C&L vs. Pro-M Meters

rayb · 01-07-2003, 01:41 PM

I'm in the market for a new mass air flow meter and am looking for some additional real world experiences. I've narrowed it down to C&L (73 or 76mm) and Pro-M's 75mm bullet as they seem to be the most popular and best reviewed. Anybody have any positive or negative experiences to share with these meters? There seems to be various degrees of idle problems experienced, but it seems to be hit or miss. I'm looking to fit it to a very mildly modified '90 5.0L.

sn95gt19 · 01-07-2003, 01:49 PM

i have had problems with to pro-m's so far, i went to a granatelli and havent had any problems since

84LX89GT · 01-08-2003, 01:08 AM

I have the C&L/Vortech mass air meter housing, and i bought a ford calibrated MAF sensor since i'm putting in 30lb/hr injectors. The C&L is an ok housing and it gets the fuel curve pretty close, so i haven't had any problems with it. I didn't want to take a chance once i started using nitrous, so i just bought a specially calibrated meter (and i'm pretty sure a Ford Racing MAF will be programmed well).

91GTturbo · 01-08-2003, 05:51 PM

If your staying NA, go C&L. If your planning on adding a blower or turbo, get the Pro-M.

NotchJohnson · 01-08-2003, 11:11 PM

I have a 75mm pro-m unit in my car. Recently Ive had a few probs with it. The car would die out at 2k after I put the heasd/intake on and when I unplugged it the car ran fine. A few days later I plugged it back in and the car ran fine, but it dies out every now and then upon accelerating. Dont know what the problem is, but im gonna try to find someone with a different maf to determine that its the problem.

2FastLX · 01-09-2003, 05:16 AM

I had a C&L and it worked fine for me. I've never had any experience with Pro-M so I can't say which is better, but a friend of mine swapped on a C&L at the track and gained a tenth. The Pro-M was a 75mm and the C&L was the new 76mm. He said it idled better too it seemed. I just never liked the idea of having to pay $100 for calibration if I needed to upgrade so I went with the C&L. And the folks at C&L seem real nice on the phone. You'll get a lot of comments on both meters, but here is some info C&L has on their web site concerning the "tricking" that most people slam C&L about...

"The purpose of changing the MAF calibration for use with larger injector sizes is to make the computer think that less air is actually entering the engine. By doing this, (which ALL aftermarket meters from ALL manufacturers do) you are making the computer reduce the duration of time that it is opening the fuel injectors at a given air flow rate. The larger the injector that is used, the more the voltage is dropped, and in return, the shorter the time the injectors are pulsed by the computer. This "tricking" of the computer is how a MAF allows the consumer to use a larger fuel injector than what originally came on your vehicle from the factory. Over the years, we have heard that people have said that our unit "tricks" the computer and that our competitor's method does not. This is truly ludicrous, as the only way that you can calibrate a meter for larger injectors is to reduce the output voltage, and ALL aftermarket air meters use this method to "trick" the computer. The most important thing to consider is that changing the calibration for larger injectors must reduce the voltage to the proper level for the ideal air/fuel ratio. We have spent countless hours on the dyno and at the track to ensure that our calibrations will deliver a winning combination."

I like that paragraph

5Lvenom · 01-09-2003, 01:51 PM

N/A- C&L, Forced Induction- Pro-M.

RPM427 · 01-09-2003, 01:58 PM

The C&L uses the stock ford MAF sensor, it uses calibration tubes to "trick" the computer. The pro-M's are ussually recalibrated and should be more accurate, at least in theory. I have been using a C&L 76mm for a while and have had no problems with it. My car idles good and runs great.

Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I think the 73mm was discontiued.

302man · 01-09-2003, 07:50 PM

Both the C/L and Pro-M 75's use a point measuring system . Thats why when you have a weird idle problem, people say turn the meter until it idles better. To get out of this, pro-m made the 77,80 and 83 and probably other meters that have a ring all the way around to measure air, regaurdless of the position its in. Thats why I prefere the Pro-M 77 or higher . Whatever you decide on, spend $100 and see where your air/fuel is at on a dyno. Then you will see how good or how bad it is.

01-07-2003, 01:41 PM	#1
rayb Registered Member Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Canton, OH Posts: 5	C&L vs. Pro-M Meters I'm in the market for a new mass air flow meter and am looking for some additional real world experiences. I've narrowed it down to C&L (73 or 76mm) and Pro-M's 75mm bullet as they seem to be the most popular and best reviewed. Anybody have any positive or negative experiences to share with these meters? There seems to be various degrees of idle problems experienced, but it seems to be hit or miss. I'm looking to fit it to a very mildly modified '90 5.0L.

01-07-2003, 01:49 PM	#2
sn95gt19 motors done......woohooo Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 799	i have had problems with to pro-m's so far, i went to a granatelli and havent had any problems since __________________ 95gt lazer red (98 cobra clone) Rice Haters Club Member #116

01-08-2003, 01:08 AM	#3
84LX89GT Mustangs Join Date: Jul 2000 Posts: 1,938	I have the C&L/Vortech mass air meter housing, and i bought a ford calibrated MAF sensor since i'm putting in 30lb/hr injectors. The C&L is an ok housing and it gets the fuel curve pretty close, so i haven't had any problems with it. I didn't want to take a chance once i started using nitrous, so i just bought a specially calibrated meter (and i'm pretty sure a Ford Racing MAF will be programmed well). __________________ 2005 Suzuki Hayabusa GSX1300-R 1980 Ford Thunderbird - 255 V8 ported heads, 5.0L ported stock headers, O.R. H-pipe and Flowmaster 2-chambers, dual roller timing chain hi-po Mack Truck hood emblem 1985 Mustang GT 5.0L T5, F-303, GT40p, headers, off-road h, flowmasters, MSD stuff, etc. Sold 02/06/04 1989 Mustang GT ET: 13.304@102.29 mph (5-24-03) Sold - 1998 Mustang Cobra coupe, 1/4 mile - street tires: 13.843@103.41 (bone stock)

01-08-2003, 05:51 PM	#4
91GTturbo Registered Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Valdese, NC Posts: 361	If your staying NA, go C&L. If your planning on adding a blower or turbo, get the Pro-M. __________________ 91 single turbo vert

01-08-2003, 11:11 PM	#5
NotchJohnson Registered Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Florida Keys Posts: 593	I have a 75mm pro-m unit in my car. Recently Ive had a few probs with it. The car would die out at 2k after I put the heasd/intake on and when I unplugged it the car ran fine. A few days later I plugged it back in and the car ran fine, but it dies out every now and then upon accelerating. Dont know what the problem is, but im gonna try to find someone with a different maf to determine that its the problem. __________________ 89 notch-finally not stock!! ported gt40's, ported cobra intake, 65mm tb, 75mm maf, mac cai, lt's,prochamber, fms 1.6 rr, 125 shot.

01-09-2003, 05:16 AM	#6
2FastLX The Photoshop Guru Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Mecca, Indiana Posts: 1,419	I had a C&L and it worked fine for me. I've never had any experience with Pro-M so I can't say which is better, but a friend of mine swapped on a C&L at the track and gained a tenth. The Pro-M was a 75mm and the C&L was the new 76mm. He said it idled better too it seemed. I just never liked the idea of having to pay $100 for calibration if I needed to upgrade so I went with the C&L. And the folks at C&L seem real nice on the phone. You'll get a lot of comments on both meters, but here is some info C&L has on their web site concerning the "tricking" that most people slam C&L about... "The purpose of changing the MAF calibration for use with larger injector sizes is to make the computer think that less air is actually entering the engine. By doing this, (which ALL aftermarket meters from ALL manufacturers do) you are making the computer reduce the duration of time that it is opening the fuel injectors at a given air flow rate. The larger the injector that is used, the more the voltage is dropped, and in return, the shorter the time the injectors are pulsed by the computer. This "tricking" of the computer is how a MAF allows the consumer to use a larger fuel injector than what originally came on your vehicle from the factory. Over the years, we have heard that people have said that our unit "tricks" the computer and that our competitor's method does not. This is truly ludicrous, as the only way that you can calibrate a meter for larger injectors is to reduce the output voltage, and ALL aftermarket air meters use this method to "trick" the computer. The most important thing to consider is that changing the calibration for larger injectors must reduce the voltage to the proper level for the ideal air/fuel ratio. We have spent countless hours on the dyno and at the track to ensure that our calibrations will deliver a winning combination." I like that paragraph __________________ Project: 1988 Coupe - EFI 5.8L Twin Turbo with Victor intake, Canfield heads, F303 cam, March aluminum underdrive pulleys, TKO (or T56 if funds permit), PBR twin piston calipers and 13" rotors up front, 94 Cobra rear calipers and 12" rotors on the rear, 3.73's, Griggs K-member, tubular front control arms, torque arm and panhard bar, polished 99 Cobra wheels. "The GR-40 kit installation is now complete, and the humble Fox-chassis car will now out-corner and out-stop a ZR-1 or a Viper, and support massive horsepower additions with perfect balance." Griggs Racing ICQ# 42269241

01-09-2003, 01:51 PM	#7
5Lvenom Registered Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Sacramento,Ca Posts: 10	N/A- C&L, Forced Induction- Pro-M. __________________ 95 cobra 327 s-trim

01-09-2003, 01:58 PM	#8
RPM427 Registered Member Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Huntington NY Posts: 573	The C&L uses the stock ford MAF sensor, it uses calibration tubes to "trick" the computer. The pro-M's are ussually recalibrated and should be more accurate, at least in theory. I have been using a C&L 76mm for a while and have had no problems with it. My car idles good and runs great. Someone correct me if I am wrong, but I think the 73mm was discontiued. __________________ -1993 Mustang, 900rwhp 03-04 cobra based 4v swap, full Griggs setup, project underway -1994 Ranger w/ 427cid windsor (daily beater) check it out!

01-09-2003, 07:50 PM	#9
302man Registered Member Join Date: Jul 1999 Location: INDIANAPOLIS Posts: 404	Both the C/L and Pro-M 75's use a point measuring system . Thats why when you have a weird idle problem, people say turn the meter until it idles better. To get out of this, pro-m made the 77,80 and 83 and probably other meters that have a ring all the way around to measure air, regaurdless of the position its in. Thats why I prefere the Pro-M 77 or higher . Whatever you decide on, spend $100 and see where your air/fuel is at on a dyno. Then you will see how good or how bad it is. __________________ old S trim combo 10.13@ 135 New YS combo = 680RWHP (no times)

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Group Purchase-Mass Air Meters	BlackSunshine	Corner Carvers Delight	0	11-24-2000 02:01 PM
Group Purchase-Mass Air Meters	BlackSunshine	Racer's Club House	0	11-24-2000 02:00 PM
Group Purchase-Mass Air Meters	BlackSunshine	Small Ponies	0	11-24-2000 01:59 PM
Group Purchase-Mass Air Meters	BlackSunshine	Modular Madness	0	11-24-2000 01:57 PM