I am planning to put a tuned port system on my 69 307. I read in one book that MAF is superior, and easier to program, adn programming is not as critical. Elsewhere I am told MAP is the only way to go. Harder to program, but worth the effort. I expect access soon to a MAF from an 86 firebird donor. WHat would you do? Please post pro's and con's of both systems.

I am considering adding some boost eventually if that matters.

Thanks,

Tom

I don't know that MAF is easier because to tune it correctly you shut the MAF off and tune the VE tables in speed density (running off the map only). So you have your map tune done then turn the MAF back on and tune it to match. Reason being in the case of a maf failure you have the correct tune in the computer; otherwise it could get expensive in that situation.

MAF is more forgiving to mods and a nice way to go. But with a forced induction build I prefer to ditch the map, but I run a fair amount of boost. At that level you'll peg the maf usually and then the tuning becomes sketchy at best in my opinion. On a boost application that isn't moving enough air to peg the maf, then the maf is still a nice way to go.

I've tuned both and with the correct tune they were each as smooth as the other.

Jody

I guess the Mass Air Flow sensor (MAF) vs Manifold Absolute Pressure (MAP) debate is like 400 SBC vs 396 BBC, Holley vs Edelbrock, 4L60 vs 200-4R, 427 L88 BBC vs 454 LS6 BBC, 302 SBC vs 350 LT1 SBC, Ford vs Chevy, Dodge vs Ford, Toyota vs Honda. The debate may never end.

P.S. For 1990 the IROC-Z went away from the MAF to a Speed Density System (SDS) and gained 5 horsepower. I know that for sure. I belive the SDS setup requires an MAP sensor. I'm not sure on that so I will defer to the experts as there are very few 1990 IROC-Z's out there.

I believe with Ford they did it the other way.....First came the MAP then came the MAF. Once again, I'm not sure on that and I will defer to the experts. I do believe the Ford guys like the MAF sensor better.

i like map