???

There is also the unanswered question of low speed driveability......of course the majority will say mafless. Fair enough, but I again ask: WHY? HOW? If mafless is better, restriction factor aside, lets hear HOW it manages to be better. And don't just put up track times.

[Uncle Tone]

I thought that this MAF thing was well and truely dead and buried by now :confused:

Uncle Tone Put a decent cam in your thing and then see what happens to the MAF tune when it gets confused over manifold reversion....... :lol: The MAF can only sense airflow in one direction and cannot cope with reversion.

Interesting point.

I assume you're talking about idle quality? I can't see much reversion happening when the revs rise....??? But I do see your point, if the maf can't cope with it.

[Uncle Tone]

No



Nicely put, Grant. :D

In your opinion, has research on maf tunes been lacking? Has everyone taken the easy way out when it comes to this? Are mafs that hard to get decent results out of?

[spiv]

Interesting point.

I assume you're talking about idle quality? I can't see much reversion happening when the revs rise....??? But I do see your point, if the maf can't cope with it.

Uncle Tone,

There are some very clever tuners who sponsor this forum. They cam tune a big cam so that it will not stall, hunt etc. When the Maf is removed the real ability of the tuner is revealed IMO as they need to have a thorough undersatnding of the particular vehicles needs and cannot rely on the Maf to compensate for any holes in their tune.

[gameover]

here's a post i did awhile ago explaining some of this stuff. 4th post.

http://www.hptuners.com/forum/YaBB.pl?board=gmv8engine;action=display;num=110191 7527

[MNR-0]

Yes. Back to back testing on a completely stock VY. With nothing else changed but the MAF table, the VY MAF outperformed the VZ MAF only at the very top end. The VZ MAF picked up heaps of torque in the mid-range.

Its no real comparison, though, as the MAF table changes would change the AFRs and without a full Edit, I doubt the straight VY to VZ MAF swap is worth while.

On a tuned car, the VZ MAF picked up 0.1s and 1MPH at the track. Back to back.

[Uncle Tone]

here's a post i did awhile ago explaining some of this stuff. 4th post.


So basically the maf isn't used for sudden throttle transients, as it measures the volume of air too "instantly"?

We're talking about fractions of a second here, aren't we?

And in effect, when aggressive throttle transients are occurring, the car is in "Mafless" mode?

If thats true, throttle response between the two types of tune shouldn't differ. :p

Is that a fair enough assumption?

[Uncle Tone]

Uncle Tone,

There are some very clever tuners who sponsor this forum. They cam tune a big cam so that it will not stall, hunt etc. When the Maf is removed the real ability of the tuner is revealed IMO as they need to have a thorough understanding of the particular vehicles needs and cannot rely on the Maf to compensate for any holes in their tune.

No doubt that's true, but that doesn't mean that its the way to go for all applications.....even with a cam. :)

I know of one car that produces nearly 300 rwkw with cam, heads, and maf.

[spiv]

No doubt that's true, but that doesn't mean that its the way to go for all applications.....even with a cam. :)

I know of one car that produces nearly 300 rwkw with cam, heads, and maf.

Yes, but I said "BIG CAM" i.e. >230 degrees of duration. The wagon that you are refering to has a 220/224 cam on 112 which is not what I consider to be big. Anything bigger and you will almost certainly be testing the limits of the maf due to the incraesed manifold reversion.

[Uncle Tone]

Yes, but I said "BIG CAM" i.e. >230 degrees of duration. The wagon that you are refering to has a 220/224 cam on 112 which is not what I consider to be big. Anything bigger and you will almost certainly be testing the limits of the maf due to the increased manifold reversion.
Probably so. :)

This becomes less of an issue off idle, I presume?

[spiv]

Probably so. :)

This becomes less of an issue off idle, I presume?

The fact that no tuners to the best of my knowledge still run a maf on a car with a cam >230 degrees of duration should answer your question I believe.

This takes me back to a time when i saw Sam spending a Saturady afternoon attempting to tune a VTSS with a cam and a CMS ported maf, no matter what he tried he could not get it to run properly as soon as he ditched the Maf and went mafless all problems were solved. This is only my experience, if you can find a tuner who can achieve the same power and driveability/idle quality with a cammed (with significant overlap and manifold reversion) car then well done. Meanwhile I am a mafless convert and extremely pleased with my 228/224 110 cam's idle quality, cold start driveability and fuel consumption. (Thanks Phonsy :D )

[Uncle Tone]

The fact that no tuners to the best of my knowledge still run a maf on a car with a cam >230 degrees of duration should answer your question I believe.
Not really..... :(

Its just that I can't see reversion occuring at anything except low revs!

Example: A hot cam car idles at, say, 1100 rpm. At 1800 rpm, is reversion still occuring?


no matter what he tried he could not get it to run properly as soon as he ditched the Maf and went mafless all problems were solved. This is only my experience, if you can find a tuner who can achieve the same power and driveability/idle quality with a cammed (with significant overlap and manifold reversion) car then well done.
Probably doubtful if I can find one for a cam that big I guess, because of the reversion issue (at idle only?) and the airflow restriction at high revs.

Interesting to find out if the maf would benefit the engine in between those two points, though.

[STATIE]

I know of one car that produces nearly 300 rwkw with cam, heads, and maf.

And dosn't it also run mid 14's at around 98MPH? :lol:

[Martin_D]

And dosn't it also run mid 14's at around 98MPH? :lol:

As said
Thats all.... :cool:

[markone2]

And dosn't it also run mid 14's at around 98MPH? :lol:


and from the same tuner :doh:....case dismissed

[spiv]

Uncle Tone if you are so in love with your maf then good for you yet the trap speed over the qtr tells the truth.......As has been stated by the previous posts. I will not bother trying to educate you any further on the matter.

Cheers

[Uncle Tone]

As said Thats all.... :cool:

and from the same tuner ....case dismissed

And dosn't it also run mid 14's at around 98MPH?

So this is all down to the tune? Are you sure that there is absolutely no other factors that may influence this?

B]WHY[/B] is this the case? HOW does a mafless tune convert a 260rwkw car from a 14 second slug to a 12 second missile? THIS is what I want to know.

[RIDE:42]

UT come take the ute for a spin remember it only pulled 238 rwkw :lol:
but easy low 12`s and see if you can feel the difference with out a maf.

[spiv]

Maybe if spent some time fixing your axle tramp and improving your set up (i.e. traction and launch) and less time worrying about why your car is one of the very few to run a maf then your quater mile times would be more reflective of your stated output...... :p

[Uncle Tone]

UT come take the ute for a spin remember it only pulled 238 rwkw :lol:
but easy low 12`s and see if you can feel the difference with out a maf.

Thanks for the offer Jamo. I'll take you up on it soon. :D

238rwkw with heads and cam.... you need to :bash: the guy who filled up your car that day.... :D

[Uncle Tone]

Maybe if spent some time fixing your axle tramp and improving your set up (i.e. traction and launch) and less time worrying about why your car is one of the very few to run a maf then your quater mile times would be more reflective of your stated output...... :p

Exactly my point :cool:

Not everyone is an expert down the quarter....especially with 5 runs only under the belt. :(

....and I'm not worried about the fact that my car is one of the few to run a maf......I just want to know why everyone else chooses to go mafless. If there is a significant and legitimate gain to be had over what I have now, I want it too. But I want to know how that gain comes about, thats all.

[BLACK 346]

Yep. Checked on another dyno in front of witnesses.

What mods have you got, if you don't mind me asking?

[RIDE:42]

....and I'm not worried about the fact that my car is one of the few to run a maf......I just want to know why everyone else chooses to go mafless, thats all.

caus if they wanted to do 14.00@99 they would leave it stock rofl :lol:


only std heads on the ute ;)

[Uncle Tone]

What mods have you got, if you don't mind me asking?

Ok, but I'm gonna get flamed!! Here goes...... :confused:

Monaro Performance centre twin 2.5 inch exhaust

big cats to suit

1.75 inch short 4-1 headers

Mcai & 2 hole airbox mod (stock filter)

Ported maf (don't hate me!! :eek: )

VY2 HSV maf pipe (Plastic with HSV logo)

Throttle body coolant bypass

Ported Throttle body

1.8 ratio roller rockers and heavier springs

Tune with LS1 Edit.

Resulting in 264.4rwkw.

[markone2]

238rwkw with heads and cam.... you need to :bash: the guy who filled up your car that day.... :D

265rwkw with a 105mph trap speed in some of the most favourable cold weather racing conditions so far this year......you need to :bash: a..the fuel supplier
b..the driver
c..the tyre manufacturer
d..the clutch manufacturer
e..the shock manufacturer
f..the tuner
g..Homer Simspon
h..The Maf :D

[BLACK 346]

:)
Ok, but I'm gonna get flamed!! Here goes...... :confused:

Monaro Performance centre twin 2.5 inch exhaust

big cats to suit

1.75 inch short 4-1 headers

Mcai & 2 hole airbox mod (stock filter)

Ported maf (don't hate me!! :eek: )

VY2 HSV maf pipe (Plastic with HSV logo)

Throttle body coolant bypass

Ported Throttle body

1.8 ratio roller rockers and heavier springs

Tune with LS1 Edit.

Resulting in 264.4rwkw.

I wont flame you :)
Have you considered trying to get a ride in another car
with similar power just as a comparison, might give you
some idea if yours pulls as hard, just a thought. If it
does then maybe your the worlds worst 1/4 mile pilot :p

[Uncle Tone]

265rwkw with a 105mph trap speed in some of the most favourable cold weather racing conditions so far this year......you need to :bash: a..the fuel supplier
b..the driver
c..the tyre manufacturer
d..the clutch manufacturer
e..the shock manufacturer
f..the tuner
g..Homer Simspon
h..The Maf :D

:lol: :lol:

I wish we could post videos here......I have one of my record breaking 16.3 @ 100mph run on the same night :shock: that we could all laugh at :D

[Uncle Tone]

:)

I wont flame you :)
Have you considered trying to get a ride in another car
with similar power just as a comparison, might give you
some idea if yours pulls as hard, just a thought. If it
does then maybe your the worlds worst 1/4 mile pilot :p

I do want to do that. :)

I think I just may be the worlds worst drag racer......Can't even do a burnout properly :( :D

[RIDE:42]

Monaro Performance centre twin 2.5 inch exhaust they don`t make them so what did they use?2.25 would have been better

big cats to suit as above

1.75 inch short 4-1 headers

Mcai & 2 hole airbox mod (stock filter)

Ported maf (don't hate me!! :eek: ) piss that off

VY2 HSV maf pipe (Plastic with HSV logo) :rolleyes:

Throttle body coolant bypass

Ported Throttle bodypiss that off


1.8 ratio roller rockers and heavier springs doing this but no cam -----------why?

Tune with LS1 Edit.

Resulting in 264.4rwkw

[RIDE:42]

:lol: :lol:

I wish we could post videos here......I have one of my record breaking 16.3 @ 100mph run on the same night :shock: that we could all laugh at :D
you don`t need the video i doing that now :lol:

[Uncle Tone]

you don`t need the video i doing that now :lol:

So was the whole of Calder that night :o :(

[Martin_D]

Because mate, with 105mph, you dont have 260rwkw.
Simple aint it. :lol: :lol:

[Uncle Tone]

they don`t make them so what did they use? 2.25 would have been better

.....They don't make them??? Who does?

big cats to suit : as above .... ????


Ported maf (don't hate me!! :eek: ) : piss that off ....But that's the secret to my success!! :D

VY2 HSV maf pipe (Plastic with HSV logo) :rolleyes: ....Hey! Thats 10rwkw :D


Ported Throttle body: piss that off .....Why?


1.8 ratio roller rockers and heavier springs : doing this but no cam -----------why? ....No idea. To make more power?

[Uncle Tone]

Because mate, with 105mph, you dont have 260rwkw.
Simple aint it. :lol: :lol:

Sorry mate. I forgot you were there with the rest of the LS1 crowd that witnessed my last dyno run. :rolleyes:

In other words, you don't know. Right?

Pity. I was a big fan of your scribing in various magazines........

[Martin_D]

Maybe you should have read some of what I had written then and we wouldn't be having this argument now. :teach:

[STATIE]

Uncle Tone

Your just getting plain repetitive/boring now.
We dont care.

You can have your dyno sheets to hang on the wall and we'll all wipe our arses with ours and go run good times on the strip - while your still trying to get your name up on the internet as much as you can.

Just do some reading on here for a while - you'll soon find what works for the majority.

[alto]

looks like we can add another maf discussion to the scrap heap...............and it was going so well :(

I'm still happy with my maf tune. 112mph in a car not set up for the drags gives me confidence.

I guess that it all comes down to the tune, regardless of the method...........I've seen a few mafless cars go backwards too :eek:

[Uncle Tone]

Maybe you should have read some of what I had written then and we wouldn't be having this argument now. :teach:

You're probably right.

Was it you who wrote the XL files?

[Uncle Tone]

looks like we can add another maf discussion to the scrap heap...............and it was going so well :(
Yet another one.....Oh well. :(



I guess that it all comes down to the tune, regardless of the method...........I've seen a few mafless cars go backwards too :eek:
Whoa!!! Don't say that here....... :confused:

[markone2]

Yet another one.....Oh well. :(



:


Don't worry UT…..I believe there's 5500 reasons why this one will be resurrected in one thread or another....I have a feeling this Maf of yours is going to accompany you into retirement.....and beyond

[jsttry]

I guess you missed this back on page 3 (post 67)

http://www.freeimagehome.com/images/Nias/p1010223.jpg
I haven't read the rest of the thread yet voodoo but why is that MAF disconnected? :)

[VooDoo]

No idea mate, maybe he wanted to go for a brazillian but keep the maf in place for warranty :)

(its not my car, no idea)

[Tonner]

Its just an insurance policy, its so the kids in the staging lanes can get there 5c coins back that they have turns at flicking into the OTRCAI from a distance, the maf still has a screen

[Martin_D]

109 simple as that
and if you can't I will drive and it will :) :lol:

[VZLAD]

oooooo yum yumsssss I like it.. :) dats enough for us. No you aint gunna drag our widdle VT.. :D

[Gareth@Willall]

If HSV used Map sensor tuning in their top model...... And most people utilise it now.... why is it ancient to do that?

You should re read some of ya posts mate. U will find life in here a lot nicer..... ;)

[alexcs]

tuna in fine form once again.

how about you and the rest of these goons give it a rest, there were actually interesting quesitons this bloke was asking, and all you guys could do was spout off the regular ET and sponsor crap.

get over yourselves.

edit: hehe ive noticed tones now got a red dot next to his name for asking a few technical minded questions. its a nice little mob mentality this place has.

give me a few of the them red dots if itll make you feel a little better, share the love around :)

[Martin_D]

Mate, they might have been interesting to you, but between the pair of you the search function could have answered the lot. Welcome to 1999.

And shall I add Alex if you ever come on here sprouting off about 265rwkw then run a 200rwkw 105mph you will be in for the same belting.

Doesn't anyone think after three of four years of this we should be smarter than that now? Its 2005 kids. :cool:

[alexcs]

once again youve shown you havent actually read what was being said, and jsut gone off on your mafless tirade.

i (and probably everyone) KNOW mafless is ultimately the best for highest MPH etc on the dragstrip.

this thread was trying to ask whether for a car that wont see the dragstrip, whether the VZ maf (on a VZ) and a decent tune would see my car still attain the kinda of low and midrange power of a mafless, even if there was sacrifice at the top of the rev range.

all uncle tone was asking was whether this could be the case, or whether there would be a low and mid hit with maf compared to mafless in the VZ, and if so, where the restriction might be.

you guys jsut hammered into him and gave him bad rep points for this and its kinda pathetic, this is a webboard and hes asking a quesiton that believe me HASNT been answered in the past becuase it concerns the VZ maf and not topend speed!

if you cant see that this is what we were talking about, then jsut stay out of it. we KNOW you're the god of tuning, and we duly bow down, but it was just a slightly different kind of question.

cheers.

[SV8VY]

Is this true ? You claim 265 rkw and only 105 mph :confused:
Man with 265 rkw I would be in the low 12s.
I only have around 220 rkw and run low 13s with 106 mph.
Are you sure the 6 isnt a 2?

[Uncle Tone]

i (and probably everyone) KNOW mafless is ultimately the best for highest MPH etc on the dragstrip.
Yep. As do I, without question.


this thread was trying to ask whether for a car that wont see the dragstrip, whether the VZ maf (on a VZ) and a decent tune would see my car still attain the kinda of low and midrange power of a mafless, even if there was sacrifice at the top of the rev range.

all uncle tone was asking was whether this could be the case, or whether there would be a low and mid hit with maf compared to mafless in the VZ, and if so, where the restriction might be.
I didn't think this would be such a hard question to answer....but it obviously is, as instead of answers we have flaming and ridicule. This is probably because I pressed for the questions to be answered, though.


you guys jsut hammered into him and gave him bad rep points for this and its kinda pathetic, this is a webboard and hes asking a quesiton that believe me HASNT been answered in the past becuase it concerns the VZ maf and not topend speed!
I have been hammered much worse than this before on forums. The sad thing is, when you finally prove your point, the critics always find something else to pick on. Oh well. People don't like being proven wrong, especially after arguing a certain point for a long time, and who can blame them, really.

Its unfortunate that the questions in this case were avoided, rather than answered. :(

[exwrx]

I agree with the original poster that this thread has unfortunately turned to shit. Originally it was about the VZ maf, not the classic maf v mafless debate which always turns into an ego contest. There has still been a lot of valuable info though.

Uncle Tone, if Tuna doesnt want to tune your car, thats his prerogative and people can draw their own conclusions. IMO you have two options:

1. get someone else to take your car down the quarter - if they cant substantially improve on your times, then there is definitely something wrong;

and/or 2. get a mafless tune and run the quarter again.

BTW I am happy to validate you, red dots or not. :rolleyes:

[Uncle Tone]

Is this true ? You claim 265 rkw and only 105 mph :confused:

Are you sure the 6 isnt a 2

Utterly sure. Witnessed by people who have posted in this thread.

[alexcs]

surely this isnt a little maturity returning? ;)

[SV8VY]

Utterly sure. Witnessed by people who have posted in this thread.
Well I dont know what to say except this thread http://www.ls1.com.au/forum/showthread.php?t=39717
Is the likely cause of the mysterious red dot.
Seriously must be something wrong if you have that much power and so little mph.
Get it looked at.
So after all this there is no real answer to the original question.
Its a shame.

[Uncle Tone]

I agree with the original poster that this thread has unfortunately turned to shit. Originally it was about the VZ maf, not the classic maf v mafless debate which always turns into an ego contest. There has still been a lot of valuable info though.

Uncle Tone, if Tuna doesnt want to tune your car, thats his prerogative and people can draw their own conclusions. IMO you have two options:

1. get someone else to take your car down the quarter - if they cant substantially improve on your times, then there is definitely something wrong;

and/or 2. get a mafless tune and run the quarter again.

BTW I am happy to validate you, red dots or not. :rolleyes:

Thanks for the vote of confidence, Exrex!!

I fear that no tuner would put their hand up to tune my car mafless now. Imagine the shame when I go to the track and my times don't improve from 14's to 12's!!

I wonder why that would be??? ;)

(don't say there are lots of variables at the track, because judging by the irrefutable evidence in this thread, there aren't any!! :rolleyes: :D You either run good times or you don't have any power :rolleyes: )

[VZLAD]

So experts has this question below actually been answered :rolleyes:


Hey dudes.

Im considering getting an edit, and was leaning towards mafless, but a couple of things have caught my attention.

Apparently, the MAF in the VZ is quite improved over previous series, so my question is would there be minimal gain in going mafless over maf in a VZ SS, or would it still be worth it?

Has any tuner or similar out there compared a MAF to MAF-less edit on the same VZ car on the same dyno? Probably not, but would be good to know.

A MAF edit would be preferable in terms of waranty and insurance, but not at the expense of moderate power gain if i went MAF-less. Anyway, hopefully someone will know.

Cheers fellas.

[alexcs]

it hasnt been answered totally, but ive been tlaking to a few blokes with completely stock vz ss utes who have gone from around 200rwkw to 240rkw with a MAF tune from Sams, so Im gunna stick with that. Not exactly minor gains :)

[VZLAD]

it hasnt been answered totally, but ive been tlaking to a few blokes with completely stock vz ss utes who have gone from around 200rwkw to 240rkw with a MAF tune from Sams, so Im gunna stick with that. Not exactly minor gains :)

Hmm for street think your on a winner.. why bother to pay EXTRA $$$ for maffless tune anyhow when from what I am gathering through all the jargon in this thread you wont gain bugger all much more power with the maffless tune anyhow with the VZ for street that is... :D

[MNR-0]

So experts has this question below actually been answered :rolleyes:

Hey dudes.

Im considering getting an edit, and was leaning towards mafless, but a couple of things have caught my attention.

Apparently, the MAF in the VZ is quite improved over previous series, so my question is would there be minimal gain in going mafless over maf in a VZ SS, or would it still be worth it?

Has any tuner or similar out there compared a MAF to MAF-less edit on the same VZ car on the same dyno? Probably not, but would be good to know.

A MAF edit would be preferable in terms of waranty and insurance, but not at the expense of moderate power gain if i went MAF-less. Anyway, hopefully someone will know.

Cheers fellas.

Yes it has. Go back about 5 pages.

Negligible gains going mafless from VZ MAF.

VZ MAF vs MAFless about bugger all except up the very top where you might see 2-3rwkw. Now this is on a stocker, not blown, modified or tampered with in any way - just edited.

Thats my observations. Other people will have different experiences.

Don't hijack this thread and make it a mess for the mods to clean up. There's too much crap in it already.

Tone, I know you, so don't take it personally, but if you want to change the topic from that specifically questioned above then I suggest you start your own thread.

Oh, you can't, you're not validated. :o

[VZLAD]

tis what I thought but was starting to get a bit confused with the crap this vs that bullshit

[Martin_D]

Tone,
Back to the point mate. Your car has real problems which need to be sorted.

[dean]

A while back I went from an 85mm MAF to Mafless (on a H&C setup) and picked up power from midrange through to top end (back to back, same dyno, same day). Car was better to drive, idled better, went harder - no question about the benefit a Mafless tune provided. If you are worried about warranty, there going to notice the different MAF anyway :doh:

[BLACK 346]

A while back I went from an 85mm MAF to Mafless (on a H&C setup) and picked up power from midrange through to top end (back to back, same dyno, same day). Car was better to drive, idled better, went harder - no question about the benefit a Mafless tune provided. If you are worried about warranty, there going to notice the different MAF anyway :doh:

They are talking about a VZ dean, already has an 85mm
maf, so no difference to notice.

[markone2]

A while back I went from an 85mm MAF to Mafless (on a H&C setup) and picked up power from midrange through to top end (back to back, same dyno, same day). Car was better to drive, idled better, went harder - no question about the benefit a Mafless tune provided. If you are worried about warranty, there going to notice the different MAF anyway :doh:


To those sitting on the fence undecided between the two tunes I suggest now is the time to backtrack through this thread and count who has posted there*OPINION*...and who has posted of there 1st hand *EXPERINCE* with BOTH the Maf and Mafless tunes on the same vehicle......as above.....

[SV8VY]

To those sitting on the fence undecided between the two tunes I suggest now is the time to backtrack through this thread and count who has posted there*OPINION*...and who has posted of there 1st hand *EXPERINCE* with BOTH the Maf and Mafless tunes on the same vehicle......as above.....
I will find out on Wednesday at WSID as I have had the Mafless done and retuned yesterday.
Not the VZ but the Vy.

[MNR-0]

I will find out on Wednesday at WSID as I have had the Mafless done and retuned yesterday.
Not the VZ but the Vy.
Remember, track performance is not everything. Achieving the optimal balance between street and strip is, IMHO, the holy grail of modifying your street car.

[markone2]

I will find out on Wednesday at WSID as I have had the Mafless done and retuned yesterday.
Not the VZ but the Vy.


Excellent ;)

[Uncle Tone]

Yes it has. Go back about 5 pages.

Tone, I know you, so don't take it personally, but if you want to change the topic from that specifically questioned above then I suggest you start your own thread.

Oh, you can't, you're not validated. :o

No probs mate, but I think you'll find that the subject swayed when I asked questions legitimately related to the above, which instead of answered were thrown back in my face, and defence was necessary. :)

Why am I not validated? Maybe Martin will validate me...... :p

[alexcs]

To those sitting on the fence undecided between the two tunes I suggest now is the time to backtrack through this thread and count who has posted there*OPINION*...and who has posted of there 1st hand *EXPERINCE* with BOTH the Maf and Mafless tunes on the same vehicle......as above.....

the above has head and cam, not stock.

cheers.

[VYMaloo]

Well for all of the uninformed Mr Tuna has been known to drop the occasional free tune into a struggling vehicle . SSBABY comes to mind and he even was bold enough to say the best tune he's had ( and he's tried a few ). Tuna has nothing to proove , maybe we're lucky that he has input in this thread at all .

[alexcs]

then again maybe we arent..if people dont want to answer the quesiton posed, whats the point of coming on a stirring up the same maf v mafless debate this forum has had for the last 3 years?

this wasnt meant to be about egos, it was a simple question that apparently is a little too hard to get our heads around. fair enough, but perhaps we cna drop the bickering now..start another maf v mafless thread if youre that keen to stir shit.

[markone2]

the above has head and cam, not stock.

cheers.


Then I humbly recommend you pm *Jud*....this Gentlemen runs a low 12 in his VZ SS ute.........perhaps you could enquire at what stage of high 13's the maf was ditched ;)

[alexcs]

low 12's stock apart from an edit?

where did he get his maf tune?

[Uncle Tone]

this Gentlemen runs a low 12 in his VZ SS ute.........perhaps you could enquire at what stage of high 13's the maf was ditched ;)

Was the transition from high 13's to low 12's only due to going from maf to mafless tune? If so, can someone explain why this is achievable? We know that the difference between maf and mafless is only airflow restriction, and the same power can be achieved if the airflow restriction is equal between the two tunes.....so there MUST be something more to it!!

Please....PRETTY PLEASE......can someone answer this????

I'm not looking to get flamed again, just asking. If there is some deep dark secret to mafless tunes that enables them to make more power than maf tunes discounting airflow restriction I think everyone would like to know, so all of us maf guys can unleash our engines hidden power with a mafless tune! :cool:

[Uncle Tone]

Remember, track performance is not everything. Achieving the optimal balance between street and strip is, IMHO, the holy grail of modifying your street car.

Beautiful, beautiful. Well said :cool:

[markone2]

low 12's stock apart from an edit?

where did he get his maf tune?


Low 12's unopened with mafless edit.
You will have to pm *Jud* to ask tune details....it was not a PT tune

[Delco]

Was the transition from high 13's to low 12's only due to going from maf to mafless tune? If so, can someone explain why this is achievable? We know that the difference between maf and mafless is only airflow restriction, and the same power can be achieved if the airflow restriction is equal between the two tunes.....so there MUST be something more to it!!

Please....PRETTY PLEASE......can someone answer this????

I'm not looking to get flamed again, just asking. If there is some deep dark secret to mafless tunes that enables them to make more power than maf tunes discounting airflow restriction I think everyone would like to know, so all of us maf guys can unleash our engines hidden power with a mafless tune! :cool:


A engine is just a big air pump , ITS ALL ABOUT AIRFLOW RESTRICTION :bash: :bash:

[markone2]

Remember, track performance is not everything. Achieving the optimal balance between street and strip is, IMHO, the holy grail of modifying your street car.


and the optimal guide to your cars street performance is...

A/ Dyno paper?
B/ Time slip?

[COOKIE!]

and the optimal guide to your cars street performance is...

A/ Dyno paper?
B/ Time slip?


Ill Take B thanks Larry :lol: :lol: :lol:



Now can i play for the Mega showcase.......

[Uncle Tone]

A engine is just a big air pump , ITS ALL ABOUT AIRFLOW RESTRICTION :bash: :bash:

.....as you said ages ago. :D as did MNR-O.

So that, my friends, is that.

THERE ARE NO OTHER FACTORS THAT ENABLE A MAFLESS TUNE TO MAKE MORE POWER THAN A MAF TUNE!! :bash: :bash:

Does anyone disagree??

[Gareth@Willall]

.....as you said ages ago. :D as did MNR-O.

So that, my friends, is that.

THERE ARE NO OTHER FACTORS THAT ENABLE A MAFLESS TUNE TO MAKE MORE POWER THAN A MAF TUNE!! :bash: :bash:

Does anyone disagree??

Probably most of the people who paid extra for mafless tuning :lol: But honestly there is more to it than that.

[Uncle Tone]

Probably most of the people who paid extra for mafless tuning :lol: But honestly there is more to it than that.

Could you elaborate a bit? These things need to be known!!! :)

[Redline]

Could you elaborate a bit? These things need to be known!!! :) How much correction factor did u program into the dyno to get 265rwkw?? :lol:

[Uncle Tone]

How much correction factor did u program into the dyno to get 265rwkw?? :lol:

Can anyone watching this thread who witnessed my car on the dyno answer that? :rolleyes:

I know, I know.....wipe your ass with the dyno sheet etc etc...... :rolleyes:

[Redline]

Can anyone watching this thread who witnessed my car on the dyno answer that? :rolleyes:

I know, I know.....wipe your ass with the dyno sheet etc etc...... :rolleyes: Just because people witnessed it make the power doesnt mean the dyno wasnt running a correction factor. It was a serious question, Was it a Dyno Dynamics running in Shoot8, Shoot81, normal mode....what??

If you continue to be stupid about it and cause trouble then we can organise a holiday for you, would you like that instead??

[alexcs]

might be better just to lock it redline, there wont be anytihng else gained in terms of the OT.

[MNR-0]

and the optimal guide to your cars street performance is...

A/ Dyno paper?
B/ Time slip?
A weak attempt, but a start nonetheless:

a car that is not shamed at the track and performs consistently good times
a car that is enjoyable to drive
a car than handles (90/10 suspension aint my idea of a twistie good time)
a car that stops well (good brakes)
a car that looks the goods (inside and out - not gutting)
a car that doesn't pig root on the freeway
a car that idles evenly (smooth or lopey)
a car that doesn't stall
a car that delivers torque smoothly (not hit you in the head at 4000RPM)
a car that delivers good fuel economy (better than stock)
a car that can drive quitely (no gutted cats/dropped resonators etc)
a car that is ADR compliant and meets all emissions regulations
a car that runs 11s :lol:

[Gareth@Willall]

Could you elaborate a bit? These things need to be known!!! :)

Im being General..... Think about it tho..... It cant be as easy as one reason!

[HRT Stroker]

Uncle Tone, your questions have been answered by THREE reptuable tuners with alot of runs and years on the board.

Your persistance with this is gone past a joke, combined with your childish crap yesterday and your a bee's appendage from a LENGTHY holiday.

Do not post any more rubbish in here.

Re read the thread from the start (as I have just done) and accept the experience of those that KNOW.

Or, spend some money, get a mafless tune and compare the results on your own car as countless members here have done that way, instead of pumping others for information, you can share some.

Consider yourself warned.

EOF.

[Martin_D]

A weak attempt, but a start nonetheless:

a car that is not shamed at the track and performs consistently good times
a car that is enjoyable to drive
a car than handles (90/10 suspension aint my idea of a twistie good time)
a car that stops well (good brakes)
a car that looks the goods (inside and out - not gutting)
a car that doesn't pig root on the freeway
a car that idles evenly (smooth or lopey)
a car that doesn't stall
a car that delivers torque smoothly (not hit you in the head at 4000RPM)
a car that delivers good fuel economy (better than stock)
a car that can drive quitely (no gutted cats/dropped resonators etc)
a car that is ADR compliant and meets all emissions regulations
a car that runs 11s :lol:

Hey give me my car back!

[Beej]

and the optimal guide to your cars street performance is...

A/ Dyno paper?
B/ Time slip?

What about C/ Consistently achievable lap times around a decent circuit like Eastern Creek

I vote C!! ;)

Sorry Mark couldn't resist!

Cheers,

Beej

[Uncle Tone]

Just because people witnessed it make the power doesnt mean the dyno wasnt running a correction factor. It was a serious question, Was it a Dyno Dynamics running in Shoot8, Shoot81, normal mode....what??

If you continue to be stupid about it and cause trouble then we can organise a holiday for you, would you like that instead??

Sorry. I thought with the inclusion of a :lol: emoticon that you were making fun of the fact.

Anyway, I have no idea what correction factor was used. But what I do know is that at the Anzac day dyno day everyone was down 10-20 rwkw to what they normally read on other dynos, and my car produced 256rwkw, and it was agreed amongst the people there on the day that my 265rwkw number produced on a Dyno Dynamics in Shootout mode was valid. :)

[RIDE:42]

Can anyone watching this thread who witnessed my car on the dyno answer that? :rolleyes:

I know, I know.....wipe your ass with the dyno sheet etc etc...... :rolleyes:


dynolog
test comments---
correction 3.32 sae j607 (wtf)
category 8cyl rwd
power(hp)317@160kph
power (kw)237@160kph
max tacho 11855 rpm (not bad reving from a 224 cam hey)
but i think the dyno was out a bit :lol:

[SV8VY]

What about C/ Consistently achievable lap times around a decent circuit like Eastern Creek

I vote C!! ;)

Sorry Mark couldn't resist!

Cheers,

Beej
Ill go for A,B and C

A -dyno figure has been done (and passed the test)
B - there at WSID tomorrow if it doesnt rain (again)
C -u at Eastern creek soon to beat my 1min 59

[VXSS346]

back on topic please......

4.....3.....2......

What was the topic again??? :confused:

But seriously.
This thread is not getting anywhere anymore.
I keep clicking on it just to see what Uncle tone has to say, and what he cops from the others. (no offence intended)

[r8ls1]

The only thing a maf does over mafless is restrict the very top end a bit, and at this stage nobody has run a maf and OTRCAI.
ye its been done ;) but only cuase of time(lack of) and not preference. 119mph from h/c 346 A4 /std tb/maf & orcai

defintly go mafless to get that last bit and a smoother idel even more so with the 230+ cams there is no doubt it has its advantages. its easier to leave it off if you know how to tune .

[RIDE:42]

http://voodoo.theddrzone.com/misc/capacity.jpg

[Justice R8]

Tones car made 256rwkw. I checked the settings on the dyno and it was legit. It was a dynolog dyno and the operater showed me any parameter I asked for, whilst I was on the phone with somebody that knows how they work well. Everything seemed ok. Other cars were down a couple of kw compared to other dynos they had used. I agree the car made a freaky level for a stocker.

Remember though tone. A peak power figure means nothing. Its the curve below full power that makes the diff on any track.

[Uncle Tone]

Tones car made 256rwkw. I checked the settings on the dyno and it was legit. It was a dynolog dyno and the operater showed me any parameter I asked for, whilst I was on the phone with somebody that knows how they work well. Everything seemed ok. Other cars were down a couple of kw compared to other dynos they had used. I agree the car made a freaky level for a stocker.

Remember though tone. A peak power figure means nothing. Its the curve below full power that makes the diff on any track.

Thanks Justice. :) I appreciate your efforts.

I wholehartedly agree on your point about peak power. This is something I have never disputed, actually I have seeked opinions on my power curve by others but so far have had no responses on the forums. I have put my sheet up for all to see and asked, but to no avail. :(

Considering my car is tuned with a maf, and considering also that the original poster in this thread asked for clarification on what sort of midrange power a maf tune could make, could you guys have a look at my dyno sheet and tell me if my car is peaky? Hopefully some sort of outcome can be gained by this, either for or against. :)

Err....how do I post my dyno sheet here? :confused:

[SLE355]

Here you go

http://forum.streetcommodores.com.au/attachment.php?attachmentid=20131&stc=1

[Craig]

But what I do know is that at the Anzac day dyno day everyone was down 10-20 rwkw to what they normally read on other dynoslol so mine was on its way to 370RW :p

[Senator05]

If you continue to be stupid about it and cause trouble then we can organise a holiday for you, would you like that instead??
Let's see...poster gets challenged, he then asks others for independant verification and gets threats from the Moderator. That sounds fair ?!?!

If a number of your forum readers have to ask what a MAF is, why would you assume they even know the first thing about correction factors for Dynos. If this LS1 forum is meant only for enthusiats who do nothing but tune their cars to within an inch of their life and run quarter miles every Saturday night instead of having a well balanced life, just say so on the welcome page and I and many others will disappear. I'm sure your sponsors would appreciate that. It's been an eye opener over the last couple of weeks.

On another note, and this is a general comment for all sponsors, by in my case directed to Tuna, it's disconcerting that my email to a sponsor asking questions about potential business gets competely ignored, but you've got heaps of time to sling excrement at Tone. The recommendation from my Holden dealer is apparently misplaced.

I guess I'll sit here and wait for my account to be cancelled, or at least get a shining red light for my trouble.

[Uncle Tone]

Uncle Tone, your questions have been answered by THREE reptuable tuners with a lot of runs and years on the board.
Your persistence with this is gone past a joke, combined with your childish crap yesterday and your a bee's appendage from a LENGTHY holiday.
Are you saying that I'm just supposed to nod my head, say thank you, and just accept what is posted? Why am I not entitled to seek clarification if I don't understand? What is this forum really for?

In my opinion this sort of thing goes against everything that forums stand for. Is this forum to share information with others, and to discuss options and experiences, or is it just to promote the opinions of a few select people?

If this is true, perhaps you should make it clear to people when they join, so they have some sort of idea what they can and cannot say here, and if you have done so already, forgive me, as I didn't realize this was the case.

Regarding yesterday, I did not realize that it would cause offence, it was only meant as a joke. If you could not see that, considering the way this thread has gone, then this is something I can't help you with.



Do not post any more rubbish in here.
I ask you to point out where I have done this, in what context, and in what situation.


Re read the thread from the start (as I have just done) and accept the experience of those that KNOW.
I will not accept any opinions from people who withold fact, and hide behind their reputations and flame me when asked direct questions that for some reason they don't choose to answer, for whatever reason. Those who responded properly were treated with respect, as you plainly saw when you read this thread again, as I just have.


Or, spend some money, get a mafless tune and compare the results on your own car as countless members here have done that way, instead of pumping others for information, you can share some.

I have no problems with doing that, if I can get an unbiased opinion on whether it is worthwhile, which I have seeked and not recieved. Never have I said that mafless tunes were crap. Never have I said that maf tunes are better. I have only asked questions, and for that I have recieved ridicule, which, I hope you will understand, I will not tolerate. My reactions to the flaming I recieved was completely justified, and nobody can dispute this.

I have also tried to share what information I have, but as you have seen in this thread, it was not well-recieved, as it went against what is considered the norm, therefore was cast aside as farce.


Consider yourself warned.

Duly noted, but please make sure you can justify any action you take. If you honestly can, without influence and pressure from others for you to do so, then be my guest and ban me. Its unimportant to me whether I can post here or not, and it is blatantly obvious that I have nothing to offer this particular forum, judging by the attitudes of the powers that be.

[Uncle Tone]

Here you go

http://forum.streetcommodores.com.au/attachment.php?attachmentid=20131&stc=1

Thanks Buddy!! :D

Does it look peaky to anyone after studying it?

[Uncle Tone]

Let's see...poster gets challenged, he then asks others for independant verification and gets threats from the Moderator. That sounds fair ?!?!

If a number of your forum readers have to ask what a MAF is, why would you assume they even know the first thing about correction factors for Dynos. If this LS1 forum is meant only for enthusiats who do nothing but tune their cars to within an inch of their life and run quarter miles every Saturday night instead of having a well balanced life, just say so on the welcome page and I and many others will disappear. I'm sure your sponsors would appreciate that. It's been an eye opener over the last couple of weeks.

On another note, and this is a general comment for all sponsors, by in my case directed to Tuna, it's disconcerting that my email to a sponsor asking questions about potential business gets competely ignored, but you've got heaps of time to sling excrement at Tone. The recommendation from my Holden dealer is apparently misplaced.

I guess I'll sit here and wait for my account to be cancelled, or at least get a shining red light for my trouble.

You and me both, mate, after my last post. :(

Thanks for your words, much appreciated.

Sad thing is, Martin Donnon is one of my favourite motoring writers. His story on the XL files in Zoom had me rivetted for months!! Couldn't wait for the next installment of the saga. Oh well.

[Martin_D]

On another note, and this is a general comment for all sponsors, by in my case directed to Tuna, it's disconcerting that my email to a sponsor asking questions about potential business gets competely ignored, but you've got heaps of time to sling excrement at Tone.

Who ignored you? You never sent me an email digger.

Sorry Uncle, missed your bit at the end. Credibility is about backing up results. We all have to do it no matter how painful it becomes, especially when we make claims that others consider unreasonable. You are 35, own an apparently powerful car, and have been driving for many years, yet your excuse for it being slow is "I can't drive". How do you expect most of the guys here who are enthusiasts to take you seriously?

Your maf tuned car with a heap of mods and a big dyno sheet has neither the speed or ET of a dead standard 225rwkw VY SS with only an Edit alone. What do you expect people to think?

Actually Tone, I will answer your question. Whats better about a Mafless tune? Mainly the fact that it doesn't allow lazy tuners to 'join the dots' with the MAF and set your fuel by the PE table, which way too many of them do. Which is why a properly tuned Mafless arrangement is far and away the best approach. Unfortunately not too many can do em properly.

[HRT Stroker]

Are you saying that I'm just supposed to nod my head, say thank you, and just accept what is posted? Why am I not entitled to seek clarification if I don't understand? What is this forum really for?

I am saying that if you seek information from those that have forgotten more about tuning than you or I are ever likely to know, you should listen to their responses. If you expect a Tuner to lecture you until you do understand you had better get out your wallet.



In my opinion this sort of thing goes against everything that forums stand for. Is this forum to share information with others, and to discuss options and experiences, or is it just to promote the opinions of a few select people?

If this is true, perhaps you should make it clear to people when they join, so they have some sort of idea what they can and cannot say here, and if you have done so already, forgive me, as I didn't realize this was the case.



Perhaps a little more time spent searching, reading and listening instead of "soap boxing" might improve the quality of your time here....




Regarding yesterday, I did not realize that it would cause offence, it was only meant as a joke. If you could not see that, considering the way this thread has gone, then this is something I can't help you with.


Thanks, but I am in no need of help from you. :) As I made clear to you after your whinge via PM, if you want to post like a 15 year old, Street Commodres may be more your pace.......although it may already have been. :wave:



I will not accept any opinions from people who withold fact, and hide behind their reputations and flame me when asked direct questions that for some reason they don't choose to answer, for whatever reason. Those who responded properly were treated with respect, as you plainly saw when you read this thread again, as I just have.


From what I have read the Tuners here gave you their opinion with clear explanation......quite generously considering it's their intellectual property and experience..... :shock:



I have no problems with doing that, if I can get an unbiased opinion on whether it is worthwhile, which I have seeked and not recieved. Never have I said that mafless tunes were crap. Never have I said that maf tunes are better. I have only asked questions, and for that I have recieved ridicule, which, I hope you will understand, I will not tolerate. My reactions to the flaming I recieved was completely justified, and nobody can dispute this.

I have also tried to share what information I have, but as you have seen in this thread, it was not well-recieved, as it went against what is considered the norm, therefore was cast aside as farce.


There are plenty of people offering there experiences with going MAF to MAFless tunes here....... :deal:



Duly noted, but please make sure you can justify any action you take. If you honestly can, without influence and pressure from others for you to do so, then be my guest and ban me. Its unimportant to me whether I can post here or not, and it is blatantly obvious that I have nothing to offer this particular forum, judging by the attitudes of the powers that be.


I have no pressure upon me from anyone here......it is clear from the response to your posting behaviour (Polls posted, your reputation dive etc) that I was not alone in feeling that you were going about things the wrong way...... :yup:

As to your ability to contribute.......that remains to be seen and is YOUR responsibilty ;)


HRT Stroker

[myles]

Whats better about a Mafless tune? Mainly the fact that it doesn't allow lazy tuners to 'join the dots' with the MAF and set your fuel by the PE table, which way too many of them do. Which is why a properly tuned Mafless arrangement is far and away the best approach. Unfortunately not too many can do em properly.

Thanks tuna. That makes sense. :cheers:

[Uncle Tone]

lol so mine was on its way to 370RW :p

I was only going on what was said to me on the day.

[Uncle Tone]

I am saying that if you seek information from those that have forgotten more about tuning than you or I are ever likely to know, you should listen to their responses. If you expect a Tuner to lecture you until you do understand you had better get out your wallet.
I did listen. The majority answered the questions I put forward, as you will see if you read the thread again.

And if a tuner can't take the time to explain themselves and their methods to the prospective clients satisfaction prior to any works started and remuneration exchange, then said tuner deserves no clients. I am not the only person that thinks this way.


Perhaps a little more time spent searching, reading and listening instead of "soap boxing" might improve the quality of your time here.... I would love for you to point out where I've been soap boxing.
Reading and listening only, eh? No asking questions? What is this forum? One big advertisment?


Thanks, but I am in no need of help from you. :) As I made clear to you after your whinge via PM, if you want to post like a 15 year old, Street Commodres may be more your pace.......although it may already have been. :wave:
I was told that this forum would offer constructive advice and debate, in contrast with SC. Obviously I was misinformed.

I still maintain that you have no sense of humour.




From what I have read the Tuners here gave you their opinion with clear explanation......quite generously considering it's their intellectual property and experience..... :shock:
Those who have contributed appropriately have, this is true.


There are plenty of people offering there experiences with going MAF to MAFless tunes here....... :deal:
......and how many of them have explained why their mafless tunes made more power?


I have no pressure upon me from anyone here......it is clear from the response to your posting behaviour (Polls posted, your reputation dive etc) that I was not alone in feeling that you were going about things the wrong way...... :yup:
Of course people are going to give me a bad rap. I'm disagreeing with the norm, and questioning the methods that for ages have gone unquestioned! People don't like being challenged, that I can accept. However, what I don't accept is ridicule directed towards me for trying to get this story straight.


As to your ability to contribute.......that remains to be seen and is YOUR responsibility
I will not lie down, if thats what you are alluding to......rest assured of that. Nor will I provoke threads intentionally. I will react appropriately.

[SV8VY]

I was only going on what was said to me on the day.In all seriousness the good reputable tuners have edited many cars and engines and you should really listen to what they say.
Yes anyone with a laptop and the software and a little knowledge can edit a car with the main specs for a maf tune ,BUT all cars are individual and need to be tuned live on the rollers or on the street and /or both.
Obviously as the Mod said earlier the tuners wont go into detail as this is their lively hood and bread and butter.
I have heard of a few people that have had a tune,bought the software and tried to profit by selling to others but there are problems as you cant use the same tune for every car.
Yes there are many here on the forum that like to take the cars down the strip and track to see the potential and power their cars make all in good safe fun.
A good fast street car will be quick on the track as well as comfortable to drive everyday even to go shopping with the family.
Mine is used every single day for work,family etc.
The track will give you the TRUE POWER of the car and is a safe way of doing this if you really want to find out.
The dynos need to be used as a tool rather than a correct power figure.
I have been on MANY dynos all all are different even though they are the same brand.
My power on the dynos are between 209 and 235 rkw. :eek:
I average it out and don't put too much emphasis in it.
I beat the HSV range easily as bought at the showroom and have beaten a friend of mine showing 287 rkw with many $ spent on the car and engine.
Your questions have been answered in a general way and unfortunately they wont go in to detail to give others free valuable information and tips.
I have had both maf and now mafless tune and personally think the mafless idles better,better fuel economy and seems to bring the torque power longer through the rev range.
I suggest you go on another reputable 'Dyno Dynamics' dyno for a quick power run if you are concerned about the reading as mph is a true indicator of power in the end.

[chops]

and how many of them have explained why their mafless tunes made more power?

Most customers probably don't know or care.

[MNR-0]

Hey Tone,

Check your serial numbers on your heads at the back. You may have the obligatory C4B head that accidentally made its way onto a number of stockers. Your power figure is not indicative of a stocker for sure, unfortunately the track time is.

I agree with Tuna about the MAFless tuning bit. Although in the end, its just another way of commanding the air fuel ratio. MAFless does give you rigid control of AFR via the VE table. With a MAF, the PE table is not as predictable, but still works. In my limited expereince tuning my own car and helping out a few others, Ive used both methods, and I appreciate both (yes Tuna, even WOT tuning via the VE). Nevertheless, this point is felt more by the tuner than the customer. I firmly believe both approaches can result in fast cars, and since the customer is not doing the tuning, I question does he/she really care?

Believe it or not, the best MAF tuned car has both a MAFless and MAF tune dialled in. Meditate on that for a while.

In conclusion, you will never get a definitive answer on what is best. It depends on whose perspective, the Tuners or the Customers, and how much it costs.

[VX2VESS]

Believe it or not, the best MAF tuned car has both a MAFless and MAF tune dialled in. Meditate on that for a while.

In conclusion, you will never get a definitive answer on what is best. It depends on whose perspective, the Tuners or the Customers, and how much it costs.

meaning tuned it for mafless to get that right, then added the maf back?