Made this thread over on EvoM and figured I would post it here too. I am liking that more and more tuning abilities are coming on the X. Hopefully it will catch up to the 8/9 or surpass it sometime soon
Also I had 3 posts over there on this.
------------------------------------------------------------------
http://forums.evolutionm.net/evo-x-d...ne-i-know.html
It really should say MAFless or something as Evo X's use speed density in conjunction with the MAF on the X's. They then compare both readings of load and use the lower (?) I believe.
I spoke with Tephra about doing speed density and he saw no reason on the X. So I am curious to know what the boys at Cobb (I assume Cobb as its one of their tuners posting it) think going just SD is going to accomplish. However, Tephra is essentially Cobb employed so maybe he cooked this up.
To my understanding the MAF is a restriction on 8/9's but isn't really on the X's with the X having hotwire and being able to go to a bigger intake.
I am all for doing it if its worth it.
What does everyone else think?
Ok, found some more info on EvoXforums here:
http://www.evoxforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=60395
Here is what Jon from Cobb says:
The maf isn't a restriction really. Since the maf stays in still for intake temps.
Large maf housings are not great and cause turbulence, which then skews the maf reading resulting in jagged load reading. Load is the basis for fueling and timing vs rpm. The smoother the load the smoother the car/timing/fuel/etc
And then Tephra:
yeh its not totally maf-less - it just removes the MAF from the load/fuel/timing calcs
So they keep the MAF in there I guess for IAT. I would love a rock solid idle, mine isn't horrible at all, but this would probably remove any shittiness.
Here is a nice pic...you can see with the 3.5" MAF tube which most of us built motor guys end up with how jagged the MAF gets down low. But this shows when it ignores the MAF and uses just the MAP signal...its smooth as butter.