Definitely hit me up!

I've had a bigger TBody for a while now, but have never gotten my hands on the bigger MAF body! tbody shaft grind next? Shoot me a PM, and i'll send over the links!

A couple things I noticed after the TB & MAF modification...

Prior to the change, when I lifted on the throttle, the car would decelerate pretty hard...almost like the brakes were dragging. Now it seems to "coast" much freer.

Also, I drove down to LA this w/e and averaged 24.9 mpg while averaging 75 mph with a little stop and go. I can't remember the last time I broke the 22's. This seems to corroborate the above.

Again, can not say that I've felt any real HP gains.

Just my impressions...ymmv.

Regarding to the MAF, maybe the best idea to use Pierburg "7.22684.070" MAF from CDI's models,

cause this MAF doesn't has a housing measurement, its detects air density volume only...!!

ZAYED,,

Wait. What? That MAF from the CDI is a plug and play piece for our NON diesels? Who has done this?

Hank, you probably dont feel any diff w/ the larger MAF and TBody as you'd typically only see those gains at the very top end... Tough to tell unless you drive like a mad man or you're on the dyno I would imagine since the tbody is bigger, you'd also gain some responsiveness. Who cares, that improved fuel economy is worth it :P

Yes sure, it's plug & play, i'm using it with my C55 since "2" years, it works perfect, NO issues...

MB #: "611 094 00 48"

Pierburg #: "7.22684.070"



ZAYED,,

Yeah, please explain how this other MAF will work.

Hey John. The fuel economy was completely unexpected, but sure is nice to have. I used to have trouble cracking 20mpg on a daily basis, but now I see 22mpg regularly. Hopefully these mods won't have any issues on me passing the smog check. My check engine (MIL) light was on before the mod (EGR code), so I don't know for sure if they threw any other codes. I'll have to borrow a reader again and see. My SRS light is also on (I think from when I changed out the radio), is that a dealer only fix or do you think an indy can take care of that?

Diesel Engines uses that MAF without housing, its plugged directly to the airbox, cause there is no value measurement housing in it...

ZAYED,,

How have I never heard of this prior??!?! I wanna see this thing on your car! We dont get all the cool diesel stuff out here

SRS lights are tricky.... :\ Most the time, its the stupid passenger seat sensor. I believe i recently killed mine by removing replacing the battery... Or pull the fuse to my cluster. I dont think its something you can reset on your own.

By chance do you have a pic of this installed in your MAF housing?

Why would we even USE the MAF housing if this just measured the amount of air passing in. Might as well ditch it entirely and make a mount on the side of an intake... (needswings styled intake)

Also, it was my understanding that our MAF can only communicate that they are flowing so much air.. Does this MAF have the same bounds? This whole CDI MAF thing is completely new to me!

It's plug & play, no need any mod., i put the diesel one inside 4" elbow & glow, just for test if it will measure the bigger housing, drove the car abut a week, no any problems,

after that put it in the M113 housing also no any troubles, that's confirms to me this MAF is the way to go if need to put it in the bigger housing, as i know; this MAF is the same as our MAF, just the housing value is a difference,,

pls. anyone have more info. chime in....

ZAYED,,

Personally this thread is the biggest load of garbage since I had a m103 powered 190e with the r16 resistor mod. Going with a bigger air track makes sense if the exhaust side of the heads flowed better, they don't. It's a 3 valve motor guys, 2 intake 1 exhaust.

So, you've had everything on a flow bench and verified where the restrictions are...please post your data.

From a physics standpoint larger diameters are capable of flowing more with less restriction. As I stated before, I did this because it was cheap and I didn't see any drawbacks. The gains may be minimal, if any. But, I do know my mpg went up.

YMMV.

+1,

Interested to unleash some hidden power to M112, why not, while it has a same platform with M113,,

we all know there are a good flow chances to give head-up, all M113 parts are available, plugs right away,

just need some professional hand to tune the ECU...!!

ZAYED,,

Hidden power? They pretty much designed these motors maxed out with the real world constraints. Look at the 3.7l liter version from the 2003-2005 ml350s if you want more power. 245 hp 255 foot pounds of torque. Swapping a v8 throttle body on that motor with the bigger air track makes sense. They ran the same size as the c280 w202. That motor with rear cats resonators removed and bigger air track should easily be 260 hp. I'm looking for one.

Already done that my friend, all things are plug & play,

but i repeated again, good ECU remap is the key for all that...!!

ZAYED,,

Btw I haven't taken a m112 or m113 apart. I understand the thought bigger is better. Well it is and it isn't. Making that statement is like saying putting a 3 inch exhaust on my vtec honda will make 10 more hp! For some reason that concept is always applied to the intake track. Your just wasting money honestly. Save up and swap out the motor for a bigger varient. It's not a turbo car lol! Your gas mileage probably went up because the bigger throttle body dosen't need to be opened as far.

From an article I found on the m112


In the new V6, combustion heat in each of the large, single exhaust valves is dissipated through a sodium-filled valve stem, while exhaust heat is retained and insulated by double-wall piping in the exhaust manifold. The seamless double-wall manifold is made by using high-pressure liquid-forming technology, for greater durability and lighter weight.
There is no tradeoff in horsepower and torque with the new three-valve technology compared to a four-valve design. In any efficient, well-designed engine, exhaust valve size needs to be somewhat smaller than the intake valve area, simply because the "leftovers" of combustion (especially in a modern, clean-burning engine) take up less space than the incoming fuel-air mixture.


Here's my thing. If exhaust flows so well why does the 3.7l variant with the 97mm cylinders make only 20 more hp than the 3.2 with the 89.9mm cylinders? It just seems like it dosen't flow that well or it's the cam design. That's why personally I think it's pointless to waste cash on the intake stuff. I have the 2.8 in my car so the jump to the 3.7 would be wicked. I already swapped the 16v diff from my old wrecked 190e into this one. Direct fit btw just change the rear covers. That extra 50 plus torque would be insane in this car. Bet I'd be like the 4.3l c43. Only advantage is with my diff, I could do donuts all day till the michelin man explodes.

I just recently upgraded my M112 with the larger MAF and throttle body from a 5.0L M113. When I did the swap I just used the whole MAF from the V8 car and it seems to be working fine. Is there a specific reason to use the V6 MAF sensor in the V8 housing?

Also I'm about to swap over to the V8 injectors as well, of course using only 6. Taking that into consideration, which MAF sensor should I use? Thanks!