well here i am again and this time i have what seems to be a serious problem, or is it?
so heres the go,
el xr8, cam, 2 and 1/2 inch single, explorer manifold, blue au injectors,au v8 maf.
(last three recently fitted) standard throttle body :b
the problem is it just isnt running healthy at all?
weird rough idle that seems to have a mind of its own.
noisy pinging from the right hand side.
my mechanic put it that shes running "like s**t"
he checked the computer and it came up with these codes-
327-exh gas recirculation sensor
113-1 AT
778-cooling fan #2
122-TPS
452-speedo signal
898-undefined
998-11
113- 1AT
he said i need to see a very good auto electrician.
does any one have any knowledge on the subject or had and overcome a similar problem?
what needs to be checked or done?
last of all who can i take it to here in Melbourne that really knows what there doing?
any help would be great i have already had ford try to fix the problem by completely
ignoring the cause and charging me a fortune.(same old story)
cheers every one!!
Troy.

You have multiple issues - wiring faults and hardware incompatability.

Start with removing the AU injectors & MAF. They are incompatible with your stock ecu. Put the stock parts back on.

Then have a careful look over the wiring harnesses for any signs of modification. Somewhere there are either short circuits, open circuits, or just plain incorrectly wired circuits.

Then when you get it running right with no fault codes get a dyno tune and check if AFR readings lean out (require larger injectors). If they do, get a custom chip to suit. This chip would also allow you to re-fit the larger MAF as the tuner can include the correct MAF transfer data on the chip.

^^^^^

What he said.

Brett

You can use the AU Maf, just make sure you are using the sensor out of your old one.

Thanks for the feedback guys!!!!
does anyone know someone in Melbourne who can carry out this work for me and at reasonable prices?
sounds like i need an expert?

Try getting a hold of CVE! Paul seems like the go to man when tuning stock ECU's.

You can physically make this "bastard MAF creation" and it does run, just not properly.

The air flow through the housing main body : air flow through the sampling passage ratio varies housing to housing. The sensor unit is matched to this ratio, and in turn the MAF transfer data in the ecu then matches this to known air mass and calculates how much fuel is required for correct combustion. Change any one or more of these and the ecu's idea of reality is off the mark. So like any calculation, if you put crap figures in you get crap figures out.

Closed loop operation should correct the mis-match and give approx correct AFR, but open loop has no correction via O2 sensor feedback. The ecu runs only off the relevant fuel and spark tables & scalars. So the calculated fuel injector pulse width is incorrect and the AFR is wrong.

If an upgrade is needed, it is far better to get a MAF housing & sensor pair that actually match the MAF transfer function data in the ecu and leave the original MAF housing & sensor in one piece. It can be sold to offset some of the cost of the piece that will work correctly.

So..XAFALCON your saying back to the factory MAF? I really thought i was doing the right thing with the larger MAF for extra air?
another problem im having with it all is ford hard wired the AU MAF when they fitted it?!
getting that fixed on tuesday.

778-cooling fan #2,had this on my car.one fans not working,i think its the high speed\2 speed one.i got pi##ed off and opened it up-the magnets fragment and jam up the rotor assembly.i pulled a lot of bits out,hardest part is to open and close it,as it was made to be a throw away item.

Yes. Go back to factory EVERYTHING. Then get rid of the fault codes. Then if you want a larger MAF (which you will need if you're over about 260HP net) either

fit one that is compatible with the ecu

or get a custom chip with an updated MAF transfer data table to suit the AU housing & sensor pair.

Maybe the hard wiring is the cause of many of the fault codes?? Some crossed or short circuiting wires perhaps. You could do that swap yourself, only 4 wires go to the MAF sensor.

thanks XA!! your an absolute legend!!
it was ford in Doncaster(melbourne) who did the wiring so im gonna get them to fix it.
both fans are working. Im sure it just comes down to the wiring now.
Problem is i do want to use the au sensor, but wont if its not right for the car. That means im gonna have to fork out for the right MAF again, as i was told the old one isnt any good.
might just get it back to normal for now and talk to someone who knows what they are on about for the chip and larger MAF. Im thinking Herrod maybe? It would be nice just to find one single workshop to take her to that really knows what there doing!! Im just not great with cars? Forgot more than i remember about them years ago.

just got the car back from ford.
apparently the codes were old and hadnt been deleted.
two remained, one is for the EGR, second if for the air temp sensor.
both are missing from the car.
Mick Webb left off the air temp sensor when he fitted the AU intake.
hows that figure?

The AU 70mm MAF does work very well with your setup with stock 19lb injectors. It's not strictly correct in it's operation in that load will be incorrectly calculated but, it just so happens to lean the fuel in the higher ranges enough to make more power. This is because Ford deliberately tunes them rich in the top end because it's safer when it comes to most people who don't look after their cars. Plus the load calcs mean more spark advance than you otherwise had which also happens to be just enough for a performance increase. But as the xa man says...get everything back to stock and fixed before you do anything else.
I'm not surprised about the ACT sensor. The ACT sensor can be fitted to the inlet tube(between MAF and t-body) and, while also not strictly in the correct place for this model it will still give some compensation and is likely to richen it back up a smidge due to reading cooler air than it otherwise would have in the #5 runner of the intake.

Although not a strictly accurate comparison, it is still close enough to make a judgement. Here are the numbers from the binaries showing EL MAF transfer v's AU MAF transfer. Note that the AU MAF transfer curve was not a typical shape and so some (very) slight data smoothing was performed. The data shows MAF voltage output v's Air flow mass

Volts 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
EL 55mm 11.15 30.10 60.05 104.37 166.40 249.51 357.03 492.33 658.76
AU 70mm 10.3 21.00 44.00 80.00 144.00 228.00 360.00 540.00 697.00
EL v's AU -7.62% -30.23% -26.73% -23.35% -13.46% -8.62% 0.83% 9.68% 5.80%

So in the lower flow areas the AU MAF when used on an EL ecu will cause the ecu to think that CONSIDERABLY less air is entering the engine than actually is, and will attempt to add insufficient fuel. There is up to 27% difference in the cruise region, and fuel trims will struggle to correct this level of mismatch.

In the higher flow areas where there is no closed loop control of AFR the variation swings from under-estimating air to over-estimating air. Around 4V, with your foot into it and the revs getting right up, the ecu will be commanding almost 10% more fuel addition than using the correct sensor. From this data it seems very unlikely that a leaner mixture will occur in the higher ranges.

If you were referring to the "bastard" MAF creation, I have had several instances where the symptoms broadly align with your comments. However my involvement has always been to help rectify a common problem. Clients complaining about detonation under load, requiring higher octane fuel to suppress it even though timing was correctly set. When the MAF was replaced with a factory unit, problem gone. Granted these were EB-ED V8's which have a mass transfer table with a higher airmass flow for a given MAF output voltage. This may have been enough to tip the engines over the detonation threshold, or it may just be the difference between being able to hear it happen and it being inaudible. Either way if this is the case then it must be a very fine line and one that has a questionable risk v's reward.

Relocating the IAT sensor has both positive and negative outcomes. Yes, it will richen up the mixture slightly. But the big down-side is that adaptive learning is generally inhibited below 100°F (38°C) when the original location for the IAT was the lower intake manifold. Not so much of a problem until the battery goes flat for the first time. After that the adaptives are re-set and will only "learn" in the hotest of weather. Over here in NZ this is effectively never, but in the heat of the Australian summer time ambient can reach this temperature.

The problem with comparing transfer functions from different EEC’s is that each EEC(ie; EB/D EECIV,EF/L 2bank EECV, and AU 4bank EECV) calculates the airmass in a different way. For example, the same MAF used on different vehicles will have a MAF transfer function that will read quite differently between each EEC. You have actually noted this about EB EECIV MAF xfer functions.
The AU maf is actually almost identical to the EB/ELGT/Sprint MAF which it just so happens is the same MAF as a ’93 Cobra with an airbox flange attached to it. So your MAF xfer comparisons are more like this….
As you can see in the lower regions they are in fact very similar.

The EL EEC will only ever think it has the stock MAF so it will, as the curves diverge, get gradually leaner. Whereas previously it was too rich to make the best power. In fact the EEC will be commanding the same fuel it always did with a stock MAF, which combined with the extra air mass flowing through the 70mm body will be leaner than before.
The other incorrect calculation is load which I mentioned previously.
High air mass in itself is not related to closed or open loop control, Load/TPS breakpoints are and of course with load being calculated as lower it can can result in the EEC hanging on to closed loop longer.
In the end I've been involved with at least 8 EF/L series 5.0 Falcons with just this combo and all fared very well in dyno testing. None of the owners have complained of detonation or driveability problems except those with non stock cams which of course are problematic with these models. Even then it was idle tuning that was required.
Certainly a proper recal is desirable but as cheat methods go for people with well looked after cars this is not a bad one.