Autometer Wideband

[redrumracer]

How accurate are autometer's wideband gauges?

i like the cobalt series and want to go with it but function and accuracy>looks imo.

[N3v]

get an AEM uego. I don't know about the autometer wideband in particular, but some of their other stuff is kinda cheap. the aem uego is tried and true a hundred times over by megasquirt guys.

[ben91]

get an AEM uego. I don't know about the autometer wideband in particular, but some of their other stuff is kinda cheap. the aem uego is tried and true a hundred times over by megasquirt guys.

Eh, no. The AEM sucks compared to the Innovate LC1, which is what is more commonly used by everyone including MS guys.

[simontibbett]

Yeah Innovate LC1 ftw.

And why exactly do you need a wideband?

[redrumracer]

Yeah Innovate LC1 ftw.

And why exactly do you need a wideband?

i prefer to get all the supporting equipment before i turbo my car, cause turbocharging it is the easy part.

[simontibbett]

i prefer to get all the supporting equipment before i turbo my car, cause turbocharging it is the easy part.

Oh ok

[N3v]

Eh, no. The AEM sucks compared to the Innovate LC1, which is what is more commonly used by everyone including MS guys.

:facepalm: eh, no. the LC1 sucks compared to the AEM, thank you very much. I've only owned an AEM, but the general consensus after lengthy threads on miataturbo about this, plenty of people have owned lc1's and had no problems with them, but generally they're way more finnicky about their wiring, and their sensors go bad more often than AEM.

I facepalm because this isn't the first time you've acted like I'm an idiot over your own opinion before.

[simontibbett]

:facepalm: eh, no. the LC1 sucks compared to the AEM, thank you very much. I've only owned an AEM, but the general consensus after lengthy threads on miataturbo about this, plenty of people have owned lc1's and had no problems with them, but generally they're way more finnicky about their wiring, and their sensors go bad more often than AEM.

I facepalm because this isn't the first time you've acted like I'm an idiot over your own opinion before.

I agree as well LC1 is better though, not from opinions.

[tbone heller]

How accurate are autometer's wideband gauges?

i like the cobalt series and want to go with it but function and accuracy>looks imo.

I have the Autometer. It seems to work OK, but I have not had anything to compare it to.

[RotorNutFD3S]

Look, the thread is not about LC1 vs. UEGO, it concerns the accuracy of the AutoMeter gauges. You want to have that debate? Start your own thread, but keep it civil because it's already looking like it's headed for disaster.

We tried an AutoMeter unit a while back on a buddy's turbo'd Integra, comparing it with the WBo2 readings off the dyno, it was a little slower in response, but pretty accurate all the way through. I have all Cobalts in my car, but I like the simple looks of the AEM unit I already have compared to it. I think the Cobalt would be too many colors going on. :lol:

[tbone heller]

I have the Autometer. It seems to work OK, but I have not had anything to compare it to.

You can see it here: http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2884930/7

[ben91]

:facepalm: eh, no. the LC1 sucks compared to the AEM, thank you very much. I've only owned an AEM, but the general consensus after lengthy threads on miataturbo about this, plenty of people have owned lc1's and had no problems with them, but generally they're way more finnicky about their wiring, and their sensors go bad more often than AEM.

I facepalm because this isn't the first time you've acted like I'm an idiot over your own opinion before.

:lol: you don't know sh!t, stop acting like you do.

I've told you before that I have owned both. The UEGO is crap compared to the LC1. It's got less useful range, it's slower, it's less accurate, it doesn't datalog, etc etc etc. 99% of problems with innovate is people are too dumb to wire them correctly.

Seriously, you might be happy with your UEGO, but that doesn't mean it's the best purchase.


Here's a wideband shootout

http://www.fordmuscle.com/archives/2007/06/WidebandShootout/index.php

Pay the $8 and you can see all the pretty diagrams that show why the LC1 is the best consumer level WB and that the UEGO is crap.

I have the text saved from the article but unfortunately no graphics:



Air-Fuel Meter Shootout (continued)



As previously discussed, air/fuel data is most useful when correlated with other key parameters like throttle position, manifold absolute pressure, and RPM. And this sort of correlation absolutely requires data logging. So, even though all of these units feature useful real-time displays, the most important parameters are response time and the quality of the logging solution. Response time is critical because it's possible to have accurate data, but, due to high latency/delay, the data is essentially in the wrong column of your fuel map.


Results - At a Glance
Listed below, from A to Z, are the eight meters we tested. All use the Bosch LSU4 wideband oxygen sensor. There was a surprising amount of variation between the various units, in terms of both accuracy and response time. We also rated the ease of use, display, and included software. The participants were AEM, Dynojet, FAST, FJO, Innovate, NGK, PLX, and Zeitronix.

AEM
The AEM unit was accurate during our tests, but with no real data logging capability, of limited usefulness for actual tuning. It was average for response time.

AFX (NGK)
The NGK unit exhibited low scores for accuracy, and it was missing the required wire for analog output. It does not have data logging capabilities. Considering NGK makes their own wideband sensors, it is a surprise this unit ships with a Bosch sensor.

Dynojet
The Dynojet unit was hard to set up, and the included logging software was very limited. The Dynojet exhibited the slowest response time tested.

FAST
The FAST unit had internal datalogging, but no separate logging analysis software. This perhaps makes it less useful for complex tuning, but is really "to the point" for those wanting no-frills wideband tuning. Setting up the analog outputs was somewhat difficult. Display is nice and intuitive. More on the FAST unit.

FJO
The FJO unit had tricky wiring for the sensor, the controller, and the analog outputs. It was also difficult to setup the analog outputs with the included configuration software. The included logging software was counterintuitive.

Innovate
The Innovate unit was accurate, exhibited the fastest response time, and included very good analysis software. Innovate claims to be the only truly digital unit, and the high accuracy and low latency seem to support their claims. Setup and wiring was complex and somewhat confusing.

PLX
The PLX M300 does not include logging software, and exhibited accuracy at +/1 AFR (the worst tested). Note that PLX has commented below, and believes we did not wire their unit properly in that we used a common ground for all units.

Zeitronix
The Zeitronix exhibited accuracy of +/- .54 AFR, and gradual lean drift under some conditions. The included logging software was relatively difficult and lacked features. Note that Zeitronix indicated we may have reviewed an outdated unit (see comments below.)


The only regret we have is that we couldn't effectively simulate long-term sensor "aging." Aging is mostly due to oxidation of the sensors internals and fouling of its ceramic elements. Operating conditions and fuel type are big factors in the aging process. Exposure to lead in race gas, metallic elements in octane booster additives, oil or carbon fouling and really high operating temperatures contribute to rapid aging, and a resulting loss of sensor accurancy. Because of aging it is important to have an air fuel ratio meter that can be calibrated. The common type of calibration is called a free air calibration. This is when the meter compares the output of the sensor to what it should be when exposed to a know oxygen content gas, air. If an air fuel ratio meter is lacking the ability to calibrate, the sensor should be replace at regular intervals. The trouble is when should the sensor be replaced? It takes some experience to know when this is appropriate.

We did try to emulate this idea using a variety of old and damaged sensors we had laying around. With one of these sensors, the Innovate XD-16 would show an error code indicating that the sensor was bad. However, when we connected the same damaged sensor to any of the analog gauges they read as much as 3 AFR off. Again, the obvious question is: If your gauge can't tell you when a sensor is bad, how could you ever trust it?

Optimizing Wideband Sensor Usage
Other things to keep in mind to ensure proper sensor function and longevity are exhaust back pressure, rich mixtures, and under/over heating.

A high exhaust backpressure forces more exhaust into the sensors pump cell which can cause an air fuel ratio meter to read richer than what the engines really running. Turbo engines run a relatively high amount of backpressure in the exhaust manifold before the turbine, making them a poor place to locate the sensor.

Missfires due to a malfunctioning or underpowered ignition or an extremely rich mixture can cause false lean readings because unburned liquid fuel in droplets block the small hole leading to the sensors pump cell.

A wideband sensor should not be placed in the exhaust stream and left unheated. The hole to the pump cell can quickly become clogged and contaminated by exhaust byproducts, especially during a start cycle from a cold engine. The sensor can also be damaged by exposing it to temperatures above 700 degrees C, like those typically before the turbine in turbo engines. You never want to place a sensor there anyway due to the aforementioned issues with sensor accuracy and backpressure. Lastly you don't want to place the sensor so far away from the engine that its 10 watt internal heater cannot keep the sensor hot enough.

[Doppelgänger]

I'm just curious to know how often do WB02s need to be calibrated and what is their average lifespan? I have a WB02 with my Hydra that helps the autofune settings and it wouldn't be a good thing if it were to start going bad. Been on the car for 3 yrs/35k miles.

[ben91]

your hydra wb should never need any calibration. 100k is a reasonable interval for street driven cars. maybe 60-75k for yours since you run on track and auto-x more frequently than most. if you ever run leaded fuel, remove the sensor.The hydra should only give EGO a limited authority such as if the sensor is dead, it won't pull your fuel table too far out. also, you should not be running closed loop in boost anyway so the likelyhood of engine damage due to sensor error is very mininal.

[N3v]

:lol: you don't know sh!t, stop acting like you do.

[random irrelevant butthurt whining about AEM's not datalogging.]

hey, you know what? you're a jackoff. He asked about that sensor, and I made a recommendation. A mod on miataturbo told me to buy an AEM, and I like it. I know tons of people use LC1's, hell, a good friend of mine is buying one. I personally have just heard tons of stories about 'I bought an LC1, it broke [quickly], then I bought an AEM, it works great after [a long time]. I've heard similar stories about an AEM where they replaced it with an LC1, but I see it the other way around more often. You could have respected my opinion, then voiced your own, but instead you chime in with 'eh, no' like some pompous **** stabber.

also, when you shot down my posts in another thread by calling me an idiot about my megasquirt knowledge, you conveniently didn't respond to the part where I asked you to tell me what was wrong about my tuning. You just came, took a big steamy **** on the thread, then left.