MAF vs count

[87T]

I have been compairing the [MAF vs count] numbers while making a chip and it seems to me that no one changes them. if you make inprovements to the air filter system, going from a stock to a K+N, would it not make sense to change the MAF numbers some to tell the ECM that there is improvement to the air system or am I all wrong ?????????? And if changes are made which way do you go up/down ???????

 

[bruce]

Yes and no.
If you increase the air flow by X%, and then correct the fuel accordingly you'll be close.

Tackling the MAF tables is not for the weak of heart. And personally I try to stay away from them.

Going to a Translator Plus (+ extender) and relocating the MAF gets you away from all those problems.

The best you can calibrate for with a stock MAF is 255 so that is your ceiling for the calibration.

You can crutch around it, and folks have been for years, but there are better answers.

If you limit yourself to the 255, then you set the fuel for that since that is the max fuel demand there is. So your actually setting the fuel for like 300, and just go thru a too rich stage to get the fuel right at max airflow.

Yes, I'm a firm believer in the extenders.
If you read thru the reloacted MAF stuff at GnTtype you can see how relocating the MAF accounts for any tract changes you make