[mobiuslogic]

Alrighty, so after looking at numerous intake setups, the MAF location can vary anywhere between the throttle body and the aif filter. But where is the BEST location? I remember reading long ago that the best place is as close to the TB as possible, because that way the MAF will register the drop in pressure faster, as there is less air between the throttle plate and the sensor and as such it will increase fuel sooner, giving better throttle response.

Bob, or anyone, can you confirm, deny, or do I have it all backwards? Obviously anywhere it will still register the same amount of air, but where will it register the change sooner, and as such, give better throttle response?

-mobiuslogic

 

[mobiuslogic]

Bob? Venom? Anybody? It's getting dark in here....

-mobiuslogic

 

[ron porter]

Early on, when the SHO Shop first did the 80mm MAF with the Can and K&N conical, it moved the MAF closer to the TB. Supposedly that is not a good thing, as turbulence was supposed to cause false readings.

They seem to work OK there, but looking in the Probst book, the only mention of it (on page 80) is that:

"Ford considers the delivery of air into the sensor to be even-flow, "laminar" is the term. If you plan any rework of the sensor mounting or it's duct work, consider the importance of the even flow of intake air."

The greatest potential for disturbed airflow is close to the TB, so I would not put it too close.

BTW, the MAF doesn't measure changes in pressure, it measures changes in air temperature across two wires, which measures the mass of air (temp and density). Pressure is not a part of that equation.

 

[shoz123]

I had the MAF in the fender at one time. While on the dyno I moved it to just in front of the TB (~2"). Although there was no change in peek HP, the HP did come on a couple hundred rpms sooner.

 

[PRLatinLoco]

I read an article on the Maf, and the author said that the ideal location for the MAF is as far away as possible from the TB. That's because engine noise can cause bad readings by the MAF. That fact is verified by simply looking inside stock MAFs and seeing the Post with the metal plate between the sensor and the TB. This plate is designed to absorb the sound and protect the sensor from the noise. I modified a stock MAF by removing this post and plate in the MAF. The MAF proved less restrictive, but a combination of increased intake noise to the sensor and altered air flow to the sensor caused my car to idle very, very roughly and sometimes cut off (The MAF was still in it's stock position between the filter and the TB... I didn't bother moving it). I need a recalibrated sensor in order to overcome these problems.

 

[shoz123]

The typical two wire MAF uses two heating elements to sense air mass. One is a standard reference the other varies due to air flow. I don't think noise has a thing to do with it.

 

[ron porter]

As Paul mentioned. noise has no bearing on the function of the MAF.

Chances are that when you did your MAF mod, you did not have a smooth airflow over the wires (see the quote from the Probst book in an earlier response), or you damaged the (very fragile) wire assembly in the MAF

 

[mobiuslogic]

Well, I will go with SHOZ's answer about moving it closer to the MAF, because that would go along with my thought and previous reading about getting a faster throttle response. It may be only a few hundred RPMs, but it's better than nothing.

I have no idea why "engine noise" would throw off the reading of the MAF, that one really doesn't make sense. As for air turbulence, that should all be behind the TB and make no consquence to the MAF reading.

Plus, when the TB opens (even if only a little bit), it opens on the top and bottom, and so air flow should be even on the top and bottom ("laminar") of the MAF and intake pipe and not cause any turbulence because the air flow would still be even.

SHOZ, thank you.

-mobiuslogic

 

[silvapain]

Originally posted by SHOZ123@Apr 17 2004, 11:49 PM
The typical two wire MAF uses two heating elements to sense air mass.  One is a standard reference the other varies due to air flow.  I don't think noise has a thing to do with it. 

the "noise" he is talking about is backpressure waves from the valves closing. I ported my MAF, and had the same thing happen. The sensor isn't damaged, I put it in another housing, and it works fine. That is one reason there is that baffle post in the MAF.

 

[shoz123]

On the SHOs they have the surge tanks to modualte the noise or pressure waves from the valves.

 

[silvapain]

Originally posted by SHOZ123@Apr 18 2004, 08:35 PM
On the SHOs they have the surge tanks to modualte the noise or pressure waves from the valves.

Yeah, but he has a vulcan. They don't have anything like that.

 

[shoz123]

Originally posted by silvapain+Apr 18 2004, 09:40 PM-->QUOTE (silvapain @ Apr 18 2004, 09:40 PM)

<!--QuoteBegin-SHOZ123

@Apr 18 2004, 08:35 PM
On the SHOs they have the surge tanks to modualte the noise or pressure waves from the valves.

Yeah, but he has a vulcan. They don't have anything like that. [/b]