Just installed a MAF intake kit on my 964/3.6 transplant motor. Simple & awesome!

[uwanna]

I just purchased a MAF intake kit for my 964/3.6 from Hamptonsam on the forum. Thanks Michael!
I received it yesterday, and had it installed in 25min! This kit comes from a German shop called DMEshop24 (they also make them for 3.2 and 944):
Google Translate

Found a good bit of info on the system over on the ImpactBumpers.com forum. Most folks there had positive reviews. The kit is a little pricey, but not as bad as a cocaine addiction! Found out the MAF is one used on a 1999 Alfa V6. It's only $200 or so for just the MAF on Fleabay so the added money is all wrapped up in the adapter circuit cable. (kit= roughly $1000US). Good engineering and design doesn't come cheap!

Could not have been a simpler install, plus now with the old "barndoor" AFM out of the way, it really cleaned up the engine appearance, allowing more "work room" and less skinned knuckles. Cranked right up, and has the most stable idle ever. 820RPM rock solid. Took car for a drive, and throttle response is MUCH crisper. When you come to a stop, RPM drops to a very smooth idle immediately with absolutely no "hunting". My DME unit has an old aftermarket chip from when I put the 3.6 into my '80SC back in 1992, it was copied from a CUP2 chip. Runs fabulous!

The "translation" circuitry is built into capsule/tube that is built into the adapter cable, and all you need is a 12v power source for a black pigtail. (tapped into 12v from the ICV)
To install, you just remove the "barndoor" AFM, slide the MAF into the intake rubber boot, plug in the adapter cable, and hook up the 12v pigtail. Easy peasy! Here's some pics:





Here's the circuit board that goes into the adapter cable capsule.

[The cap'n]

Better set a few hundred bucks for replacement MAFs, 'cause K&N filters and oil eat 'em up. I wish I had a hundred bucks for every MAF I've changed out for that damage. Oh, wait, I DO! BTW, MAF cleaning doesn't work, at least not for long, despite what the folks selling chemicals would like you to believe.

Oh, BTW, I'm a liberal arts grad, one of the worst (art, painting emphasis), and it really hasn't been such a bad life. At least I'm not an engineer.
The Cap'n

[uwanna]

Originally Posted by The cap'n

Better set a few hundred bucks for replacement MAFs, 'cause K&N filters and oil eat 'em up. I wish I had a hundred bucks for every MAF I've changed out for that damage. Oh, wait, I DO! BTW, MAF cleaning doesn't work, at least not for long, despite what the folks selling chemicals would like you to believe.

Oh, BTW, I'm a liberal arts grad, one of the worst (art, painting emphasis), and it really hasn't been such a bad life. At least I'm not an engineer.
The Cap'n

The trick is to oil them very spareingly, and them let them sit overnight so any excess
flows off before reinstalling. Trouble is, a lot of folks think more oil is better and WAY over oil them. Have used them for years on several cars, including ones with MAFs and never had a problem! When I remove to re oil, I check in the intake, and don't find excess oil
there. I use a Fram product called Airhog which comes with a water soluble solvent cleaner which removes all old oil from the filter (a must), then let air dry and apply oil sparingly. The oil medium by the way is bright orange, and I never see any orange in the intake.

Don't know your age, and no disrespect meant to you, but in today's job marketplace a liberal arts degree doesn't typically translate to the greatest job opportunities . Ask any recent grad. However it is a good preparation for life.
If I still had a young son, I would pragmatically recommend a technical school/trade school. According to "The Millionaire Next Door", the average millionaire in the US, is a small businessman, middle age, with an HVAC, auto repair, landscape company or the like. He drives a pickup/boring 4dr sedan, lives in a very modest house and you would never guess his worth!
Of course we can fix all our problems by paying fast food workers $15hr. Yeah right! When they get their $15hr, how much will the guy currently making $15hr
want? Perhaps he'll lobby for $20 or more. And on and on it goes! My $.02, rant over!

[Elombard]

Looks great....but I am an engineer :-)

What do you do for a living Cap'n? Not being snide I am just curious. Sounds like he owns a shop.

I think my 3.2 AFM has the track that is worn through in parts causing a slightly rough idle/cold start. I wonder if this would be an alternative rather than bending the arm. Maybe pick up a couple of ponies and/or throttle response along the way.

Good to know about the oiled filters. I have heard there were issues but did not know the details. Makes sense, I have seen them way over oiled.

[McLovin]

That looks very nice. Simple and elegant.

I assume you can use the stock airbox with it?

[uwanna]

Originally Posted by McLovin

That looks very nice. Simple and elegant.

I assume you can use the stock airbox with it?

Yes, it comes with an adapter plate to mate to the stock airbox.
My old air box had seen better days, three out of four of the clip mounting tabs
are history, so I opted for the cone filter. I got the largest cone filter I could fit.
Flows great, and SOUNDS wonderful!

[JAR0023]

Nice. Keep the updates coming. I read a bunch on the 3.2 version. Lots of positive reviews. In addition to the impact bumper site and info there was a group buy on a French forum with lots of info. Thank heavens for Google Translate as I've forgotten most of the French I learned as a kid. -J

[Steve@Rennsport]

Originally Posted by uwanna

I just purchased a MAF intake kit for my 964/3.6 from Hamptonsam on the forum. Thanks Michael!
I received it yesterday, and had it installed in 25min! This kit comes from a German shop called DMEshop24 (they also make them for 3.2 and 944):

Could not have been a simpler install, plus now with the old "barndoor" AFM out of the way, it really cleaned up the engine appearance, allowing more "work room" and less skinned knuckles. Cranked right up, and has the most stable idle ever. 820RPM rock solid. Took car for a drive, and throttle response is MUCH crisper. When you come to a stop, RPM drops to a very smooth idle immediately with absolutely no "hunting". My DME unit has an old aftermarket chip from when I put the 3.6 into my '80SC back in 1992, it was copied from a CUP2 chip. Runs fabulous!

Good news about finding a well-engineered MAFS kit, most of the others we've used have disappointed in most respects. The real key is the chip programming and the hardest part to get right so it looks like you were lucky.

Still, I'd sure recommend a dyno test to make certain that your AFR's are safe.

[uwanna]

Originally Posted by Steve@Rennsport

Good news about finding a well-engineered MAFS kit, most of the others we've used have disappointed in most respects. The real key is the chip programming and the hardest part to get right so it looks like you were lucky.

Still, I'd sure recommend a dyno test to make certain that your AFR's are safe.

Steve,
The maker stresses the unit is made to function with a stock factory chip and they do not even offer their own "optimized" chip. Something they could "flog" if they wanted to up their margins. It appears they figured a way to translate/convert the MAF signals to appear as normal for the DME unit, unlike some of the early attempts from folks like Autothority that needed to do some or part of the translation with the help of the DME chip. Also some early attempts used some hard to find/orphan MAFS, whereas this one uses a readily available Bosch HMF5 MAF.
The experience of the British and French folks seem to have been quite positive, and in fact some of them have done dyno/afr etc with good results.
Dyno/AFR test would be something I will do down the road for peace of mind.
Cheers,
Grant
EDIT: by the way, I've used the "Cup2" DME chip (probably just name on the sticker) for 22yrs (only 40K mi) and engine still runs like new

[88coupe]

Sweet! I recently ordered one for my 3.2. Seems like a really well designed piece. Thanks for sharing. Can't wait to get mine. I also read the reviews and decided I had to try it for myself.

I've run K&N filters on several cars with a hot wire MAF and never had issues. Like you said easy on the oil and a spray of cleaner if in doubt.

[sp_cs]

I had this fitted on my 3.4 (I'm on impact bumpers) and although i felt some difference with the benefits you describe , back to back dyno figures suggested 2-3 bhp/torque uplift, so in my case it wasn't worth the cost

Bear in mind my AFM was replaced recently with a NOS item, it could make a more noticeable difference on cars running the original AFM

[ClickClickBoom]

Just got mine into the slow boat from the continent. Will report after install! The google translator is a little buggy for the purchase. Create an account, read all the pertinent info, decide if you want to do it. If you want to online purchase the kit, go to the untranslated site and purchase via the "that button looks right" method. Just did it and easy peasy. I am gonna go look in the mailbox right now, to see if it's here yet!

[sp_cs]

Worth adding, the vendor is open to a discount for a group buy.

[scarceller]

Originally Posted by uwanna

Steve,
The maker stresses the unit is made to function with a stock factory chip and they do not even offer their own "optimized" chip.

So what they did is to try and make a MAF pretend to be a AFM. This can become problematic for various reasons:
- MAF already corrects for IAT
- MAF corrects for altitude
And the stock chip has these corrections built into tables in the chip. So now the DME is still doing these correction, but the MAF has already done them. So that circuitry would need to undo the MAF corrections to pretend to be a AFM. Why do that?

Secondly, the MAF has a response time of about 10ms to a change in air flow while the AFM is in the 100ms range. And the stock chip was programmed with the AFM response time in mind.

As a personal project over the past 4 years I reverse engineered the entire chip, not just the 100+ maps but the entire program code so I know how the Air Fuel model works in the stock chip. I then re-wrote the entire Air Fuel portion of the software to properly support a MAF (Ford 19lb racing MAF). In my MAF I have no such circuit board because the DME program was written to properly handle the MAF 0-5vdc signal. And my solution is drop in replacement, no extra wires and no harness cutting at all. Just new DME and MAF intake.

I'm sure this setup in this post works but be aware that it may have issues with altitude and/or severe IAT temps very cold or very hot).

After I understood the factory code was when I realized exactly what needed to be done to properly run a MAF, the code is very different between the 2 devices. For example the acceleration enrichment portion of the code had to be re-written as well.

I have two 3.2L cars running my solution flawlessly.

I don't think you'll make any extra horse power on the dyno if they retained the stock chip. Compared to the factory AFM (if working properly) just going to MAF won't make much difference. As Steve mentioned you really need side by side dyno runs.

[scarceller]

Picture of my personal car running my custom MAF:


Here's the other prototype car:

[mysocal911]

Originally Posted by scarceller

So what they did is to try and make a MAF pretend to be a AFM. This can become problematic for various reasons:
- MAF already corrects for IAT
- MAF corrects for altitude
And the stock chip has these corrections built into tables in the chip. So now the DME is still doing these correction, but the MAF has already done them. So that circuitry would need to undo the MAF corrections to pretend to be a AFM. Why do that?

Secondly, the MAF has a response time of about 10ms to a change in air flow while the AFM is in the 100ms range. And the stock chip was programmed with the AFM response time in mind.

As a personal project over the past 4 years I reverse engineered the entire chip, not just the 100+ maps but the entire program code so I know how the Air Fuel model works in the stock chip. I then re-wrote the entire Air Fuel portion of the software to properly support a MAF (Ford 19lb racing MAF). In my MAF I have no such circuit board because the DME program was written to properly handle the MAF 0-5vdc signal. And my solution is drop in replacement, no extra wires and no harness cutting at all. Just new DME and MAF intake.

I'm sure this setup in this post works but be aware that it may have issues with altitude and/or severe IAT temps very cold or very hot).

After I understood the factory code was when I realized exactly what needed to be done to properly run a MAF, the code is very different between the 2 devices. For example the acceleration enrichment portion of the code had to be re-written as well.

I have two 3.2L cars running my solution flawlessly.

I don't think you'll make any extra horse power on the dyno if they retained the stock chip. Compared to the factory AFM (if working properly) just going to MAF won't make much difference. As Steve mentioned you really need side by side dyno runs.

You've summarized it well, especially here:

"Compared to the factory AFM (if working properly) just going to MAF won't make much difference."

[scarceller]

The other thing I learned is you really can't place the MAF that close to the rubber boot, the airflow is very turbulent at that point and the MAF readings are not 100% correct. I know this because I had the system flow benched from the TB and everything in front of it. Even the AFM placement was a compromise because of tight engine compartment. You really need to place the Air Meter somewhat in front of that 90 deg boot. You only learn this by flow benching.

[Elombard]

Sal where is yours for sale? Sounds expensive but well done.

[sjf911]

Originally Posted by scarceller

So what they did is to try and make a MAF pretend to be a AFM. This can become problematic for various reasons:
- MAF already corrects for IAT
- MAF corrects for altitude
And the stock chip has these corrections built into tables in the chip. So now the DME is still doing these correction, but the MAF has already done them. So that circuitry would need to undo the MAF corrections to pretend to be a AFM. Why do that?

Secondly, the MAF has a response time of about 10ms to a change in air flow while the AFM is in the 100ms range. And the stock chip was programmed with the AFM response time in mind.

As a personal project over the past 4 years I reverse engineered the entire chip, not just the 100+ maps but the entire program code so I know how the Air Fuel model works in the stock chip. I then re-wrote the entire Air Fuel portion of the software to properly support a MAF (Ford 19lb racing MAF). In my MAF I have no such circuit board because the DME program was written to properly handle the MAF 0-5vdc signal. And my solution is drop in replacement, no extra wires and no harness cutting at all. Just new DME and MAF intake.

I'm sure this setup in this post works but be aware that it may have issues with altitude and/or severe IAT temps very cold or very hot).

After I understood the factory code was when I realized exactly what needed to be done to properly run a MAF, the code is very different between the 2 devices. For example the acceleration enrichment portion of the code had to be re-written as well.

I have two 3.2L cars running my solution flawlessly.

I don't think you'll make any extra horse power on the dyno if they retained the stock chip. Compared to the factory AFM (if working properly) just going to MAF won't make much difference. As Steve mentioned you really need side by side dyno runs.

I have my MAF installed about where your prototype was but in my case it is just after the IC. I tried it pre-IC/turbo but that really affected throttle response so I'm curious what differences you've seen between the two.
Also, I've been curious for a while on how AE was handled by Motronic with the AFM and no variable potentiometer for a TPS, would you mind sharing?

[uwanna]

Originally Posted by scarceller

So what they did is to try and make a MAF pretend to be a AFM. This can become problematic for various reasons:
- MAF already corrects for IAT
- MAF corrects for altitude
And the stock chip has these corrections built into tables in the chip. So now the DME is still doing these correction, but the MAF has already done them. So that circuitry would need to undo the MAF corrections to pretend to be a AFM. Why do that?

Secondly, the MAF has a response time of about 10ms to a change in air flow while the AFM is in the 100ms range. And the stock chip was programmed with the AFM response time in mind.

First of all, I appreciate your comments and the depth of your technical understanding of the DME system and fabrication skills. One question, how does the DME with the VFM "correct for altitude"? I know there is an altitude switch under some seats, but it only does an on/off switch at 3280ft.

I really have no clue how this DMEshop28 MAF system was devised or engineered,
and you have pretty much assumed you do. But that's just what it is, an assumption.

There are more ways than one to "skin a cat", and all I know is this kit runs wonderfully on my 3.6. I was never looking for or expected anything more than a marginal HP increase. What I do like is instant starting, rock smooth idle, and greatly improved throttle response. I other words, I'm a happy camper! We'll see how things work out down the road in the long run.

As to whether it's an upgrade worth the money, "you spends yo money and makes yo choices". Some folks spend big bucks for graphite composite trim stuff and other bling, I like things that actually "do stuff"!