Real world advantage of a 3.5" MAF over a 3.0" MAF.

[Chris996]

Worth the spending the money on an upgrade from a 3" MAF to a 3.5" on an s cover 67mm turbo since I will be replacing the 3 inch intake pipe that was on my e covered turbo? Or any suggestions on a 4"

 

[SCOOBY DOO]

Okay, I tested...at the track a 3 inch, a 3.5 and the Z06 within an hour. The 02's got SLIGHTLY leaner the larger I went. Turbo was a 6262 with a 4 inch inlet. Discuss amongst yourselves.

 

[GNVYUS 1]

I felt the Z06 had a better spool and if I remember correctly the boost went up slightly. Considering Speed Density is a noticeable difference in spool vs a maf I'd just go Z06 and call it a day.

 

[Mr.Spool]

The 3.5 is most likely all you will ever need,I've seen 80+lbs/min on one.on the same car it did not use any more fuel going to the zo6,initial tip in throttle was slightly better.

 

[earlbrown]

The numbers are pretty dramatic. Years ago I took apart an LS1 and a LT1 and measured the actual flow area.

A 3" LT1 had 60something% of a 3" pipe, and the 3.5" sensor has 80something% of a 3" pipe.

The other advantage is running a filter with a larger outlet neck. Even better if you put a 4" filter on there and squish it down so that you have a slight 'velocity stack' at the entrance.


Moral of the story, is ''it depends''. If your engine isn't taxing the smaller MAF, going bigger won't do that much. If you are borderline with the 3.5", then tossing the 3" and moving up will give large gains.

 

[SCOOBY DOO]

Fairly certain Grumpy did his 9.98 with a 3.5 LS1 MAF.

 

[Ttype6]

Worth the spending the money on an upgrade from a 3" MAF to a 3.5" on an s cover 67mm turbo since I will be replacing the 3 inch intake pipe that was on my e covered turbo? Or any suggestions on a 4"

You should move to a 3.5" MAF. As far as money goes,you can find these in the salvage yards.
I bought two 3.5 MAF sensors 7 years ago for $50.00. $25.00 each.
The aluminum body is a 2 piece body that sandwiches the sensor. The sensor is replaceable.
Don't buy the newer one piece plastic 3.5" sensor. That would be a real waste of money.
Another good aspect of the original aluminum sensor is that you can take it apart and paint the two halves any color you desire.

 

[TexasT]

Plenty of ls trucks in the yards around here to get those maf sensors. I believe they are the 3.5 on the 5.3 pickup, Tahoe and suburban. I bought several my last trip for less that twenty dollars.

 

[TTA976]

85mm 3.75”-7/8 work good no issues here was getting pop once throttle was dropped... my cam sensor was adjusted right on the edge and the ignition unsync’ed when the throttle dropped. Agree ls1 would prolly work a little better.

Most ppl who go to 85mm 3.75-3.875“ ,whatever it is , keep 4”ish S,H cover plumping look without using ugly noticeable reducers.

 

[Ttype6]

Most ppl who go to 85mm 3.75-3.875“ ,whatever it is , keep 4”ish S,H cover plumping look without using ugly noticeable reducers.

The yards are full of these as well.

 

[TTA976]

The yards are full of these as well.

ya GM never made a good maf for boost

 

[KC87]

I remember reading years ago Jim Bell or Mike Leiht (spelling) saying the stock maf was good for 600hp. Of course I'm far from an expert but reminds me that if a 550cfm quadrahog is good than an 1150 dominator double pumper will be awesome. I only did it because the 3" is much more reliable and available and doubt most engines will ever be able to take advantage of that much airflow. jmho.