5.0L (1979-1995) Mustang Technical discussions on 5.0 Liter Mustangs within. This does not include the 5.0 from the 2011 Mustang GT. That information is in the 2005-1011 section.

MAF ....

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12-21-2004, 05:29 PM
  #11  
Quik
6th Gear Member
 
Quik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 5,182
Default RE: MAF ....

well you read wrong, i will give you give your reference book, page number, article, paragraph and charts showing stock is 58 and later years were 60mm. 70mm on your set up is to much look at hte GT40 package motor it didnt even come with a 70mm. Im guessing you dont even have a need for one especially with no cam or heads. thats like ppl putting to large of a carb on their rides and thinking it makes more power now. actually its not. everything has to be set up correctly. do what you want its your car but dont wonder why ppl with other mods or less mods run better times
ORIGINAL: nemethjames1


ORIGINAL: ohsoquik02

dont go TB yet, if anything get an intake. see carefully planning your H/C/I are very important and then choosing a TB wil make or break that combo. dont get one for now. since your car is stock no need to get a new one. now get a 73,74,75 maf for now. just rule of thumb your maf should be larger then your TB by a good bit. stock they are smaller then your stock TB
ORIGINAL: RUSH2112

Interesting thread..... I was thinking about these mods as well.
First mod will be bbk long tubes, h-pipe and catback exhaust.
Next mod will be a bbk cold air fender mount

Everything else is stock, so if I decide to go with a throttle body, what do you suggest?
Also, what kind of MAF do I need to upgrade to? What do I have in the car right now?
See my signature for my car specs. Thanks for your replies.

what i read was that stock tb was 55, and i dont know stock size of maf...... but i SUPPOSE i could be wrong.. [sm=lol.gif]....... LOL but ya, and a 70mm tb on a near stock motor with bolt ons wont hurt... now going bigger then 70 would... my car is lighly modded, and i got 70mm tb and noticed a good gain... so i wouldnt call it a loss
Quik is offline  
Old 12-21-2004, 05:36 PM
  #12  
whiteyford0212
2nd Gear Member
 
whiteyford0212's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location:
Posts: 272
Default RE: MAF ....

i've always heard that on mostly stock motors 65 tb is the way to go, any bigger you'll hurt performance
whiteyford0212 is offline  
Old 12-21-2004, 05:38 PM
  #13  
Quik
6th Gear Member
 
Quik's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 5,182
Default RE: MAF ....

yepppers
ORIGINAL: whiteyford0212

i've always heard that on mostly stock motors 65 tb is the way to go, any bigger you'll hurt performance
Quik is offline  
Old 12-21-2004, 09:09 PM
  #14  
nemethjames1
4th Gear Member
 
nemethjames1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: United States
Posts: 1,665
Default RE: MAF ....

ya ya, each is own... 65mm is great for a supercharger.... 70 is great for on aspirated engines.... IMO..... and i got the 70 coz im doin h/c.....
nemethjames1 is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
jwog666
Pipes, Boost & Juice
11
12-27-2021 08:09 PM
piotrek53
4.0L V6 Technical Discussions
3
10-13-2015 06:54 PM
Mr. D
S550 2015-2023 Mustang
36
10-01-2015 01:03 PM
mltdwn12
V6 (1994-2004) Mustangs
1
09-23-2015 08:54 AM
stangin1996gt
4.6L (1996-2004 Modular) Mustang
0
09-21-2015 11:01 AM



Quick Reply: MAF ....



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:38 PM.