Project Black Golfball-plans for 2010 Options

[black92_tsi_awd]

Finally got back to working on the Talon Sat.

After I put in the replacement trans, I developed a leak and parked the car again due to the weather. I thought it was the transfer case seal so I pulled it out. Transfer Case was full of oil, so that wasn't it.

The inside on the trans housing was all wet when I pulled the clutch fork boot off so apparently one of the trans seals is leaking. Looks like the output shaft for the transfer case may be the culprit. It seems to be seaping just sitting in the driveway. Thing is, why would it be wet up by the clutch fork?? The input shaft seal shouldn't be leaking that much because it's above the oil line in the trans, at least I think so. I hope it's not the input shaft seal, I'd have to disaasemble the trans to replace that.

I did remove the inoperable cruise control since I picked up a no-cruise cable over the winter. Need to finish hooking that stuff up.

[dualdj1]

"The way I see it, MAF is best on NA cars but SD is a better way to go about things on a turbo car. If you have a 3" GM MAF and 2.5" intercooler piping, your calibration will be different that someone with full 3" since it would change the velocity of the air going through the MAF."

-- That is correct, but not really an obstacle, nor is air density, as the nature of a MAF corrects for these factors.

The main thing that matters with MAF tuning is not having any bends before/after so you get a "straight" air stream through the meter. That matters more though in a pull through (NA or FI) setup than a blow through (FI), as with blow through you're under pressure. It's just important to get an even stream of air through the maf, or have the MAF clocked properly to handle an unbalanced stream.

In a turbo setup, if you want to use a MAF, you definitely need to run Blow-Through and not Pull-Through, and your meter has to support that setup.

The MAF does require tuning though. In the software I use, you have 30 points in a table, and it's a voltage output to CFM relation, so at say .1v you have 800cfm, whereas at 5v (max) you have 2400CFM. You can tune all the points in between on that curve to give you the desired AFR across all the flow range.

The downside is that if you have a large plenum, there is some delay from the engine starting to pull more air, to the MAF reading it. I'd think with the map you would have a slightly quicker reaction. HOWEVER, that's where things like throttle tip in, etc, come into play in calculating your Commanded AFR, so you read your TPS and say ok you're pushing the foot down, add more fuel since the MAF reading will be slightly delayed. Then you don't have the throttle lag like you're talking about with the MAF systems you've used. And you have an actual measured reading on your airflow, instead of a calculated one.

I'm just not sure how much of that is possible in the DSM stuff. I would guess most if not all, as the ecu i'm using is an 89 mustang, and can do that.

So again from what I've found, it's more work to setup a MAF, but you'll keep more accurate AFR as you always know how much air is going into your engine, wheras with MAP it can only estimate. But in the case of turbos, maybe estimating is good enough if you're not trying to max out every last bit?


Honestly from everything I've read, both can be tuned almost equally, it just sounds like most are saying use whatever you're more comfortable with, there are slight advantages either way, and both require a decent amount of tuning knowledge to get setup correctly and get best performance from.