Jawnathin

Just installed the MF103 earlier today and had a quick question.

I know an MF103 works just fine on a car without a tune but I had the car already tuned on a slightly different setup. The tune was for a ported TB, ported intake manifold, and headers.

I drove the car for a bit and got on it a few times, so far, so good. Pulls pretty hard. Not sure if its because I haven't driven it hard in a little while, but it feels stronger. Spins 2nd all day long at nearly any RPM pretty easily on 335 NT05s.

Anyone see any potential problems running the MF103 in this setup?

I figure the car would just dump more fuel if it was getting more air but just want to make sure I wasn't doing something which could cause harm down the road.

ZO6FL

I had the same question, although I'm just stock with a tune, CAI & ported TB. I wanted to go from an Airaid to MF103 or 107. Jim @ Halltech suggested that if my MAF tables have altered, I would need a retune. My tuner also suggested a retune. I decided to hold off on the change until I possibly added headers to make the dyno time worthwhile.

Halltech

No tuning or re-calibration of closed loop is required with the MF103. Nothing. Your air fuel ratio, timing, etc. will be exactly like stock.

The new power comes from less restriction to flow, where pumping losses are regained from the stock filter. In addition to the recoupment of pumping losses that result in better volumetric efficiency, more airflow will be seen automatically by the MAF and compensated for.

The Beehive prevents massive timing losses due to IAT heat. Translation is more power is kept instead of lost to heat.

It is a plug a play induction system.

Tuning is almost always done in the open loop part of the PCM, which is not connected to the O2 feedback loop as is closed loop. Fuel trims are not considered by the PCM.

Tuners will change the factory tables that keep your motor running super fat (11.25:1) to around 12.5:1 to 12.7:1 depending on your fuel quality. Timing can be bumped slightly in 93 Octane states, but our intake provides much better timing from the Beehive heat shield.
Torque management nannies pull timing when your water temps hit 212F, when the Intake air temps hit 86F and above, when the slightest ping is detected and under many other built in algorithms.
Most tuners know where to find power from moving these tables around. Most will shut down the cat over temp protection fuel tables that add more and more fuel when the cats see 1616F and above. There are three tables, with the third at 20.5% more fuel than stock.

So tuning is really working over the open loop part of the PCM.

The CF112 must have +20% more MAF transfer curve scaling just to start, or lean codes pop; it is designed with a larger MAF read area due to the carbon fiber thickness, not deliberately. The CF102 has restrictive material added back to bring the MAF read area back to stock, so no tuning is needed with the 102. Restrictive as in 12mm LARGER THAN THE STOCK THROTTLE BODY.

Jawnathin

Jim, I appreciate the response, but sorry if I'm missing something, but what about a car already tuned using the stock intake?

I understand that a stock car with stock tune is a plug and play capable with the MF103, but since my car was already tuned for a different setup, I'm not sure if adding the MF103 would lean it out too much.

Thanks.

TARANTULA

If the car was tuned is better to have the car re-tune. in closed lopped the cars O2 sensors will compensate to a point but in open loop (PE) the car could be running rich or lean.

Jawnathin

I will definitely get a retune at some point to maximize gains, but was hoping I could run the car with my existing tune without any problem.

I guess I was hoping the car would just take air measurements from the MAF and MAP sensors and dump whatever extra fuel the car needs from whatever extra air the intake will net me. However, if there is a chance it can run lean and cause a problem, I'd rather not experience that.

Is the general consensus that this is a bad idea and I should go back to the previous setup until I can find time to get a tune? That would be a bit of a disappointment.

MTPZ06

I would say a re-tune is recommended, but not required. Unless your tuner really leaned out the car, I think you'll be fine. If you're concerned, just don't run it hard until you get a re-tune. Have you asked your tuner?

Halltech

You should be fine with the current tune. Rarely do the tuners touch the MAF tables.

The increase in airflow will automatically be compensated for by the MAF sensor, especially if your car is just bolt ons.

I have tuned over 500 Z06s and LS3s and never touch the MAF tables unless it is our Carbon Super Bee CF112.

Jawnathin

Thanks, I agree, recommended, but was more concerned about any potential harm from a lean condition without the retune. If that was the case, then I'd say it was required.

I have given it some quick pulls in 2nd and 3rd and the car seems ok. I'll ask the tuner. Thanks.

I've got a new code reader, that should read AFR and I could see if it even gets close to 14 during a pull. If not, then maybe I'm good to go.

Thanks Jim, appreciate the feedback. Good to know that I should be alright. I'll see if the tuner played with the MAF tables and check my AFR during a quick pull using my code reader. Yup, car is just bolt ons, nothing too fancy either.

jon6.0

You could just pay $50-$75 for a couple of dyno pulls with AFR being read to see if it's going lean up top.

johnurankar

I have the killerbee aais with b&b exhaust. I just had the car dyno'd with 13.22 a little lean will this be a problem? Its an 06 zo6 made 497hp and 466tq, the products work. Just bought not sure if it has anything else done.

briancb1

What about the 107?

KING_PIN6

i will install halltech MF103 WITHOUT TUNE..

how you experience it without tune ?

is it worth it?

Halltech

No tune required simply means that the MAF transfer code does not have to be touched. The MF103 translates airflow exactly like stock so that what the MAF estimated air is accurate with respect to actual air. Long Term Fuel Trims will be within a couple of % of stock.

Tuning is more than just re-calibrating MAF tables, and the MF103 is not going to get the air fuel ratio in WOT out of the 11:1 range without full power tuning.

The answer is: no tuning required to re-translate MAF tables, but tuning will present another 20 to 25 more horsepower on the MF103 or MF107R.

The MF107R under-reports air by around 10%, which would be fine if your car could live with 12.7:1 air fuel ratio. Unfortunately, given the fuel quality available in many states, that is a receipe for knock retard and a loss of power rather than a gain. If you were able to run 93 Octane and not see knock retard, 13.3:1 would be fine and not too lean.

Lean simply means the air/fuel fuel enrichment point at which pre-ignition occurs, negating the leaner a/f benefits to power. If you were to run 104 Octane every day, 13.5:1 would be great. Remember, any air fuel ratio fatter than 14:1 (E10 stoichiometric) will simply leave unburned fuel in the combustion process and that ends up in cats and exhaust system.

Tuning your car for the leanest air fuel ratio possible will bring more power, and actually make your car leaner, meaner, and greener. The latter being a (WGAS) benefit.

Halltech

Back in January 2006 Halltech and Donaldson Company (the OEM filter manufacturer) partnered up to get a high flow filter replacement on the market for the Z06. At the time they had 4 other iterations of the blue plug PowerCore filter. All top secret.

Our 2006 Z06 was the test car, and a DynoJet Dyno was the instrument for testing.

The Z06 was bone stock except for my LSX tuning file, that effectively turned off all of the nannies, added 4 degrees more timing and brought the air fuel ratio from the 11.5:1 to around 13:1. Pump fuel was E10 92 Octane in Minnesota. The car was filled from empty there.

There was a hole under the filter that was put there by the previous owner for cold air, the car surged like a bitch.

Testing began in the AM and lasted all day with 10 pulls. We did a bone stock baseline of three pulls. The SAE correction factor was coincidentally 1.00 for all pulls that day, eliminating false numbers from a shift in correction.

Our best pull was 479 RWHP. Yes, tuning only and 479 with the filter Z, which we marketed later that year as the LS9 filter, and yes it was the filter destined to go into the LS9 in 2009.

Unfortunately, GM saw our advertising on the forum and contacted Donaldson, and pulled a pressure play. Our marketing that showed 2 more HP with this Halltech version of the PowerCore had to show no reference to the stock filter. Obviously, without the ability to compare a product with stock stopped us cold. Luckily, all 100 filters sold in one week.

Shortly after that nightmare, GM actually called from the Milford Proving grounds and asked for one of our filters. We shipped it to them for testing on the ZR1. I still wonder why they did not go to Donaldson, but who cares. Yes, and they did not offer to pay for it.

Now the dyno. The air fuel ratio was insane. Around 13.6:1 at the tail pipes, almost stoichiometric, but look at the power. Our Tech 2 showed only two degrees of retard from knock on each pull. So 22 degrees and 13.6:1 made power like nothing I have seen since.

The last pull of the day was back to A to re-validate the original stock pull, and 476.7 RWHP was the second best pull of all the filters tested.




The stock pull was done on a different dyno (LGM) on a different day, dyno, but still stock. Put in the test data for comparison.

Jim Hall

FrankTank

Those numbers are interesting as those are almost the exact numbers I pulled yesterday with the MF103 , but also with long tube. Headers , and tune

Halltech

We have seen the MF103 do 484 without tuning or any other mods.
Numbers are just that. The fellow that did that used better fuel, and had the nannies kick in full bore on another pull, adding fuel to cool the cats and he saw 454. 30 horsepower swing. He saw a huge gain with just our intake. Most tuners do turn off some of the nannies, but miss others. The IVT Gain for instance is never addressed, and it can add as much as 20% more fuel. We shut everything off on our dyno testing so that the GM safety protocol is never active.

The actual performance depends on so many factors, it is impossible to compare any dyno with another.

FrankTank

I learned a long time ago not to get caught up in dyno numbers too much . No 2 are alike

You can check out my thread here , I pulled a 459 without the tune .

Halltech

On another day, different dyno you could see 490. Tuning basically keeps nannies OFF so that your pulls are more consistent.

The air fuel ratio change from 11.5:1 factory to 12.5:1 (average power a/f ratio) is around 10 RWHP. Timing bump a couple degrees maybe 5 if not pulled by sensors.

Headers do not yield much power on stock cammed motors, simply because their collector design is counting on exhaust scavenging during the overlap cycle. Guess how much overlap the stock cam has? Most of the power increase comes from cat relocation and better flowing cats.

Your heads need a cam with lift to take advantage of the porting. At .591" lift you're cfms are not much more than stock even with the Stage 2 heads. At .650" lift the stock cam is put to be wet by the WCCH heads. This is just the intake:

My guess is that even with the mild Katech Torquer we have you would see a substantial increase, well over 500 RWHP.

Our car has stock heads, the three amigos LSXR, Williams TB, and Halltech CF112 with the 116 LSA torquer, 13:1 CR and it makes 561 RWHP. Jason's build was exactly the same except WCCH heads, and one point less CR, and he made 570 RWHP. Same dyno.

Design wise, the Pfadt headers are the best I have ever seen. If they bolted up to the Akrapovic, I would have them on our car tomorrow.