Re: 255 MAF? (was blm based tuning)

["Bruce Plecan" <nacelp@bright.net>]

> Would not the MAF show a flat line at 231 if I wqas maxing it out (AND 231
> was the MAX)?

TO some degree has alot to do with the resolution of the datalogging.
Being freguency based there will always be less then a smooth line.  Now,
also consider how low of frquency your dealing with 30-130 Hhz.  30 is about
6 grms/sec, and 130 is the max of the meter.  Also remember the intake tract
is never static, and then there is the whole area of reversion.
As you approach the limits of any sensor (automotive, gm specific) the
resolution takes a crap.  Look at the CTS as an example.  One some ecms that
even switch pull ups as I recall, and why? to maintain even knowing the CTS.
Did you not say 350HP?.
Simple physics.  takes .75 grms/sec= 1 HP.  er was it 1.3,  don't matter
figurin even 1.3 means 275 grms/sec..  We've cracked the space time
continuim, or something is wrong.

  What it shows it a sloping increase in readings that peaks at
> 231 for a usec then maintains slightly jittery at 228 or so until the R's
> climb to 4800+ , then the airflow drops slightly.

Your there.
As I understand your discription.

 If I was maxing it out,
> I'd thing it would read the MAX value and flatline there, cause the air
was
> so much greater volume than that. Let me know if I am mistaken.

As an engineering tool your asking way too much of diacom, IMHO.  Youe want
to get lab grade results, then the switch to lab grade equipment is
necessary.

 Of coarse
> theres no mention of "a 255 MAF" or a "XXX MAF" in any postings I have
seen
> (most since the list started).. is this one of those "secret secrets"?  do
> you care to elaborate on the concept?  care to point me(us) to a part
number
> of a '165 compatible 255 MAF?

???.
Kinda surprised, with all the part numbers I post ya think I'd keeep that
one?.
Sleepy woke up when I read that and Doc is just shaking his head,  we're
crushed.  (max effort guilt trip, didit work?)

> I have 2 MAFS,  the gutted 1989:  #0 280 213 009   10 055 877  and
ungutted
> 1986: #0 280 213 004   14 094 712
> <in my best dr-evil voice>  "Need the In-Fo!"

> From: Bruce Plecan <nacelp@bright.net>
> > Er, hmm,
> > and where is it said that that maf is a 255er?.
> > The GN is, a 255er.
> > The MAF doesn't stop the engine from making any HP at a specific gm/sec,
> > just your out of calibration when that happens, ie no more timing
> > corrections or fuel corrections can be made.  Given the right combo, you
> can
> > get 500 HP out of one, but that probably er could just as easily be 550.
> > Grumpy