|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,025
Hard-core CEG'er
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 7,025 |
I would guess they are all the non-svt maf housing and sensors are interchangable. Only the actual sensor varied between the non-svt and svt.
Jim Hahn
1996 T-Red Contour SE Reborn 4/6/04
3.0L swap and Arizona Dyno Chip Turbo Kit
364 whp, 410 wtq @ 4,700 rpm
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 130
CEG\'er
|
|
OP
CEG\'er
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 130 |
So I guess the 99 up 2.5l MAF housings are plastic while the others are aluminum.
Can someone with an aluminum one and someone with a plastic one post the part numbers for the sensors? I'm just wondering if they are the same.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
Originally posted by RodneyBur:
So I guess the 99 up 2.5l MAF housings are plastic while the others are aluminum.
Can someone with an aluminum one and someone with a plastic one post the part numbers for the sensors? I'm just wondering if they are the same.
Thanks.
Would you expect them to have the same part number if they are different, aluminum vs plastic?
The calibrations are close enough if not the actually same. (never looked at a lot of non-SVT calibrations) The only real difference in calibration is between an SVT and non-SVT MAF.
If I had a choice I would pick a plastic one because it will have less heat soak.
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 130
CEG\'er
|
|
OP
CEG\'er
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 130 |
I'm hoping they are the same. It seems ford wouldnt change the sensor just because the housing was made out of plastic instead of aluminum. I didnt think of heat soak actually. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 5,810 |
Don't worry about it. Either material works fine and the maf is short enough that it isn't that likely to transfer much more heat to the air at the speed the air moves. Now if your whole intake is steel like mine with aluminum, then you might get a bit more air heating, but it isn't much.
Not only that, both the steel/alum/plastic will all get to the same temp and all will transfer heat to the air. The rate that the plastic transfers the heat will be lower. Alum may be the fastest and stainless is probably quite low as well.
So the only real time I think the plastic would be better would literally be at idle in stop and go traffic.
Former owner of '99 CSVT - Silver #222/2760
356/334 wHP/TQ at 10psi on pump gas!
See My Mods
'05 Volvo S40 Turbo 5 AWD with 6spd, Passion Red
'06 Mazda5 Touring, 5spd,MTX, Black
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 48
New CEG\'er
|
|
New CEG\'er
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 48 |
well i had an aluminum and now i have a plastic replacement
99 svt
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 130
CEG\'er
|
|
OP
CEG\'er
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 130 |
If someone has one of these laying around could you take some measurements for me? I need both ends of the MAF measured for a comparison I am working on. I've measured all my intake tubing parts but do not have a MAF to measure. I need the inside diameter of both ends on the MAF. Inches is fine. Thanks. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602
Hard-core CEG'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 9,602 |
All stock MAFs have the same dimensions. "Going from memory" it should be a 75mm inlet and a 70mm outlet. That's the best I can do tonight. 
2000 SVT #674
13.47 @ 102 - All Motor!
It was not broke; Yet I fixed it anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
