AEM UEGO wideband accuracy??
Thread Starter
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,067
Likes: 7
From: Home of the Rolex 24
AEM UEGO wideband accuracy??
I know this isnt exactly the right forum. But since its my particular model RX7 here it goes:Well I have searched in all the forums for any threads pertaining to a comparison test done between widebands on the dyno or street to validate the accuracy of the measurements of this set up ( aem wideband sensor and gauge) . http://shopping.lightningmotorsports...69&cat=0&page= Any info. or outside website concrete testing links would be appreciated. Thanks G
Its not supposed to. It does though. Thus my conclusion that it is "inaccurate". Id dig up the thread but Im teaching turbos 101 right now in the "my turbos sound like a dremmel" thread.
I am unsure. I know very little about widebands except that I want one and I had heard the AEM UEGO was inaccurate richer than 11.0
the fact of the matter is you will not spend any time richer than that anyways. Optimal SAFE tuning for rotaries lies somewhere between 11 and 12 depending on who you listen to and what your dyno says. Were you to read richer youd need to lean it out anyways. But, please disregard my statement as I may have bitten off more than I can chew. Ill go do some searching.
the fact of the matter is you will not spend any time richer than that anyways. Optimal SAFE tuning for rotaries lies somewhere between 11 and 12 depending on who you listen to and what your dyno says. Were you to read richer youd need to lean it out anyways. But, please disregard my statement as I may have bitten off more than I can chew. Ill go do some searching.
Thread Starter
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,067
Likes: 7
From: Home of the Rolex 24
Originally Posted by Barban
I am unsure. I know very little about widebands except that I want one and I had heard the AEM UEGO was inaccurate richer than 11.0
the fact of the matter is you will not spend any time richer than that anyways. Optimal SAFE tuning for rotaries lies somewhere between 11 and 12 depending on who you listen to and what your dyno says. Were you to read richer youd need to lean it out anyways. But, please disregard my statement as I may have bitten off more than I can chew. Ill go do some searching.
the fact of the matter is you will not spend any time richer than that anyways. Optimal SAFE tuning for rotaries lies somewhere between 11 and 12 depending on who you listen to and what your dyno says. Were you to read richer youd need to lean it out anyways. But, please disregard my statement as I may have bitten off more than I can chew. Ill go do some searching.
Trending Topics
OK what I have found is that the accuracy has about 1% to do with the guage and everything to do with the sensor. Bosch makes wideband sensors and Im betting thats one of the nice(more accurate) ones on the market. Bosch makes high quality stuff. Bosch's sensor reads down to about a 10afr. So the Uego would infact be accurate down at those levels it simply will not read on the analog display youll have to read digital. Hows that?
Vagina Junction
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 1,838
Likes: 0
From: Seattle, WA
Only the gauge-based AEM UEGO is innacurate below 11, as it is the components inside the gauge that do the calculation and outputs. The ECU-based version is accurate through the whole scale of A/F.
Thread Starter
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 3,067
Likes: 7
From: Home of the Rolex 24
Originally Posted by Barban
PLX is where its at. If i could id swing an R500.
Yeah I had guages but now im hiding all my electronics in a neurotic kindof way. Shoe fits though. If I ever save enough money for the PLX R500 I would mount it in the glove. Thats my dream. I think the UEGO is a great choice and were I going with a guage thats the one id get.
I don't know where the misconception is coming from, but everything I've seen is the gauge reads from 10:1 to 18:1. The blinky lights around the perimeter only go down to 11, but the numerical readout reads down to 10:1.
Just tried to get AEM tech support on the phone to verify, but they were busy. I'll try again later.
If someone can post a link with hard data that it isn't accurate down that low, I'll be happy. Until then, I'm not sure why people keep posting this myth up. Hell, it's a Bosch O2 sensor that many widebands run.
I'm likely gonna get the AEM wideband, since I dig it going in a gauge location (I HATE the clunky boxes a lot of the other widebands use for display) and the price is VERY reasonable - like $280.
Pretty much any wideband will have its life shortened by leaded gas. Good thing is Bosch sensors are cheap enough to replace if you do foul one out.
Dale
Just tried to get AEM tech support on the phone to verify, but they were busy. I'll try again later.
If someone can post a link with hard data that it isn't accurate down that low, I'll be happy. Until then, I'm not sure why people keep posting this myth up. Hell, it's a Bosch O2 sensor that many widebands run.
I'm likely gonna get the AEM wideband, since I dig it going in a gauge location (I HATE the clunky boxes a lot of the other widebands use for display) and the price is VERY reasonable - like $280.
Pretty much any wideband will have its life shortened by leaded gas. Good thing is Bosch sensors are cheap enough to replace if you do foul one out.
Dale
Lives on the Forum
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 14,716
Likes: 10
From: San Lorenzo, California
I prefer the PLX M-250 with gauge option...but I'm sure there's little functional or accuracy differences between the widebands currently available. They all use the same Bosch sensor.
It comes down to the ease of installation and secondary features to me, as well as manf support.
It comes down to the ease of installation and secondary features to me, as well as manf support.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
