Rogue Tuning NA Tune
07-08-2015 | 08:01 AM
#17
Intermediate
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
From: Lexington, KY
07-10-2015 | 02:58 PM
#19
Rennlist Member
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 245
Likes: 1
From: Palo Alto, CA
Like the original poster of this thread I'm interested if anybody has any feedback on the Miller MAF?
Joshua indicated he would be back in business soon, but now it looks like Lindsey Racing will take over the NA-Tune.
Not knowing if and when that will happen maybe it would be time to look into the Miller MAF instead.
So with that said, does anyone have any experience with the Miller GEN III MAF conversion kit.
Sorry to bail on you Joshua, but I've patiently waited for your MAF kit to return to market and it doesn't seem like it will be anytime soon.
As you can see, I'm not the only one looking for options.
Joshua indicated he would be back in business soon, but now it looks like Lindsey Racing will take over the NA-Tune.
Not knowing if and when that will happen maybe it would be time to look into the Miller MAF instead.
So with that said, does anyone have any experience with the Miller GEN III MAF conversion kit.
Sorry to bail on you Joshua, but I've patiently waited for your MAF kit to return to market and it doesn't seem like it will be anytime soon.
As you can see, I'm not the only one looking for options.
07-10-2015 | 03:09 PM
#20
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Small Business Partner
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Small Business Partner
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 5,252
Likes: 6
From: Denver
Having LR take over the day-to-days is, and has been what I (and LR) have been working towards...
It is trying to combine the best possible solution: They have the man-power to build, stock, and ship stuff quickly. The reality is that I do not have the time for the day-to-day operations of doing everything myself.
It took us about 6 months to get the LR M-Tune going. And that was with a lot of software improvements and major hardware changes.
There are much less changes for the NA-Tune kit, so I do not expect the timeframe to be as long.
It is trying to combine the best possible solution: They have the man-power to build, stock, and ship stuff quickly. The reality is that I do not have the time for the day-to-day operations of doing everything myself.
It took us about 6 months to get the LR M-Tune going. And that was with a lot of software improvements and major hardware changes.
There are much less changes for the NA-Tune kit, so I do not expect the timeframe to be as long.
07-10-2015 | 03:16 PM
#21
Rainman
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 45,595
Likes: 665
From: Nashville, TN
While we're on the topic of changing stuff 
Josh...
Do you have any pointers/tips to adjust the tuning for a different MAF housing?
I figure since the MAF housing I have now doesn't work with the NA airbox, and I can't use the airbox it's intended for, I might as well use a standard "round" housing with the slot sensor in it.
Would be about the same ID as the one I have but both ends are round pipe openings rather than the rectangle air-box hole.
Josh...
Do you have any pointers/tips to adjust the tuning for a different MAF housing?
I figure since the MAF housing I have now doesn't work with the NA airbox, and I can't use the airbox it's intended for, I might as well use a standard "round" housing with the slot sensor in it.
Would be about the same ID as the one I have but both ends are round pipe openings rather than the rectangle air-box hole.
07-10-2015 | 07:36 PM
#22
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Small Business Partner
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Small Business Partner
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 5,252
Likes: 6
From: Denver
Real life isn't quite so simple.
In a pipe, airflow isn't uniform across the entire diameter, especially at low airflows. The fastest moving air is in the center of the pipe. So, we want the MAF sensor element to be exactly in the center. The MAF sensor's length doesn't change, so when going from the standard NA-Tune pipe, which does have a very centered MAF sensor element position, to a larger diameter pipe, you are moving the MAF sensor's element away from the center.
This has a similar affect to losing low-flow resolution. How much depends on how big of a pipe, and how 'off-center' the sensing element is. Further, the loss of lower-flow resolution can harm fuel enrichment response, necessitating a change in tip-in fueling.
Additionally, MAF sensors need to have a fairly uniform & straight air entering. Turbulent airflow entering the MAF will make readings difficult, erroneous, and in-consistent. The NA airbox does an excellent job of both providing enough (cool) air, and straightening the air for entry to the MAF.
For changing to a non-provided MAF housing, I would first adjust the MAF compensation table by a static amount calculated from the ideal formula. Then I would make changes to the entire airflow voltage range in the MAF comp table, from steady-state feedback using the logger and a WBO2. Finally, I would address the fuel-enrichment settings - these are mostly done by feel.
Caveat, you might also need to adjust the load filter table, but I would save that for last, or at least not until the MAF comp table is fully adjusted.
07-10-2015 | 08:46 PM
#23
Rainman
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 45,595
Likes: 665
From: Nashville, TN
MAF housing change in an ideal world would only change the MAF reading by a simple linear formula: (area of new ID) / (area of old ID)
Real life isn't quite so simple.
In a pipe, airflow isn't uniform across the entire diameter, especially at low airflows. The fastest moving air is in the center of the pipe. So, we want the MAF sensor element to be exactly in the center. The MAF sensor's length doesn't change, so when going from the standard NA-Tune pipe, which does have a very centered MAF sensor element position, to a larger diameter pipe, you are moving the MAF sensor's element away from the center.
This has a similar affect to losing low-flow resolution. How much depends on how big of a pipe, and how 'off-center' the sensing element is. Further, the loss of lower-flow resolution can harm fuel enrichment response, necessitating a change in tip-in fueling.
Additionally, MAF sensors need to have a fairly uniform & straight air entering. Turbulent airflow entering the MAF will make readings difficult, erroneous, and in-consistent. The NA airbox does an excellent job of both providing enough (cool) air, and straightening the air for entry to the MAF.
For changing to a non-provided MAF housing, I would first adjust the MAF compensation table by a static amount calculated from the ideal formula. Then I would make changes to the entire airflow voltage range in the MAF comp table, from steady-state feedback using the logger and a WBO2. Finally, I would address the fuel-enrichment settings - these are mostly done by feel.
Caveat, you might also need to adjust the load filter table, but I would save that for last, or at least not until the MAF comp table is fully adjusted.
Real life isn't quite so simple.
In a pipe, airflow isn't uniform across the entire diameter, especially at low airflows. The fastest moving air is in the center of the pipe. So, we want the MAF sensor element to be exactly in the center. The MAF sensor's length doesn't change, so when going from the standard NA-Tune pipe, which does have a very centered MAF sensor element position, to a larger diameter pipe, you are moving the MAF sensor's element away from the center.
This has a similar affect to losing low-flow resolution. How much depends on how big of a pipe, and how 'off-center' the sensing element is. Further, the loss of lower-flow resolution can harm fuel enrichment response, necessitating a change in tip-in fueling.
Additionally, MAF sensors need to have a fairly uniform & straight air entering. Turbulent airflow entering the MAF will make readings difficult, erroneous, and in-consistent. The NA airbox does an excellent job of both providing enough (cool) air, and straightening the air for entry to the MAF.
For changing to a non-provided MAF housing, I would first adjust the MAF compensation table by a static amount calculated from the ideal formula. Then I would make changes to the entire airflow voltage range in the MAF comp table, from steady-state feedback using the logger and a WBO2. Finally, I would address the fuel-enrichment settings - these are mostly done by feel.
Caveat, you might also need to adjust the load filter table, but I would save that for last, or at least not until the MAF comp table is fully adjusted.
The new potential housing is almost the same diameter as the exit of the "S"-NA tune housing I have currently.
However the question I have still regarding rough diameter calculations is...the figure to use for the "old ID", would that be the diameter of the NA tune pipe where the sensor sits, where the J-boot attaches, or a "hydraulic radius" at the rectangular airbox entry (since the pipe size varies so much)??
My proposed filter-maf-jboot pipe would have a large bellmouth inside the air filter which should help to even out the airflow regions inside the pipe, with smooth transition in size (3" bellmouth exit to 2.75" od/64mm id MAF pipe), either welded on or silicone reducer.
07-10-2015 | 09:10 PM
#24
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Small Business Partner
Rennlist Member
Rennlist
Small Business Partner
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 5,252
Likes: 6
From: Denver
07-19-2015 | 11:32 AM
#28
Drifting
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,883
Likes: 348
From: New York & Indiana
Having LR take over the day-to-days is, and has been what I (and LR) have been working towards...
It is trying to combine the best possible solution: They have the man-power to build, stock, and ship stuff quickly. The reality is that I do not have the time for the day-to-day operations of doing everything myself.
It took us about 6 months to get the LR M-Tune going. And that was with a lot of software improvements and major hardware changes.
There are much less changes for the NA-Tune kit, so I do not expect the timeframe to be as long.
It is trying to combine the best possible solution: They have the man-power to build, stock, and ship stuff quickly. The reality is that I do not have the time for the day-to-day operations of doing everything myself.
It took us about 6 months to get the LR M-Tune going. And that was with a lot of software improvements and major hardware changes.
There are much less changes for the NA-Tune kit, so I do not expect the timeframe to be as long.
I sent payment for a NA-Tune Kit and a 85.5 or later DME for upgrade to you in May 2014. Will my payment be credited to LR and the DME sent to LR for uprade?
Waiting patiently.
You can PM a response.
Thanks,
Tom K