[no subject]

1. The outputs from the two sensors may have different curves.  This can =
be corrected by a remapping like the one you suggest - take 2.11 from MAF =
and change to 2.05 and so on for the entire curve.  A remapping would fool =
the CPU into thinking the AFM was still there (so it behaved OK) while you =
put in the less constrictive MAF.

2. The outputs are dynamically different - the 2.11 may sometimes need to =
be changed to 2.05, as above, and sometimes to 2.06, depending on the =
other axes.  So, fooling the CPU is not going to be easy!  This is because =
the sensors have different values of overshoot, etc., i.e., different =
dynamic characteristics.  Of course, these can be 'converted' too, but it =
is much more difficult to do so since you have to do another set of =
transformations.  I think, that if someone gave you all the curves for the =
meters, you could make electronic boxes that did the transformations that =
would fool the CPU.  However, these do not seem to be freely available and =
you would have to go out and develop these for yourself at some sort of =
accurate facility.  Not many of those might exist.  This is the reason the =
SS unit costs so much.  The dynamic difference stems from the fact that =
the AFM is a mechanical sensor and the MAF is solid state.  Indeed, even =
two solid state sensors could have different dynamics, but I get the =
feeling you may know more about that kind of thing than I do.

I would appreciate your pointing out any errors I might have made.

Neil Deshpande
88 325 is
89 325 iC

------------------------------