MAF-less tunes

[KERMA]

What was the largest engine you've tuned with no MAF? How many HP did it put out? (ball park).

Doesn't matter.... you (actually, a large organization, not YOU) are making OEM tunes... STOCK.

Could be 10 hp, could be a million, but it is STOCK.

My job is to take that STOCK tune, turbo, injectors, and create something that makes 50% or 100% MORE power than STOCK.

 

[darkscout]

How about blow thru MAF's they can be placed right before the IM and the pressure will be most accurate as to whats going into the engine.

MaF's hate vibration, it's why they're usually where they are. And part of the reason they aren't on larger engines.

Let's give darkscout's workplace a budget of $350 for a project and see how far they get.

Why $350? Most tuners have much more than that invested in software and hardware. Used water brake dyno on craigslist. Short of that a dyno you could easily do some mapping on the road. Use a trailer to simulate higher loads. VE mapped. Tada.

 

[KERMA]

Why $350? Most tuners have much more than that invested in software and hardware. Used water brake dyno on craigslist. Short of that a dyno you could easily do some mapping on the road. Use a trailer to simulate higher loads. VE mapped. Tada.

been there, done that, got the tee shirt.

Have fun arguing in your thread. Maybe find some clever memes to solidify your position. laters.

 

[darkscout]

Doesn't matter.... you (actually, a large organization, not YOU) are making OEM tunes... STOCK.

Sometimes actually me.

Could be 10 hp, could be a million, but it is STOCK.

So?

My job is to take that STOCK tune, turbo, injectors, and create something that makes 50% or 100% MORE power than STOCK.

Which is different than doing the above how? It's not. You up boost. More boost, more fuel. More fuel, more power. All of which can be done without a MAF.

 

[darkscout]

been there, done that, got the tee shirt.
Have fun arguing in your thread. Maybe find some clever memes to solidify your position. laters.

Have fun being ignorant and sticking you head in the sand about how some tuning is done. VWMikel has done it. I intend to do it. It's possible. It's not hard to do. I was just wondering why a lot of people here kept their MAFs. I guess ignorance like yours is the reasoning (and shoehorning into existing software).

Imagine getting an ALH tune for $100 instead of $550 with the ability to d do anything you wanted to it yourself.

 

[KERMA]

maybe you need to stop trying so hard to find something to argue about, and actually read what was offered as my contribution to your thread.

Here I was foolishly thinking you may have actually wanted some answers, or at least some partial addressing of the questions that were posed, but maybe I should have known better.

In my opinion, maf sensor and map sensor are two different ways of accomplishing the same thing.

I've personally done lots of tunes over the years with map based smoke limiters, and lots with maf-based.

Generally what I've found is that the maf-based smoke limiter tends to be...

The MAP-based calibrations tend to be...

Good luck with your project.

 

[burpod]

so, should we turn this into a poll for MAF vs MAF-less?

 

[loudspl]

so, should we turn this into a poll for MAF vs MAF-less?

do it. you know you wanna

 

[burpod]

well, if i were a mod, i would my vote is probably obvious, i think maf is dumb lol

 

[Digital Corpus]

http://strawpoll.me/713625

 

[darkscout]

maybe you need to stop trying so hard to find something to argue about, and actually read what was offered as my contribution to your thread.

Except your answer was inaccurate and wrong.

Here I was foolishly thinking you may have actually wanted some answers, or at least some partial addressing of the questions that were posed, but maybe I should have known better.

Answers that would have made sense: "Easiest to shoehorn into existing software design". "Minimum calibration time". But every response was pretty much "IMPOSSIBLE TO DO VE ONLY"

Notice what vwmikel said? Or that all the people that are happy without their MAF are vwmikel tuned? Perhaps he's the best tuner of the bunch.

 

[KERMA]

have it your way darkscout. I guess you know best.

You asked why some folks still run maf in their car.
I tried to explain why folks still run maf in their car.

You take that and try to twist it into some sort of advocacy position that you can use as an excuse to try and start a "popcorn anyone" conflict. If you already have the answers, why did you start this thread?

There are a ton of folks from 2008 through present with vnt17 or bigger and a speed density (you call maf-less) kerma tune. That's from before your boy even thought about selling tunes, and that's a LOT of happy people. You might be surprised just how many.

And that's a lot of experience too, actual experience in the trenches tuning actual cars for actual people, with a lot of hard knocks along the way. I think I should probably have SOME idea by now what works, and what doesn't. This is from actual practice in the trenches after dealing with thousands of actual cars. What I'm saying is not just idle speculation and posturing behind a keyboard. This is not what fabulous unicorn "might" happen "someday" but based in the practical reality and actual experience in the past and present with many actual TDIs.

One very popular TDI tuner is (or was) only changing the "maf unplugged fault" single value fallback from 550 mg to 1275 mg then going around calling it "speed density". This is the "other" method that mike refers to. But this is not me. I change that value ONLY as a diagnostic aid to help diagnose a bad maf.

Did you know: There are even north american TDI PD software versions with MAP-based smoke limiters from the factory. So speed density is not news to me. My own car (VE) runs a map-based smoke limiter, and has for years. MAP-based smoke limiter has its applications.

Regarding the "shoehorning" comment... As far as I can tell, the only alternative available at this point is talk about what "might" happen "someday". But if there's something else available to actually use today, I will certainly consider it on it's merits.

 

[robnitro]

A VE map doesn't account exactly for actual real life situations.

example which I have experienced also w map tune:

Smokeless in 3rd and 4th, some smoke in 2nd and 1st...

Why? Because lower gears need more turbo vane angle to make the boost. More EMP, less airflow for the same boost!

So a VE map , unless it can also dynamically change based on EMP is not a replacement for a MAF.

 

[eddie_1]

Every tuner, even the nicer ones, I have consulted have always said the other guys tune was crap. With time though what I found - beyond of course the obvious reasons of the tune being possibly crap or the competitive nature of the business that makes them say that - is since each Tuner has a certain approach in tuning and info is rarely shared, if they don't recognize their approach in the tune they say it is crap, also between ECUs differences are quite large. What I am saying is that as a friend from Michigan used to say to me 'there are many ways to skin a cat'. I think this is very true in tuning. I have a MAF based and MAP based tune which I can switch between with vagcom. I made the 150mph video with the MAP based tune. I found at least on my setup the MAP based to be a bit smoother especially reduced surging/squealing with the 1722. The MAF is a bit more aggressive. The MAF may have a bit more smoke during the squealing. In other words my take is the turbo bring up is a bit better with MAP based.