Take a look at the link in post 12 matey, ;)

so its still 3", but has been milled out an extra .15 of an inch, supposedly to give an 11% increase in flow rate

hmmmmm, I think I will wait for the logs to show what difference it makes, as its quite a lot of money, for perhaps no increase in air flow on my setup

I will log my new air flow from the bigger induction port and feed to see if this has made any difference first
 
You have to be careful increasing MAF tube sizes, also, as you need to "fiddle" with the settings to keep the fuelling right, lots of logging etc.

Not for the faint hearted.
 
You have to be careful increasing MAF tube sizes, also, as you need to "fiddle" with the settings to keep the fuelling right, lots of logging etc.

Not for the faint hearted.

nope, but its a good learning curve, all be it done very carefully

I have been wanting to learn the side of lemmiwinks for a while, but this all depends on if spending the money for the new large MAF is justified through increased air flow?
 
Didn't Probee have loads of problems with his custom MAF housing? Even after adjusting the bore size 0.5mm at a time....
 
You have to be careful increasing MAF tube sizes, also, as you need to "fiddle" with the settings to keep the fuelling right, lots of logging etc.

Not for the faint hearted.

Very true but after a few logs and tweaks my fueling is better now than when it was unmodified stock. Even if you don't adjust fueling its still within the tolerance of auto ecu correction.
When logging with an oversized maff housing your air mass logs will always be lower, but the proof is in the pudding for me as the boost increases and the butt dyno agrees. IMHO the main thing that holds our small turbo's back is poor air flow, the more you give it the better it performs.
 
Very true but after a few logs and tweaks my fueling is better now than when it was unmodified stock. Even if you don't adjust fueling its still within the tolerance of auto ecu correction.
When logging with an oversized maff housing your air mass logs will always be lower, but the proof is in the pudding for me as the boost increases and the butt dyno agrees. IMHO the main thing that holds our small turbo's back is poor air flow, the more you give it the better it performs.

eh?:confused:

you increase the MAFF housing size, but the logs will show a lower reading?

why is this? would it not show higher readings due to a larger MAF = increased flow of air......

completely confused now :cry:
 
See, this is why I posted what I did.

I've NO doubt it's a good idea to open up the intake on the atmos side of the turbo, don't think I was saying you'd done the wrong thing, Karl. It's just that you know what you're doing, you must've spent hours logging and tweaking, keeping an eye on fuelling and boost etc. I know yours is a bit of aspecial case with the code/turbo setup you've got. You understand what you're doing.

I doubt it would be particularly worthwhile on a stock K04, either (not relevant to above posts, but someone will be thinking it).

Edit: @JB, maf flow is logged in grammes per second, which is mass flow rate. The way the sensor works it effectively measures speed, so if you increase the size of the maf tube for the same flow rate, the metered value desceases because the same amount of air flowing through the tube would be slower in a larger tube. It's related to the ECU code being calibrated to a specific maf diameter (called maf scaling), so when X amount of air flows in, the maf outputs a certain voltage. If you increase the diameter, more air can flow in for the same output voltage, so the maf under reads and the car will run lean. The ECU will compensate based on the lambda readings, but whether it can compensate enough is what you need to keep an eye on...
 
Last edited:
Very true but after a few logs and tweaks my fueling is better now than when it was unmodified stock. Even if you don't adjust fueling its still within the tolerance of auto ecu correction.
When logging with an oversized maff housing your air mass logs will always be lower, but the proof is in the pudding for me as the boost increases and the butt dyno agrees. IMHO the main thing that holds our small turbo's back is poor air flow, the more you give it the better it performs.

Hmmm
BUT

The ecu is requesting load, which is in part mass airflow as part of its judgement of load, so making it read lower, will make it ask for more from the turbo to achieve the same load, relying on the lambda control to achieve its actual vs requested fueling. logging block 001 will show how much adjustment "its" having to make in this respect

So not more airflow from just bigger intake but conning the ecu into asking for the same airflow as it now under measures.

hope that makes sense
 
slower, but a greater volume though right?

nope

for no other change (ie boost) same Mass Air FLow is still the same Mass Air Flow, BUT the velocity is slowed, hence the measured MAF signal is related to velocity past the sensor, given a "fixed" tube bore size, hence Mass Flow is calculated.
 
Hmmm
BUT

The ecu is requesting load, which is in part mass airflow as part of its judgement of load, so making it read lower, will make it ask for more from the turbo to achieve the same load, relying on the lambda control to achieve its actual vs requested fueling. logging block 001 will show how much adjustment "its" having to make in this respect

So not more airflow from just bigger intake but conning the ecu into asking for the same airflow as it now under measures.

hope that makes sense

I'll post some logs of 001 up to see whats happening. The boost on my setup is controlled by a mbc and not n75 so the ecu cannot adjust boost for normal operation, possibly adjust injector duty instead though. I measure a small increase in boost when i run a standard descreened maff tubewhen the g/sec increase. I'm certain that increasing the flow of the intake system increases the ability to make good boost.
 
I've noticed my RR run was done in 5th gear, what effect will this have on accuracy if any as i thought it was normal to run in 4th.
 
I've noticed my RR run was done in 5th gear, what effect will this have on accuracy if any as i thought it was normal to run in 4th.
Check the GB ratio's
I think when I was looking at getting a new gear box and had a look at the ratios I thought that 5th was more of a 1:1 ratio than 4th was.
I would doubt there would be much difference TBH, perhaaps 3rd or 6th there would be though.