: Dyno Results



CadV
07-02-09, 07:01 PM
I am going to try to be as civil as possible because I am really pissed off right now. The dyno is 20/20rwhp on the low side so you can add that to what you see.

Low numbers were done with the 2.55 pulley tune:

http://i43.tinypic.com/103bhxk.jpg

I wish you could see the air fuel ratio but it was beyond lean. Afterward we reviewed the 2.55 tune to stock and saw very little difference with no added fuel for the increased boost. Granted mistakes happen but they told me it was not a pulley tune.

Next run was after we fixed the tune. As you can see the car runs great up until 5000-5500 where we started getting detonation so he shutdown. So I got around 520hp/tq at the 5000-5500rpm mark before he let off.

The guys helping me with the car used to work for a well known r&d shop so they put in a call to a friend where he said point blank the car does not provide enough fuel and a fuel booster pump is required. This was not some chump they spoke too either it is their head engineer saying this. I am holding off disclosing any names.

I do not recall that information being conveyed to us and that is what I am most angry about. Who has the correct information that is what I would friggin like to know?

I want to say thanks to Pat at Quality Motorsports because he burned a lot of his day helping me with this. His brand new stock V did 450rwhp on a very hot day.

CadV
07-02-09, 07:23 PM
Some side note stuff. Installed a 160 TStat with no changes to the tune and it did not throw any codes. Also flushed radiator and went with distilled water and water wetter and saw a 10 degree drop on temps.

kencav
07-02-09, 07:36 PM
Cadv know your frustration- see previous posts

How did you fix tune- did they use a new tuning program- efilive? HP?

So your tech is saying we need a fuel booster at a certain boost pressure?

whisler151
07-02-09, 07:37 PM
So you were 435 and 423 with both pulleys, 90mm TB, intake and the W4M pulley tune? I was hoping to see your numbers up near 600. I thought the W4M tune was supposed to help your power. Any idea why your A/F ratio was so lean with the W4M tune?

Is your engine alright with the engine being so lean? Detonation doesn't sound good.

CadV
07-02-09, 07:42 PM
Cadv know your frustration- see previous posts

How did you fix tune- did they use a new tuning program- efilive? HP?

So your tech is saying we need a fuel booster at a certain boost pressure?

The tune was made from scratch using HP Tuners (3 guys with a ton of experience put their heads together to come up with it). Yes he said we need a fuel booster but I am unsure at what level we need it. I am working through the issue with Quality Motorsports and I will keep you guys updated. Basically I have to baby my car right now.

CadV
07-02-09, 07:47 PM
So you were 435 and 423 with both pulleys, 90mm TB, intake and the W4M pulley tune? I was hoping to see your numbers up near 600. I thought the W4M tune was supposed to help your power. Any idea why your A/F ratio was so lean with the W4M tune?

Is your engine alright with the engine being so lean? Detonation doesn't sound good.

435 was with stock TB, modded stock airbox (another intake mod that Quality is going to release in the future), and w4me tune. We think the tune was a mixup because it did not have the fuel changes you would expect. Basically a mislabeled 2.55 pulley tune but in all honesty I have no idea.

We did not get detonation when it was running lean only after we started giving it the fuel it needed. That was only once and he shut it down.

I remember the A/F ratios were 10.35 and 13.x just not sure which one is when it was running lean. I think it is the 10.35 but I am prolly wrong.

wait4me
07-02-09, 08:59 PM
It sounds like you didnt flash in the CEF file correctly in the handheld tuner and or flash in the correct tune. 1.28515625 1.28515625 1.28515625 1.28515625 1.271484375 1.263671875 1.2822265625 1.3154296875 1.4541015625 1.45703125 1.45703125 1.45703125 1.45703125 1.45703125 1.45703125 1.45703125 1.45703125 1.45703125 1.408203125 1.408203125 1.408203125 1.408203125 1.408203125 1.4287109375 1.470703125 1.470703125 1.470703125 1.470703125 1.470703125 1.470703125 1.470703125 1.470703125 1.470703125

are the eq ratios that im asking with is a MASSIVE amount of fuel added compared to stock in the CEF i sent you. If they dont match these values then the CEF file was not loaded that i emailed you. I KNOW the tune works for your exact mods as I have the SAME tune on my car which works perfectly as does with all the other cars i have tuned here in person with the SAME mods. If the tune wasnt working then it was simply that..... The CEF file was not loaded correctly into the handheld.

I have warned EVERY ONE there are no supprises that when you are near your 600hp mark then you are DONE... The car cant safely supply any more fuel to support the extra horsepower... I say it every day.

Your 255 upper and 8% lower is the max you can run.. You should be at the 588-600hp mark to the wheels now. The only reason you wouldn't is your stock airbox. Which ALSO plays with the airfuel ratios..

If your shop wants to send me the Read from what they pulled from the handheld i can check it here and can see what you actually have in your ecm at that time and check. But im VERY sure that if it was the right tune, it should have been dead on.

The 255 only pully tune you originally had of coarse will be lean as it wasnt set up for the 5% pulley also which adds a ton more power. Without the 5% pulley is will show 11.6-11.8 on the af all the way thru the rpms at wot..


The shitty thing is, that if you could have just waited a few hours, i could have talked with you and walked you thru installing the cef file and then your warrenty wouldnt have been void on your engine /transmission now...

TAGZO
07-03-09, 07:03 AM
CadV,

no worries man! it will get solved. it is just a matter of fine tuning the tune. i do tune all my cars my self and i know how it gets sometimes :want: I know that Jes will help you quick :) it is not that hard really. if you need my help, i am hear for you :cheers:

CadV
07-03-09, 09:30 AM
Jess has been real responsive so he suggested I put his 4" intake on which I just got done doing. Updated the tune on my handheld and trying to get a dyno lined up.

Will keep you guys updated.

He did say we shoud not need any fuel mods below the 600hp mark. Jess also said A/F with my mods should be around 11.6 any more than that and the fuel system cannot supply the needed fuel. The last run we were doing 13.x.

stealthjr
07-03-09, 11:28 AM
CadV,

Sorry I missed you at Quality yesterday...but maybe it was for the best after hearing about your bad day. Let me know the next time you go to Quality and hopefully I can catch up with ya!

Hopefully picking up my V today!

Robert

CadV
07-03-09, 08:34 PM
Just got back from round 2 and the results are still not good. Massive amount of gas was thrown at the car (9.x A/F) with Jesse's new tune and it ran crazy rich. Even after leaning it out to 11.5 I never did over 500rwhp. The best I did was 520rwhp with Quality Motorsports tune and we ran into the fuel restriction at 5000rpm.

I have had a bunch of people review the tunes given to me and there have been a lot of red flags.

Lingenfelter was asked about the pulley combo and they said flat out a fuel booster pump is required.

I am not getting into modifying the fuel so I am backing out of the blower pulley and going to stick with a 9" crank ring if my motor and tranny are ok. My car is not running good right now.

When you do anything to your car get a computer on it and dyno it. Don't trust the tunes.

nynd
07-03-09, 09:04 PM
So does this mean the tunes and mods aren't living up to what they claim?

Luna.
07-03-09, 09:58 PM
I'm just baffled as to how low the numbers are, even for 20/20 low. My lame car only needed a tune to get to 520 rwhp. Keep in mind that comparing dyno to dyno is dangerous, but still--that's a HUGE gap.

I'm hoping to get 560-570 with crankpulley, headers and Corsa exhaust. I'm thinking that's pretty reasonable...

Gary Wells
07-03-09, 09:58 PM
Sorry to hear that you are having problems, CadV, and I certainly hope that you get everything straightened out to your satisfaction. I can only imagine how disheartening this is. You might have saved me a lot of money, though, as I am just getting ready to get one of these, and I think that I will go very slow on the mods. I get frustrated even when my '87 turbo Buick isn't running straight up, and I can only imagine how this feels with a pricey ride like these. Good Luck with everything. I am sure that you will get it all together & running top notch.
TIA/R: Gary Wells

kencav
07-03-09, 11:17 PM
Cadv-

Are you referring to the WFM tunes most of us are running as having faults?

What specifics are your techs referring to?

Most of us appear to be ok-see no other reports of tune problems

CadV
07-03-09, 11:27 PM
I'm just baffled as to how low the numbers are, even for 20/20 low. My lame car only needed a tune to get to 520 rwhp. Keep in mind that comparing dyno to dyno is dangerous, but still--that's a HUGE gap.

I'm hoping to get 560-570 with crankpulley, headers and Corsa exhaust. I'm thinking that's pretty reasonable...

It was 105 in the dyno shop when we made the runs.

CadV
07-03-09, 11:49 PM
Cadv-

Are you referring to the WFM tunes most of us are running as having faults?

What specifics are your techs referring to?

Most of us appear to be ok-see no other reports of tune problems

I simply trusted what I bought and never verified it with a tuner and dyno.

I would like to see someone running 15 pounds of boost post their dyno of 600rwhp. I genuinely would like to see it. According to the people we spoke with it is impossible with our fuel system. That's why Hennessey and Lingenfelter are offering 540rwhp packages because beyond that you run into fuel problems. Lingenfelter has all this stuff in R&D and the fuel is why it has not been released.

If I am wrong no biggy, I am after the truth. Too many people have told me what I am sharing with you guys.

Just be careful guys.

wait4me
07-04-09, 03:18 PM
I have shown dyno videos on lingenfelters dyno with SEVERAL people as witnesses in person on hitting those numbers as promised.. The tunes are set up for cars that have no issues. If you have issues on your car then of coarse the tune isnt going to be correct as it is expecting everything to be normal. If you ran Rich in the program it is because you are not making the horsepower that you should be. Even a stock car with just the 255 upper pully and STOCK tune makes 540-560 horsepower TO THE WHEELS. With JUST the 255 upper. That is why the other guys say that number. With my tune for the 255 upper i just pull some timing to be safer, add just a hint of fuel from stock as it is around 11.5 after the tweek and then make some limiter changes and minor background stuff.

For the 255 upper and 5% "8.5" ring you should be near the 600 mark with exhaust and cold air box. I know, as i have done it here SEVERAL times on SEVERAL cars in person.. Im sure i have High def vids of all the cars if it would make a difference..

IF YOU GO PAST THE 8.5 Ring is when you want to add a fuel fix. As that is when you get past that 600 horsepower mark. That was the only reason why i even started messing around with a fuel fix was that i wanted to add a 9 or a 9.5inch ring to my lower that is on my car. That was the only time it was needed. Yes the fpdm is at 95-100 percent duty cycle at that point, but only at that point. The only issue then was you start to drop fuel pressure from 65psi to about 60psi, which then makes the injector duty cycle hit 95% So TECHNICALLY you could probably have enough fuel for 15 more horsepower to be at 100% duty cycle.

If the tune i set up was very rich it was simply because something on your car was making it not make the power it should have.. Im supplying the fuel for the 600 you should be at.. Which if you say it was REALLY rich also shows that the stock fuel system isnt running out of fuel as it was obvously adding more than the engine was using...



Another thing for everyone to know is, heat soak intake is full of crap. How long does it take for thermal transfer of heat to air. Then think about how long it takes, and how long the air is actually inside the intake track itself due to being consumed from the engine.. It isnt an issue EVER.. Anyone saying different is probably a person selling something of coarse, and wants to make money on something...

If people want plastic intakes, i can make plastic ones, Just the metal ones are longer lasting, dont split, are really tough and wont fall apart.... Think about EVERY TURBO car and supercharger car that is using METAL piping.... They dont seem to have issues.......

stevenash71
07-06-09, 09:35 AM
:headcase:sorry to hear your having problems. Keep at it im sure you will solve the problem. Good Luck

CadV
07-06-09, 09:57 AM
Gonna check and change the spark plugs see if that makes a difference. Right now the lower rpm's are very sluggish, shifts are sloppy. Once the RPM's build up it is much smoother but I am missing a lot of power for sure. Any higher gear low RPM scenario where more gas is being dumped in the cylinder it runs crappy.

Just running the stock tune right now and not giving enough gas for the blower to kick in.

I am working with Jesse on it. He offered to work on it for free if I bring the car up. I just need to prove there is not something mechanically wrong with the car or it will be a wasted trip.

The tough part has been the different stories I am getting from shops I talk too. The stories are not consistent and most of the time vary quite a bit. Their stories prompted me to create this thread in the first place. At least Jesse has worked on our cars so I am trusting his advice. Including the other shops has just made things worse and more stressful.

Jesse did say that a totally stock car and tune with 2.55 upper should dyno at 560rwhp.

If changing the plugs doesn't work I am backing out of all the mods.

Razorecko
07-06-09, 10:31 AM
I might be shooting out of my ass here but is it possible that your car is making around or over 600rwhp and as soon as you start going the car just bogs down because of the fuel issue ? What if you pulled one of the pully's off and than dyno'd it ? Something that would bring down your power level....I'm guessing you have an auto caddy ?? I'm pretty sure Jesse is running this stuff on a manual ? Maybe this is some kind of an issue with the auto trans somehow trying to safeguard itself ?

CadV
07-06-09, 11:20 AM
I might be shooting out of my ass here but is it possible that your car is making around or over 600rwhp and as soon as you start going the car just bogs down because of the fuel issue ? What if you pulled one of the pully's off and than dyno'd it ? Something that would bring down your power level....I'm guessing you have an auto caddy ?? I'm pretty sure Jesse is running this stuff on a manual ? Maybe this is some kind of an issue with the auto trans somehow trying to safeguard itself ?

That could be possible. I have more shop time set for saturday and they have a dyno. I thought about pulling the 8.5" crank off just t9o see if i got around 550. Problem is the car is running so bad right now. If the plug swap works I will try your suggestion.

CadV
07-06-09, 11:22 AM
Here is our spark plug info in case anyone ever needs it.

Firing Order 1-8-7-2-6-5-4-3
Spark Plug Wire Resistance 397-1,337 ohms
Spark Plug Torque 15 Nm 11 lb ft
Spark Plug Gap 1.02 mm 0.040 in
Spark Plug Type GM P/N 12571164
AC Spark Plug P/N 41-985

kencav
07-06-09, 04:55 PM
Cadv- I have auto as well with following

WFM CAI/modded air box
WFM max perf tune
Corsa

Dynoed 490 rwhp 93 degrees

WFM CAI/modded air box
WFM max perf tune
WFM 8.5 crank pulley
AR headers
Corsa

Dynoed 535 rwhp 91 degrees

Plan to remove AR Headers and add 9.5 pulley with switch to WFM pulley tune
Expect rwhp to increase with boost probably 560-575 range

So far only drivability issue was attempt to install 4-inch cone- rough idle

wait4me
07-06-09, 05:18 PM
Ken was my tunes airfuel ratio right on with your mods??

brent eb02
07-06-09, 05:25 PM
Ken...why are you taking the headers off?

Razorecko
07-06-09, 05:31 PM
The 4in cone on my manual gives me no idle issues, this sounds like an auto thing also

CIWS
07-06-09, 05:32 PM
Ken...why are you taking the headers off?

http://www.cadillacforums.com/forums/cadillac-cts-v-series-forum-2009/173874-decided-remove-ar-headers.html

kencav
07-06-09, 05:36 PM
Jesses A/F ratio was spot on with mods even with headers

Headers problem is CEL and need to reposition 02 sensors

Razorecko
07-06-09, 05:58 PM
Hey Jesse if you're doing all these mods on a manual cts-v than it needs to be really clear to all auto owners buying mods because they will not..in no possible way get the same #'s as a manual V with the same mods. Just not possible

wait4me
07-06-09, 06:14 PM
Yeah i know razorecko. The autos have been dynoing larger numbers than the manuals, So i do tell them different numbers from manual vs auto. As i was right on in the numbers with the mods on kencavs. Well i was 4hp low i think.... I try to make all the numbers fair. All the numbers have been in independant dynos with no number fudging all over the USA.

kencav
07-06-09, 06:37 PM
Gonna check and change the spark plugs see if that makes a difference. Right now the lower rpm's are very sluggish, shifts are sloppy. Once the RPM's build up it is much smoother but I am missing a lot of power for sure. Any higher gear low RPM scenario where more gas is being dumped in the cylinder it runs crappy.

Just running the stock tune right now and not giving enough gas for the blower to kick in.

I am working with Jesse on it. He offered to work on it for free if I bring the car up. I just need to prove there is not something mechanically wrong with the car or it will be a wasted trip.

The tough part has been the different stories I am getting from shops I talk too. The stories are not consistent and most of the time vary quite a bit. Their stories prompted me to create this thread in the first place. At least Jesse has worked on our cars so I am trusting his advice. Including the other shops has just made things worse and more stressful.

Jesse did say that a totally stock car and tune with 2.55 upper should dyno at 560rwhp.

If changing the plugs doesn't work I am backing out of all the mods.

CadV- unless you go totally back to stock I would consider taking Jesse up on his offer if you have the time to do it. Like yourself I am going thru the trials and tribulations of modding a relatively new production car with performance packages and upgrades in the infancy of their developement. You payed alot of money for this car and judging from many of your great posts/photos are very passionate about vehicles and in particular your CTS-V. Apparently no one has "logged as much flight time" as Jesse in the engine bay of these cars. If these things are in part leaps of faith that seems the logical way to go if possible.

Gary Wells
07-06-09, 07:09 PM
Yeah i know razorecko. The autos have been dynoing larger numbers than the manuals, So i do tell them different numbers from manual vs auto. As i was right on in the numbers with the mods on kencavs. Well i was 4hp low i think.... I try to make all the numbers fair. All the numbers have been in independant dynos with no number fudging all over the USA.
Jesse:
Not to be disrespectful nor to bogart this thread, but I would swear that I have read on this forum that every time comparison #'s have been discussed with everything the same excepting trannies, the manuals always produce more RWHP & RWTQ. Am I slipping?
TIA/R: Gary Wells

kencav
07-06-09, 07:17 PM
Jesse:
Not to be disrespectful nor to bogart this thread, but I would swear that I have read on this forum that every time comparison #'s have been discussed with everything the same excepting trannies, the manuals always produce more RWHP & RWTQ. Am I slipping?
TIA/R: Gary Wells

I was under the same perception

Razorecko
07-06-09, 08:58 PM
I think it was a slip of the word - no way an auto will dyno more than a manual- theoretically not possible

RapidRob
07-06-09, 10:06 PM
^^^ Yeah - gotta be a slip-up, (due to stress perhaps ... :lildevil:)?

Rob

CadV
07-19-09, 10:36 PM
Here's an update...

1) The K&N filter oil messed up my MAF sensor. I was using wait4me's kit. Here is information straight from GM on what I was experiencing. Needless to say I will never use an oiled filter again.


04-07-30-013B: Info - Automatic Transmission Shift, Engine Driveability Concerns or Service Engine Soon (SES) Light On as a Result of the Use of an Excessively/Over-Oiled Aftermarket, Reusable Air Filter

Subject: Automatic Transmission Shift, Engine Driveability Concerns or Service Engine Soon (SES) Light On as a Result of the Use of an Excessively/Over-Oiled Aftermarket, Reusable Air Filter

DO THIS DON'T DO THIS
First, Inspect the vehicle for a reusable aftermarket excessively/over- oiled air filter DO NOT repair MAF sensors under warranty if concerns result from the use of an excessively/over-oiled aftermarket, reusable air filter.

The use of an excessively/over-oiled aftermarket, reusable air filter may result in:
• Service Engine Soon (SES) light on
• Transmission shift concerns, slipping and damaged clutch(es) or band(s)
• Engine driveability concerns, poor acceleration from a stop, limited engine RPM range
The oil that is used on these air filter elements may be transferred onto the Mass Air Flow (MAF) sensor causing contamination of the sensor. As a result, the Grams per Second (GPS) signal from the MAF may be low and any or all of the concerns listed above may occur.

When servicing a vehicle with any of these concerns, be sure to check for the presence of an aftermarket reusable, excessively/over- oiled air filter. The MAF, GPS reading should be compared to a like vehicle with an OEM air box and filter under the same driving conditions to verify the concern.

The use of an aftermarket reusable air filter DOES NOT void the vehicle's warranty.

If an aftermarket reusable air filter is used, technicians should inspect the MAF sensor element and the air induction hose for contamination of oil prior to making warranty repairs.

Transmission or engine driveability concerns (related to the MAF sensor being contaminated with oil) that are the result of the use of an aftermarket reusable, excessively/over-oiled air filter are not considered to be warrantable repair items.

2) I was also experimenting with an induction kit (rerouted the brake duct up into the airbox) but it was actually forcing too much air at higher speeds. It could also be the tune is not configured to support something like this.

3) The NAPA belts stretch way to much in the Texas heat. For example 080670 with 2.55 upper and 8.5" bottom it has a tension under the half way mark on the tight side. After a week or so of driving it is right under the loose line. I have a heavier duty belt on order and should be here tomorrow.

The above items were causing my sluggishness and a shutter when I was in a high gear low rpm scenario. I have no idea if this was causing my poor dyno numbers but I will find out this weekend. My belt is slipping right now so once I get my heavier duty belt I will let you know for sure.

RapidRob
07-19-09, 10:44 PM
^^^ Thanks CadV - I was wondering. Are you on the W4M CAI now, or on the modified factory intake?

Rob

CadV
07-19-09, 10:55 PM
^^^ Thanks CadV - I was wondering. Are you on the W4M CAI now, or on the modified factory intake?

Rob

Modded stock.

When my car is running good I will share more specifics. I just don't want to get ahead of myself because something mechanical could still be wrong with my car.

Some people are not going to like what I have to share but I don't want anyone to have to go through this.

CIWS
07-19-09, 10:58 PM
Glad to see you're making some headway with the car and it's issues :thumbsup:

jwa999
07-20-09, 12:12 AM
Thanks for the update, Cliff. I kept wondering what had caused your problems. Could have been the P-Valve. A friend of mine also mentioned overly oiled k&n filters can cause MAF sensor problems. So did you simple clean the MAF sensor?

I was just looking at ordering the full air intake from Jesse. I guess you have to use your MAF sensor from the stock box. I was going to ask him if he has spare MAF sensors. Couldn't find the acdelco maf part anywhere online.

So far removed the air scope and the brake duct to see what the effect would be. I found a little droning in 6th gear at 65-70mph, not sure if it wasn't there before. All other droning at lower rpms is gone. Also found it that the auto trans *will* shift to 4th then 5th if you're in manual mode 6th gear at very low rpms and hit the gas.

Hans.

Rolex
07-22-09, 11:28 AM
Excellent info here. Thanks for sharing your learning experiences with us. :D

Razorecko
07-22-09, 11:52 AM
Hey CadV are you still running that 4" TB ? And the intake maf/ oil issue was that with the K&N in the stock box ?? - I patted the K&N oil filter down on my intake because K&N reallllly over oils all their stuff

CadV
07-22-09, 02:35 PM
So did you simple clean the MAF sensor?

I bought a new one.


I was just looking at ordering the full air intake from Jesse. I guess you have to use your MAF sensor from the stock box. I was going to ask him if he has spare MAF sensors. Couldn't find the acdelco maf part anywhere online.

I got a connection for parts. I can get you one if you want. ACD# 213-4343 and GM# 1393948

CadV
07-22-09, 02:50 PM
Hey CadV are you still running that 4" TB ? And the intake maf/ oil issue was that with the K&N in the stock box ?? - I patted the K&N oil filter down on my intake because K&N reallllly over oils all their stuff

No I am not using the 4" because I don't have a non K&N filter. I am not sure which K&N filter caused the issue but it really messed my car up.

Razorecko
07-22-09, 04:01 PM
No I am not using the 4" because I don't have a non K&N filter. I am not sure which K&N filter caused the issue but it really messed my car up.

Did you use the K&N filter as a cone type on a cai intake or the flat K&N filter in the oem box ??

CadV
07-22-09, 06:46 PM
Did you use the K&N filter as a cone type on a cai intake or the flat K&N filter in the oem box ??

I had both on the car.

CadV
07-22-09, 07:32 PM
Got the new belt on. Did a bunch of research and decided on the Goodyear Gatorback. I went with part 4080665. It is a little tough to get on and once you do it is right on the tight line but you still have a inch or so of play on the tensioner. It stretch out a little and ends up half way between the loose and tight line. I can feel a huge difference between the NAPA and GB belts. Lighting guys swear by the GB belts.

When I swapped the belt I could of swore I saw the crank wobbling but seems it was an illusion. Was told by a friend to rev it up to 2k and then look at it. At 2k it was smooth just in case anyone notices the same thing.

Took the car for a test drive and for the first time in a long time it feels normal. Smooth shifts and WOT the car feels like it is up on it's toes. Power feels like it is getting to the wheels. I will know for sure Saturday when I dyno the car again. The tune is rich right now so waiting for Jesse to send me an update.

If everything goes well I have a replacement blower that should be here tomorrow. Gonna go ahead and port/polish the new blower and 2.55 snout since I got an extra one. If things don't go well back to stock I go.

Learn from me guys and leave the stock blower pulley alone because you have to buy a whole new blower to get the stock snout. Removing the stock blower pulley will destroy it FYI. I spoke to 5 dealerships and if they see the snout pulley has been touched your whole drive-train warranty is gone.

jwa999
07-22-09, 10:37 PM
Found an interesting article about the MAF sensor and the effects of it getting dirty:
http://www.fordscorpio.co.uk/cleanmaf.htm

Now I suggest using a defluxer spray. Carb cleaner might hurt the plastic bits.
Defluxer spray is used on printed circuit board boards and anything electronic that you want to degrease and clean. It evaporates quickly. Does not leave a residue.

Hans.