can someone tell me what the sensor that I see in my air intake just past the filter is? I would expect it to be some type of temperature or air flow sensor. If I were to replace my intake duct work with an aftermarket system like a K&N do they have a connection for that sensor?

 

There are aftermarket replacements for the MAF but the factory one works as good as any. Yes most aftermarket air filter and induction systems require you to reinstall the original or an aftermarket MAF (Mass Air Flow sensor).

This type sensor works by sending a signal voltage along a wire that is exposed to the intake airflow. As the air passes over this wire it cools, a closed loop system tries to keep the wire at a constant temp and increases or decreases the voltage to do this. The computer can determine rate of air flow, based on sea level air density, by these voltage variations. The computer will then add an appropriate amount of fuel to achieve a mixture ratio of 14.7:1 (air to fuel)

 

Well, another informative answer but your comment brings up new questions. (You also answered my factory computer chip question). If I install a less restrictive air intake system, and the MAF sensor determines that I am passing more and cooler air and then the computer adjusts the fuel mixture to achieve the 14.7.1 how does it produce more power? The mixture that is going into the cylinder is the same. Is it that there is more of the mixture or a more condensed charge which carries more fuel? And if that is the case how in the world does it give you better mileage when in effect you are burn more fuel?

 

AAAHH now the grasshopper is thinking! This can get very complicated. The short answer is sometimes you get better MPG and sometimes you get less MPG. More depends on right foot and tire pressure than any other factor.

How does it make more power? First to burn, at a controlled rate, the air fuel mixture must be in the proper ratio of 14.7:1. If we have an intake system that creates some resistance to air flow and we modify it to have half the resistance, we should expect about twice as much flow. More total volume of air fuel mixture can enter the cylinder. The “potential” of this increased VOLUME of mixture will create more power. If this is achieved, then the next factor is how many degrees, in advance of the rising piston, must we fire the plug to cause this mixture to get completely burned and develop the big push down.

Several other factors: Compression ratio, intake valve open timing, exhaust valve open timing, and any overlap of the valves open or close times. On the exhaust side we have to balance the system with SOME backpressure because the valves are mechanically opened before the bottom of the power stroke. If we had too little backpressure, then we loose low rpm power (torque) because some of the final fuel burn is expended into an open hole and no longer creating downward pressure on the piston.

Intake and exhaust systems are always a compromise because we cannot instantly open or close them in a four cycle motor. The Motor’s engineered design, factory power band, parasitic losses of the valve train, alternator, water pump, air conditioner, drive train, rolling resistance of the tires, wind resistance of the frontal shape, altitude, grade of fuel, final drive ratio, tire diameter, are ALL factors. Your motor will make more power at sea level on a cool day (denser air) than at 5000 foot on a cool day. Increase the air temp and power will decrease. Same goes of relative humidity; there is a slight gain at lower H2O% and slight loss with higher H2O%. Now admittedly these are very minute ranges but are still factors. Note that these are cumulative in nature.

Asked in another post was “why do PSD get more power than Gassers with the intake and exhaust modifications?” Answer, because Ford, Chevy, and Dodge are required to make the gasoline engines lighter, quieter, and more efficient. Not so of the Diesel motor family. By design the V8/V10 family is already near it’s best potential. The Diesel has much more potential. The manufactures deliberately detuned them so they would not have to add the expense of other drive components that can handle the increased torque loads. They don’t talk about it much, but a lot of the diesel guys that went on steroids had to spend big bucks to get their trannies bullet proofed. You send 800ftlbs of torque through a drive train rated for 600ftlbs and stuff is going to break.

 

Anew engineering lesson from the master. All things being equal, theoretically of course, to get the best performance from the larger flow of air/fuel and better scavenging of the exhaust the timing needs to advance. How much advance can the stock computer compensate for? This is where the chip come in it reprograms for more advance which will burn the mixteure more efficiently. Thnaks a bunch. I had heard the v10 was at a very efficent level for a stock engine.

 

Because there are no readily available aftermarket stroke changing crank shafts or different profile cam shafts, about all we can do is change the intake, ignition timing, injector size, and exhaust systems. This limits how much we can drag out of the motor in "stock" configuration.

Of course you always got nitrous or super charged. Have even heard of a twin turbo setup.

Almost every mod readily available is pricy, can increase power, and usualy gives the increased power higher in the rpm band. The chips almost always require you to provide the code for the original PCM program. From there they modify the injector pulse durations and advance curves, most of the time requiring 91-octane fuel. This is a general statement; there are some pretty interesting "chips" out there that have all kinds of features.
<O
Chasing horsepower and torque is expensive in these motors

I am sure glad that my use of the SuperDuty is such that I am very happy with the stock power and looking forward to my new 05 V10 3 valve with 355 HP!<O</O

 

Again, I agree. I am happy witht he X and the V10. I was just kind of trying to convince myself on which way to go or to just forget about it. Like I said in the thread I am looking at a light trailer, ours is actualy too big for us anyway. I took my car trailer and tractor, about 5200lbs for a 120 round trip today. Average about 11.5. Compared to the TT at 8000lbs. and 7to8mpg. I may go that way.