peepsalot said:I know the MAF doesn't take input directly from the IAT, but how are you so sure that the ECU does not use both MAF and IAT in it's air/fuel calculations, without knowing exactly how it was programmed?
And are you sure the hot wire only goes to 200 F? That seems kinda low. I bet you could get temps over that with a heatsoaked stock intercooler and some upped boost. Ideal gas law says temps would be 427 F(pre-intercooler) at 10psi on a 90 F summer day. I wonder what the **** happens when the MAF sees the wire getting hotter than 200 F without aplying any current.
That 427 F is even assuming the turbo is 100% efficient, which it's not, so temps would be higher...
I might be off on teh 200 F... it has been a while since I have ever done research to that depth, but I think I am right on that.
The ECU is a standard Ford computer. Their architecture is pretty much the same across the board. Now fair warning, my memory is really sketchy on this one... Fuel control is based on engine load vs RPM. Load is based on air flow vs. ECT vs. pulse width base factor. Base factor is based on avg. O2 vs. EGT this is where the learning comes into play.
Now could Mazda have circumvented this? Sure. But we will never be able to find out since the firmware is encrypted. But we do know that the DSM Convert SS AFC works. And that does not intercept the IAT.
Consider how little thought was placed in building the car with the spongy engine mounts and bushings, plastic piping and an intercooler mounted right next to the radiator, I just can't imagine that they would have placed very much emphasis on adding an additional table just for the IAT to control fuel injection.
My 2 c.