[98-ASTRO-SS]

How much power if any do you get from removing both front & back screens on your mass air sensor? I had a 02 Chevy 1500 shortbed w/ a 5.3 & removed them & never had any problems or at least the 40,000 miles I put on it. Just trying to get all the power I can out of this Stro :layrubber:

 

[evil_motors]

well you could take them out and then start a nice fire in your intake when something sucks into there like a leaf or something. that sensor glows red hot and the screens keep debris from touching it. plus it "straightens out the airflow" so you probably get better readings from leaving it alone. if you really want more power just drop a v8 in. its easy enough.

 

[astro355]

The only time removing a MAF screen will get you more power is if you have a straight intake setup. As already mentioned, the screen is responsible for straightening the air flow across the resistors. If the air flow doesn't evenly flow across the resistors, your readings will be wrong. The screen does not stop debris from being sucked into the intake, that's the job of the air filter. If any debris hit the screen, the screen would be destroyed.

 

[evil_motors]

if he is talking about cutting out the screens then he might not be running with an air filter anyways.. that is a huge power loss. i know alot of people who run without them as long as you arent in dusty areas. it all depends on what you are driving on.

 

[rev_les]

driving anywhere without an air filter is going to eventually kill an engine. They sell a high flow mass air sensor for these engines, I'm not sure about how they really perform though; all the advertising about gains is a pie in the sky.

 

[astro355]

driving anywhere without an air filter is going to eventually kill an engine. They sell a high flow mass air sensor for these engines, I'm not sure about how they really perform though; all the advertising about gains is a pie in the sky.

They do have gains and they are minimal, just a percentage of your overall power. Are they worth it for a daily driver, no.

 

[rev_les]

exactly, minimal on a stock engine.for something opened up to need more breathing with a cam and headers, it would be worth it. I wouldn't be screwing with those screens though :mrgreen:

 

[astro355]

I only time I ever removed a MAF screen was on my Firebird. The air inlet was a straight line from the hood to throttle body so deflection was cut to a minimum.

 

[guyonearth]

Unless you're running your engine over 5000 rpm all the time you're not outflowing your stock system. It's mathematically impossible. Most of the advertising about intakes is pure hype, stock engines simply don't turn fast enough for any of these mods to have any meaningful effect.

 

[astro355]

Unless you're running your engine over 5000 rpm all the time you're not outflowing your stock system. It's mathematically impossible. Most of the advertising about intakes is pure hype, stock engines simply don't turn fast enough for any of these mods to have any meaningful effect.

How is it mathematically impossible? Anytime to reduced drag in a wind tunnel (which is basically what the intake is), you increase its flow. Like you said, it won't have any meaningful effect but that doesn't mean it has no effect.

 

[guyonearth]

An engine of a given size will only pull in so many CFM at a given RPM. Increasing the capacity will not have a meaningful effect without somehow increasing the engine's ability to utilize more air. The stock 4.3 is not really short of CFM capacity. I think removing the screens is probably a waste time. You would do better to take the baffle off the throttle plate.

 

[astro355]

An engine of a given size will only pull in so many CFM at a given RPM. Increasing the capacity will not have a meaningful effect without somehow increasing the engine's ability to utilize more air. The stock 4.3 is not really short of CFM capacity. I think removing the screens is probably a waste time. You would do better to take the baffle off the throttle plate.

Right but once you start adding resistance to the engine (air filter, bends in ducting, exhaust components), that capacity decreases and the aftermarket is full of stuff to try and get that capacity back.

Don't get me wrong, I think removing the screen in these vans is a terrible mistake. It WILL create more problems than anything else.

 

[98-ASTRO-SS]

Thanks. I removed my screens in my 89 Iroc also but I just figured that the aftermarket high flow MAF doesnt have any screens so it would only help to take mine out or at least the rear screen out & by the way I am using an air filter anybody would be dumb not to. I will be getting a K&N this weekend for it.

 

[astro355]

Thanks. I removed my screens in my 89 Iroc also but I just figured that the aftermarket high flow MAF doesnt have any screens so it would only help to take mine out or at least the rear screen out & by the way I am using an air filter anybody would be dumb not to. I will be getting a K&N this weekend for it.

Its a bad idea to use a K&N filter with a MAF. The oil from the filter will get in the MAF and as a result, the readings will not be accurate. It creates more problems than it helps.

 

[evil_motors]

wow mister negative. There is no problem with K&N filters. You dont put that much oil on them. I have ran one in all of my vehicles and a few of them had over 300k miles on them with no problems. And with the positives of the K&N you would be dumb not to get one. i mean $40 for a filter that lasts forever VS $15-$25 for one you have to change at least once a year? I am sure that if the oil caused a problem with the Maf then the recurculating oil and air mix from your valve covers that go back into your filter box would have a problem with it too on cars that have that feature.

 

[Leeann_93]

He's not being negative; he's telling you what he's seen in the shop from many cars with MAF sensors and K&N filters.

Personally, I'll never put a K&N on one of my vehicles. There's a study by an engineer around on the internet somewhere where he tests filtering capacity vs. any HP gains - the K&N not only oiled up the MAF, but then it deposited a ton of dust and dirt onto that oil. The study, done on several different air filter types, concluded that the OEM style air filter was actually the best.

 

[astro355]

wow mister negative. There is no problem with K&N filters. You dont put that much oil on them. I have ran one in all of my vehicles and a few of them had over 300k miles on them with no problems. And with the positives of the K&N you would be dumb not to get one. i mean $40 for a filter that lasts forever VS $15-$25 for one you have to change at least once a year? I am sure that if the oil caused a problem with the Maf then the recurculating oil and air mix from your valve covers that go back into your filter box would have a problem with it too on cars that have that feature.

As Leaann stated, its not negativity. K&N filters should not be used with MAF, even if you oil them a little bit. The first thing that happens with the MAF once it gets dirty is that your fuel economy goes south. You say you didn't have any problems, really how would you know? Did you monitor you fuel economy for the period of time the K&N filter was on and then for an equal amount of time, run a normal filter?

I just find this argument odd because if you talk to a K&N rep, they will talk to you about possible contamination from crankcase oil, possible bad components from the factory or even use an analogy to using a paper towel to blot extra grease off a pizza. What?

1. Possible contaminates from the crankcase oil. The funny thing with that is there was never a problem until after the K&N was installed. And in most cases I've dealt with the problem went away with a good cleaning of the MAF and of course removing the K&N filter. In a few, the MAF needed to be replaced. Blaming crankcase vapors for the oiling of MAF is not based, seeing how their isn't some mass TSB or recall for oily MAFs from the factory.

2. Possible bad components from the factory. Right, and people who have bad components already just happen to be the same people installing K&N filters on their daily drivers. The percentage is pretty high, just in the Northern Illinois area alone.

3. Sure, blotting a piece of pizza with a paper cloth absorbs the grease and doesn't let go. But then did you try blowing thru that paper cloth. The grease sure comes out then. Come on.

See, you are getting me wrong here. I love my K&N filter. I will never use anything else. I don't have a MAF, hell, I don't have fuel injection. No problems on my end.

What recirculating oil/air mix are you talking about that goes thru the MAF?

 

[guyonearth]

He's talking about the PCV system, I assume, but on an Astro that doesn't go back in front of the MAF, the inlet is behind it near the throttle body.

 

[astro355]

He's talking about the PCV system, I assume, but on an Astro that doesn't go back in front of the MAF, the inlet is behind it near the throttle body.

I'm not going to assume he is since the PCV doesn't go to the airbox. That's why I asked.

 

[evil_motors]

Well in my 15 years of being a mechanic i have never seen anything like that or heard of it.. but that doesnt mean it hasnt happened. And yes i monitor most of my cars. I usually have my laptop conected to my "fast" cars. I also asked my friend who has been a mechanic for 25 years and he also has never seen anything about this.. but he has heard of it and told me its a myth. So i mostly just dont believe anything unless i have seen it myself. So i guess i will keep using them and let you know if i ever have any problems with it. I did however read an article about how someone's stock filter was better in alot of tests than a K&N. i will have to see if i can find it.