Pro-M went out of business

David Neibert

SCCoA Admin
The title says it all.

Hopefully you didn't have a meter there getting recalibrated or your screwed. I was planning to use their 4" universal blow thru on the turbo car...not sure what to use now.

David
 
Rumour on the turbomustangs.com forum was that some of the employees would reopen the facilities shortly. We'll see if that pans out. That company went downhill after the founder Bob Atwood, the former Ford engineer, passed away a few years ago. :(

cheers
Ed N.
 
I was talking to Lee at C&L yesterday and he said it was their biggest shipping day ever in their history. Maybe this had something to do with it. lol
 
Dave,

Do you think that big C&L meter will work on the turbo car ? I've heard they are good for over 1000 HP in blow thru applications, but the guy at Forced Fab thinks the stock electronics will peg at about 600.

David
 
XR7 Dave said:
I was talking to Lee at C&L yesterday and he said it was their biggest shipping day ever in their history. Maybe this had something to do with it. lol

With a tuner's perspective, with the different way Pro-M plays with the numbers compared to C&L with their sample tubes what is a more ideal way of doing things? I.e. what allows the tuner the best ability to get that SC motor tuned?

It's something I'm wondering especially when thinking of a cam with a bit of a burble to it.
 
Actually the Pro M way of doing things always worked better for me.

Witha Pro M ya knew what you were getting. The C&L has a margin of error you cant avoid
 
The Pro M worked slightly better than the C&L in some cases where chip tuning is not part of the program. The reason for this is that the stock injectors in the 5.0 are REALLY sloppy. They have a low slope of 26 and high of 19. This is a 37% increase in injector size compensation due to the fact that the turn on/off rate of the stock injectors is so slow. When you put a real 30lb injector in the 5.0 that runs low 32 high 30 then you end up really lean at idle and of course it runs like crap. Then you take into account that the 5.0 learns adaptive at very low loads and you start to see that changing injectors can really screw with things.

Since Pro M is able to custom taylor the curve to compensate for the crap injectors that are no longer there, you will have had better idle with the Pro M. As far as accuracy of the transfer function itself, that is a function of the electronics more than the meter itself. The good Pro M meters are the ones with a bell mouth that has a filter attached directly to it. That was the original Pro M design that kicksazz. The bullet designs really aren't any better than any other meter and the "flow sheet" that you got with the meter was NOT the actual flow sheet of THAT meter. It was merely a flow sheet of a test meter which makes it no more accurate than the C&L with the stock electronics ASSUMING that there isn't an issue with the electronics on your particular meter (which is not uncommon, ask any tuner.....).

Now, considering the SC which starts out with 30lb injectors with a 33 low and 30 high slope, you will get much more consistent results without a tune because your aftermarket injectors will perform similarly as the stock ones in both high and low slopes. Not only that, most SC's learn adaptive at higher loads (like 90% load in some cases) so it is learning off of a stabillized high slope value.

Now consider the 94-95 SC's and those injectors are even worse than the stock 5.0 injectors. With a low slope of 50 and a high slope of 34, you can see that these are not only NOT 36's but rather 34's, but they have a 42% change from idle to WOT which is going to be hell on aftermarket injectors and exactly why C&L doesn't really recommend their meters for a 94/95 with larger than stock injectors.

Don't you wish someone had told you that 5 years ago? I do. The more I learn the more I realize why we have struggled so bad for so long with the SC and tuning.
 
Mike8675309 said:
With a tuner's perspective, with the different way Pro-M plays with the numbers compared to C&L with their sample tubes what is a more ideal way of doing things? I.e. what allows the tuner the best ability to get that SC motor tuned?

It's something I'm wondering especially when thinking of a cam with a bit of a burble to it.

To answer this question, the ideal way of doing it is to have a meter that has reliable electronics (OE is best), known airflow path and a detailed transfer function that you can plug into the tuner file.

If you use this information to choose your MAF you will be better off than simply plugging in ANY meter and hoping it will work.

The one thing you have complete control of and which affects any meter, is the airflow path. Putting a cone filter directly on the MAF and mounting it in an area that is not restricted and doesn't see a lot of turbulence is the best.

Then, OE electronics are more reliable which is one of the reasons the OE uses them! Altering the MAF in any way is going to affect the end result, so I would have to say that a C&L is not ideal for that reason. However, finding an OE meter that doesn't peg without alteration, and fits your SC without modifying it is another issue. The world is full of compromises. You have to pick the ones you want to accept. The L 90MM unit is good for about 400rwhp without pegging, so it is a good alternative for some people. The SCT MAF is a better version of the stock L 90MM. It has an extended transfer function that won't peg and since it is made by the same company that made the stock meter so quality and consistency is OE grade. However, your SC won't run with one unless you have a chip, so that poses a problem for some people. For example, you can't even drive the car temporarily while waiting for a dyno tune with this meter. A lot of people like the idea of driving the car (taking it easy) with a calibrated MAF until tuning can be performed as well as the "bolt in" aspect. I know I prefer this in most cases.

As for the tuning difference between a Pro M and C&L, it is purely a matter of time. For a person like Jerry who generally tunes an SC in one dyno pull and one reflash of the chip, a transfer function that he can plug in quickly makes his job easier and faster. I've seen Jerry tune cars in a matter of 5 minutes if everything is right and the transfer function is correct. However, I've also seen it take a lot longer because a meter didn't read right and he had to plot an entirely new transfer function. This is not something that is brand specific. I've seen Pro M meters dead out of the box. It happens. At least with a C&L if the car was running before you put it on, it will run after.

Most C&L meters do not have a known specific transfer function - wait, yes they do, they have the stock Ford one. It is just either skewed up or down depending on sample tube. However, I have actual transfer functions for some of the C&L meters and those are the meters that I use most and sell with chips that match them.

Does that help?
 
If someone were getting a MAFS & SCT Chip from you when doing a tune, would it be better than going with C&L? ... I have a Pro-M 87 now because the L-90 would peg on me. But, for those that may hit over 400rwhp in the future, would it be best to go with the SCT MAFS/Chip/Tune together?

Anthony
 
SilverCasket said:
If someone were getting a MAFS & SCT Chip from you when doing a tune, would it be better than going with C&L? ... I have a Pro-M 87 now because the L-90 would peg on me. But, for those that may hit over 400rwhp in the future, would it be best to go with the SCT MAFS/Chip/Tune together?

Anthony
The best combination would be the SCT MAF/Chip/Tune, yes.

The C&L works well but really if you are getting a tune it doesn't really matter that much. One thing about the C&L is that you never have to worry about it pegging. You just get a larger sample tube.
 
Last edited:
XR7 Dave said:
To answer this question, the ideal way of doing it is to have a meter that has reliable electronics (OE is best), known airflow path and a detailed transfer function that you can plug into the tuner file.

If you use this information to choose your MAF you will be better off than simply plugging in ANY meter and hoping it will work.
...
Does that help?


Not sure if it helps or not. But what I'm getting from that is that from a tuning perspective, reliable electronics on the MAF sensor itself are key. So using a piece of MAF hardware with stock electronics is perfectly fine, and in fact, may be ideal from some perspectives.

One remaining question may be though, is it the electronics that "peg out" with airflow, or is it the hardware design. I.E. if I want to run 360 rwhp to the ground, it won't matter how big a MAF I have as the stock electronics will not be able to measure the flow?
 
Mike8675309 said:
Not sure if it helps or not. But what I'm getting from that is that from a tuning perspective, reliable electronics on the MAF sensor itself are key. So using a piece of MAF hardware with stock electronics is perfectly fine, and in fact, may be ideal from some perspectives.

One remaining question may be though, is it the electronics that "peg out" with airflow, or is it the hardware design. I.E. if I want to run 360 rwhp to the ground, it won't matter how big a MAF I have as the stock electronics will not be able to measure the flow?

The stock electronics can measure 2000hp+ if you have the right hardware on it. It's airflow that pegs the MAF, and by changing sample tubes you change the airflow past the meter. You just have to make the adjustments in the chip.

With a properly calibrated MAF it's not so much a matter of HP as it is a matter of injector duty cycle. The stock MAF sensor is matched to a specific amount of injector duty cycle. When people peg the C&L meters they are also running dangerously close to 100% duty cycle and should be upgrading injectors as well which, with a new sample tube, will lower your MAF sensor readings and correspondingly increase your Hp headroom.

Better?
 
Back
Top