[HeatherM35d]

Originally Posted by tuikku

.
It seems clearly, that I am arguing about horse powers with strange people...
This must be a very important subject and definitely I have to be proud of all my posts, though I do not recognise me any more...

Arguing? Nah. We like our Dyno methods. Hp at the wheels is the honest American way. Why measure the horsepower at the wheels and then toss another equation on top of that? 'Calculated flywheel hp'. We keep it at the wheels. 500 rwhp or bust!

[HeatherM35d]

That got warm..

[tuikku]

.
Measuring result only by wheels disposes of one important thing, power loss.
And one more ... power loss is not calculated, but measured, by scrolling section.

When using system, as I do (insoric).
The difficult thing in winter and winter tires is that in acceleration section tires slips => measuring device sees it like a bit worse power, car accelerates more slowly.
But nevertheless car scrolls "normally". It does not "repair" or pay attention the difficulties at the beginning.
The scrolling section is as important as the acceleration one.
And the result is practically always worse than dyno, also in summer.

But is is not so important.
This system shows the real "street" performance of car.
And I measure always in the same place, and try to use same speed ar,ea to make the results comparable to each others.
To me, in fact the results are not so important but the changes in it.
And it is good for that, also enough exact, I see there even the smallest changes, that I make in softw.
It is very difficult to make a good, working program to modded +400hp car, if haven`t collect a data that can be compared.

[tuikku]

.
True and true, what does it matter - not much.
What matters is, if only the results should be comparable to each others.
And they are.
Few hp`s does not matter anything, or if mine measurement is better or worse than yours...

[tuikku]

.
Here you are

[DWR]

Originally Posted by Bob@BPC

And one last thing, trying to go off what bmw or any company list as there "factory" hp can be misleading

Absolutely true. But it tends to be more skewed for performance cars.

And I think there is wide agreement, performance on the road is ultimately what matters. tuikku's method is good. It also has an advantage when considering things like intercooler performance. But it has the weakness he describes - traction - and the false reading of acceleration. Today it is easy to measure the physical acceleration of the vehicle with a cell phone. The combination of data is really powerful. How fast the engine is accelerating versus how fast the car is accelerating is going to be the next level of tuning when everyone has 500whp and cannot get it to the road!

Finally, sorry Shnaggs, I think we are off your topic.
There are are many pros and cons of MAF removal.
The MAF does perform a function in the control strategy. Some of the "self tuning" is compromised without a MAF. As long as you understand the compromise, you can make an informed decision. Not sure we have flushed that out, yet.

[tuikku]

.
I think that main difference between maf and map controlling can be found in the working principal idea.
First, the important thing ( to engine and program) is amount of air, not the boost pressure.
Map controlled program uses pressure rising as information of increased amount of air and from the level of boost it concludes air level.
Maf tells all of this straight.

MB uses map controlled programs, the good thing about it is, that even heavily modded cars is quite easy to get work.
You can remove all the unnecessary wires and left only couple of pressure and heat sensor.
To heavily modded or racing cars I recommend map controlling, otherwise not.