Actually, its my fault. Rhetorical nor sarcastic questions belong in such a technical discussion that has been inundated with so much misinformation. It's too confusing.Ohh, sorry I'm super dense in determining rhetorical or sarcastic statements sometimes.
Landtank MAF surprising scangauge results
- Thread starter Brian894X4
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
semlin
curmudgeon
sleeoffroad
Supporting Vendor
Please show me where I said that? I said the disconnect of the FPR from the reverse line can cause the pressure to drop and cause the truck to run leaner.
So if turbocruiser reported an AF of 10 before and now it is 12, isn't that leaner? I was attributing this to the fuel pressure differential lowering.
Also, please point out any other misinformation if you wish, and please don't just limit it to my posts.
- Thread starter
- #284
I'll try asking this again.....because it seems to have gotten lost in all long theory discussions.
Why is it that the LT MAF appears to behave very poorly with the intake filter system removed? Yes, I know this is not a recommended thing. I only discovered the problem by accident, not because I don't run without a filter. But later found out that removing the filter has no affect on the stock MAF.
Why is it that it appears to take far less airflow disruption to kill the engine with the new sensor than the old sensor?
The things that are hurting my confidence in this mod are the following.....
1) Simple deviations like removing of the air filter intake system seem to have dramatic affects on how the engine runs to the point of killing it, when it's not an issue with the stock MAF.
2) Why the FPR regulator has to be modified has not be properly explained except to say that it fixed the problem and there's no reason to have a FPR anyway, despite the fact that every Toyota return fuel system through the current models, happens to have one.
3) Basic testing of the sensor parameters to see if they both give the same readings for a given condition doesn't appear to have been done, instead relying on the on board diagnositc system to give data, which could be questionable, given that we know something in the system, be it the sensor or the ECU is not calibrated properly at least at idle.
4) Changing a major sensor that the ECU relies on is not a light mod. Changing almost anything else in the system, the ECU can compensate for if the sensors are calibrated correctly, or if not able to compensate will throw a code. Changing a major sensor, renders everything the ECU does questionable. And the MAF is a major sensor. Unlike even the 02 sensor, the engine will not even start and run without the MAF. Even with hooked up and powered properly, if the MAF is blocked or even just turned around backwards, the motor will not even start. This is a major functional part of the engine and ECU system.
The good things about this mod are the following....
1) The mod is absolutely been proven in my mind to gain signficant performance at WOT and does seem to improve driving characteristics. We can debate why that is and if the performance comes at a price such as an unseen lean condition or whatever, but the performance gain is there.
2) The quality and design of the housing are top notch and it's really a work of art. Well worth the price for the quality and workmanship
3) Replacement sensors are a fraction of the price of the old sensor and even used sensors can be found for as little as $40.
4) A lot of trucks have run this mod with seemingly no issues, other than the ones I mentioned.
Personally, I'm still on the fence. Right now the stock MAF is back in the truck and it will probably take some more evidence of no problems, before I put the LT MAF back in, but I'll be keeping it and watching and seeing how others do with their trucks long term and if any other solutions come out about the above questions.
Why is it that the LT MAF appears to behave very poorly with the intake filter system removed? Yes, I know this is not a recommended thing. I only discovered the problem by accident, not because I don't run without a filter. But later found out that removing the filter has no affect on the stock MAF.
Why is it that it appears to take far less airflow disruption to kill the engine with the new sensor than the old sensor?
The things that are hurting my confidence in this mod are the following.....
1) Simple deviations like removing of the air filter intake system seem to have dramatic affects on how the engine runs to the point of killing it, when it's not an issue with the stock MAF.
2) Why the FPR regulator has to be modified has not be properly explained except to say that it fixed the problem and there's no reason to have a FPR anyway, despite the fact that every Toyota return fuel system through the current models, happens to have one.
3) Basic testing of the sensor parameters to see if they both give the same readings for a given condition doesn't appear to have been done, instead relying on the on board diagnositc system to give data, which could be questionable, given that we know something in the system, be it the sensor or the ECU is not calibrated properly at least at idle.
4) Changing a major sensor that the ECU relies on is not a light mod. Changing almost anything else in the system, the ECU can compensate for if the sensors are calibrated correctly, or if not able to compensate will throw a code. Changing a major sensor, renders everything the ECU does questionable. And the MAF is a major sensor. Unlike even the 02 sensor, the engine will not even start and run without the MAF. Even with hooked up and powered properly, if the MAF is blocked or even just turned around backwards, the motor will not even start. This is a major functional part of the engine and ECU system.
The good things about this mod are the following....
1) The mod is absolutely been proven in my mind to gain signficant performance at WOT and does seem to improve driving characteristics. We can debate why that is and if the performance comes at a price such as an unseen lean condition or whatever, but the performance gain is there.
2) The quality and design of the housing are top notch and it's really a work of art. Well worth the price for the quality and workmanship
3) Replacement sensors are a fraction of the price of the old sensor and even used sensors can be found for as little as $40.
4) A lot of trucks have run this mod with seemingly no issues, other than the ones I mentioned.
Personally, I'm still on the fence. Right now the stock MAF is back in the truck and it will probably take some more evidence of no problems, before I put the LT MAF back in, but I'll be keeping it and watching and seeing how others do with their trucks long term and if any other solutions come out about the above questions.
One example where you have stated that disconnecting the FPR will cause a lean condition on boosted trucks. This is misinformation since you don't know for sure. Not only do you not know, but turbocruiser , for one, has logged data that does not demonstrate a too lean condition.
I say misinformation because you have expressed your assertion as a matter of fact rather then a matter of concern and you have done so based, in part, on conjecture. Misinformation and misunderstanding are not the same thing.
With the purpose of supporting your too lean assertion, pointing out that turbocruiser logged a 12 where it was a 10 is also misleading since leaner doesn't mean too lean. In fact, we know that turbocruiser was running too rich at high boost before he ran LT's MAF.
Fellas fellas fellas, whoa, let's stop a second, realize that we're all one and that although this is perhaps a passionate technical subject, it is simply a technical subject that we're all working on through this thread whether we wanted to or not! 
Let's really relax and get mindful instead of vengeful; it is ours to offer respectful thoughts as opposed to disrespectful thoughts and it is ours to offer opinion, data, experience, expertise,etc as opposed to other insulting offerings. For what its worth to whomever is getting aggravated about Christo's comments here you gotta realize he's a helluva good guy who wouldn't want to 'hurt' this mod in the slightest. He's simply inquisitive and asking things that he wants to ask. Likewise Rick is a helluva good guy who's answering to the best of his ability via all the data we all collectively collected here.
Cantcha see its somewhat circular here; all of Christo's questions are out there to be correctly calculated at some time through extremely technical efforts and cracking Toyota computers and things that we realistically can not/have not done, and all of Rick's answers are out there screaming that this thing works. It is what it is and it is, in my humbly offered opinion, an amazing modification for our rigs, but, what it is not, is reason to fight amongst ourselves. Once this thing is figured out fully and we all have consensus it'd be so much sweeter if we got there with some frickin style huh? One Love, TC.
Let's really relax and get mindful instead of vengeful; it is ours to offer respectful thoughts as opposed to disrespectful thoughts and it is ours to offer opinion, data, experience, expertise,etc as opposed to other insulting offerings. For what its worth to whomever is getting aggravated about Christo's comments here you gotta realize he's a helluva good guy who wouldn't want to 'hurt' this mod in the slightest. He's simply inquisitive and asking things that he wants to ask. Likewise Rick is a helluva good guy who's answering to the best of his ability via all the data we all collectively collected here. Cantcha see its somewhat circular here; all of Christo's questions are out there to be correctly calculated at some time through extremely technical efforts and cracking Toyota computers and things that we realistically can not/have not done, and all of Rick's answers are out there screaming that this thing works. It is what it is and it is, in my humbly offered opinion, an amazing modification for our rigs, but, what it is not, is reason to fight amongst ourselves. Once this thing is figured out fully and we all have consensus it'd be so much sweeter if we got there with some frickin style huh? One Love, TC.
Why on earth would you care about how it runs without an air canister?
sleeoffroad
Supporting Vendor
Compared to the FPR connected, disconnecting it will cause a lean condition. I did not say lean, below 14.7 blow up the motor lean. That was the context in which we were comparing lean to rich.
I know it for fact, because we have done it to prove that the FPR is working, and working as we expected on boosted trucks. With both the stock FPR and rising rate FPR.
How do you know 12 was not too lean in that particular case?
sleeoffroad
Supporting Vendor
Well put and duly noted, but...Fellas fellas fellas, whoa, let's stop a second, realize that we're all one and that although this is perhaps a passionate technical subject, it is simply a technical subject that we're all working on through this thread whether we wanted to or not!
Cantcha see its somewhat circular here; all of Christo's questions are out there to be correctly calculated at some time through extremely technical efforts and cracking Toyota computers and things that we realistically can not/have not done, and all of Rick's answers are out there screaming that this thing works. It is what it is and it is, in my humbly offered opinion, an amazing modification for our rigs, but, what it is not, is reason to fight amongst ourselves. Once this thing is figured out fully and we all have consensus it'd be so much sweeter if we got there with some frickin style huh? One Love, TC.
this would have been better handled offline since it is a confusing matter and Rick is a vendor with a stake in the product being discussed. If there was irrefutable proof that the LT MAF was a danger to our motors then maybe a whistle blowing session would be appropriate. But most of us know with a great level of certainty that this is an excellent, affordable mod that is of benefit in multiple ways. If I were itching to cause doubt I would of let the sleeping dogs lie until I knew for sure or someone's motor blew. Who really thinks that soemone's motor is going to blow after all of this time?
Because he is running caster bushings and not plates
Maybe he should of listened to you when you told him he needed cc bushings, plates, and new arms.
- Thread starter
- #292
I don't want to run without a filter. I'm pointing out there appears to be a major calibration issue at idle. Removing the air filter should have zero affect on the engine if the sensor was working properly with the ecu. This is evidence that real world could have an adverse affect in shutting the engine down in the worst possible conditions.
I think the tone has been pretty civil for the most part.
Not sure how to come to a conclusion as Turbo put it best, Rick and Christo are speaking from opposite points of reference.
Not sure how to come to a conclusion as Turbo put it best, Rick and Christo are speaking from opposite points of reference.
Fair enough now that you clarify. But there are some reading this thread (at least there were
) who respect you and could easily mistake what you were saying to mean too lean when in fact there is not an identifiable problem in the proper context. But leaner isn't necessarily a bad thing. In fact, less rich may actually be desireable as long as it isn't too lean.
Because LT, TC, and others were ecstatic about their results. No one said, (not even you) "oops, back to the drawing board". 3 years later they are still cookin'.
Try pouring dirt around your air filter (in the canister) and then give it a try. PM me if you want to sell your MAF.
Abaco Performance LLC Website said:
It seems like the main point of contention vis a vis the response curves could be solved by sending $100 and a air box, piping and both the oem sensor/housing and Rick's housing/sensor to these guys. Seems to both be realistic and easily done.
- Thread starter
- #297
That aftermarket sensor looks interesting, but the problem with anything like that is if it fails, you're absolutely dead in the water. The engine will not run without the MAF, no matter what. That's one advantage of the LT MAF. There's little doubt that the LT sensors are reliable as they are Toyota products and are found in dozens and dozens of different models.
removing the air cleaner from the MAf introduces turbulence in the air stream and majorly screws with the sensors ability to read it. If you look how the canisters shape is leading into the housing I think it will become clear as to what I'm saying. The same thing holds true if the MAF is moved to close to a turbo inlet. The thing doesn't like air turbulence.
And if the sensor fails the truck will run. It goes into limp mode and after a few restarts it will begin to idle and eventually you can drive the truck. But it will run like crap. One of the best things about using this MAF sensor is it is a hell of a lot cheaper and they are used in so many different Toyotas and Lexus's that finding one in a junk yard isn't all that hard either.
Christo seems to have a completely different idea on how to approach making a Hi Flow tuned MAf. When I had these same thoughts about his caster plates I chose to go out and design my own. At this point it's probably the only thing that will make him happy with a mod of this type.
And if the sensor fails the truck will run. It goes into limp mode and after a few restarts it will begin to idle and eventually you can drive the truck. But it will run like crap. One of the best things about using this MAF sensor is it is a hell of a lot cheaper and they are used in so many different Toyotas and Lexus's that finding one in a junk yard isn't all that hard either.
Christo seems to have a completely different idea on how to approach making a Hi Flow tuned MAf. When I had these same thoughts about his caster plates I chose to go out and design my own. At this point it's probably the only thing that will make him happy with a mod of this type.
And props out to the design team of our ECU who had the clairvoyance to see into the future and embed MAPs that would work with a sensor not yet developed and a housing originally made out of spare plumbing parts which produce air flow rates 150% greater than the engine was designed to use.
What if you paired this with URD's MAF signal calibrator. This way you could modify the voltage to get the fuel trims back to normal. you guys might want to check out gadge's web site, he is the co-founder of urd and know his stuff about toyota ECU's. Here is a link to his tuning guide http://www.gadgetonline.com/U-Tune.pdf
and a link to his website Gadget's 4Runner
and a link to his website Gadget's 4Runner
