MAF VAG-COM log results
#1
![Default](https://www.audiworld.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
<center><img src="http://pictureposter.audiworld.com/40525/maf.jpg"></center><p>This is a 4th gear run, ambient temp was 9 deg celsius. I am a little disappionted that the car would not break the 200 g/s barrier... but several runs were quite consistent in the high 190's once the boost was up. Car felt pretty strong today (cleaned the MAF recently).
Has anyone removed the MAF Screens and kept the stock airbox and filter?
Has anyone removed the MAF Screens and kept the stock airbox and filter?
#3
![Default](https://www.audiworld.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
register more air. ~190 g/s is about average for the stock MAF.
Here is one of my runs with the new VW MAF and screen removed: (Warning!! If you do not have a cone filter, do not remove the screen, there will be turbulence of the charge air which may cause your MAF to read the air flow inaccurately. Cone filters' design act like a flow straightner - which the screen does for an OEM setup.
~ 240 g/s
<img src="http://pictureposter.audiworld.com/24538/red_intake_377_image001.jpg">
Here is one of my runs with the new VW MAF and screen removed: (Warning!! If you do not have a cone filter, do not remove the screen, there will be turbulence of the charge air which may cause your MAF to read the air flow inaccurately. Cone filters' design act like a flow straightner - which the screen does for an OEM setup.
~ 240 g/s
<img src="http://pictureposter.audiworld.com/24538/red_intake_377_image001.jpg">
#4
![Default](https://www.audiworld.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Hmmm what I really wanted to know was who has removed the MAF screen and kept the stock air box and filter..
Search showed that Stanford tried it, with mixed results... was wondering if anyone else had given it a shot with better results?
Search showed that Stanford tried it, with mixed results... was wondering if anyone else had given it a shot with better results?
#6
![Default](https://www.audiworld.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
as Gary said. Removing it seems to work with Cone filters, less than optimal with the stock box due to the directional changes of the air and resultant turbulence. Like Gary's chart above, I'm peaking at 230 G/sec with a cone, screens removed, and the VW MAF. sTTanford calculated about an 18% restriction with the vane/screens in. The numbers Gary and I are seeing with this stuff removed, seems to bear this out and seems to be in the ECU's range for adapting Air Fuel and injection pulse rates (chipped).
#7
![Default](https://www.audiworld.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
That is an impressive amount of command boost!! I know you have may supporting mods, but I am still curious about the software.
My GIAC X chip has never asked for more than 2280 mbar. With the ECS N75, my highest recorded manifold pressure is 2550 mbar, from 3500 rpm to 4500 rmp, then it tapers off to 1900 mbar near 6800 rpm.
My GIAC X chip has never asked for more than 2280 mbar. With the ECS N75, my highest recorded manifold pressure is 2550 mbar, from 3500 rpm to 4500 rmp, then it tapers off to 1900 mbar near 6800 rpm.
Trending Topics
#8
![Default](https://www.audiworld.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
any discernable performance gain when you swapped in the VW MAF? There is some debate that the VW MAF's higher readings simply cause the car to run rich, and actually cause a loss in power. comments?
#10
![Default](https://www.audiworld.com/forums/images/icons/icon1.gif)
Excel is used to create the graphs.<ul><li><a href="http://public.fotki.com/ttschwing/performance_graphs/data/">http://public.fotki.com/ttschwing/performance_graphs/data/</a</li></ul>