| Author | Topic |
|---|
Location:
South Australia
Registered:
July 2002
|
|
Re: map vs. afm?
|
Mon, 11 October 2004 01:55
 
|
 |
A 2-bar MAP sensor means it'll read pressure from 0 to 2.0bar...what you have to realise though, is that a 2.0bar reading is approximately equivalent to 1.0bar of boost. The pressure reading from a MAP is basically 1.0bar (atmospheric pressure) + whatever boost you are running, so you are effectively limited to 1.0bar of boost (ie 2.0bar of total manifold air pressure)
Go with AFM, have you read anything anyone has said here????
AFM ensures much better a/f ratios, putting a MAP sensor on is only good when you are worried about space in the engine bay, or maybe the cost of componentry. If you don't care about a/f ratios and only want maximum power at only ONE narrow range of throttle application and RPM then why not stick carbies on? 
If you want really good smooth reliable engine operation with really good power and good torque, then use AFM/EFI.
jcmf - the actual restriction placed on the engine from having the spring-loaded flap is quite small - what is a restriction is the overall cross-sectional area of the flap-type AFM and it's shape. Last I checked, squares are the second worst polygon for surface area vs. circumference - and if you know much about airflow, you would much rather air flowing through a geometrical shape that has high cross-sectional area for a given circumference, the best shape just happens to be a circle but it's an impractical shape for the job.
|
|
|
| | Subject | Poster | Date |
|---|
 |
map vs. afm?
|
4A-GTE | Sun, 10 October 2004 08:34 |
|
Re: map vs. afm?
|
DunkyMonkey | Sun, 10 October 2004 12:21 |
|
Re: map vs. afm?
|
oldcorollas | Sun, 10 October 2004 12:33 |
|
Re: map vs. afm?
|
mrshin | Sun, 10 October 2004 14:28 |
|
Re: map vs. afm?
|
THE WITZL | Sun, 10 October 2004 14:34 |
|
Re: map vs. afm?
|
mrshin | Sun, 10 October 2004 14:56 |
|
Re: map vs. afm?
|
THE WITZL | Sun, 10 October 2004 15:03 |
|
Re: map vs. afm?
|
no_tofu_speed | Sun, 10 October 2004 15:23 |
|
Re: map vs. afm?
|
inertia | Sun, 10 October 2004 15:54 |
|
Re: map vs. afm?
|
RWDboy | Sun, 10 October 2004 16:00 |
|
Re: map vs. afm?
|
justcallmefrank | Mon, 11 October 2004 00:13 |
|
Re: map vs. afm?
|
4A-GTE | Mon, 11 October 2004 00:49 |
|
Re: map vs. afm?
|
RWDboy | Mon, 11 October 2004 01:55 |
|
Re: map vs. afm?
|
THE WITZL | Mon, 11 October 2004 01:58 |
|
Re: map vs. afm?
|
oldcorollas | Mon, 11 October 2004 02:14 |
|
Re: map vs. afm?
|
oldcorollas | Mon, 11 October 2004 02:16 |
|
Re: map vs. afm?
|
RWDboy | Mon, 11 October 2004 02:34 |
|
Re: map vs. afm?
|
indian | Mon, 11 October 2004 05:47 |
|
Re: map vs. afm?
|
quest | Wed, 13 October 2004 23:26 |
|
Re: map vs. afm?
|
RWDboy | Thu, 14 October 2004 02:37 |
|
Re: map vs. afm?
|
quest | Thu, 14 October 2004 06:32 |
