4.0L OHV & SOHC V6 Tech General discussion of 4.0L OHV and SOHC V6 Ford Ranger engines.

5.0 Maf

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Feb 2, 2005
  #1  
checkmyvitals's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
From: London, Canada
5.0 Maf

Hey guys, did a search and couldn't find anything (which REALLY surprised me)... just wondering what you guys thought of doing a 5.0 MAF swap. the ones off the 5.0 cobras, with a string sensor. IMO, most efficient and apparently a very smart sensor.
 
Reply
Old Feb 2, 2005
  #2  
gatorblue92's Avatar
RF Veteran
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 8,239
Likes: 3
From: Delaware
my friend did this on his 3.0 taurus and it killed his cats... so i would not do it
 
Reply
Old Feb 2, 2005
  #3  
Dave and Julie's Avatar
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 874
Likes: 2
From: outside Detroit, where it's safer
Originally Posted by gatorblue92
my friend did this on his 3.0 taurus and it killed his cats... so i would not do it

Hmmm.
 
Reply
Old Feb 2, 2005
  #4  
n3elz's Avatar
RF Veteran
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 10,623
Likes: 6
From: Kennett Square, PA
lol! For all I dissed Dave on this issue, if you put the calibration out too far, for too long, you can do damage. You have NO IDEA what the calibration of the 5.0 MAF is and just swapping it is not sensible without a lot more information.
 
Reply
Old Feb 2, 2005
  #5  
Dave and Julie's Avatar
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 874
Likes: 2
From: outside Detroit, where it's safer
And you won't know until it's too late.
 
Reply
Old Feb 2, 2005
  #6  
loneFX4's Avatar
Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 955
Likes: 1
From: Summerville,SC
my cats are gone so it doesnt matter
 
Reply
Old Feb 2, 2005
  #7  
n3elz's Avatar
RF Veteran
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 10,623
Likes: 6
From: Kennett Square, PA
Originally Posted by Dave and Julie
And you won't know until it's too late.
Cue the violins!

Actually, if you pay more attention to detail than I did, you can use a scanning tool that allows you to watch PID's to verify that your not at the extreme limits. Had I done that, Doc would not have gotten the CEL on the MAF mod on his truck.

So you CAN know before it's too late -- you just have to actually LOOK!
 
Reply
Old Feb 2, 2005
  #8  
sawred's Avatar
Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 580
Likes: 0
From: San Antonio, TX
Originally Posted by n3elz
So you CAN know before it's too late -- you just have to actually LOOK!

Who'd a thunk it
 
Reply
Old Feb 2, 2005
  #9  
V8 Level II's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (4)
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 7,910
Likes: 27
From: Michigan
Originally Posted by gatorblue92
my friend did this on his 3.0 taurus and it killed his cats... so i would not do it
Each MAF sensor design has a unique transfer function that describes the mathematical relationship between the sensor voltage and the measured air flow. This is arrived at empirically and flashed into the PCM. Mixing MAFs and PCMs from different applications is asking for fueling errors and their consequences.
 
Reply
Old Feb 2, 2005
  #10  
n3elz's Avatar
RF Veteran
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 10,623
Likes: 6
From: Kennett Square, PA
Absolutely. For some reason, when cut, the 3.0's don't move so extremely far off the curve, and the 4.0's do.

It's strange to me because the 3.0 sensor fills more of the cross section and I would expect the change to be more severe when cut. But in fact it's the other way around.
 
Reply
Old Feb 2, 2005
  #11  
checkmyvitals's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
From: London, Canada
Anyone seen any info on this? It is a very convincing switch to me, but I can't even find any pics of the string MAF...
 
Reply
Old Feb 2, 2005
  #12  
n3elz's Avatar
RF Veteran
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 10,623
Likes: 6
From: Kennett Square, PA
I've seen no info, and what we just told you should make it a less convincing switch. THINK ABOUT IT: that MAF is designed to scale the signal for the full range airflow of a 5.0L, high output engine. Do you really think it's range is going to be even CLOSE to the right range for a 4.0L Ranger SOHC?

What is it exactly that is convincing to you about it?
 
Reply
Old Feb 3, 2005
  #13  
Dave and Julie's Avatar
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 874
Likes: 2
From: outside Detroit, where it's safer
Originally Posted by n3elz
Cue the violins!

Actually, if you pay more attention to detail than I did, you can use a scanning tool that allows you to watch PID's to verify that your not at the extreme limits. Had I done that, Doc would not have gotten the CEL on the MAF mod on his truck.

So you CAN know before it's too late -- you just have to actually LOOK!

Which PID is that?
 
Reply
Old Feb 3, 2005
  #14  
V8 Level II's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (4)
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 7,910
Likes: 27
From: Michigan
Excuse my ignorance but what is a MAF "string sensor"?? Are we talking about a common hot-wire sensor here or something else? If it is not a hot wire sensor, the chances of it even functioning with a calibration set up for a hot-wire sensor is just about nil.
 
Reply
Old Feb 3, 2005
  #15  
n3elz's Avatar
RF Veteran
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 10,623
Likes: 6
From: Kennett Square, PA
Originally Posted by Dave and Julie
Which PID is that?
I already posted that, Dave, in the other topic: LTFT and LTFT2

I take it you know what they represent and how they are derived?
 
Reply
Old Feb 3, 2005
  #16  
Dave and Julie's Avatar
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 874
Likes: 2
From: outside Detroit, where it's safer
Long term fuel trim will not tell you what the catalyst temperature is, that why I thought you must be talking about something else.
 
Reply
Old Feb 3, 2005
  #17  
n3elz's Avatar
RF Veteran
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 10,623
Likes: 6
From: Kennett Square, PA
I never said it told catalyst temperature. I said it would tell me if the MAF was out of range and causing a lean or rich condition. You indicated that you needed those conditions to damage the CAT. Hence, if fuel trim is "under control", there would be no catalyst damage from a lean conditions. Q.E.D.
 
Reply
Old Feb 3, 2005
  #18  
Dave and Julie's Avatar
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 874
Likes: 2
From: outside Detroit, where it's safer
If fuel trim was under control you would not have had any CMDTC's.
 
Reply
Old Feb 3, 2005
  #19  
n3elz's Avatar
RF Veteran
Joined: Jun 2004
Posts: 10,623
Likes: 6
From: Kennett Square, PA
Gosh, you don't read anything I actually type do you, Dave?

I SAID I didn't read the LTFT's above idle when I FIRST did the mod, and missed that it was at the limit. I said that was a MISTAKE and I should have done it. When Doc came back I DID read them, and discovered the reason for his CEL.

You don't let up in the face of facts, do you, lol! If you read my topic on it, you would have known you are running a rabbit trail on this one. I've already answered your questions and challenges, before you posted them. Are you just ANXIOUS to make a negative point, or are you interested in what actually happened?
 
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
FoMoCoFiddy
4.0L OHV & SOHC V6 Tech
11
Dec 24, 2009 11:22 PM
n3elz
General Ford Ranger Discussion
20
Dec 17, 2004 01:31 PM
Mnemonic
General Technical & Electrical
16
Aug 24, 2004 07:34 PM




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:31 AM.