[MalcolmV8]

Hey Guys,

Had a customer's blown fox come in for a retune after some changes. Built 306 with a Procharger. Strapped it on the dyno and started fixing MAF and quickly realized it was to small. Maxed out at 5 volts at 4400 RPM making around 400 whp. Looked up his part # and it's the bone stock MAF in a bigger housing.
What's a nice replacement MAF for the fox bodies that'll just bolt into stock flange (since it's already in a larger housing). Will the SCT BA2600 MAF for example work? I've used a lot of the SCT range of MAFs on the SN95 cars and they work well.

Thanks

[cgrey8]

My knee-jerk reaction is C&L housing for a plug-n-play solution. But that's an old school solution, not a modern solution.

[MalcolmV8]

I took apart what was on the car and it was indeed a C&L housing which explains how it made the HP it did on a stock MAF. I called Pro M up and they set me up with a housing with the same 3.5" inlet and 3" outlet so it'll bolt right into the guy's car and will have a Pro M MAF on it that they claim will handle the HP. Should be able to get back on this car by next week and see how it does.

[cgrey8]

In that case, you could replace the tube with one that'd register more air. But the Pro M route is probably the better one.

[MalcolmV8]

I'd thought about that but every time we try something new like that means getting the car on the schedule, getting the car on the dyno, start tuning till we find either it works or max out MAF again. That gets a whole lot more expensive and time consuming.
If it was just a little side project it'd be fun to tinker with and see how that works out.

[cgrey8]

That's the difference between a project and a money-maker. Hobby's don't really follow the time-is-money philosophy. So if time is a factor, then you got the right idea. Get what you know is going to fix the problem even if it's costs a bit more.

[MalcolmV8]

Yes exactly. When it's a DIY side project at home you don't charge yourself for labor so if it takes a month of experimenting and you get it you consider it a win and you "saved" money. But when a customer is paying for dyno time and tuning sessions & labor using known working solutions is the cheapest and best route.

With that said one thing that does concern me with the Pro M is that the website said the sensor was rated to 550 flywheel HP and I told the tech on the phone that we plan on making that to the wheels. He said that since I'm using the meter in a blow through configuration the range is extended and I will have no problem with that. I was very surprised because that's the exact opposite of my experience. I've tuned plenty of centrifugal supercharger & turbocharged cars in blow through configuration and the meter is always a lot smaller than in draw through. He said it's because I've been using junk sensors. IE OEM Ford slot sensors, SCT, HPX etc. He says Pro M makes all those sensors and they're just rebadged and none of those are of the same quality as the actual Pro M.
So we shall see.

[cgrey8]

I can't say for sure how much truth there is in Pro M, but I do believe their sensors are significantly better and handle blow as well as a draw where other sensors suddenly behave differently in a blow-thru. I think the classic example is what a complete fail the infamous LMAF is in a blow-thru config. It's to the point of being completely useless and completely unreliable under boost blow-thru conditions.

As for whether the sensor will handle 550 at the wheels vs flywheel, I'd feel a lot better about just getting the flow sheet from them. Then you could determine that for yourself. Doing a little math with your inputs being expected max HP, an assumed BSFC based on blower type and PSI, the tune's target AFR, fuel type, and you should be able to estimate max mass-flow rate. As long as the MAF's curve is capable of representing that max flow rate without exceeding 4.7v, you are good.

[MalcolmV8]

That goes back to does the flow sheet truly represent the sensor's abilities in blow through? The tech was confident their sensors read better in in blow through configurations so I took his word for it.

Interestingly to get data on the MAF cost an extra $50 over the cost of the MAF. So we'll see what that looks like when it arrives. Goes back to what costs more? a good baseline to start with vs dyno & tuning time to figure out the curve. I can't say I've ever purchased a part before though and then had to pay extra to get data on the part I just bought lol.

[cgrey8]

The only way I'd pay the extra is if what they supply is SPECIFIC to your MAF, and not just some general curve you could get from others.