Thanks for the offer but have already fixed my problem with this MAF.

http://www.abacoperformance.com/products.htm

 

As my father used to say, you can't argue with a fool. An "A" type ex-cop, go figure!

 

Sir (seevi),
The Spin Monster is a very knowledgeable individual. HE IS NO FOOL. I don't see why you are being insulting or derogatory. He has and does provide this forum with much free advice. He takes a lot of his free time help the other Corvette owners on this forum. I know he has helped me with my Vette. He never asked for a dime. He goes out of his way to ensure that what he does is top notch for the benefit of the Corvette owner.

 

I dont recall any part of my posts that were insulting or derogatory, yet thats the direction you take it in when someone disagrees with you?

I submit a lot of help to people on this board and when I see false rumors perpetuated, I couter it to stop myths from continuing. You made a statement and rather than discuss it in a mature way, you want to compare educations to see who is right.

Experience alway beats education, hence why you cant read a book to learn to weld. It was your asking the education level that caused the problem here as if you negate a person's experience by asking about degrees; Its disrespectful.

Your post above is in violation of the forum rules. Whats funny is you edited it several times to optimize your insults. I would have respected a disagreement with proof which was all you were asked for.

I realize I could have defused this out the gate so I'll go first: While your friends/assicates with engineering degrees may have sound reason to believe that the screen is needed, factual research has shown this to not be true, as highly modded cars can run fine without the screen. I value your input and wish we could start over on a respectful new beginning. I am sometimes forceful with my positions but am not being disrespectful to you. I appologize if it was interpreted that way and rest assured you werent the first to think that. If you ever need help or want to debate things feel free to contact me.

 

You do not want to remove this. The screen has nothing to do with protecting the sensor itself, it is there to straighten the airflow so the sensor reads the correct amount of incoming air. The reason the ZO6 does not have one is because it has a completely different style MAF meter that air actually flows through a opening in it. With that being said it is also the reason that most aftermarket intakes for the ZO6 throw codes. GM spent a massive amount of money on the LS3/7/9 intake to make sure there was no turbulance before the sensor, therefore no honeycomb was needed. By removing the screen you can end up causing surging in your car.

 

Wow I should have read the whole post.
Different applications. You can make any MAF work in a car as long as you can program. My new Mamba system uses a LS7 Hitachi MAF in a LS2 application. You have to relate this to airflow, if it is trubulant then the MAF is not reading it correctly, that is all the honeycomb does, it does not protect anything. When you have a long straight tube the honey comb is not needed, you do not have anything causing turbulance and it will work just fine. A stock airbox is not straight and it has sharp radius's that can cause turbulence, this is why the honeycomb is there. Some applications require it, some don't. Unless you are using something complelety different then stock and it is nice clean straight tubes or at least 6" in front of the MAF then you will not need the honeycomb.

 

I removed the screen on my stock unit and ran it that way for 2 years and later with my vararam and smooth coupler. All combos were fine. Yes ALL changes to MAFs need a tune hence why I say dont remove it. The stock unit/air cleaner does not need the screen and I have tested it. I have never seen any set-up have issue with it if it was tuned.

I lost count of how many cars with the stock MAF I have tuned that had no screen. I have never seen anything that resembles turbulance in the scans nor did it ever manifest itself in driveability. We are talking a lot of cars. None had the stock air cleaner assembly which is straight. The only part that isnt straight is the back end accordian which has been on dozens of cars I have tuned with no screen and they all drive fine.

Based on the stated facts, I have yet to see a car that has issue with its removeal so I'm requesting evidence to support your statement. I have asked for it before in this thread and seem to get insulted when I ask; dare I do it again. Can you please supplly me with a scan of a car that has turbulance demonstrated to support what you are saying. At least supply me with a configuration you have seen this turbulance and I will use and test that combo. Maybe there is one I dont know....the stock configuration isnt one of them....mine was stock and ran fine with it that way. If no one can state a configuration or show a scan that factually had issue with the screen's removeal, then what is the basis for saying it?

I will go as far as request a Colorado stock car owner to come to me so I can install and tune my stock/screenless MAF to once and for all prove what I already know.....the screen removeal does nothing adverse on any combo I have seen. The MAF test is fully reversible so there is no risk as I can simply put the stock MAF back in for you.

 

Spin, I would be happy to provide you with a scan. I will post it in just a little while. It is also important to know where the turbulence occurs, it is just off idle and low RPM. In the upper RPMs there is so much air moving that it does not seem to be as much of a problem. Tuning will not fix a turbulence issue, but looking at your histograms you should be able to determine if in fact you do have an issue. What you are looking for in the histogram is at steady RPM the MAF Hz is moving 3-4 box's and more for a really bad issue. This can cause a lean code to be thrown just as if the calculation on the g/sec vs Hz is off when a different air box is installed. How do I attach a file here or do you want me to email you. It is going to be difficult to actually see it in the scan because you are not looking at it in real time. It is much clearer when the car is running and you are watching it as it is happening, but I will gladly give you the file.
Justin

 

well now, i have to add some additional 'cents' here.

please refer to my previous thread here:
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/c6-f...m-maf-ls2.html

HPTUNERS scan prior to adding screen:


AFTER adding screen:


so as you can see, proof. screen does add accuracy to the maf reading. which in turn makes it fueling more accurate.

now back to the OP question. yes, a maf with no screen flows more than No screen, but at what cost you say. well, here is what you are giving up. accuracy.

a screen helps. and it shows. period.

-Carl

 

Carl,
Good thinking, I did not think about posting a screen shot. This is exactly what I am talking about. Thanks

 

Both of the screen shots show a car running stoic. Codes dont get triggered unless it goes outside the +24/-14 levels of the LTFT's. If you are at +20 and it goes to +25% it will throw a code but it also means you are really off on WOT fueling from too high a +LTFT. The scan certyainly shows that the car is nowhere near triggering a lean code being at +10 LTFT's and not near +24% needed for the trigger. It can of course serve as the final push for an untuned car that Jabbot points out, can trigger if the car isnt tuned and has other airflow mods in which case we are all in agreement that without a tune, the screen shouldnt be touched.

[I]The one with no screen actually never ran leaner, it had rich dips and richer fueling is associated with a smoother idle. Short term fuel trends also indicate it running leaner by 2% with the screen in place contrary to the predicted result.

EDIT: I do credit there is less variation but dont see how you think it translates to smoother driveability. Further supporting my position is the fact that it requires a 14% change in airflow to jump to the next higher MAF table cell. In a stock 2005 c6 tune the 2200hz cell is .501 on airflow and the next higher cell requires 2350 to hit a .582 airflow reading which is a 14% increase for it to input the next higher cell. Therefore a +/- 7% reading from the MAF input frequency doesnt jump to the next fueling cell. This means that even with the tighter MAF output the table's resolution precludes the ability to note a differnece in actual fueling. In other words, a 2210 input frequency and a 2340 input frequency would still access the same 2200 cell in the MAF table (.501gm/cyl) and hence there is no fueling change due to idle airflow. If one argues that it averages the reading up from the midpoint than a 2175 to 2275 would still access the same 2200 cell and again no fueling change occurs.

Now if someone says that the computer actually uses exact numbers and there are infinite cells for access then the fueling is relevant (and Spin is wrong), but one has to note that you cant tune these cells tighter than the alloted 14% jumps cell to cell.


I agree, High rpm WOT is irrelevant.

Thanks for the posts from both of you. I did learn something. You also did it without calling me a fool, questioning my education, or labeling police officers.

Shows; yes, your findings are sound and it proves the point.
Helps? Does it make a difference in the way it feels? I just dont see how its something felt but rather the math of it would let some relax more even if its really a question of can you really feel it. If the gains are even slight on an N/A car, its worth it for guys looking for that last ounce of HP. Having no screen on essentially the same sensor, I dont see the need to smooth out what is already awesome. I'd be willing to try it on my car if you tell me where to get the screen and if I am assured it cant come loose.

Good job.

 

Spin, You will not need the screen on your car by just looking at your intake. Try putting a 90 degree bend right in front of your MAF to test it out and you will clearly see and feel what I am talking about.

 

Fair enough. We both put more than enough time into this.

For anyone else sending PM's on this topic (I got a few), no your screenless MAF is not going to cause a lean condition on your car leading to engine damage. We, the sources in this thread, are splitting hairs trying to get the highest level of accuracy in info on these topics to learn. A properly tuned Lingenfelter 100mm MAF or one like mine wont blow your engine even though it doesnt have a screen. If your car does have a driveability issue, you will know right away.

 

Removing the turbulance? i thot turbulance was a good thing?

 

Good for what? The MAF is a air meter that basically reads the speed of the incoming air. If it is turbulant then the reading is incorrect. You do not want any of your sensors reading incorrect.

 

Nice

 

Amen to that. You can have a dozen degrees and still be a moron with no common sense. I think we have a few of those in Washington right now.

 

Not to bring up an old thread and cause anymore nonsense, but I'm not sure what to get out of this. If you remove the screen, you need/should get a retune? Are there potential gains on a H/C LS2?

 

That may be true for the C6 Z06, but if what you're saying is true then how do you explain the lack of a MAF screen from the factory on the C5 Z06 (LS6) which had the exact same style MAF as the C5 LS1s (that also happened to come with a screen)?






Yes, I would.

In my opinion, yes there could be (though they'd be ever so slight).

 

Thanks Marc. I'll probably be down at the shop next week so I'll get Julio's thoughts on it.