Right....
Yesterday I've approached quite interesting discussion o a PL forum.
All this is because one bloke in PL did conversion fl a/t to manual. He used a/t pfl MAF, and after conversion he noticed increased fuel consumption. By simple coincidence he replaced MAF by one from manual fl and fuel consumption gone reasonable as expected.
So... because he knows mapping ecu etc. very well, he did check what's going on in tables etc.
What he noticed is that load maps differ between pfl and fl, also manual and a/t so let's say: 4 different tables of air load. And those tables refer differently to MAF signal, which is also differently defined depending what drivetrain used and fl/pfl version.
At the moment we are in middle of discussion (new thing, yesterday evening came out, I've spent 3hrs on Skype on chat) it's temporary conclusion that it may be an issue that matching MAF to vr4 model is quite significant to fuel consumption and performance, but need to be confirmed that those 4 different MAF types exist.
Anyway I'm still not convinced, having manual image flashed in 7201 (or is it still a/t image with tcl "disabled"...? NJ to confirm) and pfl a/t MAF my fuel consumption went down, now with V6 TB gone up (as expected). So I'm not a person who may have answers.
And most important, so far I haven't noticed that our MAF's have different serial numbers vary on drivetrain or pfl/fl.
So, all those more familiar with ecu tables and maf scaling may join discussion, please...