ok guys we have an sd section now and we should use it all of us sd guys need to get together and go through the pros and cons of sd , like stock the sd injection yeilds more power than stock mass air , stuff of that nature all the way to when building more horsepower what hoops you have to jump through to get there
One of the arguments I've heard is that SD provides better airflow due to the lack of a MAF sensor hanging out in the induction tract. My question for you guys is this, does that filiment and the crap that holds it really take up enough space that it costs measurable horsepower?
__________________
Who cares how much horsepower it has, all that matters is how fast it goes!
Best run 13.23 at 106.97mph with a 2.183 60'
Times from before tune and driver mod.
I wouldnt really think so.... But with SD, the preset fuel maps cause the engine to run a lil richer at WOT versus MAF.... thats the main reason they make more power stock vs. stock....
__________________
1988 GT
CAI, Built AOD, 3000 Stall, Shift Kit, B&M Console Hammer Shifter, 3.55s, U/D Pulleys, Unequal Shorties, Off-Road H-Pipe, Flowmaster Cat-Back, Upper and Lower Rear Control Arms, Subframe Connectors, 3G Alt
your right shawnk007 . far as the mass air meter being a restiction i wouldn't think it would be .idk for sure never had a mass air car .and dimebag start rattleing off some stuff man we faught to get this section we need to use it .
We would all have to agree that a MAF system is far superior in terms of determining air/fuel metering, but hey, some of us like to be different...... SD just takes alot more research and patience to perfect.I guess us SD guys just like challenge.....
__________________
1988 GT
CAI, Built AOD, 3000 Stall, Shift Kit, B&M Console Hammer Shifter, 3.55s, U/D Pulleys, Unequal Shorties, Off-Road H-Pipe, Flowmaster Cat-Back, Upper and Lower Rear Control Arms, Subframe Connectors, 3G Alt
I hate to admit it too, but reading the actual incoming air is a better way to determine how fuel much to send, rather than relying on the engine vacuum....
__________________
1988 GT
CAI, Built AOD, 3000 Stall, Shift Kit, B&M Console Hammer Shifter, 3.55s, U/D Pulleys, Unequal Shorties, Off-Road H-Pipe, Flowmaster Cat-Back, Upper and Lower Rear Control Arms, Subframe Connectors, 3G Alt
no i dissagree.... if it set up right SD is better, it doesnt HAVE to read the incoming air, it knows what to expect(your going to flow the same air at the same throttle position ever day... it may be denser but i dont see maf taking that in to consieration. thats what the air temp sensor is for, which we have. maf is more idiot proof(but yes has its advantages, but so do we)
ok pros n cons
pro-stock for stock their faster
con-limited cam choice
pro- you CAN do an h/c/i
con-you have to watch the hp out put
pro-you can run a 6psi kb s/c
con-cant upgrade to 24lb injectors
pro-it looks "sleeperish"
con-no dyno tuning usually available
pro-easier to tune/trick yourself if you know what to do
con-dont run a dry shot
pro- if you get a vac leak, all u do is idle a little high, not like maf
con-not as good of gas milage as maf(not terrible though, just not AS good)
pro-loves wet shots
pro-you can run more timing
i could prolly keep goin...
__________________
13.72 at 102 bone stock. new times to come. full suspension, 3.73s, 100 shot, exhaust and a tire.
You are talking performance....... Why do you think manufacturers today all use MAF???? Im an SD guy, butIll be the first to agree that switching to MAF is the new age..... aka smarter and simpler....
__________________
1988 GT
CAI, Built AOD, 3000 Stall, Shift Kit, B&M Console Hammer Shifter, 3.55s, U/D Pulleys, Unequal Shorties, Off-Road H-Pipe, Flowmaster Cat-Back, Upper and Lower Rear Control Arms, Subframe Connectors, 3G Alt
speed density
