Or... Where to get a cheap 70mm MAF.
Lately I've been looking at some simple and cheap (especailly cheap!) areas I can improve the performance of my car. I got to thinking about the stock 55mm MAF which for a stocker or minor bolt on car is fine. On my engine it's the final restriction of the intake path that I haven't dealt with. Basically since I'm using 19# injectors I just wanted a larger meter that I can install my stock electronics on. I sure didn't want to pay $180 for a C&L meter housing much less over 250 for the one that comes with that prettly aluminum elbow. SCREW THAT! LOL... So I started researching over at the Corral and learned that the 94/95 Mustangs came stock with a 70mm meter. Sweet! Too bad no-one is selling one at the moment. So I did some more looking around and found out that a few other Fords use the same meter/injector combo. Here's the list that I came up with:
94-95 Mustangs V8 or V6
92-94 Crown Vic 4.6
92-94 Town Car 4.6
92-94 Grand Marquis 4.6
I went to my favorite local yard today. There was not one single SN Mustang but I did find 2 meters on 4.6 Town Cars. It seems the secret is out though because there were only those 2 meters out of about 20 Town Cars and Crown Vics. Anyway, I scored them both for $15 because they didnt have change for a 20 but he had five ones, heheh...
They're not a bolt on proposition though. I've got to do a little modification. You'll notice in the pics that it has a square bolt on . I've got to take them up to work tomorrow and cut off the corners and then grind it round with an aluminum wheel... No biggie.
Once I install it I'll update the thread and let you know how it worked out.
In the mean time. Here's some comarisons with the stocker.
(http://i1.tinypic.com/6ybebzt.jpg)
(http://i9.tinypic.com/6q01jio.jpg)
(http://i15.tinypic.com/72kt4ew.jpg)
http://www.foxtbirdcougarforums.com/showthread.php?t=17529
http://www.foxtbirdcougarforums.com/showthread.php?t=17465
http://www.foxtbirdcougarforums.com/showthread.php?t=17422
Have you looked and read around here?
But what you are not considering, is that large sampling tube blocking airflow in the center...
Truth be it known, I'll bet it doesn't flow any more than a stock 55mm Stang meter... Same ones were on the '96(maybe earlier) 300 6cyl's... I have one and have run it on the '93 Grand Marquis, works fine...
The info that I found was this:
58mm 606 cfm
70mm 815 cfm
I figured 200 CFM is worth a few bucks and a little effort.
One is pending sale, one is sold and the other is way more than I would want to spend. How would that have helped me at all?
Ok IF those figures apply to that style meter...
BTW my '95 4.6 Tbird has a meter like that, but uses the Mustang mounting... It croaked shortly after I got the car and I stuck a Stang unit on it... Checking to see if it's another problem, but it runs pig rich rich on cold idle(below 45*)... Suspect it isn't cal'd correctly.... But it seemed OK at first, even the CEL turned off by it's self, then came back on a few days later... Now has a code 171, prior had a 102....
OK, the results are in and it was a well worthwhile mod. There are no idle or driveability issues. I still pulled 17in/hg vac at idle. The car definitely felt stronger from about 4K to 6K. I figured it would be worth something because the 55mm MAF meter was the final choke point in my induction system.
So I figured if some was good then more would be better... right?
WRONG
DO NOT DO THIS...
(http://i8.tinypic.com/822pd78.jpg)
I took the other meter that I had and cut out the bar running down the middle and ground it down nice and smooth. Looks like this baby could flow some air, lol! Then I installed it and fired it up. The first thing I noticed is that it idled like it had a big cam and vac dropped to 15". It also smelled rich... Bad sign! I let it warm up and took it for a drive. There was NO power above 3000 RPM. So much for that experiment. I put the other 70mm (the one with the bar) back on and chunked this one in the recycle bin... the car once again ran like a champ. The above pictured meter is now s aluminum but for $7.50 it was worth finding out in the name of science, lol...
One tool you will need for removing your MAF sensor from the housing is a T20 anti-tamper Torx bit or driver. I bought mine from NAPA.
(http://i8.tinypic.com/6kz0cxd.jpg)
Overall it's a great cheap mod that works. Cutting and grinding round the mounting is labor intensive without a bench grinder but if you have the time and tools it's worth it. Probably not on a close to stock engine but on mine it was. Just dont remove the bar down the middle!
It should look like this when you're done...
(http://i4.tinypic.com/869pwet.jpg)
By taking the center section out more air passed through the MAF. However the calibration tube could not compensate for it without being altered in some way itself whether it be by tuning your EEC or some other method. In theory if you put the electronics for yours in a Ford 80 MM housing it SHOULD work without issue, that is if you do not alter the housing in any way.....
Interesting.
It worked great on the 70mm. If only I could find an 80mm in the junk yard. I'd try it in a heart beat since they only want $10 for MAF housings. An 80 would require larger diameter couplings though. I had to work to get them over the ends of the 70.
Good tip on the Mass Air meters.I'll be grabbing up all of the 70's at the boneyard that they have this Friday.Maybe I can make a couple of bucks or trade them for something else i need.
You could probably sell them as is and let the buyer modify or buy the adapter. Someone sells a bolt on adapter for them. I forgot who. I was gonna try and sell my 2nd one for $30 (that seems to be the going rate on the internet give or take a few buck) but I decided to experiment with it instead.
Good luck though... Because like I said above it seems like the secret is out down here in DFW. I could only come up with 2 of them out of alot of cars. You might have better luck up there though.
I'll sell them for $25.00 shipped.
Im wondering why you had problems?? I did that very same procedure on my 98 mustang gt and 98 cobra and never once had a problem.
Yes and I thought I read a write-up somewhere doing that exactly.
I'm wondering why it worked at all...
Since the MAF is dependent on a set ratio of air flow through both the main body and the sampling tube, changing the size of the main opening is approx equivalent to trying to run a set of 14lb inj in a 5.0HO...
In other words guys, if you're cuttin on a MAF housing, you're fornicatekin' up...
I believe Dog proved the point...
Yea you’re that does make since but I know I read write-ups on it don’t know how they made it work. Maybe playing w/the FPR or the ECM up injector size. I don’t know or maybe they got lucky.
Ok, I got to thinking that maybe I did something wrong after reading the posts (here and elsewhere) where it worked fine after removing the center bar. So I took another look at it and realized I never removed the backing plate after cutting out the bar. I removed the plate so the sample tube would flow straight through and it did work fine. Idle is normal and I'm pulling 17" of vac. The car runs very strong full and part throttle. There are no issues at all.
Sorry for the bad info. It will work great both ways. Just dont forget to remove the backing plate on the center bar.
(http://i16.tinypic.com/6kqizvs.jpg)
I'm guessing that the problem was that air was not flowing through the sample tube with the back plate in place causing it to back up in the sample tube and send an eroneous voltage to the EEC.
I'd be interested in seeing A/F ratio curves...
Bet You'd be in for a big surprise...
Agreed. Got any pics of your final version of this to show it with the plate removed?
I did one of them meters back in the day, it ran like with the meter that I cut and grinded down the post.
Than I bought a pro-m mass air meter and car ran great. I used a 75mm pro-m with both the 19# and 24# injectors combos and was always happy with them.
My opinion is the words "cheap" and "mass air" shouldn't be in the same sentence, just buy a good used meter for about $100 and be done with it. I bought my last two pro-m meters on ebay for $100 each and always was able to re-sell them for $100 when I upgraded.
Holy back from the dead Bat Man! :D
I have access to a couple of these units from 92-94 Crown Vics. If I transfered over my 55mm maf unit's electronics, and, with out cutting out the center bar it should work fine and give me a bit of a hp improvement correct?
Pro-M or PMAS as they are now called sucks ass! I had a 80mm blowthru meter from them ($300) calibrated and even chipped the ECU and my car ran like . Not to mention there tech support sucked. Hmm... reminds me of Procharger
Went back to a C&L meter with the chip (tuned by 5.8FASTCAT)
and the car runs like an animal
So when one does this swap (stock 89-93 55mm MAF for 94-95 70mm MAF) do the electronics have to be swapped? IE do you just use the 70mm MAF as is or do you have to swap the 55mm MAF electronics over to it?
Ah some more fun with pics. I took pics of a 70mm 94-95 Mustang MAF vs a 93 Cobra/T-bird SC/94-95 T-bird LX housing. I'm going to try to run the 94-95 Mustang housing with the 55mm electronics swapped in first and if it runs good I'm going to try the T-bird housing with the 55mm electronics swapped in to see how it does. Should be fun :hick:
(http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa33/thunderjet302/MAF%20meter/Pic010.jpg?t=1216743910)
(http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa33/thunderjet302/MAF%20meter/Pic011.jpg?t=1216743943)
(http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa33/thunderjet302/MAF%20meter/Pic012.jpg?t=1216744001)
(http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa33/thunderjet302/MAF%20meter/Pic013.jpg?t=1216744028)
(http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa33/thunderjet302/MAF%20meter/Pic015.jpg?t=1216744058)
(http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/aa33/thunderjet302/MAF%20meter/Pic016.jpg?t=1216744095)
Yeah alot has happened to them, check this thread out
http://forums.corral.net/forums/showthread.php?t=625408&highlight=pro-m
Ok so I'm now running a 70mm MAF :D . I'm using a F2VF sensor and housing from a 94 Crown Vic Interceptor (same as a 94-95 Mustang MAF) with the ground down. I tried the 70mm MAF from my 95 T-bird first (the MAF I used in the comparison pics) with the F2VF electronics from the Vic MAF (since the stock 55mm MAF electronics will lean out in a 70mm factory MAF housing) and it ran like poo. Turns out the T-bird 70mm MAF has a slightly longer *sampling tube* which the F2VF sensor doesn't like. The car feels stronger in street driving (so the 55mm MAF must have been restricting power somewhat) but I still have to take it to the stip to see if I picked up anything. So if you have a MAF converted car that's still running 19 lb injectors this is a cheap (I spent $30 for a complete MAF and one extra housing incase I screwed one up grinding ;) ) upgrade for a slightly bigger MAF. I'm the second person here to do it and yes it does work.
By I assume you mean where it would mount up if it were used in a 94-95 'Stang setup.
What's the difference in length on the sampling tubes?
Yep by I mean where the front of the meter was bolted to the stock air box. I just cut it off with a hack saw and ground it down on a bench grinder so it was round and fit in the factory air tube.
The *sampling tube* on the 94-95 T-bird MAF is about 1/3-1/2 inch longer. The bores on both meters are the same but the extra length of the tube probably changes the signal that the F2VF sensor is expecting. I would *probably* work if the sample tube was cut down to match the 94-95 Mustang housing (easy to do with a Dremel) but since I was trying the housing off my 95 I didn't do it. It would have cost me $4 to get another housing from the junk yard so I just used the Mustang/Crown Vic housing since I had 2 sitting around.
I wouldn't say "It gained me 1000hp omg its the best ever" but it did pick up something. I would say power output is close to what it was with the 55mm MAF (it might have gained a whole 3-4 hp) but the biggest improvement is in throttle response. The car responds better to throttle inputs than it did before. It also seems to rev a bit quicker and does feel like it's breathing a bit better over 4000 rpms.
BTW how do you like the C&L meter you're using? After a discussion on sbftech.com I'm considering going with a 73mm C&L MAF and 24lb injectors next year as I'm pretty close to maxing out the 19lb injectors at full throttle. I know I could increase the fuel pressure with a AFPR but it's considered a band aid and something that shouldn't be done by Joel over on that board. I trust Joel as he seems to really, really know the EEC system like the back of his hand.
Link to the discussion?
Band aid? Meh. That depends. If you are above the adaptive limitations of the ECU with your setup and only need 4-12 PSI more than stock and have enough pump than IMHO it's fine to turn up the pressure.
FWIW I like my C&L.
Linkey: http://sbftech.com/index.php/topic,14647.0.html
I do have a big enough pump (155lph) but this is the thread that I found with some good info on AFPRs: http://sbftech.com/index.php/topic,3998.0.html Basically if you turn up the pressure the EEC adapts to it after a bit and you end up with the same problem again.
If THAT happens you didn't need the increase in pressure to begin with. You turn up the pressure when your car has gone beyond the adaptive capabilities of the ECU.
If you've went beyond what the injectors can handle @ 100% duty cycle @ a certain pressure you either
A: turn up the pressure
B: get bigger injectors & a different MAF/metering tube.
If it's a band aid then why do so many Mopar applications use 55 PSI from the factory on gas engines?
@ 40 PSI with the 19's my setup ran so lean it threw a code.
Bumped to 62 the code went away. Car went static @ WOT, but part throttle and idle were spot on. If the car had only needed 55 PSI I'd still be running 19's. I ran the car that way for over a year and the
"problem" never came back.
P.S I'm not the only person to run 19's with a trick flow headed combo.
So even if your car has gone above the adaptive capabilities of the ECU it doesn't "learn" the increase in fp and adjust for it? I didn't know that.
I know I'm really close to what the 19s can handle with stock pressure at full throttle. It hasen't thrown a lean code yet but a full throttle in 3rd gear you can feel it kinda getting close to "falling off" for lack of a better term. I would actually like to buy new injectors next year as my current ones have an unknow number of miles on them. I've thought about getting 24s as they should work fine with my current set up at stock fuel pressure, plus there might be an aluminium head swap in the works which leaves me with some breathing room.............;)
Let's say with a certain combo you're running lean and @ 100% duty cycle @ say 4000 RPM to redlinewith stock pressure. You need to bump the pressure. Let's say you bump it to 60 and for a little while it actually runs rich (an ideal situation would be 54), The ECU will in a situation such as this learn and trim the duty cycle, but not to a point where it would throw a lean code again. It'll clean things up a bit.
At stock pressure you'd be beyond the limits because of physical impossibility. By increasing the pressure you've increased he theoretical and physical capabilities of the system --again if fed by enough fuel pump.
In that case go for it. If you were dead set done with your setup I would leave it be though.
Food for thought: On the Ford GT the engineers went with two (2) 34 pound injectors per cylinder instead of one (1) larger injector. The reason? It's easier to control pulse width on a smaller injector @ idle and part throttle than a larger one. At least that's what they say.