ok heres the deal a 5.0 and 2.3 have the same size sensor that bolts onto differant size mass air things, the 5.0 is 3" on one end and 3 1/2" on the other, my car has had a swap and now is back to original after blowing up the swap so its a mess now,originally i got it as a 2.3l swapped in a 351 and c4 blew out a rod, taost put the 93 4 banger back in, i never had a stock 2.3 intake some gay aem ram air was on it, so i wanna see what puting the 2.3 mass sensor on the 5.0 mass body will do, i know it will flow more air cus the center hole is bigger, anyone have a opinion on this. im just playing around with spare parts, this 4 is pretty fast compared to the older 88hp 4s this is at 105hp, and every pony count, thinkn of having a cam made for it too, back with the old reliable 4
__________________
93lx 4 banger cost me $350 bad body damage, now mostly fixed, my second stang so far sold for 900
current:86gt 5peed built t5,offroad h pipe 3" flows dumped.
85 gt vert my new project, getting a 86 gt motor
is there a larger throttle body of of a ranger that will fit , and larger injectors? im thinkin larger injectors, hi flo fuel pump, fuel pressure regulator, larger throttle body and maf sensor
__________________
93lx 4 banger cost me $350 bad body damage, now mostly fixed, my second stang so far sold for 900
current:86gt 5peed built t5,offroad h pipe 3" flows dumped.
85 gt vert my new project, getting a 86 gt motor
Charles O. Probst has an excellent book entitled Ford Fuel Injection & Electronic Engine Control covering the EEC IV and Mazda control systems. Available from J.C. Whitney. And, yes, that's the main reason for the oxygen sensors. Should correct for anything within reason.
"Within Reason" being the key word. Sounds like a fun experiment, but I think the outcome may disappoint you.
The sensor elements may be the same, but the transfer table in the ECU for the respective MAF is different. MAF calibration is based partly on the size of the MAF body. The table is used by the EEC to translate MAF signal into a useable value on a scale. If you use a larger MAF without modifying the table, you throw the fuel curve off.
The following is just an example. None of the numbers are real, just simplified to make math easy.
Let's say a 2.3 MAF flows 0-500cfm. 0cfm=0VDC output and 500cfm=5VDC output
The ECU is programmed with those values. It knows when is sees 5V from the MAF that incoming airflow is 500 cfm and knows how much fuel to push.
Change the MAF to one that flows 0-1000cfm where 0cfm=0vdc and 1000cfm=5vdc.
Now what happens? The scale is waaayyy off. Now at WOT the computer still sees 5vdc and thinks that airflow is 500cfm when it's actually 1000cfm. The O2 sensor will scream lean and it'll try to compensate but it won't be enough. It'll still throw a code because it won't be able to correct the A/F ratio
The 5.0 aftermarket got around EEC tuning with larger MAFs by making everyone think they needed a certain size injector for a certain size MAF. The bigger injectors compensated for the extra air coming in through the larger MAF. It's a bandaid workaround that eventually became the standard.
i had a 5.0 and i put a 76mm maf and i could tilt the maf 1 way and it would lean it out and the other way would richen it up. or if goin lean is a prob put a adj fuel regulator on it. the 5.0 and the 2.3 are the same. i got a aeromotive from my old 5.0 on my 2.3 and a 155lph pump.
So bottom line, what would you have to do to efficiently put a stock 5.0 MAF on the 2.3? I was thinking about doing this, because the stock MAF for the 2.3 is TINY!
Turbo, megasquit and holset turbo. Guys with this setup use the 5.0 setup. They also have wideband and can tune there computer to use the maf. Putting it on a na 2.3 is not a good idea. Will go lean. This what happen to my turbo motor because I went lean. Too much modification and not enough fuel. Notice chunk missing approx 2oclock in picture. http://i177.photobucket.com/albums/w...5/100_6252.jpg
Don't know if this helps or not. I tried putting a 3.8 on my 2.3L...
Needless to say it ran way lean. I even hooked my snap-on brick computer while i drove it to monitor the readings. The car ran good at really low RPM's but once you got your foot in it a lil' bit...
Disapointment! haha Nice idea though.
you should opt for a performance chip it should really wake up that 2.3 liter-will optimize the whole system-they say it should be good for 30 ponies-thats my next step
Okay guys lets think here. The MAF sensor is a hot wire that changes temprature as air passes over it. The MAF is calibrated to the ECU based on that temprature change through the designed housing. The fuel injectors are matched to that calibration. The fuel pump regulator is designed to work with that specific set of fuel injectors. The ECU has a table for injector timing and duration based on the MAF reading. The O2 sensor is designed to compensated for standard wear and tear of a car over time for performace and emissions reason. All of this does not cover the fuel pump design which is matched to the total fuel pressure and flow requirements specified in the ECU.
NOW: You CANNOT change out the MAF housing for a larger (or smaller) housing without changing the volume of air the housing passes. This invalidates the MAF values and by chain reaction invalidates the injector timing, fuel pressure regulator, fuel injector and fuel pump operational specs.
NOW: You can compensate by either reprogramming the ECU tables OR buying a matched injector, fuel pump, meter housing, fuel pump regulator and ECU set. Those are the options. If you choose to reprogram then you need a dyno and 4 gas analyser to compensate for load limits as well.
5.0 mass air sensor on 2.3 less restriction 
