Date:         Sat, 5 Jul 2014 12:09:54 -0400
Reply-To:     David Beierl <dbeierl@ATTGLOBAL.NET>
Sender:       Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From:         David Beierl <dbeierl@ATTGLOBAL.NET>
Subject:      Re: Update on AFM testing procedure
Comments: To: Harold Teer <teer.vanagon@gmail.com>
Comments: cc: Neil N <musomuso@gmail.com>, Karl Wolz <wolzphoto@q.com>,
          Jarrett Kupcinski <kupcinski@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To:  <CAGwfHKTOx6F8y_VE=tPn50wDpfH+Q4sgQHKekAK=8pXj1xF8zQ@mail.g
              mail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed

At 10:41 AM 7/5/2014, Harold Teer wrote:
>needle moved smoothly on all three. Â Before 
>testing, I took the time to clean all three with 
>CRC Mass Air Flow Sensor Cleaner. Â The inside 
>body of mine with 160K miles was pretty clean 
>already but the one my friend had was terribly gunked up but sparkles now.


Umm...you are aware that those aren't Mass Air 
Flow sensors, nu?  The MAF has a cobweb platinum 
wire or some such strung across the airflow and 
is happiest squeaky clean (burns itself clean 
every time it starts, I think.  Very fragile and 
doesn't move, protected from debris by some sort 
of shield in front of it I imagine?).

Our AFMs are big and heavy and move around like 
crazy.  The wiper was designed to run dry (I 
believe.  I don't think there's lubrication 
embedded in the track other than it being 
graphitish).  But the shaft certainly needs lubrication.

Been much too long since I've been inside one to 
say anything specific, so it's just a heads-up.

Yrs,
David