Post by
Ubernoober »
https://forums.nicoclub.com/ubernoober-u14357.html
Tue May 18, 2004 9:30 pm
MAP is better in the sense that it is more flexible. A MAF must be calibrated for a given airflow, and of course, the correct MAF must be chosen to match the engine airflow goals. This means a standalaone company would have to have an entire catalog of MAF's to match what the buyer is trying to build. With MAP, you simply use fuel tables. Fuel tables are programmable so even the end user can move the ECU kit from one engine to the next by simply altering the tables.
Yes yes, I realize there is a lot more to this and I don't know everything. I am just trying to summarize. If anything is totally wrong, let me know, because I like to educate myself.