Using a piggyback fuel controller in conjunction with Maft-pro??

[dylansword]

Hey y'all. Right now I am using Maft pro. Mainly so I don't have to use a afm. And I have heard that Maft pro. Is terrible for tuning fuel. So my question is, can I keep using the Maft pro, so I don't have an afm, and also use something to tune, and adjust fuel? If so, what would work best? Thanks in advance.

 

[Beals]

pretty sure maft pro eliminates the need for a piggy back, sounds like the tuner didn't know what they were doing. I'd look around for more information because I don't see a stand-alone being worse then a piggy-back ever.

 

[Rollus]

Maft Pro is a piggyback.

Exept for AEM F/IC which insert directly in injectors and ignition signal, all other I know (Maft Pro, MapECU, SAF-C) work the same for fuel: they modify the MAF signal to let the ECU think more or less air enter the engine.

Piggybacking a piggyback is nonsense .

Just read the manual, forums, and tune it correctly.

 

[supra13's]

The maft-pro setup, when tuned properly has been proven to work well on 500+ rwhp cars. If yours isn't working right there's something not setup right. What is the car doing to make you think it's not working correctly?

 

[supraguy@aol]

Yeah, i was under the impression that the maft pro has a decently high fuel tune resolution.

 

[Another MkIII]

Everything I have read tells me the MAFT Pro is as close as you can get to stand alone from a piggyback. Either something is wrong with your setup, or the person tuning didn't know what they were doing. But using a piggyback on a piggyback just sounds stupid.
-AM3

 

[QWIKSTRIKE]

Everything I have read tells me the MAFT Pro is as close as you can get to stand alone from a piggyback. Either something is wrong with your setup, or the person tuning didn't know what they were doing. But using a piggyback on a piggyback just sounds stupid.
-AM3

Enough said its a wrap!