Romeoxray7

I have read a lot of forms and a lot of talk about different wideband controller kits to use. I'm trying to find out which wideband kid is most compatible with the power FC. And also compatible with the datalogit. Tech edge, innovative, AEM...?
Really appreciate your guys help! Genuinely mean that.
94 rx7 twin seq., hks full exhaust, hks racing intake, hks ignition, power FC

cewrx7r1

iTrader: (2)

NGK Performance Products - Powerdex AFXâ„¢

Better than PLX and Innovate.



But no matter which you use, you should calibrate your DL/PFC/lap top to record what the wideband display shows. It can be from .1 to .3 AFR off.

Banzai-Racing

iTrader: (11)

National backorder on that unit, have not been available for over 8 months, with no ETA.

I stick with the Innovate units, it is what came standard with our Mustang Dyno and I have been using them for over a decade to tune every car that comes through our shop.

thorin

i just spent a day researching widebands and the NGK AFX seems really overrated. It has a very narrow range. Lots of people like it because the same OEM that makes it also makes a very expensive wideband, but there is no real reason why it's "better" than anything.

it used to be cheap, but now its only sold by ballenger, and it's expensive for what it is.

after all the research I did, I found that while innovate may have had reliability problems in the past, they have improved a lot, and they have good features. I chose to buy an innovate LC-2 and the spacer heatsink recommended for hot exhausts.

C. Ludwig

iTrader: (27)

The NGK AFX was made by ECM, which is a leader in lab grade test equipment that supplies many OEs. The AFX was a rebadged ECM AFM1600. It is not on back order but is no longer available as the NGK AFX. NGK now offers their AFRM which is not made by ECM.

Ballenger Motorsports now sells their own rebadged version of the AFM1600 for anyone still wanting this unit. ECM no longer has literature for the AFM1600 on their site though so I'm not sure if Ballenger just bought up some old stock or if they've bought the rights to the product as well.

If you get one, they're hands down the best wideband in the budget range. To do any better you'll need to spend north of $1k for a true lab grade unit. Only downside is the clunky display that is hard to integrate into an interior and make it look half way decent. When guys like Greg Banish, OE and performance tuner, recommend them and they're made by a company with ECM's reputation, the hype is well deserved.

Complaining about the limited range? You run engines on gasoline outside of the range 9 - 16:1 AFR? How's that work for ya?

thorin

I don't see how more range is bad. But it seems like you also mostly like it because it's made by ECM, a company that makes a 1000$ one. why else is it the 'hands down best'? If you can convince me, I'm open to hear any compelling evidence you have.

I was not able to find any independent lab test results on the accuracy and response of any consumer widebands at all. Except for the fordmuscle one, which I will not link to, because it was a poorly conducted test. I emailed ECM and asked for some kind of details on this product. here is my conversation (read from bottom to top):




As far as the narrow range goes, an idling 13b-rew can go close to 16:1, due to the air pump diluting the exhaust. This means you are hitting the edge of the range easily. If you are not using an air pump, the 9-16 range is probably fine.

TomU

iTrader: (11)

14point7?

Sigma Lambda Controller Pure Plus 2.1 | 14Point7

thorin

Alan to, who posts on many boards under toalan is the only manufacturer who has been forthcoming about his testing methods and controller designs. He even sells some in kit form with open source software. His wideband controllers are very interesting. Some have data logging for things like boost, rpm, etc.

I honestly would have bought that one, but I sent him an email with pre sales questions and he took a week to get back to me. During that time, I got impatient and bought the innovate controller instead.

One of the features the 14point7 controllers have is the ability to send a fixed calibration voltage to help you set your analog input transfer function on the dataloggit. I have never been able to get my AEM UEGO gauge to work accurately with the dataloggit, because it won't sit at a single voltage for long enough.

The innovate lc-2 has programmable output voltage ranges, so I believe I should be able to do something similar to force it to a specific output level for setup purposes.

I guess I can say that definitly DON'T recommend the AEM UEGO gauge.

cewrx7r1

iTrader: (2)

Put the sensor in a large jar sealed at top with a few layers of Saran wrap or other cellophane wrap held on with strong rubber bands. Do not let the sensor hit the bottom.

Fill jar with propane until sensor is max richness.
Use a straw or very small hose/tube to blow in until about an AFR of about 11 is read on the WB meter. Move jar around so sensor sweeps through the mixture once in a while. Observe the WB's AFR reading on its display, and observe what your logger is reading.

Change the logger WB setting until you log what the WB reads. Not as easy as a fixed
WB output, but any person worth his salt as a mechanic can do this.

I use 11 AFR because my boost AFRS are around this point.

If this is too much for you, then you do not have the Right Stuff.

C. Ludwig

iTrader: (27)

My opinion is based on the fact that I've owned and/or used most of the budget range wideband controllers on the market and the ECM produced AFX has always given the most consistent and reliable results. My experience with anything that uses a Bosch 4.2 sensor, with the exception of the Daytona Sensors produced Haltech wideband, is very short sensor life. To the point the less expensive Bosch sensor still ends up costing you more due to replacement costs than spending more up front for an NTK sensor. Innovate and AEM in particular love to eat sensors.

My theory with Innovate was always that they, to this day, choose to drive the sensor pump cell with a digital signal when the sensor is designed to be driven with analog. My results over the years with Innovate products I would consider inconsistent at best. Combine that with eating sensors on the regular and warranty headaches from the years we sold their products when Haltech used to rebadge them and I decided no more years ago. I've heard they've gotten better but I won't be going back. It's a shame because I like their Logworks software. I've had Innovate, and other, widebands on a chassis dyno running parallel with a ECM AFM-1000 with the real deal $500 lab grade NTK sensor and, again, the results were inconsistent. Sometimes they would match up, sometimes not.

AEM, IMO, works pretty well and their results line up consistently with the ECM combo, but they eat a lot of sensors.

FJO I've run on a couple cars because years ago they were about the only thing in the budget range that could use an NTK sensor. I've found the ones I've used to read lean over stoichiometric and that leads you to tune the car very rich if you believe it. They no longer are available, so it's a moot point I suppose.

Haltech's Daytona Sensors built wideband with the Bosch sensor has always worked well for me. Good sensor life and good repeatable results. Only downside is that they're expensive when you factor in a display gauge. If you're running a Haltech ECU and are using CAN connection with the ECU, then their wideband makes a lot of sense since you get diagnostic features with the CAN connection you wouldn't get with an analog connection.

The NGK AFX has always just worked. My personal unit is many years old and still uses the original NTK sensor. It's output has been consistent when compared to the true lab grade instruments over the years. Again, IMO, hands down the best unit in the budget range of widebands. And yes,part of that logic is that it is made by ECM. They do auto diagnostics equipment at a very high level as their business. Their market is laboratories and OEs and they just happen to offer a budget project for the hobbyists. I'd rather drive a budget Ferrari than a high end Ford. Same goes for makes like Techedge and 14.7. I've found what works for me and has worked well for my customers over the years. No need to reinvent the wheel and try something else.

vtjballeng

Interesting discussion. I am curious what could be presented to satisfy this query? What actual information do you want to see?:

As far as the comparison tests, none currently exist without bias or significant technical fallacy. A well run test would easily run into the $50k+ range which isn't in the budget for magazines. Magazines & media sources usually run "reviews" as partially paid advertising. It would be nice to have some solid independent testing out there.

ECM does make high end calibration equipment and serves nearly the entire OEM & calibration market. $500k+ calibration equipment and benchmark level testing equipment is their common market. They are in at the ground level, working with manufacturers on development & testing equipment.

Companies like Innovate & PLX reverse engineer their solutions. Aftermarket products have gotten better over time and the market took something of a leap with the 4.9 due to better published data and existing implementation experience at the aftermarket level. Generally, the aftermarket is still not at the stage of delivering benchmark results over years of sensor use. The ECM hardware, including the AFR500, does.

If you are tuning with an air pump in place, you will need to compensate in any case. ECM is able to modify the AFR500 for additional range (AFM1600).

The AFR500 (& AFX before it) has two fixed output voltages it outputs during the timed boot up procedure. This allows you to validate any voltage offsets and your transfer function in your datalogger. Details in the manual http://www.bmotorsports.com/download...500_Manual.pdf .

thorin

yeah, I read about this modification. couple hundred dollars, iirc. Unfortunately, the combined cost makes this a very expensive device. right now the canadian dollar is only 75us cents and for the price difference, I can get the car on a dyno for a few hours, which will help me ID any offsets my LC-2 may have.

hmm, good to know, didn't read that far.

vtjballeng

The Canadian dollar issue is hitting hard for a lot of people right now. In the longer term future, I expect a wider range option for the AFR500. In general though, most aren't tuning above 16:1 so much as monitoring. Some rare applications like lean burn stratified charge engines, some newer DI engines, and apparently air pump based examples do move above this range. Though even those applications aren't typically under power at this AFR, rather they are in part or off-throttle operation.

The Innovate ground problems are, unfortunately, not a fixed offset. I've worked with their units in the past and have worked with a lot of tuners who thought the same (just compensate for the offset), only to find that the offset was variable. We had to chalk that one up to experience and move to more better hardware.

If, for some reason, you want to try to identify offsets in the LC-2, don't burn dyno time doing it. Use a butane or propane torch with the flame out and you can do testing to try and track down the values where you aren't soaking dyno dollars. As the LC-2 is programmable you can output fixed values at fixed points to attempt a correction. Just bear in mind the point about variable offsets (moves with battery voltage, noise, & more).

thorin

Is it dangerous to fill a jar with propane or butane and air and then stick a heated o2 sensor in there?

vtjballeng

Never tried that one. Butane ignition temperature is 405C & Propane is 470C. You will undoubtedly have a mix of air and propane in the jar unless you create a purge system. The heater element in the sensor may get up to this temperature and ignite the gaseous mix.

So, in short, yes it is a potentially dangerous proposition if you are nearby and unprotected. Especially if you choose a glass jar. I would recommend other testing methods.

Ian_D

That reminds me of what I used to do as a kid: put a hole in the top and bottom of a metal can/box with a lid, fill it with gas from a gas cooker, light the gas coming out at the lid then wait for the whole thing to go bang, sending the lid way into the air. When I grew up I graduated to bigger bangs, but that's another story.

The O2 sensor should heat to 600F (316C) or thereabouts, below the autoignition temperatures of Butane and Propane, but there is still a risk of things going wrong if you use the container of Butane/Propane method. As long as you use a tin with large opening (with or without a lid) in the open air and don't lean over it then the method outlined above should be reasonably safe (as suggested, you may need to be made of 'The Right Stuff', whether that is daring or stupidity I leave people to decide themselves). Just passing unlit blowtorch gas over the sensor may work too.

As for sensor failure rates, do these depend on where it sits? My first thought was to put mine in the downpipe where it bends under the firewall and I'm going to check that out with what others have done.