Spitfire 3500

[3400-95-Modified]

No, 94-95 was speed density, 96 was MAF OBDII... I'm currently running a 97 Venture ECM on my OBDII wiring, unchanged.

Some say SD is easier to tune, others think MAF is better.... My turbo legacy is a MAF system and you'll hear about some WRX guys switching to SD and I just can't fathom why, or even what the benefit is.

I like my MAF setup since it knows exactly how much air is flowing in and changing the A/F is very easy now that all my tables are scaled appropriately.

[Google Adsense]

[ForcedFirebird]

It's because MAF doesn't recognize boost and can't compensate timing accordingly like a SD system can.

[3400-95-Modified]

I don't think thats true for the newer OBDII systems... It just doesn't make sense to say a engine control system that utilizes both a MAP sensor and a MAF sensor can't register positive pressure and air flow at the same time. And/or have the same controls or ability to control spark the same way as the previous systems.

I've read that the real reason why people switch to SD on a high boosted vehicle is the sheer limitation of the MAF sensor itself not being able to measure that amount of air flow... But even today I think that can be overcome with different sensors and different engine control systems.

I have a feeling that SD systems are being treated as the next "Carb"... Some will just prefer to tune with that setup and like its results more than switching to a MAF system if one is available for what they are doing and will suffice in its ability to measure enough flow.