5.0 Maf - Ranger-Forums - The Ultimate Ford Ranger Resource


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

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old 02-02-2005
checkmyvitals's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: London, Canada
Posts: 70
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 With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-02-2005
gatorblue92's Avatar
RF Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Delaware
Posts: 8,238
my friend did this on his 3.0 taurus and it killed his cats... so i would not do it
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-02-2005
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: outside Detroit, where it's safer
Posts: 874
Quote:
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 With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-02-2005
n3elz's Avatar
RF Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Kennett Square, PA
Posts: 10,620
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 With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-02-2005
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: outside Detroit, where it's safer
Posts: 874
And you won't know until it's too late.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-02-2005
loneFX4's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Summerville,SC
Posts: 955
my cats are gone so it doesnt matter
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-02-2005
n3elz's Avatar
RF Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Kennett Square, PA
Posts: 10,620
Quote:
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 With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-02-2005
sawred's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 580
Quote:
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 With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-02-2005
V8 Level II's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (4)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 7,833
Quote:
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 With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-02-2005
n3elz's Avatar
RF Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Kennett Square, PA
Posts: 10,620
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 With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-02-2005
checkmyvitals's Avatar
Member
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: London, Canada
Posts: 70
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 With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-02-2005
n3elz's Avatar
RF Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Kennett Square, PA
Posts: 10,620
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 With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-03-2005
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: outside Detroit, where it's safer
Posts: 874
Quote:
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 With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-03-2005
V8 Level II's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (4)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 7,833
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 With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-03-2005
n3elz's Avatar
RF Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Kennett Square, PA
Posts: 10,620
Quote:
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 With Quote
  #16  
Old 02-03-2005
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: outside Detroit, where it's safer
Posts: 874
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 With Quote
  #17  
Old 02-03-2005
n3elz's Avatar
RF Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Kennett Square, PA
Posts: 10,620
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 With Quote
  #18  
Old 02-03-2005
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: outside Detroit, where it's safer
Posts: 874
If fuel trim was under control you would not have had any CMDTC's.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 02-03-2005
n3elz's Avatar
RF Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Kennett Square, PA
Posts: 10,620
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 With Quote
Reply

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pro-M MAF 75mm and SSD intake ..... FoMoCoFiddy 4.0L OHV & SOHC V6 Tech 11 12-25-2009 12:22 AM
Amsoil FAQ/Technical Bulletin on MAF contamination n3elz General Ford Ranger Discussion 20 12-17-2004 02:31 PM
MAF mod on a 4.0l? Mnemonic General Technical & Electrical 16 08-24-2004 08:34 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:30 AM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.