Using MAF Translator with SAFC 2

[J. Fast]

Well MAP is a projected airflow estimation and MAF is an exact airflow measurement so which one has more precision when calculating fuel delivery? At one point in time I used to think MAP>MAF Well that really isn't so. Map is cheap and very stable but sensitive to modification changes. With Map any time you change something on your vehicle and alter the airflow you have to re-tune or tweak this and that unless you start integrating additional sensors such as baro, fuel, and etc. MAF, well, you spend more time upfront but your fuel compensation will always be the same based on airflow. The only real difference between in the two is when they calculate airflow. One calculates based on the exact amount of air being metered before the TP, the other uses Boyle's thermodynamic principle to estimate CFM.


Why standalone w/MAF over MAF AFC aswell? Well, BSFC for one, BSFC can be manipulated by AFR. Second and most important, anything accessing load of manifold pressure will compensate all tables. When you use MAF and AFC you compensate linearly, and globally. Compensations are very rarely linear, most all are parabolic. Finally, your car isn't stock and either is the volumetric airflow. 3.5L tells me larger bore, different stroke, different VE, different fuel and timing compensation requirements. What you have going on isn't stock... not even close. Buy something to make real time scaled corrections, with additional safety parameters you can control, and a three dimensional tuning solution for 3 dimensional problems associated with cars that produce 600+ hp. Just my .02. You spent a ton of time and money and you get what you pay for.

[shmoo]

great write up guys. after reading this, i sent payment for a maftranslator and gm maf. i've already got an safc1