Just fitted the riser and yellow injectors
starts and idles ok just need to take it on a run now.
(http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg21/STIG_010/002_zps3b58f85b.jpg) (http://s244.photobucket.com/user/STIG_010/media/002_zps3b58f85b.jpg.html)
Anyone else running this mod?
Quote from: "shiny"Just fitted the riser and yellow injectors
starts and idles ok just need to take it on a run now.
(http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg21/STIG_010/002_zps3b58f85b.jpg) (http://s244.photobucket.com/user/STIG_010/media/002_zps3b58f85b.jpg.html)
Anyone else running this mod?
I'm very interested in this. My only worry is not being able to get 98-99 fuel all the time. Could keep a bottle of octane booster in the car at all times I suppose.
Let us know what gains you feel and if your mpg takes a beating
Octane boosters are no good, the best ones bearly give 1 octane increase
Quote from: "rbuckingham"Octane boosters are no good, the best ones bearly give 1 octane increase
Hmm that's pretty useless. Never used them before. So basically you'd have to plan your journeys carefully
I fill up with super-unleaded 98 octane anyway every garage has that down here.
As for miles I do around 50-100 dry miles a month,second car so m.p.g is not an issue,
should keep the oil rings free from sticking?
I will update on any gains.
No other members running this mod?
Never heard of it but interested! What's the idea
It's a trick to try and gain a bit of torque and throttle response.
It's a bit technical but this is my understanding...
Essentially you move the MAF into the middle of the airflow (the stock setup is low) which tricks the ECU into advancing the timing. You use the 2zz injectors to compensate for the changed MAF readings for the fuel mix. And, I think, the high octane fuel helps when the timing is moved on and prevents knock.
The end result isn't any real power changes, but a bit more torque.
Best bet is to have a read over on spyderchat as there are two or three really excellent, in-depth threads about it.
I was considering it for mine but from what I've read it works best 'tricking' a stock setup - i.e. with the stock airbox (which has the lower MAF position and the vanes that you remove) and the stock ECU.
As I'm very soon to be going with my induction kit (with the MAF basically in the centre) and mapped I don't think I'll see significant changes as the torque curve can be tweaked directly. May look into injectors though and see what's possible.
Also, I spoke with a guy who's done it on his and he said he really felt the difference on road (where you are in and out of the rev ranges) but that on track days he felt less impact as you're at the top end a lot more (at which point everything is 'on' anyway).
Quote from: "shnazzle"Quote from: "rbuckingham"Octane boosters are no good, the best ones bearly give 1 octane increase
Hmm that's pretty useless. Never used them before. So basically you'd have to plan your journeys carefully
Don't all petrol stations to super unleaded now?
Tesco Excellium
Shell Nitro Vpower
Bp Ultimate
etc etc
My turbo only runs on high octane petrol.
I've found octane boosters good at preventing det (irrelevant of whether or not they boost octane much).. so if you were suffering with det due to poor fuel, it would definitely be a good idea to add one imo.
Fantastic results for a few pounds much more torque right through the range,more responsive and still pulling after 4k.
The fact of the decentering flowmeter as I understand it.
Rising the MAF lies the computer about the intake air quantity. Indeed, the speed of air on the walls approaches zero and rises (not linearly) at its maximum at the center of the tube. Approaching the flowmeter to the wall, the flow reading is less than the reality. The computer thus controls lower injector opening duration. This is why a 310cc injector can work in stoichiometry. The AFR signal communicates to the calculator the AFR values and tells him if he is doing right or not. Thus ECU can learn small differences in injection mass (production dispersion or simply injector aging effect).
The trick is in finding the right position for the MAF.
In what concerns ignition... ignition MAP depends also on speed and load (which includes air flow). As the computer sees less load compared to reality, it commands higher ignition advance. That adds more power and responsiveness.
The thing is not to lie the ECU too much and have knock.
Thanks for the info guys...but I won't be doing it to mine
Quote from: "Meeerrrk"Thanks for the info guys...but I won't be doing it to mine
Why? Just interested in your thoughts.
I don't really like mods which "trick" the engine into changing the air/fuel mixture, and there is a comment above that for a track car it isn't noticeable due to driving at high revs; so for that..."I'm out"
Quote from: "Meeerrrk"I don't really like mods which "trick" the engine into changing the air/fuel mixture, and there is a comment above that for a track car it isn't noticeable due to driving at high revs; so for that..."I'm out"
Yes I can understand when you are set up for racing/track, as for a road car it is
a noticeable cheap mod s:D :D s:D
The engine appears to be running a lot sweeter at low and high revs now too s:D :D s:D .
Quote from: "Meeerrrk"Thanks for the info guys...but I won't be doing it to mine
+1
I prefer Power FC or AEM or similar.
If you mean AEM FIC then pointless unless going FI as you can only retard timing not advance it
Quote from: "keljon"If you mean AEM FIC then pointless unless going FI as you can only retard timing not advance it
I am speaking about standalone solutions
reviving this thread as a current private sales thread has got me thinking about this again.
Specifically in combination with the emanage Blue and the map I have.
Initial thoughts are:
1) Raise MAF, change to yellow injectors, remove intake veins, leave emanage as-is. Logic being, the emanage is based on stock, and the MAF mod is built to trick stock. So, logic tells me that it will trick the emanage s:) :) s:)
2) Raise MAF, change to yellow injectors, remove intake veins, keep eManage map, but put in compensation for injector change which will cascade across maps. Logic here is a bit more complicated; It assumes that the eManage really only kicks in on WOT and in open loop. So that's WOT 4000+ rpm. The map at that point already expects more fuel/air, so it might work out. Under 4000rpm and WOT it runs off the stock ECU basically, so then the usual effect of the MAF mod takes place.
3) Raise MAF, change injectors, remove intake veins and have eManage remapped for this setup. This is obviously very costly, and frankly playing around with just the capabiltiies of the eManage will give me better results. (thinking VTEC input mod to force into open loop).
Quote from: "shnazzle"reviving this thread as a current private sales thread has got me thinking about this again.
Specifically in combination with the emanage Blue and the map I have.
Initial thoughts are:
1) Raise MAF, change to yellow injectors, remove intake veins, leave emanage as-is. Logic being, the emanage is based on stock, and the MAF mod is built to trick stock. So, logic tells me that it will trick the emanage s:) :) s:)
2) Raise MAF, change to yellow injectors, remove intake veins, keep eManage map, but put in compensation for injector change which will cascade across maps. Logic here is a bit more complicated; It assumes that the eManage really only kicks in on WOT and in open loop. So that's WOT 4000+ rpm. The map at that point already expects more fuel/air, so it might work out. Under 4000rpm and WOT it runs off the stock ECU basically, so then the usual effect of the MAF mod takes place.
3) Raise MAF, change injectors, remove intake veins and have eManage remapped for this setup. This is obviously very costly, and frankly playing around with just the capabiltiies of the eManage will give me better results. (thinking VTEC input mod to force into open loop).
With emanage just fit injectors and remap. The riser is just to make the system think more air went in
Not sure if it's appropriate to ask- but given the current state of the private dashes section, does anyone have any thoughts on buying yellow injectors second hand? Any pitfalls? Is it better just to buy new?
Quote from: "rbuckingham"Quote from: "shnazzle"reviving this thread as a current private sales thread has got me thinking about this again.
Specifically in combination with the emanage Blue and the map I have.
Initial thoughts are:
1) Raise MAF, change to yellow injectors, remove intake veins, leave emanage as-is. Logic being, the emanage is based on stock, and the MAF mod is built to trick stock. So, logic tells me that it will trick the emanage s:) :) s:)
2) Raise MAF, change to yellow injectors, remove intake veins, keep eManage map, but put in compensation for injector change which will cascade across maps. Logic here is a bit more complicated; It assumes that the eManage really only kicks in on WOT and in open loop. So that's WOT 4000+ rpm. The map at that point already expects more fuel/air, so it might work out. Under 4000rpm and WOT it runs off the stock ECU basically, so then the usual effect of the MAF mod takes place.
3) Raise MAF, change injectors, remove intake veins and have eManage remapped for this setup. This is obviously very costly, and frankly playing around with just the capabiltiies of the eManage will give me better results. (thinking VTEC input mod to force into open loop).
With emanage just fit injectors and remap. The riser is just to make the system think more air went in
That clears that up! So really it should be possible to incorporate the MAF mod into the map.
But I remember you saying that you tried the whole bigger injectors thing and it just didn't work out with piggyback. Need PFC or Ultimate. Right?
Quote from: "jvanzyl"Not sure if it's appropriate to ask- but given the current state of the private dashes section, does anyone have any thoughts on buying yellow injectors second hand? Any pitfalls? Is it better just to buy new?
Nothing wrong with buying 2nd hand, but it would be worth having them cleaned. Chances are they'll be alright, but you don;t know what happened after they were removed.
Over all it sounds like a nice Mod to do - I think I just need to be very sure on the injectors side of things. Thanks for the background!
Good reason to think about the state of injectors. I had mine delivered refurbished mid last year (AUSinjection through Amazon - wasn't too sure about that source but they worked a charm). Not sure if it's decent to chime in here with an ongoing sale but with works for my rebuild having started, the set of injectors I'm putting up for sale has been only removed yesterday by my garage.
Would be glad if someone could advise me on how to store/ship them as safely as possible in case someone wants them.
If shipping insulate as well as lots of padding.
On the injectors with emanage it will be fine as you tell the ecu the size and it will adjust the timings on the injectors to keep the quantity of cc's to the same.
As for things that need standalone ecu if stage 2 + cams as they take the overlap past what the stock ecu can cope with.
What's the max power 310cc injectors will support?
I recon about 230 at max. Also its best not to run injectors at their max, aim for about 90%
I have 440cc in mine.
Sp240 kit.
I run this mod and still running 95 octane. More response. Feels much better than stock. I love it.
Maybe I should have had a knock monitor. But I have not noticed anything bad so far.....
Well Cap says you need to run at least 91 Ron in the US. I think 91=95. Could be wrong.
I've run this mod with RON95 also for more than a year now. Like the torque and don's have any issues with the car.
I've currently got my stock injectors being cleaned. Some advice on the Maf mod will it only improve low end torque with the 2zz injectors or would I notice any response improvement doing it with clean stock injectors? Is it worth investing in the 2as injectors how much noticeable difference is normally gained? Finally with the maf mod on stock or 2zz injectors is there serious possibility of engine knock and how bad could this be. Im trying to work out if the performance gains warrant the risk.
No risk of knock. Have to use the mod exactly as designed. The rise of the MAF and removal of veins, and then paired with the 2zz injectors is the perfect balance.
There's no risk really.
Great thanks, two final q's im not using the stock air intake either I'm using a PPE air filter imported from the US will this make any difference to the way this mod works in your opinion. Also any ideas on where to get hold of the maf risers/spacer?
Your best bet will be to have a look on the MAF mod thread on Spyderchat. There's a hell of a lot of thought and time gone into it. The way I understand it, it's a case of following a very specific recipe of parts.
As for the riser, you can try on Spyderchat or make one yourself out of a thick plastic. As long as the height is identical (don't know what the height is)
Alex..
The MAF Mod was the result of troubleshooting some 1ZZ PPE intakes that did not run well, and 2ZZ Swaps that did not run well either. All of this was done in the States. The MAF Mod's 'Kit Form' allows it to be a Reversible improvement with little fuss.
The bench marks of the mod were taken from a Stock intake system, and a Stock USDM ECU.
My perceptions are, the USDM and JDM ECU's are somewhat similar for Ignition advance curves, with the '03 and later USDM Ecu's having a less aggressive Ignition Curve than the previous years. Also I noticed the '03 and later 1ZZ USDM ECU's have a fuel enrichment Programming that will take the AFR's well into the 13's with just the slightest hint of moving the Throttle.. where the 00-02 ECU's will stay in Stoch during minor throttle movements.. The Thought here was this was a 'Fix' to prevent the Dreaded Pre-Cat-Syndrome.. But that is a discussion for another Post..
For your situation, you will want to match the results on a Custom Intake.. Not hard but you'll need to do a little testing.
1) Install the Yellow Injectors
2) Install the Spacer
3) Check for Drivability.. and Look at Fuel Trims..
The 'Bench Mark' I used was a Long Term Fuel Trim of about -7.. it will range from about -5 to about -10.. If you are More Negative than -10 then you will need to raise the MAF.. if you are More Positive than -5 you will need to Lower the MAF..
All the MAF Mod does, is fool the ECU into thinking the engine is LESS loaded than it is.. so it will give MORE ignition advance.. The Side effect of this is the ECU will also give LESS Fuel.. So the two choices are Raise the Fuel Pressure or install bigger injectors.. I chose the Injectors as it simpler to do.. but either will work..
The Yellow Injectors were my first stopping point.. I set the MAF height to give a MID 12's AFR at WOT.. my STOCK set up was running in the 11's!.. My Next step was to go to the 'Brown' Injectors and Trim MAF Height to give 12's AFR at WOT and check drivability.. That never happened..
My 1ZZ is now Sporting a Crower Stage 1 Cam.. so any work I do will not be reflective of a Stock Machine.. The MAF Mod and the Stock ECU are playing nicely with the Stage One Cams.. The car scoots nicely now.. So I've stopped tweeking on it.. Also I've moved over to a 90's 300 ZX NA as my Daily Driver.. so the Spyder is not getting the miles it was..
With my STOCK engine I was getting Heat Soak Problems on +100F days on LONG drives pulling hills.. that is why I recommend bumping up the RON number.. California has 87RON!.. and I had to go to 91 to stop the Heat soak issues.. (91 is all we can get in the Peoples Republik of Kalifornia ) So I just run the 91 all the time as an insurance policy.. Winter I'll run 87 if it's not expected to get hot..
Learn what Engine Pre-Ignition/Knock sounds like.. If you hear it you have tuned it improperly..
I like to start out with Lo Octane fuel.. as I will hear the knock and it will let me know where on the Engine Load it happening.. then I can always Bump Up in Fuel to cover it..
Good Luck..
Cap
All this time I never knew you were a member on here as well!
That was one informative post. Thanks Cap!
This is where a 3d printer comes into its own,
Once you have the design you can tweak the thickness to match your needs then get a permanent one machined at the correct height.
I have one.. It's called a Lathe..
The Spacer raises the MAF about 5.8MM in the Stock Box.. If you look at the MAF, it has a 'Step' about 5.7 mm Down.. the Spacer raises it a Smidgen higher than that..
Some people make a big fuss over the O-Ring Seal.. I do not run one and have chosen not to get involved in the chatter of those who say it's necessary..
Cap
Quote from: "Cap"I have one.. It's called a Lathe..
haha! Kids with their fancy toys eh?
I didn't understand the o-ring thing... doesn't that change the height of the maf again? Seemed odd.
The MAF has an O Ring in a groove.. So the use of it ( Or Lack of it's use ) does not cause a height change..
However, you can place a larger diameter O Ring under the MAF mating surface to act as a spacer and raise it up.. A 6MM Cross section O ring is rather hard to find.. s:) :) s:)
Cap
Cap Thanks for the wealth of information. It's opened up a new depth of understanding for me. I'm going to get a Bluetooth OBD to be able to measure my fuel trims. At the moment don't know exactly what they are all I know is I get a very good mpg and frequently get 320+ miles out of a full tank so am presuming I'm not burning rich or lean...? Anyway thanks again and to Dan for other advice. Will let you know how I get on.
Quote from: Cap on September 28, 2016, 02:52Alex..
The MAF Mod was the result of troubleshooting some 1ZZ PPE intakes that did not run well, and 2ZZ Swaps that did not run well either. All of this was done in the States. The MAF Mod's 'Kit Form' allows it to be a Reversible improvement with little fuss.
The bench marks of the mod were taken from a Stock intake system, and a Stock USDM ECU.
My perceptions are, the USDM and JDM ECU's are somewhat similar for Ignition advance curves, with the '03 and later USDM Ecu's having a less aggressive Ignition Curve than the previous years. Also I noticed the '03 and later 1ZZ USDM ECU's have a fuel enrichment Programming that will take the AFR's well into the 13's with just the slightest hint of moving the Throttle.. where the 00-02 ECU's will stay in Stoch during minor throttle movements.. The Thought here was this was a 'Fix' to prevent the Dreaded Pre-Cat-Syndrome.. But that is a discussion for another Post..
For your situation, you will want to match the results on a Custom Intake.. Not hard but you'll need to do a little testing.
1) Install the Yellow Injectors
2) Install the Spacer
3) Check for Drivability.. and Look at Fuel Trims..
The 'Bench Mark' I used was a Long Term Fuel Trim of about -7.. it will range from about -5 to about -10.. If you are More Negative than -10 then you will need to raise the MAF.. if you are More Positive than -5 you will need to Lower the MAF..
All the MAF Mod does, is fool the ECU into thinking the engine is LESS loaded than it is.. so it will give MORE ignition advance.. The Side effect of this is the ECU will also give LESS Fuel.. So the two choices are Raise the Fuel Pressure or install bigger injectors.. I chose the Injectors as it simpler to do.. but either will work..
The Yellow Injectors were my first stopping point.. I set the MAF height to give a MID 12's AFR at WOT.. my STOCK set up was running in the 11's!.. My Next step was to go to the 'Brown' Injectors and Trim MAF Height to give 12's AFR at WOT and check drivability.. That never happened..
My 1ZZ is now Sporting a Crower Stage 1 Cam.. so any work I do will not be reflective of a Stock Machine.. The MAF Mod and the Stock ECU are playing nicely with the Stage One Cams.. The car scoots nicely now.. So I've stopped tweeking on it.. Also I've moved over to a 90's 300 ZX NA as my Daily Driver.. so the Spyder is not getting the miles it was..
With my STOCK engine I was getting Heat Soak Problems on +100F days on LONG drives pulling hills.. that is why I recommend bumping up the RON number.. California has 87RON!.. and I had to go to 91 to stop the Heat soak issues.. (91 is all we can get in the Peoples Republik of Kalifornia ) So I just run the 91 all the time as an insurance policy.. Winter I'll run 87 if it's not expected to get hot..
Learn what Engine Pre-Ignition/Knock sounds like.. If you hear it you have tuned it improperly..
I like to start out with Lo Octane fuel.. as I will hear the knock and it will let me know where on the Engine Load it happening.. then I can always Bump Up in Fuel to cover it..
Good Luck..
Cap
My appologies for reviving an old thread but it remains to the point. I just pulled the trigger on a set that has been circulating appearantly unused in the club for some time.
The highlighted bit is for Shnazzle.
A slight ´glitch´ observed by some is the fuel cut off on pedal lift when say on a downhill or otherwise cruising. This fuel save mode on the overrun is present anyway though not very prominent. It gets more promiment with the MAF mod as the ecu perceives less flow and may shut off earlier. It is not a technical issue.
I would like to add that the ECU operates in both open and closed loop. In closed loop the O2 sensor is leading for the fueling. When those sensors get a bit older and less sensitive this is more critical with the MAF mod.
Yes, I have noticed the same glitch. Not a problem. Just more noticeable as you are saying.
Those of you running this mod, what effect does it have on fuel consumption?
And if anyone reading this wants the maf spacer, I have a spare.
When I ran it I don't remember there being much of an effect on the fuel but I think my mpgs slightly increased.
Quote from: jvanzyl on January 14, 2020, 23:01When I ran it I don't remember there being much of an effect on the fuel but I think my mpgs slightly increased.
The ignition advance should be more eefficient, hence the better response and slightly better hp.
The larger injectors has no extra enrichment because of the O2 sensors.
Any increase in fuel used should be the brain enjoying the quicker go; the car would be slightly more frugal if you´d drive the same, but that would entirely defeat the purpose...
Something else; the alcohol % in what we get from the pump.
The E5 is 5%, E15 .... yes 15%.
Alcohol runs cooler and burns slightly slower. The latter should have hardly effect on the combustion because of the designed turbulence but the former will. Problem is that there is no publicly available information so whát the effect is????
The MAF mod though will, if anything, be better suited to alcohol addition.
Here some infomercial https://epure.org/about-ethanol/fuel-market/fuel-blends/
Quote from: Petrus on January 15, 2020, 09:34Something else; the alcohol % in what we get from the pump.
The E5 is 5%, E15 .... yes 15%.
Alcohol runs cooler and burns slightly slower. The latter should have hardly effect on the combustion because of the designed turbulence but the former will. Problem is that there is no publicly available information so whát the effect is????
The MAF mod though will, if anything, be better suited to alcohol addition.
Here some infomercial https://epure.org/about-ethanol/fuel-market/fuel-blends/
You can add IPA to fuel to increase cetane number. Around 0.5l per 50l of gasoline. However I never used it.
I'm using Archoil AR6900-P MAX which increase fuel quality, and lately I bought Oilem. And seems like car engine works more smoothly, and somehow car is more responsive. Definitely mpg increased, somewhere between 5-10%.
Interesting how it would work with MAF mod.
https://www.oilem.com/blog/difference-between-hybrogen-and-ar6900-d/
Quote from: tom256 on January 15, 2020, 10:51Interesting how it would work with MAF mod.
It would make no difference.
The pump 95 is good enough.
It nowadays being E5 just adds to it being enough.
Now íf you would go up the equivalent of a southern slope of the Alps on a hot summer day with no traffic, then simply fill up with 98 in the vallye.
It is noteworthy that, at least here, the 98 has no alcohol.
Remember o2 sensors are slow though. It's not a wideband. And especially in open loop (cold startup for quite a while, overrun, full throttle) the ecu goes off the fuel map and long term trims.
You're relying on the car's compensation tables and rpm goals to clean that up.
The general consensus on the MAF mod is that it works well EXACTLY under the parameters Cap created. Any deviation (change in intake, change in fueling, etc) and you're on your own.
Regardless, the car is expecting much smaller cc injectors. So you're forcing it to compensate constantly.
Quote from: shnazzle on January 15, 2020, 14:03Remember o2 sensors are slow though. It's not a wideband. And especially in open loop (cold startup for quite a while, overrun, full throttle) the ecu goes off the fuel map and long term trims.
You're relying on the car's compensation tables and rpm goals to clean that up.
The general consensus on the MAF mod is that it works well EXACTLY under the parameters Cap created. Any deviation (change in intake, change in fueling, etc) and you're on your own.
Regardless, the car is expecting much smaller cc injectors. So you're forcing it to compensate constantly.
enter the sensitivity, or lack thereof, of the O2 sensors.
To be complete; it álso expects less air then is actually flowing.
Concerning the intake mods, that reads ´standard filter housing and down stream´. A different intake elbow or sports filter does not upset the formula. In other words a Markiii pipe and K&N element will do fine.
For me there are two contradicting aspects:
1. I really do not like the ´fooling´ of the ecu
2. I really like more ignition advance
To achieve the second the alternative would be an extra box of tricks álso manipulating the ecu but at a far greater cost.
Also the set came at the right moment; was going to pull the valve cover off this week and now make that when the set is in. Yes, I know, no need but it does make swapping injectors less fiddly.
The bottom line of the MAF mod. is just about thé best tuning return on investment for the n.a. 1ZZ. Fingers crossed the sensors are up to it. If not; it´s reversable.
The part I don't like (and why I no longer run my piggyback) is that the 1zz is a knock-prone engine.
Timing is already set to provide maximum torque with a margin of error to accommodate different air density to increase engine life.
To me, the MAF mod just eats into that margin.
You may see a bit of torque gains. Not an issue, as long as you make sure you're always operating that vehicle within that margin. If for whatever reason the mix ends up lean while you're hoofing it... Bad times.
But that's the "tuning" game isn't it? :)
Good fun. Only live once.
As for alternative; bit more expensive but arguably less "dirty" is a piggyback. You can do one of two things; manually change timing advance on a map, which allows you to be a lot more controlled over where you apply the advance, as opposed to everywhere. Or change the airflow output. Which essentially is exactly the same as moving the MAF. But again, more control over the calibration. That often automatically adjusts timing. Then you can add fuel to compensate via the fueling adjustments.
That's why I sold my MAF mod kit.
Downside of the piggyback... Maf calibration. Get it wrong and it's all over the damn place.
Which reminds me, I really should sell the yellow injectors and Emanage I never bothered fitting...🤓
Quote from: shnazzle on January 15, 2020, 15:28Downside of the piggyback... Maf calibration. Get it wrong and it's all over the damn place.
...and why you ditched it.
We are on the same wavelength. Hence my dislike of fooling the ecu.
I also agree that the longstroke ís more knock sensitive BUT we should bear in mind that the thing is programmed for the USA 89 rated fuel, which over here is 93 rated.
For those baffled by ratings: They are index numbers comparing to 100% octane. That is why aviation/racing fuels can rate over 100.
The different ratings for the same fuel stem from different test conditions: A different standard motor, different operating condition gives a different rating.
The RON number is higher than the MON number.
Over here the RON number is given because it looks better.
In the USA it is the average of RON and MON.
Back to the 1ZZ; that is safe for RON 93.
Cap Weir noticed that the MAF mod could do with a bit more safety margin on long climbs on a hot day so to be sure advised 91, our 95.
Mind, that is with the OEM catalist. On a sports or no catalist, the engine already runs cooler.
Lastly, in the States there is no freely availeble equivalent of our 98.
So, even though 95 should be cool, we have the better flowing exhaust ánd 98 as XXSafe.
Just as a perspective; the closest 98 pump is at 4 km and at the highway exit/entry from the village. Just befóre the pump station, we have an airport for small aircraft and ... that has Avgaz from the barrel :-)
No, seriously, E5 Euro95 is quite sufficient and I have that at 1 km.
Quote from: Call the midlife! on January 15, 2020, 15:51Which reminds me, I really should sell the yellow injectors and Emanage I never bothered fitting...🤓
Quote from: Call the midlife! on January 15, 2020, 15:51Which reminds me, I really should sell the yellow injectors and Emanage I never bothered fitting...🤓
Wait, we now have a spare spacer ánd a set of yellows!! Gogogo boys (m/v).
Quote from: Gaz mr-s on January 14, 2020, 22:29Those of you running this mod, what effect does it have on fuel consumption?
And if anyone reading this wants the maf spacer, I have a spare.
We were one of the early adopters of the MAF mod using a spacer directly from Cap and have been running it for almost 7 years and thousands of miles. We picked up 1-2 MPG in most conditions. We installed the mod on another MR2 and got the same results. Both are using a cheap Chinese clone header, which work well enough.
I suspect the increase is as much from needing less throttle because of the improved midrange torque than it is from any timing changes.
The only downside was the somewhat abrupt fuel cut when off throttle at about 3,000 RPM. Oddly enough only one MR2 had the problem.
Quote from: Beachbum957 on January 15, 2020, 19:07We were one of the early adopters of the MAF mod using a spacer directly from Cap
You sure were!
Cap made only a few and asked Corky to take over.
Thanks for sharing the long time first hand experience. You setting it over to the next speaks volumes.
Quote from: Petrus on January 15, 2020, 20:32Quote from: Beachbum957 on January 15, 2020, 19:07We were one of the early adopters of the MAF mod using a spacer directly from Cap
You sure were!
Cap made only a few and asked Corky to take over.
Thanks for sharing the long time first hand experience. You setting it over to the next speaks volumes.
The second MR2 used a spacer from Corky, but the results were the same.
From what I understand Corky added a seat for the O-ring in later runs to make it more fool proof.
The MAF can be fitted without the o-ring using a light smear of sealant but without the seating the O-ring makes the MAF sit too high. This led to considerable confusion.
Has it arrived yet Petrus??
Quote from: jvanzyl on January 17, 2020, 10:42Has it arrived yet Petrus??
Don´t know.
Am at Málaga Girl´s.
Will see Monday but regardless not getting on with it till later in the week.
The mod kit arrived in the mountains!!
No rubbahs yet.
Next weel the weather forecast is bright so should get round to it then.
Back to the kit: The spacer surprises me a bit being in alumminium with o-ring in groove; nice! Had expected plastic.
Still on the agenda.
New o-rings and donuts fitted on the injectors.
The cam cover gasket has turned up but now Í am off for a few days. Grrrr...
Next week. I hope.
I have all the gear and no idea ;D
I remember someone said something about it being a messy job taking out the injectors as you're likely to get fuel everywhere.
Anyone have a good way of replacing the injectors?
I bought one of the 3D printed risers.
Quote from: The Other Stu on February 5, 2020, 11:57I have all the gear and no idea ;D
I remember someone said something about it being a messy job taking out the injectors as you're likely to get fuel everywhere.
Anyone have a good way of replacing the injectors?
I bought one of the 3D printed risers.
Just need a tiny bit of grease (red or silicone) to ease the injectors back into the fuel rail.
I used a combination of my phone and a mirror to see over the corner so I could slot them back in.
If you want - we can do both of ours together one evening? Doesn't honestly take that long, just haven't been motivated lately.
Quote from: jvanzyl on February 5, 2020, 13:24Quote from: The Other Stu on February 5, 2020, 11:57I have all the gear and no idea ;D
I remember someone said something about it being a messy job taking out the injectors as you're likely to get fuel everywhere.
Anyone have a good way of replacing the injectors?
I bought one of the 3D printed risers.
Just need a tiny bit of grease (red or silicone) to ease the injectors back into the fuel rail.
I used a combination of my phone and a mirror to see over the corner so I could slot them back in.
If you want - we can do both of ours together one evening? Doesn't honestly take that long, just haven't been motivated lately.
A smear of engine oil works really well.
Quote from: The Other Stu on February 5, 2020, 11:57I have all the gear and no idea ;D
I remember someone said something about it being a messy job taking out the injectors as you're likely to get fuel everywhere.
Anyone have a good way of replacing the injectors?
I bought one of the 3D printed risers.
Cold engine, disconnect the battery and it doesn't really matter if you lose some fuel, it'll clean things up as it sprays around and then evaporate 😂.
If you lay a couple of rags over the fuel rail it'll stop any spraying too far.
I will be taking off the cam cover so can actually see what I´m doing.
It is sweating to the spark plugs anyway ánd I´like to do away with the plastc vanity thing meaning a vanity polish of the aluminium.
Quote from: Petrus on February 6, 2020, 08:45I will be taking off the cam cover so can actually see what I´m doing.
It is sweating to the spark plugs anyway ánd I´like to do away with the plastc vanity thing meaning a vanity polish of the aluminium.
knowing what I know now in terms of how easy it is to remove - this is absolutely the easiest way of doing things. More time consuming possibly - but infinitely easier.
Quote from: jvanzyl on February 6, 2020, 08:53Quote from: Petrus on February 6, 2020, 08:45I will be taking off the cam cover so can actually see what I´m doing.
It is sweating to the spark plugs anyway ánd I´like to do away with the plastc vanity thing meaning a vanity polish of the aluminium.
knowing what I know now in terms of how easy it is to remove - this is absolutely the easiest way of doing things. More time consuming possibly - but infinitely easier.
That plastic 'vanity thing' keeps rain water from gathering in the spark-plug holes.
Quote from: Carolyn on February 6, 2020, 10:03Quote from: jvanzyl on February 6, 2020, 08:53Quote from: Petrus on February 6, 2020, 08:45I will be taking off the cam cover so can actually see what I´m doing.
It is sweating to the spark plugs anyway ánd I´like to do away with the plastc vanity thing meaning a vanity polish of the aluminium.
knowing what I know now in terms of how easy it is to remove - this is absolutely the easiest way of doing things. More time consuming possibly - but infinitely easier.
That plastic 'vanity thing' keeps rain water from gathering in the spark-plug holes.
And we've seen a number of coilpack failures over the years. Particularly from 2zz conversion who leave off the "vanity cover".
Does it rain in Malaga?
Quote from: jvanzyl on February 6, 2020, 11:14Does it rain in Malaga?
Not much - but he might wash the car quite frequently 'cos of the dust?
Quote from: jvanzyl on February 6, 2020, 11:14Does it rain in Malaga?
I wondered the same about Alicante before visiting there last Sept. Rain is not the word, it was like being stood in a waterfall for 3 days. If it were not for the 4th day being dry, I think we'd have jumped on an early plane home! The South got it bad at the same time,
@Petrus posted some pics and commentary. Worst weather they've had in decades apparently. Holiday was a success but it was in the balance!
Quote from: Carolyn on February 6, 2020, 11:17Quote from: jvanzyl on February 6, 2020, 11:14Does it rain in Malaga?
Not much - but he might wash the car quite frequently 'cos of the dust?
Not arguing the point as it simply is valid, however, not much of an effort to temporarily chuck the cover on the head when rinsing the car ;-)
Couldn´t wait any longer so have started taking things apart.
1. Taking thecam cover off is définitely the better procedure.
2. The manifold mounting holes are crud collecting corners so take care and prepare.
My TwinAir filter element is way affective appearently: Very dirty at one side, clean at the other.
Need to wash & coat.
Still on the fence about the splash/vanity plastic. Think I will refit. Not worth any potential problem is it?!
Quote from: Petrus on February 7, 2020, 15:30Still on the fence about the splash/vanity plastic. Think I will refit. Not worth any potential problem is it?!
Not really imo!
Some people have painted theirs. Looks pretty good, but obvs you have to use a paint which can handle high temps.
So scrubbed the cam cover, cleaned the plastic and put it back on.
Car started after just a few seconds of cranking.
No petrol smell.
Runs slightly high but not oddly so. Have not driven it, so it will learn yet I suppose, hope ;)
I was a bit surprised about how much of a restriction the insert with the ´grid´ is. Taking it out wíll flow better. I can imagine that the OEM set up will get confused if you just take it out.
Anyway; dunnit:
The eagle eyed will spot the alu spacer 8)
(https://myalbum.com/photo/GE6qD5co4Jd8/1k0.jpg)
Prolonged cranking is due to o2 sensors beginning to age.
As they get older they don't adjust as fast. Don't forget to give the maf sensor a clean.
Quote from: jvanzyl on February 7, 2020, 19:15Prolonged cranking is due to o2 sensors beginning to age.
As they get older they don't adjust as fast. Don't forget to give the maf sensor a clean.
Probably just clearing fuel rail and injectors that are full of air....
Quote from: jvanzyl on February 7, 2020, 19:15Prolonged cranking is due to o2 sensors beginning to age.
As they get older they don't adjust as fast. Don't forget to give the maf sensor a clean.
Yes, cleaned it.
The cranking I attributed to priming as the whole fuel system had gurgled empty on the rags.
Will find out tomorrow.
Quote from: Carolyn on February 7, 2020, 19:22Probably just clearing fuel rail and injectors that are full of air....
What I figured.
If anything it started quickly considering.
Have a nice road trip planned for tomorrow direction Lake Iznajar. It does not get more interior Andalu´ than between there and Córdoba.
My date is planning the restaurant stop sómewhere thataway.
Perfect learning opportunity for the ECU and experiencing any difference for me.
Thanks for the feedback on the vanity plastic Carolyn. Not worth the hassle.
Found some extra illustrations of the vane holder that is removed; it is quite a restriction.
Sadly, because the intake is precisely calibrated it cannot simply be removed without recalibrating the whole panorama.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160708/16813eabdb4dd60cd720d769380e20c1.jpg)
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160708/d24b68fa2fbc2c175dcfcb34219a8501.jpg)
You taken it out for a spin yet?
Interested to see if your cranking was prolonged or not this morning and your thoughts on the extra torque?
No, not yet.
Will go for a coffee in a moment but that is not going to be informative.
The trip is planned for the afternoon. Hope to have no time for feedback till tomorrow but hey, nothing as fickle as ... béééép.... (politically correct censored)
What the h... a quick coffee and a longer ride :))
Started brisquely, ran a bit whoolly, rich.
5 kms to the restaurant, not even getting up to temp. Stopped, still ran on the heavy side, lowish idle.
Coffee down, out on the highway. Then a bit of B-road, provincial road, highway and provincial road back home.
The exhaust note quicky changed back to the original crisper running.
At home it idled as usual, a tád low if anything.
Not a long drive so no in depth opinion.
First impression is that from 2k to 4,5k revs it responds and pulls like in a lower gear. Impressive.
Makes sense as the vane thing ís quite a restriction, the injectors are bigger squirts and the advanced ignition is more efficient.
Still quite a ´boost´ from such an appearantly innocuous modification. Seriously, had not expected it to be so noticeable.
Perhaps it is my car being >100 kilos lighter. As I write, it responds and pulls like in a lower gear yet without running out of steam as in a lower gear so it móves.
Overtaking on the two lane roads is notably easier; it immediately pulls and goes on the rev band.
Ergo; sofar sogood.
Glad you're noticing the difference! I'll get round to fitting mine at some point.. can't remember if it's mot friendly or not..
Quote from: jvanzyl on February 8, 2020, 11:45Glad you're noticing the difference! I'll get round to fitting mine at some point.. can't remember if it's mot friendly or not..
Yep! It's MOT friendly. Have run this on my 2002 PFL without an issue :).
Ok, back at my laptop.
The ecu is still learning some details appearantly; starting is inconsistent. Cold is ok if lumpy, hot os spot on, in between it seems to be looking for sómething; taking some time.
Because of the latter was rather relieved it started brisquely this morning; on the parking lot of a small rural hotel out in the white on the map. A wonderful place to stay but not to get stranded :o
Anyway, it started.
Changing up goes without the pick up hesitation now.
For the rest the extra response/torque is as I wrote unexpected.
Refitting the vanity plastic was a good suggestion. It rained last night when it was parked outside :P
It's never going to get cold starts right consistently. Without o2 feedback and with non-calibrated setup all it has to go off is long term fuel trims. So unless every cold start is under the exact same environmental conditions, it's going to fumble a bit.
Take the bad with the good.
Good news is there are a number of other compensation tables that will smooth it out on the fly (IACV and timing control to reach a target rpm). Bad news is it doesn't remember those settings. So it has to go through the PID loop every time you start the car
And if all else fails and you get fed up with extended cranking, have a look at the age of your 02 sensors... just saying.. I've been there before.
Quote from: jvanzyl on February 9, 2020, 11:06And if all else fails and you get fed up with extended cranking, have a look at the age of your 02 sensors... just saying.. I've been there before.
O2 sensors don't do a thing during start up.
That's fuel status 1.0. Which is cold startup.
O2 sensor heaters are still heating the elements and the ecu ignores the input.
Quote from: shnazzle on February 9, 2020, 10:42It's never going to get cold starts right consistently. Without o2 feedback and with non-calibrated setup all it has to go off is long term fuel trims. So unless every cold start is under the exact same environmental conditions, it's going to fumble a bit.
Take the bad with the good.
Good news is there are a number of other compensation tables that will smooth it out on the fly (IACV and timing control to reach a target rpm). Bad news is it doesn't remember those settings. So it has to go through the PID loop every time you start the car
Thanks for sharing the insight.
The driving has réally improved.
As I wrote the difference is beyong expectation. It stands to reason and no doubt more pronounced because of my lighter car but it still is awesome for such an appearantly innocuous mod. I mean it is not in the same league of change as different cams or forced induction yet it is like driving in a lower gear.
Quote from: Petrus on February 8, 2020, 10:25First impression is that from 2k to 4,5k revs it responds and pulls like in a lower gear. Impressive.
it responds and pulls like in a lower gear yet without running out of steam as in a lower gear so it móves.
Overtaking on the two lane roads is notably easier; it immediately pulls and goes on the rev band. .
That is exactly what others have seen with the mod. While a dyno test confirmed there was more torque and HP at full throttle, the most noticeable changes are at part throttle, with better throttle response, and needing less throttle to get the same acceleration. For us, the result was also better MPG on winding roads where you are accelerating and braking often, staying in the range of 3,000 RPM to 4,500 RPM, but rarely using full throttle.
Incidentally, a friend went from the MAF mod to stage 1 cams and a head that was ported and cleaned up. The cam and head work didn't play well with the MAF mod, but the dyno chart with the cams and no MAF mod was almost exactly the same as stock cams with the MAF mod. Having driven their car, I think the throttle response with the MAF mod was actually slightly better.
Quote from: Beachbum957 on February 9, 2020, 12:33That is exactly what others have seen with the mod. While a dyno test confirmed there was more torque and HP at full throttle, the most noticeable changes are at part throttle, with better throttle response, and needing less throttle to get the same acceleration. For us, the result was also better MPG on winding roads where you are accelerating and braking often, staying in the range of 3,000 RPM to 4,500 RPM, but rarely using full throttle.
In other words; easier driving! The mpg is ofcourse a nice bonus but not on any list of mine ;-)
QuoteIncidentally, a friend went from the MAF mod to stage 1 cams and a head that was ported and cleaned up. The cam and head work didn't play well with the MAF mod, but the dyno chart with the cams and no MAF mod was almost exactly the same as stock cams with the MAF mod. Having driven their car, I think the throttle response with the MAF mod was actually slightly better.
I had read that earlier and though I am aware that the head desígn and the long stroke make a cam set less effective as an improvement it is still rather a lot of effect from such a relatively simple mod. for little money.
If anything it is a surprise that it was not taken up by more users.
Still have a question about this mod.
I understand the ´trick´; to get more ignition advance at more load than the ECU measures.
To compensate for less fuel added by the ECU, larger injectors are fitted.
At high to max load, the ignition advance is on the OEM curve anyway, but what about the fuel/air ratio with the now potentially too large injectors?
The O2 sensors tell the ECU to keep the injectors in check and so restore order to OEM parameters: Ergo the ECU turns dówn the fuel whick because the Yellow injectors have a larger increase in capacity than needed to compensate for the load trick.
From several sides I have been told that, with an exhaust permitting this, the MAF mod adds about 5 hp because the gate is removed.
So obviously the flow measued by the ECP at full throttle flow gets the fuel corresponding to that load: Remember the ECU turning dówn the fueling whick.
We knów that opening up the exhaust allows the engine to pump more air, that the OEM tables of the ECU can allow for 10% more flow, more fuel. The ceiling of max flow signal, the max values in the tables, allow for 10% more power.
Now the question.
Does the trick of fooling the ECU that less air flows through, raise the ceiling?
I mean, the logic would be that if the signal from the MAF mod is 10% down, then flowing 10% more equals the 100% signal in the OEM setup?!
So what if still more air passes through the MAF; with the larger injectors, thát is no longer a mechanical limit; there is more than enough fuel squirt availeble for the 10% of the exhaust and recuperation of the ´lost 10%´.
The crux of the question is how much room is there in the OEM tables and does the MAF indeed move the whole table, thus defacto that room?
The OEM tables are static. But, the long + short term trims can adjust up to a whopping 30% each way (or was it 35?) before an error is thrown.
BUT.. you'll notice the MAF mod doesn't use fuel trims to do its "magic". I think on Cap's thread he was trying to keep it under 10% or even less. He used the MAF position, veins and injectors to tweak it.
Remember the idea of the MAF mod wasn't to increase airflow or fueling.
The idea was to advance timing.
Cap found on a flow bench that to his surprise that one of the best cone filters (PPE) actually provided less MAF signal than the stock box at the same CFM. Even more interestingly, stock box without veins even less MAF signal. I reported the same on my Hurricane intake.
That means 2 key things that are often twisted around about the MAF mod;
1) speed of air does NOT increase MAF voltage
2) CFM is (in this setup) unrelated to the speed of the air
This is key... The MAF mod does not pretend there is more air. It pretends there is less LOAD. The pipe still flows X air, but it pretends X-n is being flowed.
E.G. 200CFM in,170CFM reported. Whereas the stock box it's 200CFM in, 200CFM reported.
OK so now we have a voltage from the MAF.
The ecu uses a MAF-based fueling strategy.
Sees low load.
Looks low on the fueling table for the given RPM.
Looks low on the ignition table for given RPM.
Fuel is low and timing is advanced for the supposed lean condition.
O2 sensors pick up lean condition and increase fuel and timing. Car runs shit for a bit and within seconds/minutes we're back at square as the car trims out the issues.
Cap saw this on his wideband. So, how do you prevent the o2 sensors from seeing lean?
Make it so that there is more fuel, without the ecu knowing about it. Increase the injector size.
Going back you now have
- Low load = advanced timing from ignition table
- low fuel = lean
- "normal" CFM = lean (for this load)
Then...
- more about 20% more fuel (I think) from the 2zz injectors. Compensates for the lean condition, O2 sensors read stoich or near. Car thinks all is good.
You've shifted down on the ignition table.
Compared to stock 1zz you have more advance, which (compared to an oem ecu) can unleash more power as you're reducing the safety margin built in for knock (hence the 98 fuel).
So, if The OEM tables are static. But, the long + short term trims can adjust up to a whopping 30% each way (or was it 35?) before an error is thrown.
BUT.. you'll notice the MAF mod doesn't use fuel trims to do its "magic". I think on Cap's thread he was trying to keep it under 10% or even less. He used the MAF position, veins and injectors to tweak it.
Remember the idea of the MAF mod wasn't to increase airflow or fueling.
The idea was to advance timing.
Cap found on a flow bench that to his surprise that one of the best cone filters (PPE) actually provided less MAF signal than the stock box at the same CFM. Even more interestingly, stock box without veins even less MAF signal. I reported the same on my Hurricane intake.
That means 2 key things that are often twisted around about the MAF mod;
1) speed of air does NOT increase MAF voltage
2) CFM is (in this setup) unrelated to the speed of the air
This is key... The MAF mod does not pretend there is more air. It pretends there is less LOAD. The pipe still flows X air, but it pretends X-n is being flowed.
E.G. 200CFM in,170CFM reported. Whereas the stock box it's 200CFM in, 200CFM reported.
OK so now we have a voltage from the MAF.
The ecu uses a MAF-based fueling strategy.
Sees low load.
Looks low on the fueling table for the given RPM.
Looks low on the ignition table for given RPM.
Fuel is low and timing is advanced for the supposed lean condition.
O2 sensors pick up lean condition and increase fuel and timing. Car runs shit for a bit and within seconds/minutes we're back at square as the car trims out the issues.
Cap saw this on his wideband. So, how do you prevent the o2 sensors from seeing lean?
Make it so that there is more fuel, without the ecu knowing about it. Increase the injector size.
Going back you now have
- Low load = advanced timing from ignition table
- low fuel = lean
- "normal" CFM = lean (for this load)
Then...
- more about 20% more fuel (I think) from the 2zz injectors. Compensates for the lean condition, O2 sensors read stoich or near. Car thinks all is good.
You've shifted down on the ignition table.
Compared to stock 1zz you have more advance, which (compared to an oem ecu) can unleash more power as you're reducing the safety margin built in for knock (hence the 98 fuel).
So, if you increase the airflow of the car via exhaust or pre-MAF intake, nothing changes. As long as the fine-tuned calibration of the flow around the MAF remains the same. You're just shifted on the ecu load maps. Regardless of where on that map you are.
Great read.
Which reminds me. When back on the road. Must recheck my trims now I've changed zorsts.
Thanks Patrick.
The crux I was looking for being that the tables are 30-35% ´wide´ anyway.
So one cán flow 30-35% more air, the ECU will not throuw an error, the Yellow injectors squirt too much and the O2 signal makes the ECU turn down the whick in effect matching the air flow.
Quote from: Petrus on April 26, 2020, 10:49Thanks Patrick.
The crux I was looking for being that the tables are 30-35% ´wide´ anyway.
So one cán flow 30-35% more air, the ECU will not throuw an error, the Yellow injectors squirt too much and the O2 signal makes the ECU turn down the whick in effect matching the air flow.
Shouldn't need to. Aside from the fact that you're never ever going to flow even 10% more air on normally aspirated, let alone 30-35. No matter what intake trickery you use. There's at atmospheric theoretical maximum on any given day for the conditions without boost (and excluding ram effect from pulses) that's the most you're going to get. The ecu's table will happily work with that range without needing fuel trims.
IF and only if you stay with the rough AFR the ecu expects. If you can keep the o2 sensors happy, it'll never need trims.
Fuel trims (short and long) are only there to account for aging components, inefficiencies, atmospheric differences. They're compensation metrics.
Also bear in mind that relying on them is dangerous because your car spends a fair bit of time in open loop where your fuel trims are not there to "save" you
Quote from: shnazzle on April 26, 2020, 11:42Aside from the fact that you're never ever going to flow even 10% more air on normally aspirated,
Euh... yeah you do.
Remember that the engine is an air pump. The burning of fuel is only the internal drive of the pump.
From chain of the fow included the side inlets in the quarter panel to the very tip of the exhaust.
Fit a tubular manifold, sports or decat and a sports muffler and the inlet will by default flow at léast 10% more and the restriction will be somewhere else.
Tackling thát will in the end lead to the head/stroke being the restriction. From what I gather, that will be at about 20% more air than OEM.
Its-a-simple Patrick. Without more flow of air, there is no increase in output.
The measure max Dyno output without flowing the head/new cams is some 170-175hp. Even if you take into account that this may be optimisic readings, you still get at a potential of 20% more output = more air flow.
If I remember correctly you yourself measured at least 10% extra fuel flow as a result of deristricting the exhaust. This equals at least 10% more air.
Mind, it is all marginal in the light of forced induction. That is obvious.
That does not make 10 to 20% more flow of air impossible though.
A thing to mull over: Fit a scoop to the side inlet and there wíll be!!! more flow though the pump.
10% was just a flippant guesstimate and I did mean from just intake changes.
Hence why my post in the Final word on intakes finishes by saying that all the gains are in the exhaust.
Unless you start putting in higher lift cams etc etc.
But, there is nothing you can do to the intake, in my opinion, that will make it flow more. It might flow differently, unleashing a more immediate throttle or more low down torque at the cost of high end, or vice versa. But not more. Because on our cars it is limited by what happens after the throttle body.
With or without MAF mod.
What WOULD be good is if someone did a MAF mod #2,but with a high flow filter. That way getting the advance, the immediacy on the throttle and the nice roar :)
It's very much possible. Just needs the same tweaking and experimentation that Cap did originally. But it would only apply to that one specific intake.
So you'd end up
MAF Mod Original
MAF Mod PPE
MAF Mod Hurricane
MAF Mod K&N 57i
And each one may have different injectors, different MAF spacer, different vein setup.
I'd love to have I built for my Hurricane so that I could put it back on without all of the negative effects.
Quote from: shnazzle on April 26, 2020, 14:0410% was just a flippant guesstimate and I did mean from just intake changes.
Ok, missed that. Would agree with that. Without deristricting the exhaust tehre is no way more gets in unless you púsh it in.
QuoteHence why my post in the Final word on intakes finishes by saying that all the gains are in the exhaust.[
Unless you start putting in higher lift cams etc etc.
But, there is nothing you can do to the intake, in my opinion, that will make it flow more. It might flow differently, unleashing a more immediate throttle or more low down torque at the cost of high end, or vice versa.
Well....
Improving the exhaust makes the inlet flow more, making the whole, each and every element, more restrictive.
Toyota designed it to flow as much as the exhaust passes.
With the TRD horn they already point out that there ís room for improvement.
QuoteBut not more. Because on our cars it is limited by what happens after the throttle body.
Seems that this ideed is the limiting factor once the system is flowing 20-25% more.
QuoteWith or without MAF mod.
What WOULD be good is if someone did a MAF mod #2,but with a high flow filter. That way getting the advance, the immediacy on the throttle and the nice roar :)
It's very much possible. Just needs the same tweaking and experimentation that Cap did originally. But it would only apply to that one specific intake.
So you'd end up
MAF Mod Original
MAF Mod PPE
MAF Mod Hurricane
MAF Mod K&N 57i
And each one may have different injectors, different MAF spacer, different vein setup.
I'd love to have I built for my Hurricane so that I could put it back on without all of the negative effects.
I will stick with Cap´s MAF mod, TwinAir, deduct and now improved intake horn.
Is this a suitable place to ask a few questions about this please? I've read the thread in Spyderchat and a few others, but I can't remember if these answers came up.
The first is which insurers are ok with the MAF mod? Direct line who didn't blink over lowering and custom exhaust wouldn't touch it, because it was an engine mod.
The second is can someone recommend where to get the spacer and injectors?
The recommendation is to use super unleaded which is 98 ron?
PM sent
Who and where do I find the sellers of the "kit" or can someone offer alternative( 3d printed etc) spacer, then I can source the rest of the bits.
There aren't any 'sellers' as such. You just need to keep your eyes peeled on here or on facebook groups for the bits. ChrisW that I got my spacer from was prompted by someone else & made a small number with the proceeds going to a charity. Whether he might make more....but not right now due to Covid.
A same day comparison, nicked the graph from Spyderchat, blue is MAF mod.
I call that quite a result for such minor trickery.
(https://www.spyderchat.com/attachments/119777781_10157303299915894_7225171576868568957_n-jpg.79112/)
Wowzers... but, does look like the sort of improvement you get from advancing timing a few degrees.
Do you have a link to the thread Petrus?
Quote from: AdamR28 on October 31, 2020, 08:23Wowzers... but, does look like the sort of improvement you get from advancing timing a few degrees.
Do you have a link to the thread Petrus?
There is no info in it. Thís thread is umpteen times more usefull.
A friend did the same dyno test with and without the MAF mod. Both tests were with a Zero header and a low mileage shortblock. The dyno charts were similar to the one from Petrus, but he saw a 5 HP increase, possibly because of the header. The dyno runs were repeated multiple times with the same results.
The same person then added Crower Stage 1 cams and a flow benched head with a port cleanup. The cams didn't work well with the MAF mod and stock ECM, but after experimentation w/o the mod, the dyno showed a 1 HP gain over the MAF mod and stock engine but with slightly lower peak torque.
His MR2 with the cams and our stock MR2 with MAF mod feel almost the same when driven back to back. If anything, the car with the MAF mod had slightly better throttle response. Both cars have almost identical fuel trims
The MAF mode is a very cheap way to get more performance. We have been running it for over 7 years with zero issues
Quote from: Beachbum957 on October 31, 2020, 12:04A friend did the same dyno test with and without the MAF mod. Both tests were with a Zero header and a low mileage shortblock. The dyno charts were similar to the one from Petrus, but he saw a 5 HP increase, possibly because of the header.
Probably the header as the chart I copied also gives a 5hp gain, only at different revs, zero at the top end where the stock exhaust is most likely the bottle neck.
With excuses for resurrecting an old thread; would like to update and this is the imo best place.
For the air flow, the bréathing, Patrick was bang on the nail with the observation that all is governed by atmospheric air pressure.
The air flows into a hole, in this case the intake, from the outside only to compensate for a lower pressure inside the hole/intake.
Any restriction exhaust side means less scavenging means more residual pressure, means more suking needed by the piston going down to lower the pressure inside the hole.
On the intake side we have pretty much the same: Any restriction means more drop in pressure needed.
Now there are two main restrictions designed into the ZZW30 air pump. Both to reduce the noise. One is a serious restriction in the flex connection of the OEM cat. The other is a serious restriction in the entry horn/elbow on the air filter box.
I have done plenty of ceteris paribus as possible before and after comparisonswith several intake and exhaust mods.
It makes no sense modding the intake unless the OEM cat flexi is de-restricted.
As Patrick, again, boringly spot on, has explained it has no effect on what the MAF does. That stays the same.
Back to mine.
I am running a TRD type deducted / derestricted entry to the air box.
Like TRD a sports filter.
Generic decat unequal length decat exhaust manifold.
A decat pipe.
It now breathes as freely as it comes which means a higher filling rate meaning a higher mean piston pressure meaning more powah but also more need for higher octane fuel because of the MAF mod ignition advance.
Bottom line is that it makes for quíte a difference.
Not done nor doing a dyno run but the data from the accelerometer (compensating for the lightness added) it has well over 10% hp more than stock.
The starting remains the same again as Patrick explained, pfffff...., depending on whether conditions being as the ECU remembers them.
Brisk when cold (and more or less the same as before).
Brisk when hot.
Brisk to reluctant in between.
Bottom line: A3VT!
or in good old English GO FOR IT!
Quote from: Petrus on April 13, 2023, 21:56it has well over 10% hp more than stock
That's mighty impressive
yellow injectors, MAF mod ,new O2 sensor now en-route
Quote from: Gibla on April 13, 2023, 22:33That's mighty impressive
yellow injectors, MAF mod ,new O2 sensor now en-route
Mind that is with the whole flow optimised. The MAF mod ´just´ shifts the ignition table to a different octane rating. Improving flow makes more use of that.
Quote from: Gaz mr-s on June 29, 2020, 00:52There aren't any 'sellers' as such. You just need to keep your eyes peeled on here or on facebook groups for the bits. ChrisW that I got my spacer from was prompted by someone else & made a small number with the proceeds going to a charity. Whether he might make more....but not right now due to Covid.
Hi
@Gaz mr-s , nearly 3 yrs on since you gave that reply .....would this ebay item look anything like the original concept?
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/264943533139
I am using the one on eBay.
Quote from: Gibla on April 14, 2023, 07:25Hi @Gaz mr-s , nearly 3 yrs on since you gave that reply .....would this ebay item look anything like the original concept?
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/264943533139
Cool 8)
Kuddos to 3D printing!
Quote from: Gibla on April 14, 2023, 07:25Hi @Gaz mr-s , nearly 3 yrs on since you gave that reply .....would this ebay item look anything like the original concept?
https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/264943533139
Yeah. The price is a bit steep though. But if J88TEO thinks it works well, that's the main thing. They have to be accurately made I believe.
Quote from: Gaz mr-s on April 14, 2023, 10:07They have to be accurately made I believe
Yes...
We have the MAF mod on 2 different MR2, and it definitely works. The torque increase at lower RPM is very useful.
A word of warning. Some have tried the mod with cold air intakes, and most have found it doesn't work well with any CAI. The concept was created with a stock intake system, and any major change doesn't seem to match well.
Stick to the original concept, and it is a relatively cheap performance boost with no downsides
Will be looking at getting this done in December. Any recommendation where to get the injectors? Thanks!
I have bought a 3D printer riser off of ebay and am about ready to fit but have a couple of questions;
The 2zz injectors, I saw someone say you use 1zz seals on them, but surely the ends being different means that's not possible?
These 3D printed risers have no provision for O-rings anywhere, should I use a touch of selant either between the maf tube and the riser or between the riser and the maf?
Many thanks!
When I used the yellow injectors I'm sure I used the same O rings and bottom seals as for the green ones.