MAFF sensor.

"Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food" apparently. MAF, on the other hand, stands for "Mass Air Flow"...

HTH =B9

--=20 Lordy.UK

=B9 "Hope That Helps" :)

Yes, sort of got that one. But MAFF?

"Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food" apparently. MAF, on the other hand, stands for "Mass Air Flow"...

That's what I believe. MAFF has one F too many to be an acronym for a car part. Mike.

A mistake? Mike.

Ooh, superscript. L33t.

Mass Air Flow, Fool?

Is this in relation to the BMW? Could it be a typo or misspelling? Not that I doubt you but I don't think I've seen any references to a sensor with 2 F's before.

In the case of a broken one, the following two suggestions might be appropriate.

May Affect Fuel Flow ? Many Arabs Feeling Flush.... :-)

Isn't it actually now DEFRA(department for environment, farming and rural affairs), and AMM (air mass meter)?

It was in a reasonably professional document. Had it been maff rather than MAFF I'd have assumed it was just a nickname. So I'll just ignore it. ;-)

AFM Air Flow Meter

Might After Five Fog's

Peter Hill gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

AFM, AMM and MAF all measure the air slightly differently, don't they?

Is a mistake perpetuated by idiots, in the same way that people use the=20 term "pattern parts" instead of "patent parts".

--=20 Lordy.UK

Pattern / Patent - now there's a debate....

Lordy.UK gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

Umm, no.

Non-OEM parts _are_ "pattern". It's impossible to patent something like a car front wing.

Of course you can.

A quick look on Google reveals that Volvo once took action against a company for infringement of copyright on someone selling reproduced front wings without a licence.

The term "patent parts" comes from them being exactly that, parts that are made under licence from the original manufacturer. It's a phrase that morphed via chinese whispers into "pattern parts" with all manner of accompanying stupid reasons for why it should be "pattern", none of which make sense.

It's been used wrongly for so long though that the wrong useage is now the norm - simply because no-one remembers it's wrong.

I'm clearly not as old as you, but I've never heard anyone use the term 'patent parts'.

Interesting debate, here's my non-sensical reason:

I know someone who worked as a pattern maker. His job was taking things and working out how to make moulds so that they could be cast in a foundry. I have no idea what he made, but probably absolutely anything you wanted.

Non original parts being called 'pattern' parts makes much more sense to me than 'patent' parts.

Somone makes a pattern, then starts churning out parts. Seems unlikely to me that they'd obtain a licence. Some of the pattern parts I've bought for cars did the same job but were completely different from the original manufacturer's ones.

Well I've been around the motoring scene for a very long time and non OEM have always been known as pattern. Ie parts made to the same pattern but not necessarily *identical* to the original.

Lordy.UK gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

Copyright infringement is not the same as patent infringement.

A patent requires something inherently new and innovative about a design. Not merely a slightly different curve to the wheelarch.

What complete and utter bollocks.

Miniscule Airbag Fault Finder