Dyno Comparison Text: DBX VS PMAS MAF
- Thread starter Venom351R
- Start date
Paul said:
lol damn
I was at 12.8 when I was at 306 RWHP (as it was strapped onto the dyno before the first tune in May) so with 38 more RWHP and over 40 more FTLBS of TQ at the wheels I have the power for it, and with the slicks I have the traction for it, now I just have to drive it
BruhBrahBrad
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2008
- Messages
- 3,784
- Reaction score
- 11
Venom351R said:
Yeah I wasnt trying to offend you man, just curious.
There are lots of determining factors which lead to numbers being high or low. Im also only running 9:5:1 compression, great for boost, not so great for N/A. Im going to go w/ a better set of heads, the ones on there are an older style AFR head back from 2000 and Im not even sure of the stats on them. And Im also getting a set of long tubes.
no we do not have emissions testing just inspections. The EGR is removed.
Im looking at getting a set of Trick Flows that are in the range of 205 AFRs. My friend who has helped a lot w/ my Mustangs over the years keeps saying to try the Trick Flow heads. He made quit a bit w/ them on his 91 when it was N/A and Turbo. I think it would be a good match for my intake as well. Id like to get the lower port matched.
The question is to is the improved power through the RPM range due to just moving the timing from 10* to 12* or did maybe something to do w/ the difference in meters?
Im looking at getting a set of Trick Flows that are in the range of 205 AFRs. My friend who has helped a lot w/ my Mustangs over the years keeps saying to try the Trick Flow heads. He made quit a bit w/ them on his 91 when it was N/A and Turbo. I think it would be a good match for my intake as well. Id like to get the lower port matched.
The question is to is the improved power through the RPM range due to just moving the timing from 10* to 12* or did maybe something to do w/ the difference in meters?
Yea, it does, to a point. that is why the ACT sensor is there, so the computer can calculate the actual air density model, not just what the MAF just signaled. also, the air density changes drastically as temp changes, but everyone knows that.
The reason that Ford MAF sensors "peg", is because they are voltage change based ".005 to 5v" to measure said volume, where GM MAF's are frequency based "400mz to 3kGhz" as an example, and therefore run out of voltage before the GM runs out of frequency to use. Pegging is defined as the signal voltage coming out of the sensor to the computer as being 4.999v, or as much voltage as the MAF can produce.
now, to get to the science of why the Lightning MAF seems to "peg", or not read after a certian airflow rate, is that some of the air is sampled, or pulled into a tube to flow past the element to cool the heated element. only so much air can be pulled out and "sampled" before it runs out of volume, or the MAF element runs into its voltage limit. sure, the MAF can flow huge numbers, but what can it actually measure? This is why the Lightning MAF can only read part of its 1700cfm "capacity".
The reason that Ford MAF sensors "peg", is because they are voltage change based ".005 to 5v" to measure said volume, where GM MAF's are frequency based "400mz to 3kGhz" as an example, and therefore run out of voltage before the GM runs out of frequency to use. Pegging is defined as the signal voltage coming out of the sensor to the computer as being 4.999v, or as much voltage as the MAF can produce.
now, to get to the science of why the Lightning MAF seems to "peg", or not read after a certian airflow rate, is that some of the air is sampled, or pulled into a tube to flow past the element to cool the heated element. only so much air can be pulled out and "sampled" before it runs out of volume, or the MAF element runs into its voltage limit. sure, the MAF can flow huge numbers, but what can it actually measure? This is why the Lightning MAF can only read part of its 1700cfm "capacity".
duff daddy
Legend
Paul said:
we wish him the best of luck on his search of 12.4 I do have to interject some true facts so far. that 12.8 was run a few years ago, and less hp. but, has yet to run 12's last year or one 12 this year. him and i, because of closeness to the track were suppose to have a good battle this year and him with his 351 and my little 281 should have been a good race. but i wont be running for a while, and hes been broken. either way good luck, and lets see if you can make one 12.x pass first before you got after your 12.4's
hahaduff daddy said:Paul said:
we wish him the best of luck on his search of 12.4 I do have to interject some true facts so far. that 12.8 was run a few years ago, and less hp. but, has yet to run 12's last year or one 12 this year. him and i, because of closeness to the track were suppose to have a good battle this year and him with his 351 and my little 281 should have been a good race. but i wont be running for a while, and hes been broken. either way good luck, and lets see if you can make one 12.x pass first before you got after your 12.4's
for your info I did run 12's last year. Dont make me post the slips.
I have yet to make a full pass down the track this year w/ it running 100% Now that everything is taken care of it will be much different.
duff daddy
Legend
ooh i thought you 12.8 was from 2 years ago ... sorry
OnyxCobra
Post Whore
glad to hear the car is running good, now go rip the track up!
duff daddy
Legend
ooh, well you got your work cut out for ya, time my best is a 1.62 short and 12.67 and you have 70 cubes more then me ... mwahaha
duff daddy
Legend
sweet good luck let me know my buddy from town si going to pete to get a tune, and im going at night to look at a new truck
Similar threads
