hard MAF pipe destroys MAF

[grocerygetter]

OK...I have a friend and experienced GN owner tell me that the pol. alum. MAF pipes destroy the stock Buick MAF's due to the resonance in the pipe from the turbo.
Opinions?

Here's my take. IF the insanely high RPM resonances of our turbos due cause such sympethetic resonances of the MAF pipe that destroy our MAFs...then change or eliminate the frequency. You could add mass to the pipe like a hose and hose clamp in the middle of the pipe...or a little Dynamat on the underside of the pipe (outside of the pipe obviously).

 

[TurboJim]

Sounds like you've been talking to a NJ gewrew...or his puppeteer....

I have had a hard MAF pipe since they came out and never had a failure.... well, no, I did, but I had a maf HOSE on it at the time.

 

[87buick3825]

I've also had solid pipes on all my cars an never a MAF failure I've also heard a chip will wear your motor out fast !!

 

[Jerryl]

Originally posted by 87buick3825
.......I've also heard a chip will wear your motor out fast !!

FUNNY!

 

[turbosam6]

Well, I can say that my maf was perfect then failed within 100 miles of a hard maf pipe install. I think theres some credit to the theory, but it could be coincidence.

 

[Gary Wells]

Originally posted by turbosam6
Well, I can say that my maf was perfect then failed within 100 miles of a hard maf pipe install. I think theres some credit to the theory, but it could be coincidence.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How many miles on the car?
How many miles on the MAF?
Did you use a bracket to keep the set-up from vibrating?

I have never had a MAF failure out of 5 turbo buick cars, but then I have never run a hard set-up, either.
I have heard that the MAF is subject to failure due to vibration, and if the diameter of the hard pipe is anything different as that of a stock set-up then more than likely the users saw no need for a bracket to hold the set-up reasonably stationary. As a consequence, I would be more inclined to believe the "Vibration" theory over that of the "resonance" theory. Regardless, I would be damn Pi##ed if I blew a MAF considering there are no good ones made anymore, re-manufactured ones are a crapshoot at best, and the original new in boxes are basicallly drawing "collector Item" money. I would probably go to the translator+ set-up, but I would not be happy about being forced to do it due to this.

 

[grocerygetter]

I'm making an aluminum bracket to support the MAF on mine...just to play it safe...they say you don't need one with a hard pipe but I know better. This whole resonance thing is slightly snake-oilish to me.

 

[bruce]

While in oem form they had a bracket, I believe that was due to the ducting not being able to hold the weight of the sensor.

Non of the later MAFs have any support bracketry, that I've seen. They all just are mounted in the *stiff* rubber ducting, and seem to live forever.
The late MAF with the tiny heated coils would seem to be the weak spot, for vibration, but I've yet to see a coil fail.

Dunno how many miles I went with the stocker, and then Late MAFs just mounted with short sections of hose, and solid pipes, but it's alot. I've never had a MAF failure.

 

[turbosam6]

My car had 47,000 when the maf failed. I guess it could be one hell of a coincidence, but who knows. I went the T+ route then, now I have a FAST. The vibration is going to be there regardless of whether or not you have a bracket.

 

[SPOOLN]

i put a solid pipe on my car and within 2 miles it failed.

 

[Gary Wells]

Originally posted by turbosam6
My car had 47,000 when the maf failed. I guess it could be one hell of a coincidence, but who knows. I went the T+ route then, now I have a FAST. The vibration is going to be there regardless of whether or not you have a bracket.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"........................The vibration is going to be there regardless of whether or not you have a bracket. [/B][/QUOTE]"
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't believe that to be necessarily true or correct. I think that a solid pipe without any type of bracket mounted at or near the MAF will/would measure more vibration at the MAF than if a factory type bracket was holding the MAF and mounted ala factory style/location. Just my personal opinion, though. Would also depend on how flexible the set-up was in the area of the MAF and how the solid pipe type set-up was mounted at the extreme ends

 

[TurboDave]

Originally posted by grocerygetter
OK...I have a friend and experienced GN owner tell me that the pol. alum. MAF pipes destroy the stock Buick MAF's due to the resonance in the pipe from the turbo.
Opinions?

Here's my take. IF the insanely high RPM resonances of our turbos due cause such sympethetic resonances of the MAF pipe that destroy our MAFs...then change or eliminate the frequency. You could add mass to the pipe like a hose and hose clamp in the middle of the pipe...or a little Dynamat on the underside of the pipe (outside of the pipe obviously).

It's not the hard MAF pipe that does the damage.
It's mounting the maf to the motor for support that kills 'em. Like that stupid ATR MAF mount they used to sell. bolted right to the alternator bracket. The engine vibrations are what do them in.

After having one of those for a few months (back in 88), and killing the MAF, I left the hard pipe hooked up, but just let the filter support the MAF. It's been on there now for over 15 years, and 100,000 miles and still going strong (on my 87).

 

[Red Regal T]

I know we're speculating here, but doesn't an overwhelming majority of TR owners use a hard maf pipe? I know I have for the past 8 years and still am using the original maf sensor, so have to assume this failure is not a normal occurence.

I once acquired one of those brackets that attaches the maf sensor to the alternator bracket. Seems to me, to use this bracket would cause more vibration to the MAF, than not using it. I heard years ago, and seemed sensible to me, this bracket could cause a malfunction, so I chucked it.

 

[grocerygetter]

I wasn't going to the altenator...I was either going to the frame under the filter or to the MAF off the driver's side IC support bolt. The brace to the altenator doesn't seem lucrative.

 

[Ormand]

I'm with Turbo Dave on this one. It always seemed dumb, to me, for anyone to mount any sensitive items on the engine if there was another choice. The engine moves much more than the frame, and with much higher accelerations. Positioning an item at the end of a bracket, out away from the engine, magnifies those accelerations. I've had my MAF supported by the conical filter, sitting on top of the vacuum cannister, for several years. The MAF is original to the car, and may stop working any day now, but it has held up for 18 years, so I guess I can't really complain.

 

[bishir]

I just opened the hood to show my MAF the nicely polished pipe that I was about to install then it burst into flames and melted off the car! That's the most convincing evidence yet I think!

 

[bruce]

Originally posted by Ormand
The engine moves much more than the frame, and with much higher accelerations.

Positioning an item at the end of a bracket, out away from the engine, magnifies those accelerations.

Not always true. On the later vettes they had problems with the suspension/ chassis, passing enough vibration into the engine, that it would set of the Knock Sensor strategies in the PCMs.

Only with the assumpion, of the mountings being the same.
A softter mount, further away, *can* reduce the frequency of pulsations the device, sees.

While Ford solidly mounted the MAFs, on the Air Filter housings, that were mounted to the frames, the later GM have it positioned between two pieces of hard rubber dusting.

*Vibration* shouldn't be confused with accleration, and deccleration rates. While something might appear to be flopping around, the motion wasted in the flopping around, may dissapate the real shock loadings.

I've heard, that it's actually heat that kills the voltage supply in the oem MAFs, that most often, causes them to fail.

 

[Ormand]

*Vibration* shouldn't be confused with accleration, and deccleration rates

Shouldn't be confused, true. But it is impossible to have "vibration" without accel/decel. Unless, of course, you are talking about vibration with zero amplitude. In that case, you can also have infinite frequency. But it is the accel/decel that causes the forces that do mechanical damage. F=MA, and if A=0, there can be no forces. "Shock" is the first derivative of acceleration, and not usually a problem unless impact is involved.
In the case of the Vette, "vibrations" passed through to the knock sensor did not necessarily have the same accelerations that the engine movements have. The engine movements will be at a much lower frequency than the sensing range of the knock detector, I think. Highest engine accels are probably in the range of a few hz up to maybe 20 hz, while the knock detector is looking for something like maybe 5k hz.

 

[buzzman]

Red A says stay away from the solid pipe.........i have not found him to be wrong very often.

 

[buzzman]

Red A says stay away from the solid pipe.........i have not found him to be wrong very often.