Jump to content



Recommended Posts


is it possible to use a MAF-Sensor instead of a MAP with G4 xtreme?

I have download the software and find now way to use MAF on loadaxis of fueltable.

There are only MAP and TPS aviable on load axis.

Only Accel Enrichment could  use MAF Sensor.




Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Ralf.

Martin is correct... As BAP is taken in to account always for fuel corrections.  It sounds like you may be missing a fundemental idea here. 

Have a look at the attached image, and you can see on the left I right click on the Y-Axis to select 'Axis Set up', and on the right, this is within the 'Axis set up'... choosing the parameter you want to tune the Y-Axis off on the fuel table.

If you knew this, I do not mean to offend you, however maybe you didn't realise this was able to be done.  Let me know if this resolves your frustration.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 years later...


I am just in the process of wiring a MAF sensor to my G4 Xtreme. The engine is already tuned for speed density, but I wish to use gram/cyl on my ignition table to help tune spark advance. It will help me find the relationship between MAF and MAP for my engine.

It seems that I can achieve this, but I have noticed one serious limitation. The MAF is calibrated using a standard cal table on the G4. Given that the table only has a resolution of 16 entries (with fixed increments), it is almost impossible to both have adequate resolution in the low flow ranges and at the same time measure up to maximum flow. There is a very noticeable error between 0 gram/sec and the next value.

Although I can manipulate the values for my experiment, it seems that for someone wanting to do a full MAF tune on their engine, it would be virtually impossible to get a MAF translation that is anywhere near accurate over the full flow range.

So am I missing something here? Is there a more accurate table available for the MAF? Maybe in the G4+ ? . I understand that most people won't be using a MAF to measure engine load, but it might be a bad idea for those that do.



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Simon

That's fair enough. I am pretty happy with my MAP tune.

I think I may have found a bug in the MAF flow values. Either that or I am having a brain fade. I am logging Mass air flow in grams/sec and also grams/cylinder. The values for grams/cylinder look incorrect, so I have calculated grams/cylinder as follows.

From a point on my log, mass flow = 57.8 grams/sec. My engine speed was 2372 rpm = 39.53 revs per second.

The Mass/revolution should be 57.8/39.53 = 1.462 grams/rev. Engine is a V8 so mass/cylinder = 1.462/4 =0.366

However the PC log shows grams/rev(x100) as 72.4 (or 0.724 grams/rev). The mass/cylinder(x100) = 18.2 (or 0.182). Both these values seem to be half what they should be when compared to the raw flow in grams/sec.

Could someone have a look at this for me please? Unfortunately my log file was too big to upload.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...