New MAF sensor = WOW!!

[Luxus Panzer]

Any particulay model here people have used with sucess?

http://www.amazon.ca/s/?ie=UTF8&keyw...qid=1406291368

[J4kner]

So, a couple things to learn here:
2. MAF's wear out over time?

Honestly, I thought a MAF either worked or it didn't work? No in between.

Kind of a question to build on n7plus1's point, Would cleaning my maf be just enough or should I look at replacing it?

How do I know if its the original MAF or is it just a guessing game?

[old guy]

If you monitor the MAF sensor flow rate you should see somewhere around 3gps at idle and around 135gps max for a stock engine. You can also monitor the LTFT and STFT (long term and short term fuel trims). The fuel trims are determined by the ECM based on information from the front wide band oxygen sensor. The STFT indicates the immediate adjustments being made. The LTFT is a change in the base flow rate across the complete spectrum. If the STFT is constantly adding fuel the LTFT base rate will be bumped up accordingly until the STFT is fluctuating between adding and subtracting fuel.

As the MAF sensor changes (for example getting dirty) it can begin to under report the amount of air being drawn through the sensor. Consequently the front O2 sensor will read an overall leaning out condition and the ECM will make a correction by providing a positive add to the LTFT in the form of a % adjustment. A LTFT reading of 10 would indicate a 10% increase in the base map.

If the MAF sensor is reading more air than actually being consumed the opposite will happen and the O2 sensor will report a rich condition since the ECM will be providing too much fuel based on the flow rate. Consequently the ECM will make a downward adjustment as a negative trim. For example the MAF I put in settled out at -1 to -3%. That’s an indication that it is reporting more air than is actually being consumed.

The maximum fueling adjustment available to the ECM is ±25%. Audi/VW considers ±10% to be within an acceptable range. By monitoring these different conditions (max/min.gps, LTFT/STFT) you can get a pretty good idea as to how well your MAF sensor is functioning.

[Luxus Panzer]

Any particulay model here people have used with sucess?

http://www.amazon.ca/s/?ie=UTF8&keyw...qid=1406291368

Bump & Question...

Does the bluetooth OBDII transmitter have any security (password)?

I ask as.... what is to stop someone else from connecting to your cars ODBII port via the bluetooth and making changes to your car??

Thanks.

[a4darkness]

Luxus, either start your own thread or do some searching. There's a grip of info about this elsewhere.
Many of us have been successfully using the Torque app and this BT OBD2 Scanner for a while now.

Let's keep this on topic...

Kind of a question to build on n7plus1's point, Would cleaning my maf be just enough or should I look at replacing it?

By all means, clean your MAF. It usually makes a sizable difference. I try to clean mine a few times a year.
I'd reco not removing the MAF element from the housing but rather just spraying down the element while in the housing (removed from the car works best).
Now will cleaning it be as good as a new one? From the looks of things brought to light here, sounds like it won't.

I was under the same impression as Nate...

I thought a MAF either worked or it didn't work? No in between.

And as a side note the new MAF still pulled noticeably stronger than the original OEM one. I assume that is the difference between the original MAF under-reading the gps under load and constantly adding fuel versus the new MAF reading fat under load.

Excellent discovery Fletcher, props as usual. You mentioned mileage being about the same but have you noticed any increases in highway fuel economy as the ECU has had time to adjust or still the same? Seems like the short term would be increased g/s and smoother/better acceleration and the long term effect some increased HW mileage.
Lots of great info ITT thus far.

[J4kner]

By all means, clean your MAF. It usually makes a sizable difference. I try to clean mine a few times a year.
I'd reco not removing the MAF element from the housing but rather just spraying down the element while in the housing (removed from the car works best).
Now will cleaning it be as good as a new one? From the looks of things brought to light here, sounds like it won't.

I ended up removing it (before seeing your comment) and cleaned it. I don't know what you would classify it as being dirty but I used MAF cleaner and let it soak on a rag, dirt came out but didn't make me think thank god I cleaned this thing.

I believe my problem is not to do with the MAF, but most likely the ATF fluid. That is for another thread though. However I have been trying to find the diameter of my MAF through online sources, but to no avail. Anyone know the size of it on hand? I don't want to take it off again and measure it, maybe next time I clean it.

Sorry if that's a bit off topic!

On the other hand should I just get a new MAF for the hell of it? or will cleaning it a few times a year do justice (Not sure if I will notice a difference between a clean MAF or a new MAF).

[walky_talky20]

the MAF I put in settled out at -1 to -3%. That’s an indication that it is reporting more air than is actually being consumed.

I wonder if this is by design. That way as it gets dirty, it actually reads *more accurately*. Gives it a little bit of headroom, to stave off the unavoidable low readings as it ages.

There is a failure where the MAF will read way over the top, though. When chipmunks drop their little seeds into your air box (somehow) and the MAF screen gets clogged with that junk. The more stuff is lodged in there, the smaller effective size of the housing. And you get grossly inflated MAF readings.

[old guy]

You mentioned mileage being about the same but have you noticed any increases in highway fuel economy as the ECU has had time to adjust or still the same? Seems like the short term would be increased g/s and smoother/better acceleration and the long term effect some increased HW mileage.
Lots of great info ITT thus far.

The mileage remained pretty much the same with both MAF sensors. The ECM apparently is quite capable of adjusting to both an under and over reading MAF sensor. So once the LTFT has settled out the A/F is where it should be. I think the difference I felt under full throttle acceleration was because the variation in air flow occurs quickly and the ECM really doesn't have time to make that quick adjustment to the base map. That could be observed in the 25% STFT adjustment and the 12.6% A/F ratio at 6,000 rpm. The fat mixture was conducive to lower cylinder temperatures and consequently higher timing advance and more power being generated. With my under reading MAF just the opposite occurs and the mix goes leaner, the CF's go higher and ultimately the ECM starts to pull even more timing to protect the engine. But once I go back to "normal" driving the base map for either MAF sensor is adjusted appropriate to the air flow. At least this is my speculation for the difference in performance

I wonder if this is by design. That way as it gets dirty, it actually reads *more accurately*. Gives it a little bit of headroom, to stave off the unavoidable low readings as it ages.

That very well may be. At this point I'm not really sure why the over reading MAF sensor started getting a little lumpy at idle. Actually it wasn't the idle itself that was a problem but coming off the idle when first letting out the clutch and pressing the gas pedal. Instead of accelerating then engine would kinda hiccup almost to the point of stalling. To overcome it I would have to give it a little more gas than usual to get going. It wasn't severe at all but just enough to be a constant annoyance. At some point I may try the rebuilt MAF sensor again and see if a slight tweak in the idle speed makes any difference. The stronger acceleration was pretty nice.

[n7plus1]

this is interesting. Did you decide to keep the new one or send it back for a refund?

[old guy]

this is interesting. Did you decide to keep the new one or send it back for a refund?

I just kept it. If I get a chance to figure out the idle blip I may run it again.

[n7plus1]

so you can confirm this?

I thought a MAF either worked or it didn't work? No in between.

im not having any issues but if i can expect some added performance, why not?

[old guy]

so you can confirm this?



im not having any issues but if i can expect some added performance, why not?

A dirty MAF sensor can have an effect on performance. The heated wire can also degrade over time. Both conditions can change the performance as the ECM has to adjust to the different conditions as I mentioned in post 48.

[GeriatricGinger]

Cleaned mine; no change.. but at least its clean..

[DiertyEuroSpec]

I cleaned mine also and noticed no change, then come a month or two later and the MAF just quit out of no where. Literally drove perfectly fine parked the car and 4 hours later went to garage it and the MAF was DEAD causing a start and die situation with my engine. Unplugged it would run and this is how I came to determine it was it.

I was totally blown away by the fact it just died like that..maybe the heating element burnt out or shorted or something as it was raining that day Anyway just putting this up for future MAF troubleshooting.

[B6A4Dave]

Semi-Necrobump..at least its in the same year...

I'm on my ever lasting quest to increase my MPG and I'm under the impression that my MAF is OEM..and it's sounding like Old Guy that the potentially knock-off cheap-o MAF in the end had more of a placebo effect.. Or would you say it helped the car perform?

Another thought, the LTFT and STFT are worthless under WOT conditions anyways seeing as how the car has transitioned from Closed loop to Open Loop.

If a definition is needed of CL to OL transition I'd be happy to explain from a tuner's aspect the strategy and how it works...

Regardless, yea, your fuel trim's dont mean squat diddly in WOT Conditions.. It isn't even using the O2 Sensor at that point.

And if you're 12.6:1 AFR @6k under full boost...I'd say that's pretty damn lean for pump gas and more an AFR I'd target on E85.

There are a few different theories about AFR and tuning, however, I stick with 11.5:1 on Pump gas for various reasons which I dont care to explain unless asked..

Back to the subject at hand...Would you say the new MAF helped your performance and MPG? and can you please (If I somehow missed it) post a link to where you purchased it from!

EDIT: Found this sale http://www.europaparts.com/mass-air-...6a906461l.html

OEM MAF $105

and this.. http://www.ebay.com/itm/NEW-Genuine-...b2180a&vxp=mtr

[drjonez]

...Another thought, the LTFT and STFT are worthless under WOT conditions anyways seeing as how the car has transitioned from Closed loop to Open Loop....

Not on the ME7.5.....WOT is closed loop. Please do some more research and understand the car you are dealing with...

[B6A4Dave]

Not on the ME7.5.....WOT is closed loop. Please do some more research and understand the car you are dealing with...

...Somebody explain to me how that makes any sense....For idle control, emissions and performance. It makes no sense..

Closed loop = With O2 Sensor feed back
Open loop = Commanded off the tune's fueling maps.

[old guy]

As Drjonez already pointed out the ME7.5 controller is capable of maintaining a closed loop condition throughout the full RPM range. It's really a very sophisticated control system. Nothing like something using a narrow band O2 sensor. ME7.5 is constantly making adjustments regardless of throttle position. The only thing that you will see with VCDS when you go WOT is that the real time O2 adaptation will drop to zero and it will shoot for the target A/F. However the ECM is still making adjustments to timing, boost and TB position. If the engine steps out of the parameters set in any of the "protection" maps the ECM will revert to what it considers safe settings.

And to answer your other question: When I installed the MAF sensor it most definitely made a difference in the WOT performance. The only explanation I have is that the WOT performance was well suited for the freak of nature K03 I picked up. That damn thing would boost to 26 psi and hold around 20. Certainly not normal performance for a K03. Unfortunately it starting making a "loud "woooo" noise when cold and I was afraid to keep the thing past the warranty period in case it crapped out completely. It was still a boosting banshee when I pulled it out. Unfortunately a loud banshee.

When I pulled the rebuilt MAF sensor out and and compared the actual sensor to the OEM one I found that it was configured differently. It had a noticeably larger and more tapered airflow opening than the OEM sensor. I think that had something to do with the improved high end performance when coupled with the higher boost but gave me issues with the idle and low end control. I really didn't notice any difference in mileage.

And to answer your last question: Yes this is the MAF sensor I am currently running: Clicky click

[DiertyEuroSpec]

And to answer your last question: Yes this is the MAF sensor I am currently running: Clicky click

As well am I for Europa's price

[drjonez]

...Somebody explain to me how that makes any sense....For idle control, emissions and performance. It makes no sense..

Closed loop = With O2 Sensor feed back
Open loop = Commanded off the tune's fueling maps.

Ha. You sound like me years ago when I started digging into "modern" engine management strategies. Modern ECUs are incredibly complex and the hardware has come a long way, couple that with cheap WB O2 systems and you have a great setup. Given that, closed loop all the time is a no brainer....it makes perfect sense for all cases you outlined.

[19jdog]

will a new maf help us 3.0 guys? hmmm....

[virgoavant]

Ive been watching that europa MAF sensor for some time now...waiting for the right moment to bite. Hope the sale lasts long enough for me to get one.

[B6A4Dave]

Is it worth a shit?

Link!

[alimo20]

I am trying to diagnose this lean code (additive) + brake booster code that i have been getting. I logged my MAF values today and this is what i am getting WOT on the highway. its peaking to 170 g/s. I am not chipped all i have is a HFC in there. I have done a boost leak test and we are good there, but i have not done an intake leak test. Do these numbers seem normal?

Lambda RPM Load Inj. On Time Mass Flow
% /min % ms g/s
0 3040 133.8 15.64 88.86
0 3720 160.9 19.04 113.89
-5.5 3560 152.6 16.32 102.28
-4.7 3520 151.9 16.66 102.72
-3.9 3520 149.6 16.66 101.5
-3.1 3560 148.1 16.32 99.39
-3.9 3600 149.6 16.66 103.97
-4.7 4880 154.9 17.34 143.22
-7 5440 156.4 17.34 162.47
-3.9 5480 151.1 17.68 160.31
-1.6 5560 156.4 19.38 168.86
-0.8 5600 153.4 19.72 164.58
-0.8 5680 154.1 20.06 163.97
-0.8 5720 151.9 19.72 165.39
-0.8 5800 151.1 20.06 167.53
-0.8 5880 148.9 19.72 167.22
-0.8 5960 147.4 19.38 167.22
-0.8 6000 147.4 19.72 170.19
13.3 6040 33.1 3.74 74.28
-19.5 4880 14.3 1.7 0.14
-12.5 4160 13.5 1.7 0.44

[texasboy21]

I am trying to diagnose this lean code (additive) + brake booster code that i have been getting. I logged my MAF values today and this is what i am getting WOT on the highway. its peaking to 170 g/s. I am not chipped all i have is a HFC in there. I have done a boost leak test and we are good there, but i have not done an intake leak test. Do these numbers seem normal?

Lambda RPM Load Inj. On Time Mass Flow
% /min % ms g/s
0 3040 133.8 15.64 88.86
0 3720 160.9 19.04 113.89
-5.5 3560 152.6 16.32 102.28
-4.7 3520 151.9 16.66 102.72
-3.9 3520 149.6 16.66 101.5
-3.1 3560 148.1 16.32 99.39
-3.9 3600 149.6 16.66 103.97
-4.7 4880 154.9 17.34 143.22
-7 5440 156.4 17.34 162.47
-3.9 5480 151.1 17.68 160.31
-1.6 5560 156.4 19.38 168.86
-0.8 5600 153.4 19.72 164.58
-0.8 5680 154.1 20.06 163.97
-0.8 5720 151.9 19.72 165.39
-0.8 5800 151.1 20.06 167.53
-0.8 5880 148.9 19.72 167.22
-0.8 5960 147.4 19.38 167.22
-0.8 6000 147.4 19.72 170.19
13.3 6040 33.1 3.74 74.28
-19.5 4880 14.3 1.7 0.14
-12.5 4160 13.5 1.7 0.44

170g/s is very high for a stock car. Thats big injector tune territory. What is your peak boost?

Stock should be about 130g/s.

[A4SoftWalker]

Here is an easier to read format below. Are you SURE you are not chipped?

[KHARDa4]

Curious...What kind of max gps do you see with the K04?

I saw 195 g/s on my k04 setup.

[alimo20]

Here is an easier to read format below. Are you SURE you are not chipped?

I'm pretty certain i am not chipped. I mean i've never done it and PO did not really seem the type to be mod the car and not tell me.

I also pulled some boost values from TorquePro - I'm not sure they make a ton of sense. here is a short run and you can see it surging to 30 and then holding at 7-9 for a bit. I didn't have a lot of good space to run it out on, heavy traffic this afternoon:

Run 1

Run 2

why would i be seeing surged PSIs like 30s and 20s?

[texasboy21]

^Something isnt right. A stock car cannot flow 170g/s. And your boost it whacky.

If your vac is reading -11inHg at idle you have a massive leak, the app you are using is way off, or like I mentioned above your car is whacky.

[5ktq]

That's besides the point, the map sensor is before the butterfly on these cars so it can't see vacuum at all...

[A4SoftWalker]

I think the app is simply converting mmHg to psi and not accounting for atmospheric pressure of approx 14.7psi perhaps?

[alimo20]

I think the app is simply converting mmHg to psi and not accounting for atmospheric pressure of approx 14.7psi perhaps?

yea i have it set to PSI only. so -11 = 22inHg which i think is good.

and what adjustment? should i set torquePro to subtract 1 atm(14.7psi)? I did that manually here in the latest runs from last night.

Run1:

Run2:

my MAF is still reporting silly things like 160g/s. I am guessing it needs the United Airlines treatment.

[shurur9]

old guy strikes again, I am on the original sensor and have 200,500 miles now

me too at 214K!!

[5ktq]

No that's still totally whack. -14.7psi (vs ambient on earth) would be the pressure in space, it can't be any lower than that.

And there's no MAP sensor!. The car simply can not read manifold pressure. There's a charge pressure sensor before the throttle, so it can see ambient -> boost, but no vacuum, as there never is any vacuum there.

[B6Sticks]

For anyone who still comes across this very interesting and helpful thread, like I did, FCP has a genuine OEM Bosch MAF for $81. Just ordered mine. My car is stage 1 APR with a 034 HFC, FMIC, smoothed intake box/ Piper cross foam drop in filter, plus more little things, has 140k original MAF. Just ordered a new one, my maf is under reading, and the cars performance lacks. I ran with the MAF unplugged and the throttle response was much better and smoother as well as the car pulling much harder, feeling like it should. I already tried cleaning the MAF, made no difference for me, and on the metal parts of the sensor there is corrosion and surface rust spots! What?! I can tell why it's under reading in boost/WOT. Reads 3.3 at idle, but I only see a Max of around 130-140 in 2nd gear WOT. Doesn't throw any codes, but definitely is weak and crapping out slowly. Can't wait to get my new genuine MAF from FCP Euro. Shipped same day! Here's the link -> https://www.fcpeuro.com/products/aud...or-bosch-63123

Sent from my Pixel using Audizine mobile app

[MikTip]

Beware of cheap Chinese maf sensors!

[Tahoe3.0]

looks like it's time for a new one. I believe I messed mine up about a year ago with a wet/oiled K&N drop in and oil residue making its way onto the wire. I have cleaned it with the crc stuff several times with no noticeable change.

switching over to the AEM dry one.

[easyAudi]

*Yes this is the MAF sensor I am currently running: Clicky click

Anyone heard of/used a Bremi 30028 MAF? An equivalent to Bosch? Is it an OEM MAF in Europe? (my hopeful hunch)

Old Guy or anyone that bought a MAF from Europa, linked above: Any chance you recall what brand or even part number you received? (above photos are gone..from ~2014). I received 'Bremi 30028', here in March 2022, box labeled 06A906461LB.

..based on folks' saying Bosch is OEM, I sorta expected Bosch to arrive, but perhaps the inner sensor is indeed Bosch. I don't have any security torx bits, so I can't pull out the sensor to confirm. Given the troubles others have had with non-OEM / non-Bosch MAFs, curious how concerned to be before installing* And prefer not waiting for a replacement.

To clarify for all, I realize the difference between actual OEM and OE-equivalent. Europa's site still says "Brand new, OEM mass air flow sensor for 1.8T", but then brand OE supplier, which I wrongly assumed meant Bosch MAF without audi rings stamped on it...

For completeness:
OEM p/n: 06A906461L.
Bosch equiv p/n: 0280218063.
Arrived: Bremi 30028, box also labeled 06A906461L/B

[ and yes, this thread is olddddd. Specifically curious to heard from those buying from Europa and what arrived.. if Bremi, how it performed ]

[Tahoe3.0]

I have a small collection of MAFs on a shelf that I bought from various parts suppliers, all aftermarket, and each one failed shortly afterwards. One of them lasted 2k miles before it failed. I'll take a look at them this afternoon to see if any are the Bremi brand. I think I did buy the 3.0 version of the Europa one Fletcher linked at some point.

[easyAudi]

I have a small collection of MAFs on a shelf that I bought from various parts suppliers, all aftermarket, and each one failed shortly afterwards. One of them lasted 2k miles before it failed. I'll take a look at them this afternoon to see if any are the Bremi brand. I think I did buy the 3.0 version of the Europa one Fletcher linked at some point.

Thanks so much! If one of your failed MAF was a Bremi, I'll likely hold off installing mine and get a Bosch.

@B6Sticks linked Bosch above that I obviously missed, here. I went with Europa given the positive feedback above and quick shipping, rather than a super slow shipped Bosch that I found..