Running 35r on stock maf
Jan 4, 2009, 03:38 PM
#31
Just to throw another spanner in the works...
HKS open air induction kit, does that not change the flow of air into the sensor, ie more turbulence thus making it read a lower load?
If that statement above is true then merely removing the honeycombe, in theory, should only reduce the load?
Please comment.
HKS open air induction kit, does that not change the flow of air into the sensor, ie more turbulence thus making it read a lower load?
If that statement above is true then merely removing the honeycombe, in theory, should only reduce the load?
Please comment.
Jan 4, 2009, 09:45 PM
#32
Evolving Member
iTrader: (11)
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Thousand Oaks, CA
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i have an extra MAF that i took off the car once i went with the AEM EMS so if any one wants a cheap MAF to try this out on PM me and we can work something out
Jan 5, 2009, 04:35 AM
#33
Just to throw another spanner in the works...
HKS open air induction kit, does that not change the flow of air into the sensor, ie more turbulence thus making it read a lower load?
If that statement above is true then merely removing the honeycombe, in theory, should only reduce the load?
Please comment.
HKS open air induction kit, does that not change the flow of air into the sensor, ie more turbulence thus making it read a lower load?
If that statement above is true then merely removing the honeycombe, in theory, should only reduce the load?
Please comment.
Actualy, the design of the HKS pipe is larger at the MAF, and tapers down to the turbo inlet, so airflow is slower at the MAF reading a lower signal at the MAF. Most aftermarket pipes are either the same size as stock, and has a reducer at the MAF, which of course is a very sudden reduction in size, which can result in higher readings at some RPM's at the MAF due to acceleration and turbulence in the reducer area. Others are overall larger, with the reducer at the Turbo, which results in lower readings too, but also introduces some other quirks.
Jan 5, 2009, 04:37 AM
#34
I want to add, its not that someone couldn't live with the removal of the honeycomb, There just isn't enough evidence that the gains are better than the drivability issues it can introduce.
On a large aftermarket turbo, airflow rates are much slower in daily driving, drivability is just not the same with a GT35r as it is with the stock turbo anyway. But removing the honeycomb DOES adversely affect drivability. Its there for a reason. And it will make signal output more unpredictable at any given RPM under different conditions, which will result in tuning problems.
On a large aftermarket turbo, airflow rates are much slower in daily driving, drivability is just not the same with a GT35r as it is with the stock turbo anyway. But removing the honeycomb DOES adversely affect drivability. Its there for a reason. And it will make signal output more unpredictable at any given RPM under different conditions, which will result in tuning problems.
Jan 5, 2009, 07:14 AM
#35
Account Disabled
iTrader: (38)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Virginia Beach, Virginia
Posts: 9,319
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
have you tested your theory Jack? we all know that what's on paper doesn't always apply in the real world, sometimes you have to ignore what people say and old theories in order to advance.
Jan 5, 2009, 07:25 AM
#36
I want to add, its not that someone couldn't live with the removal of the honeycomb, There just isn't enough evidence that the gains are better than the drivability issues it can introduce.
On a large aftermarket turbo, airflow rates are much slower in daily driving, drivability is just not the same with a GT35r as it is with the stock turbo anyway. But removing the honeycomb DOES adversely affect drivability. Its there for a reason. And it will make signal output more unpredictable at any given RPM under different conditions, which will result in tuning problems.
On a large aftermarket turbo, airflow rates are much slower in daily driving, drivability is just not the same with a GT35r as it is with the stock turbo anyway. But removing the honeycomb DOES adversely affect drivability. Its there for a reason. And it will make signal output more unpredictable at any given RPM under different conditions, which will result in tuning problems.
Originally Posted by TTP-Engineering
If we were to venture a hypothesis, we believe that you may be able to get away with this more easily on a larger turbo like Chris' 35R. For a stocker footprint turbo, I just cannot see all the low rpm airflow and fast transitions in airspeed working out too well without the air straighteners in there.
Great minds think alike.
Jan 5, 2009, 07:33 AM
#37
Account Disabled
iTrader: (38)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Virginia Beach, Virginia
Posts: 9,319
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I think we can all agree that it would be a pointless modification on a small turbo since I didn't find any HP with a larger turbo. Also the smaller turbos aren't in any danger of pulling in the honeycomb most likely and you can always glue it in. So truly, whether or not it causes driveablity issues on a smaller turbo doesn't really matter. I'd just like for there to be testing before bold claims are made based on theory.
Jan 5, 2009, 08:47 AM
#38
I actually did have alot of trouble tuning a car with the MAF screen missing.. It would have alot of fluctuating values under similar conditions. I had worked on this particular car (It had a GT30 in it) for awhile never noticed it was missing, just very difficult to get it to be very drivable under different conditions. At higher load and boost, it was more or less fine. I only discovered the screen was missing because I had taken the MAF off to look at the intake pipe and the DV to see what it was stumbling and stalling so frequently.
My attitude is if it works then fine.. It honestly doesn't matter much to me what people ultimately decide to do. My entire point is there's no benefit to removing it. The screen is an aerodynamic feature to guide the metered air to the right location on the sensor. If its not there, then it won't be properly metered all the time.
And there's a reason the MAF screen seperates and collapses, its due to debris or other damage to the screen causing them to no longer be aligned properly. It generates lift and turbulence which will cause it to collapse into itself. So that I can understand. I now frequently check for defects and straighten them out if I look at a MAF equipped car.
I personally don't run a stock MAF, and haven't for a very long time.
My attitude is if it works then fine.. It honestly doesn't matter much to me what people ultimately decide to do. My entire point is there's no benefit to removing it. The screen is an aerodynamic feature to guide the metered air to the right location on the sensor. If its not there, then it won't be properly metered all the time.
And there's a reason the MAF screen seperates and collapses, its due to debris or other damage to the screen causing them to no longer be aligned properly. It generates lift and turbulence which will cause it to collapse into itself. So that I can understand. I now frequently check for defects and straighten them out if I look at a MAF equipped car.
I personally don't run a stock MAF, and haven't for a very long time.
Last edited by MalibuJack; Jan 5, 2009 at 08:50 AM.
Jan 5, 2009, 08:59 AM
#39
Account Disabled
iTrader: (38)
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Virginia Beach, Virginia
Posts: 9,319
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I'm glad to hear you have some experience...so was the honeycomb/mas replaced and everything was right with the world again? or was it left at that?
I checked my honeycomb when I was ~ 500awhp and they looked fine but the whole thing turned a little, that was enough to prompt me to glue it in. I figure that's cheaper than the alternative
I checked it again before putting in the HTA86 and it looked fine but because of the way I glued it in, my load was artificially higher and pegging 380 prematurely. By removing the honeycomb my load lowered and there's no chance of a failure.
Since then we've figured out how to defeat the 380 load limit in the ROM so that's a non issue though.
I checked my honeycomb when I was ~ 500awhp and they looked fine but the whole thing turned a little, that was enough to prompt me to glue it in. I figure that's cheaper than the alternative
I checked it again before putting in the HTA86 and it looked fine but because of the way I glued it in, my load was artificially higher and pegging 380 prematurely. By removing the honeycomb my load lowered and there's no chance of a failure.
Since then we've figured out how to defeat the 380 load limit in the ROM so that's a non issue though.
Jan 5, 2009, 09:42 AM
#40
Yeah I gave him my Old MAF sensor from my car, kept his around for awhile before I hacked it up to get its MAF connector off it for my third plug and play MAF harness for my blowthrough experiments.
I do have a stock MAF here that I put on my car occasionally (usually its when I have trouble that I'm attempting to diagnose with my blowthrough setup) and I can swap sensors pretty easily, only I don't have a hacked spare laying around to really test this (my car probably isn't a good candidate for this sort of test anyway)
BTW the lowered load is due to the air directing around the sensor's shedder bar. Thats the reason the screen is there. As air speed increases/decreases, due to air density, pressure, or temp, or even the alignment of the air filter will shift the direction the air is traveling slightly which is why at high airflows things don't change much (only read lower, but at least consistently lower) unfortunately at much lower airflow, turbulence has a much larger impact on what gets through the sensor, and at any given time, under the same conditions, the load values could vary due to the output frequency being off.
But in all honestly, we're all in agreement on whether or not its a worthwhile modification for most people, and that simple answer is its probably not.
I do have a stock MAF here that I put on my car occasionally (usually its when I have trouble that I'm attempting to diagnose with my blowthrough setup) and I can swap sensors pretty easily, only I don't have a hacked spare laying around to really test this (my car probably isn't a good candidate for this sort of test anyway)
BTW the lowered load is due to the air directing around the sensor's shedder bar. Thats the reason the screen is there. As air speed increases/decreases, due to air density, pressure, or temp, or even the alignment of the air filter will shift the direction the air is traveling slightly which is why at high airflows things don't change much (only read lower, but at least consistently lower) unfortunately at much lower airflow, turbulence has a much larger impact on what gets through the sensor, and at any given time, under the same conditions, the load values could vary due to the output frequency being off.
But in all honestly, we're all in agreement on whether or not its a worthwhile modification for most people, and that simple answer is its probably not.
Jan 5, 2009, 05:19 PM
#42
Evolving Member
iTrader: (19)
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Ohio
Posts: 336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mellon, you say the word and I'll be ready. Only issue here would be the weather, which is already a limiting factor for tunning my car.
Jan 6, 2009, 02:13 AM
#44
Will the honeycombe survive 2.4 bar from a GT35r?
I was thinking, would a metal mesh before the honeycombe inside the maf help secure it from collapsing under pressure?
I was thinking, would a metal mesh before the honeycombe inside the maf help secure it from collapsing under pressure?
