toddk911

I see your point here and agree that with the same X amount of cfm-kg/hr a motor with much better internals will be more efficient and thus be able to produce more hp with the same cfm.

Using John's numbers of 1,000kg/hr max for the stock AFM, that works out to about 480cfm which divided by appx. 1.5 hp made per cfm = 320hp; maybe 10hp +/-

eniac

As far as the AFM is concerned, you would have to install a stronger spring for the flap to have more resistance. This really isn't something you want to do, also by the time it's recalibrated and new software is designed to match you could have installed an already calibrated MAF.

The problem with the AFM is it's physical limititation. Once the flap is pushed all the way open, it can n longer provide any form of air measurement, thus fuel is out of control. There is no software that can help this.

Auto_Werks 3.6

Ha... I doubt that. He probably puts false info out every once in a while just to screw with us . ST once posted on a thread that he peaked and held 30psi to the redline with a K26-6 turbo. Most people didn't understand the question, so in his defense he may not have either... I may have worded it too vaguely as well. Regardless, I don't believe what anyone on this board says blindly, including special tool.

Regarding my post and turbo tommys response. I'm sorry if you don't understand what I said. Do some google searching for moment of inertia / internal combustion. There are some interesting write up's floating around out there.. I think one from popular hotrodding or some other magazine. When I did some fact checking I saw evidence of a correlation between decreasing the moment of inertia of the clutch + flywheel & faster ET's at the strip. That as has already been discussed is RWHP. But you may choose not to believe that as well. Which is fine. It doesn't hurt my feelings.

In this case though, it is simply physics.

Auto_Werks 3.6

This also means that with better internals you should be able to do more with the stock AFM. You will see more RWHP before maxing out the sensor.

special tool

This is exactly right, again.
I have proven this, obviously by datalogging my mass air(for about 3 years now) before and after and during all testing.

gt37vgt

missed my point about AFM by bass the idea of the bypass is that when your afm reads 95% there is say 250CFM going through the air flow meter and 200 cfm going through a fixed size bypass giving 450 measured cfm with an AFM rated at 255cfm . just like Karmen vortex afm you just measure some of the air . and then account for this in your fuel mapping .
even if you put a second AFM in parallel and doubled your injector size and started there

eniac

That could work, it would be similar to what would happen if you installed a stiffer spring on the "door". It would take more CFM to push it open and therefore more CFM to max it out.

But.....why man, why?!?

tman

My car did just over 280 rwhp with afm, running pig rich.
Way below 10 a/f.
I think everyone agrees that the afm has to go to make decent hp,
so whats the point.

gt37vgt

yeh but a stiffer spring would give you the same max flow and kill midrange throttle response . maybe stiffen the spring if you set up the AFM in a blow through set up