MAF tables in TunerPro
Thread Starter
Melting Slicks
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 2,469
Likes: 6
From: Winchester Ontario
MAF tables in TunerPro
There are 6 tables showing MAF (gm/sec) vs. TPS (volts).
I know from scanning my car before that it reaches 250 +. I'm upgrading my cam and heads and it will flow a lot more now.
How soon should I set my MAF to 255? At what voltage?
If on the chip at 3.93 V it only shows 158 gm/sec and I'm well over that, is that going to be an issue? Should I start setting 255 to all Volts around the high 3's?
I expect it to hit the "desired" 4.5 ish volts but as it's approaching it, what values will I need to input?
***EDIT***
383, 10:1, Super Ram, 230/230 0.598"/0.598", AFR 195 Eliminators
I know from scanning my car before that it reaches 250 +. I'm upgrading my cam and heads and it will flow a lot more now.
How soon should I set my MAF to 255? At what voltage?
If on the chip at 3.93 V it only shows 158 gm/sec and I'm well over that, is that going to be an issue? Should I start setting 255 to all Volts around the high 3's?
I expect it to hit the "desired" 4.5 ish volts but as it's approaching it, what values will I need to input?
***EDIT***
383, 10:1, Super Ram, 230/230 0.598"/0.598", AFR 195 Eliminators
Melting Slicks
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 395
From: Lakeville MI
Don't adjust the MAF calibration tables just yet.
You want to increase the maximum MAF flow vs rpm limit table to first permit higher flow rates.
I would set this to 255 for 4800 rpm and up, and also increase the lower values in the table by 10-20% to protect for the increased flow. This table just keeps the MAF calibration in check by providing an upper limit in the event the MAF itself is registering implausible values.
The MAF calibration tables can be used later to fine tune the blms etc.
Use the PE vs rpm table to provide the extra enrichment for the rpms in which you anticipate the airflow exceeding the 255 gm/sec limit. Likely 5200 rpm and above. You want the target AFR to be richer than the actual desired AFR, since the airflow is likely being limited.
You want to increase the maximum MAF flow vs rpm limit table to first permit higher flow rates.
I would set this to 255 for 4800 rpm and up, and also increase the lower values in the table by 10-20% to protect for the increased flow. This table just keeps the MAF calibration in check by providing an upper limit in the event the MAF itself is registering implausible values.
The MAF calibration tables can be used later to fine tune the blms etc.
Use the PE vs rpm table to provide the extra enrichment for the rpms in which you anticipate the airflow exceeding the 255 gm/sec limit. Likely 5200 rpm and above. You want the target AFR to be richer than the actual desired AFR, since the airflow is likely being limited.
Melting Slicks
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 395
From: Lakeville MI
WOW the PE vs rpm table looks to be quite rich in the 4000-4800 region, but need also to see the coolant temp table for an overal picture.
With the normal coolant temp table values (like +22.7 %) a 0% in the rpm table is a 12.0:1 Target AFR.
Negative values being leaner, positive values being richer from the 12.0 reference..
What I had in mind would be positive values on the order of 5-10% for rpms 5200 and above, with maybe 0 to slighty negative values in the 4000-4800 region where the MAF is still reliable. Also positive values of 5-10% in the 2800-4000 high torque region.
Of course your car's ideal settings may certainly be different from any of these suggestions.
Note: For PE vs rpm, I'm thinking on a 0-50% scale. If your editor permits values up to 100% in this table, you can double the ranges that I mentioned since they will effectively be divided by 2 to determine the target AFR.
With the normal coolant temp table values (like +22.7 %) a 0% in the rpm table is a 12.0:1 Target AFR.
Negative values being leaner, positive values being richer from the 12.0 reference..
What I had in mind would be positive values on the order of 5-10% for rpms 5200 and above, with maybe 0 to slighty negative values in the 4000-4800 region where the MAF is still reliable. Also positive values of 5-10% in the 2800-4000 high torque region.
Of course your car's ideal settings may certainly be different from any of these suggestions.
Note: For PE vs rpm, I'm thinking on a 0-50% scale. If your editor permits values up to 100% in this table, you can double the ranges that I mentioned since they will effectively be divided by 2 to determine the target AFR.
