kevincnc

After all this work, I thought it deserved a catchy name This is my attempt to keep my engine bay stock looking. Can you find the MAF sensor in the first picture?



This picture shows the airbox opened up and MAF sensor hidden in a gutted AFM.







Here are a few more pictures starting with a view looking into the opening. Next is the difference between the stock airbox opening and the modified one. After that is the difference between the stock AFM and gutted MAF version, then finally the gutted AFM ready for MAF.

It may be my imagination, but throttle response seems better around town. Power is smooth at all RPM's and the analog signal looks smoother than with the stock airbox opening. I think there's actually less turbulence now than with the rectangular-to-round transition as before. It is running a little lean now so I'll tune that out with the piggyback. Next I'll try to open the snorkle up to 3" without making it obvious, and then do some testing with it vs. a cone filter.

In case you're wondering, I'll tell you anything you want to know about how I did this, but have no interest in doing it again. Now I need a car to go all out on with engine bay bling and leave off the stuff that makes it hard to work on.

RajDatta

Wow!!
Impressive. Are you sure you don't want to do another one .
Raj

Judson951

Very nice job. Your engine bay looks amazing as always...

Jeremy Himsel

You need help. really.

Landjet

That engine bay is way to clean.

kevincnc

Thanks guys...those of you that are being nice anyway. Here it is in daylight, it looks like I need to paint the exposed tube to match the AFM housing. I may do that at Jeremy's house to see if he can take it.

PorscheDude1

Nice work!

Spidey944

Brilliant!

nize

kevin, that is awesome work. you do know that the stock snorkle is a huge restriction though, right? read here;
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/showthread.php?t=385273

also, how are you running an air filter? or are you?

Chris Prack

That is a kick *** job. Really. First class. But why? Are you not allowed to have a MAF or something?

kevincnc

Thanks guys.

Nize, I'm using a K&N lightly oiled. I know the snorkle is a big restriction, but I think at 3" it won't be so bad. I'm really just trying to see how good I can get it compared to a cone filter, then may decide to do that anyway and get larger IC pipes.

kevincnc

Thanks. Why? That's hard to explain...maybe Jeremy's right. It just seems wrong modify such an original engine. Not that I'm against a nice highly modified engine, I just wanted to keep this one as original (looking) as possible.

IPSC

Ok never mind you answered my question.

Does look nice though.

IPSC

nize

i can agree with this. 951's with the air box+snorkle removed just look like there's something missing there. it's very obvious and just looks wrong. this was the one thing that was holding me back as well, but i finally gave in and removed the airbox when the dyno test showed a +36whp increase in power with nothing else changed.

plus, the poor turbocharger is obviously getting stressed by being forced to suck in air through a tiny straw at high rpm's.

RajDatta

Kevin, you just did what I have been wanting to do for a while now. I currently have a APE MAF setup but want to complete the 968 turbo S engine bay look and this is what is holding me up. I was planning on getting one of those stealth MAF setups but this looks like its even better. Since the airbox on my car will mate to a very short snorkel that connects directly to the driver's side NACA duct, I am not concerned about much restriction.
If you don't mind, I would like to pick your brains further via pm or email. Is that ok with you?
What kind of MAF did you use?
Raj