MAFT Benefit over LS1-Edit???? Lower percieved Engine load increases timing.
Thread Starter
Race Director
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 17,602
Likes: 20
From: Palm City Florida
MAFT Benefit over LS1-Edit???? Lower percieved Engine load increases timing.
I understand that when you use the MAFT to "artificially" increase the MAF frequency it in turn causes the injectors to get richer. The PCM still is reading the stock MAF table and thinks the load on the motor is lower than reality, thus keeping the timing as high as possible..
But when you remove the MAFT and Program with LS1-Edit.. You are increasing the MAF values in the table. We are not gaining the same timing benefit here...
If I am mistaken..sometimes I am.. :D let me know..
So if the above is true and I need to add more fuel to keep my LTFT's negative and maintain a lower perceived load (to keep timing high)...Then the best way to go about it is to add SVO 30# injectors....
?????
But when you remove the MAFT and Program with LS1-Edit.. You are increasing the MAF values in the table. We are not gaining the same timing benefit here...
If I am mistaken..sometimes I am.. :D let me know..
So if the above is true and I need to add more fuel to keep my LTFT's negative and maintain a lower perceived load (to keep timing high)...Then the best way to go about it is to add SVO 30# injectors....
?????
Former Vendor
Joined: Jul 1999
Posts: 2,103
Likes: 0
From: Indianapolis Indiana
St. Jude Donor '11
Re: MAFT Benefit over LS1-Edit???? Lower percieved Engine load increases timing. (chuckster)
Hey Chuck,
I know I have mentioned this before, but what timing are you getting now? If you are getting 28-30* of timing, then you will not see any more power no matter how much more timing you get. I had one heads/cam car that we threw 32* at it with custom programming to see what would happen. No knock retard, but also no gain at all in power at peak or through the curve. I set it back to 28* to keep it safe in case I ran into a slightly bad batch of fuel.
As far as the 30lb SVO's, I have been getting 440RWHP out of stock injectors and 28* of timing with no issues. If duty cycle is thought to be an issue, think about how often you are near redline percentage wise in daily driving. I would think the only reason I would go to 30lb SVO's would be if it was a road race car consistently in the upper RPM's (4500+) and running to the redline.
My .02
Later,
Mike
I know I have mentioned this before, but what timing are you getting now? If you are getting 28-30* of timing, then you will not see any more power no matter how much more timing you get. I had one heads/cam car that we threw 32* at it with custom programming to see what would happen. No knock retard, but also no gain at all in power at peak or through the curve. I set it back to 28* to keep it safe in case I ran into a slightly bad batch of fuel.
As far as the 30lb SVO's, I have been getting 440RWHP out of stock injectors and 28* of timing with no issues. If duty cycle is thought to be an issue, think about how often you are near redline percentage wise in daily driving. I would think the only reason I would go to 30lb SVO's would be if it was a road race car consistently in the upper RPM's (4500+) and running to the redline.
My .02
Later,
Mike
Thread Starter
Race Director
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 17,602
Likes: 20
From: Palm City Florida
Re: MAFT Benefit over LS1-Edit???? Lower percieved Engine load increases timing. (Vette Doc)
Mike, thanks for the feedback...
So you are saying that there is a point of diminishing returns with Timing..Kinda what I thought... But...You did not say that the car gained HP by pulling timing...You simply pulled it to be safe since it did not lose anything..
Some people are telling my the assuming no K/R less aggressive timing is putting more power down than agressive.. Is this true? The only thing I can think of is that they added so much extra fuel at WOT to extinguish k/r that the car ran fat and produced less hp..
I may only be 41 but I always remember our vintage 60's cars being set to the highest timing at idle that would produce the fastest Idle rpm. Then take it out on the road and listen for knock..If there was some we went back and pulled a degree or 2 at a time till it was gone..
So you are saying that there is a point of diminishing returns with Timing..Kinda what I thought... But...You did not say that the car gained HP by pulling timing...You simply pulled it to be safe since it did not lose anything..
Some people are telling my the assuming no K/R less aggressive timing is putting more power down than agressive.. Is this true? The only thing I can think of is that they added so much extra fuel at WOT to extinguish k/r that the car ran fat and produced less hp..
I may only be 41 but I always remember our vintage 60's cars being set to the highest timing at idle that would produce the fastest Idle rpm. Then take it out on the road and listen for knock..If there was some we went back and pulled a degree or 2 at a time till it was gone..
