...if I should cut out the first two cats. From what I have read, or what I understand, I will not experience any problems as long as I leave the sensors in place and get the MIL eliminators, or get that burned in my chip. Do the drawbacks outweigh the benefits? I am getting ready to order my chip from Dennis, and I just need to know what to tell him to burn.
I'm wondering...
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Joined
·
54 Posts
Are you planing to run straight pipes? If not then I'd leave them in. Acid Rain will mess up.
if you want to...
take off the mufflers and run strait pipes from there, but you need the back pressure from those cats. i heard from some of the people on here that a stock bird with strait pipes loose power. if you want to, get high flow cats. i prefer MAC ones.
take off the mufflers and run strait pipes from there, but you need the back pressure from those cats. i heard from some of the people on here that a stock bird with strait pipes loose power. if you want to, get high flow cats. i prefer MAC ones.
Have Dennis shut off the O2 sensors on your
new chip. That way you can do whatever you want, whenever
you want to your exhaust...cats,.....no cats,....whatever.
There's always the ART system (drool) available to you a couple
hours away in Miami....cats,....no cats,....high flow cats,
once again whatever you want.
What are you doing as far as a MAF.....?
new chip. That way you can do whatever you want, whenever
you want to your exhaust...cats,.....no cats,....whatever.
There's always the ART system (drool) available to you a couple
hours away in Miami....cats,....no cats,....high flow cats,
once again whatever you want.
What are you doing as far as a MAF.....?
Well...
I have the 80mm LMAF. I asked Dennis if I should go with the Mustang MAF instead of the LMAF, but he said to just stick with the LM. I will sell the LMAF if the Mustang MAF is better. I got a pretty good deal on it. What do you think? Also, what about filter setups with each MAF?
I have the 80mm LMAF. I asked Dennis if I should go with the Mustang MAF instead of the LMAF, but he said to just stick with the LM. I will sell the LMAF if the Mustang MAF is better. I got a pretty good deal on it. What do you think? Also, what about filter setups with each MAF?
I'd go with what Dennis told you...
the theory behind the GT Mustang MAF is that it's designed for
a lower volume of air (NA) and that by using a lager percentage
of the transfer functions (table) in the GT Mustang MAF your
metering is theoretically more accurate than using a smaller
percentage of the LMAF's (larger) transfer functions (table).
I suppose this is all true, but if Dennis didn't feel it was
necessary to make the switch, then I wouldn't worry about it.
I'm ASSUMING he's getting that info from "you know who" -
if that's the case, I'd feel very comfortable using the (L) MAF
you have.
As far as filter setups - THAT is a controversy that will never
go away. Simply put - I haven't found K&N filters to be a problem
with respect to MAF wire oiling (so far). They shouldn't be
cleaned very often, unless they practically have a solid coating
of mud on them - I posted a long writeup in the old Forums on
proper oiling techniques a few months ago. If you want to read it,
I'll find it for you.
Cone or panel filter? I've gone back to using a K&N panel filter,
from using an Autophysics cone, and my stock air box of course,
simply because it's simple and easy to maintain and I've got a
totally sealed system that keeps heated under hood air from
elevating my intake charge. No one, so far, has proven a cone of
the same surface area provides any additional power. I suppose they
do provide a certain level of satisfaction with respect to the
wood factor however and that's the main reason, I'm guessing , you
see so many of them being used. If you want to use the oem style
paper filter instead - go for it, just change 'em pretty often.
Good luck with the mods, I hope this helps,
the theory behind the GT Mustang MAF is that it's designed for
a lower volume of air (NA) and that by using a lager percentage
of the transfer functions (table) in the GT Mustang MAF your
metering is theoretically more accurate than using a smaller
percentage of the LMAF's (larger) transfer functions (table).
I suppose this is all true, but if Dennis didn't feel it was
necessary to make the switch, then I wouldn't worry about it.
I'm ASSUMING he's getting that info from "you know who" -
if that's the case, I'd feel very comfortable using the (L) MAF
you have.
As far as filter setups - THAT is a controversy that will never
go away. Simply put - I haven't found K&N filters to be a problem
with respect to MAF wire oiling (so far). They shouldn't be
cleaned very often, unless they practically have a solid coating
of mud on them - I posted a long writeup in the old Forums on
proper oiling techniques a few months ago. If you want to read it,
I'll find it for you.
Cone or panel filter? I've gone back to using a K&N panel filter,
from using an Autophysics cone, and my stock air box of course,
simply because it's simple and easy to maintain and I've got a
totally sealed system that keeps heated under hood air from
elevating my intake charge. No one, so far, has proven a cone of
the same surface area provides any additional power. I suppose they
do provide a certain level of satisfaction with respect to the
wood factor however and that's the main reason, I'm guessing , you
see so many of them being used. If you want to use the oem style
paper filter instead - go for it, just change 'em pretty often.
Good luck with the mods, I hope this helps,
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Join the discussion
