Chevy Impala SS Forum banner

1 - 7 of 7 Posts
C

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
My dad has a 2002 Trans am WS6 with the LS1, He has an extra SLP MAF sensor laying around, and I was woundering if it would work on my Caddy? I haven't tried it yet, so I thought I would get you guys'es 2 cents first. Lata Fellas!
 
C

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
It's probably larger, like the typical F-body MAF, and would require modification and programming.

And, for what it's worth, wouldn't make a bit of difference in your car's performance to even bother with it.
 
N

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
I played with my MAF off my 96 Burb on my Cad with the MAF tables updated. I felt slightly better in the mid range, no different up top. Overall, I like ditching the MAF alltogether and go MAFLess/Speed Density like the LT1 was designed originally in 92-93. It works well for me. But you need highly tuned VE tables to do it right.

If the price is free and you have nothing better to do with your time (it won't match up to the stock air box and intake tract), and/or you are like me and just like to play with things, go for it. I am all for mods like that, anything that is learning is worth it.
 
9

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
hey Chris, you need to get a gear upgrade next. I would recomend from personal experience 3.42's with an EATON POSI, i ordered mine from National DriveTrain, remember your axle is 8.5 inches, 30 spline, 10 bolt.

http://nationaldrivetrain.com/shopsite_sc/store/html/page29.html

The 3.42s make a huge difference, also my drive shaft does NOT vibrate at all, i've gone up to 117 mph no problem. With the Eaton POSI handling has improved, getting on the on ramps making a left turn especially it feels alot tighter with the car trying to track straight, traction off the line is excellent.

Oh, and beating the snot out of the car in mixed driving I got a solid 17 MPG! I calculated my 0-60 using a stop watch and I did it in 6.5 seconds. See my list for mods. I had no problem walking away from a 98 or 99 Mustang GT while accelerating to speed from an on ramp on to the interstate.
 
C

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I know man, Im getting my Cat back exhaust installed on monday, and then im going to order my gears. I was thinking your setup, but with 3:73's. Then I will get my PCM programmed and then maybe my throttle body/MAF mods will work with the car much better! Thanks for the site man!
 
9

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
Maybe XXL-Vette can chime in, i was going to go to 3.73's. I was advised fuel mileage would drop tremendously with the 3.73's, im thinking about using them on my other Fleetwood which is an occasional driver. If your not worried about mileage go for it.
 
C

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Originally posted by 2-B1G-w00ds:
I was advised fuel mileage would drop tremendously with the 3.73's
This is not necessarily true; depends on the tune, the driving habits, and the terrain (among other lesser things).

Most people see the biggest loss in fuel economy from the big gain in "weeeee" factor. Stay off the accelerator pedal and it's not so bad.
 
1 - 7 of 7 Posts
Top