Has anyone ever converted from MAP to MAF for fuel mileage and I hear the throttle response is slightly better. Is it worth it? I have a 94 Pontiac Grand Am 3.1L.
Both cars I have worked on have both of these sensors. I have read online that there is some improvement using MAF, but it would be tough for me to quantify as I can see them both updating live in Torque when I drive each of the vehicles I have to play with, and I suspect that things are governed on each car by primarily MAF. I just use the MAP to investigate vacuum leaks (which are easily findable with a $7 Harbor Freight hand pump and one American Spirit…lol).
I have options using ELM327 and Torque that I must set in order to have the tool track my mileage as I drive. But when properly set, the computation is automatic. Is this how you are doing things, or can you explain a bit more about how you are presently calculating fuel mileage?
I’m filling up as full as possible, marking the starting mileage and trying to record the ending mileage as close the the empty line as possible.
Don’t you have a couple of years left before you would be able to get such a conversion to pass inspection in the metroplex?
I’m sure this is a stupid question, but why not?
I’m sure someone who has been through this can speak more accurately to this, but this is based on assorted reading when considering an older car. Cars less than 25 years old are subject to emissions, including confirming that the systems are as designed by the manufacturer. My understanding is that a complete newer engine with all the factory emissions can be installed, but is a pain to get through the inspection. But one model year engine with a newer model year emissions is not a certified combination, and as I understand it won’t pass. But being over 25 years old gets you past all that.
1 Like
Thank you. I’ll try and look up the laws
Well on the older cars they don’t test by diagnostic board but by tail pipe emissions and I heard MAF is better for fuel efficiency and emissions.
My recollection from the last time I had a vehicle go through ASM dyno test, they still did a visual inspection of the engine compartment looking for any modifications to the emissions system.
I would guess the question is if you can do what you are trying to do well enough that it looks factory?
The other risk is that you know you are trying to make it better, but to the inspection station, or anyone looking to enforce EPA regulations, is it going to look like an improvement, or is it going to look like tampering?
Best I recall it’s 2-24 or 2-26 years that all take emissions. That was the last time I looked at the TTC.
I had a argument with the inspector about he law. Particularly the muffler law. In Tx in the code specifies a muffling device which includes a turbo.
Short version: seems like a lot of work for not much benefit.
Longer version: seems like a lot of work for not much benefit, and might not pass inspection.
Even longer version: seems like a lot of work for not much benefit, and might not pass inspection, and could land you with a Federal Tampering citation/fine
tl;dnr: I think I’d leave well enough alone.
But if you do it, keep us apprised. 
Well she isn’t my daily driver. She is my tinker toy so I’m thinking about trying a few things like a 3100/3400 hybird. Not going to race it, just want to have some fun with it and get it running well and rebuilt. Maybe even an engine swap with a 3500 v6