MAF free mod ?
04-02-2004, 05:05 PM
#13
TECH Addict
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 2,002
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if you look, the more experienced guys that have been posting here said "dont do it". we've been around long enough to see this question before and the answers that others have given. so leave it in. the gains are so minimal or minute, that it is not worth doing. better safe than sorry
04-02-2004, 05:43 PM
#15
The general consensus still stands. No matter how many threads are started on this. Do not do it!!
Taking out the screen will casue some, and I do mean some, more air to flow. BUT the effects are not positive! But in turn you throws things off, LTrims will go negative which means, everybody at the same time "You are running lean!". That mass air is calibrated WITH THE SCREEN INTACT! Take it out, you just screwed everything up. Unless you are gonna tune for the absence of the screen, leave it alone! LEAVE IT IN!!! But yall do what you wish. Those in the know, know to leave it in.
Taking out the screen will casue some, and I do mean some, more air to flow. BUT the effects are not positive! But in turn you throws things off, LTrims will go negative which means, everybody at the same time "You are running lean!". That mass air is calibrated WITH THE SCREEN INTACT! Take it out, you just screwed everything up. Unless you are gonna tune for the absence of the screen, leave it alone! LEAVE IT IN!!! But yall do what you wish. Those in the know, know to leave it in.
04-02-2004, 05:53 PM
#16
Staging Lane
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Mechanicsville, VA
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I say that GM must have seen some gains if they took the screens out of the 2002 & up Z06/Corvette MAF sensors from the factory. The 2001 Z06 had a screen in the MAF and the 2002 MAF's were screenless. I am sure that the MAF was recalibrated slightly as well. With other engine changes and descreening the MAF from 2001 to 2002 the hp #'s went from 385 to 405. If turbulent air was an issue, don't you think they would have kept the screen? I took the screen out of my 2000 stepside 5.3L MAF and see a minimal difference and it idles and runs fine...no SES codes either. F-body LS-1 cars see a decent difference by replacing the ends on their MAF's that are screenless with some hp gain. I really don't see any reason to have a screen if performance is something you desire. The only thing the honeycomb can do for performance is slow air flow thereby decreasing peak hp. Don't stab out the honeycomb/screen with a screwdriver...just take a razor on the edges until it is loose and gently pry it out. If you go stabbing it out, you could possibly damage the filaments in the center that are very delicate. It seems like companies like Granatelli, etc. see the benefits of a screenless MAF as none of their aftermarket MAF's have a screen. I say that I can make my own Granatelli MAF for free and reap the benefits even though they may be minimal.
04-02-2004, 05:55 PM
#17
Originally Posted by 01Tahoetwinscrew
I say that GM must have seen some gains if they took the screens out of the 2002 & up Z06/Corvette MAF sensors from the factory. The 2001 Z06 had a screen in the MAF and the 2002 MAF's were screenless. With other engine changes and descreening the MAF from 2001 to 2002 the hp #'s went from 385 to 405. If turbulent air was an issue, don't you think they would have kept the screen? I took the screen out of my 2000 stepside 5.3L MAF and see a minimal difference and it idles and runs fine...no SES codes either. F-body LS-1 cars see a decent difference by replacing the ends on their MAF's that are screenless with some hp gain. I really don't see any reason to have a screen if performance is something you desire. The only thing the honeycomb can do for performance is slow air flow thereby decreasing peak hp. Don't stab out the honeycomb/screen with a screwdriver...just take a razor on the edges until it is loose and gently pry it out. If you go stabbing it out, you could possibly damage the filaments in the center that are very delicate. It seems like companies like Granatelli, etc. see the benefits of a screenless MAF as none of their aftermarket MAF's have a screen. I say that I can make my own Granatelli MAF for free and reap the benefits.
04-02-2004, 06:04 PM
#19
TECH Addict
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: New York
Posts: 2,002
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
maybe our truck instakes are contoured differently. so in order to straighten out the air, GM put the screen in there for a reason. in their performance cars, maybe the air has a direct flow pattern into the intake, and a screen is not necessary. just a hypothesis
04-02-2004, 06:08 PM
#20
13 Second Truck Club
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Pueblo de Nuestra Señora la Reina de los Ángeles de la Porciúncula
Posts: 4,094
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Originally Posted by 01Tahoetwinscrew
Sorry, I agree with the recalibration issue of the MAF but the screens definitely hamper airflow and turbulence isn't an issue.
Now, look at the intake tube of a corvette, it is a straight tube into the inlet of the TB.
Do you see what I'm getting at?
