most of the prices are way off, the innovate is a lot cheaper than that too. they're listing msrp, not reality
possibly a few.........:headspin: actually i'm hopefully getting her back this weekend from getting tuned :dribble:
Come one now...10 samples is more than accurate enough for the DIY'er with an in cabin WB. Don't be ridiculous. Besides, a peak-and-hold is really all you need anyway. ..Now...Price wise I stand corrected....
...Well I did not realize Innovate was comparably priced. A few years a ago the LM-1 was double the ZT-2....plus you get Predator plug in. I did always think the Innovate was a more quality component but for the price difference (again, 4 years ago) it wasn't worth it. Regardless, just putting my $.02 out there on the subject. We're not benching these motors guys, lets just keep in mind the real motivation which is datalogging. The sniffers on dynos aren't even as accurate as the worst WBO2 kit available.
Orderd the wideband from Moes today..Talked to Bob and he was really great to deal with..Was very informative about the products and took time to answere all my questions.I would highly recommend doing buiness with him...Now.. after I orderd unit I am thinking why not spend the extra money and just get the XD16...Think maybe I will call back tomorrow and see if I can change to the XD16.lol..Maybe I should have that this through more eh.
Wade, have you actually been able to get the Innovate LogWorks to recoginze your LC-1? All my research and bugging both Diablo and Innovate have yet to yeild an answer. On the Innovate forum there is a 6 month thread that leads to no answers yet. I have a LM-1, mainly went this direction so I could log in the rig without a computer. Ordered a digital readout with built-in kill switch from Dynotune as hopefully some additional safety for running the spray. Be sure and follow the recalibrating instructions for the sensor. Be safe.
if you look at the graph that i put up, you'll see that the accuracy was off by about .75 in that test, which is a lot when you're tuning. there's a big difference between 11.2 and 12.0, which is basically the range of error that is possible with that gauge. i'm not willing to bet my motor on "it's good enough", and most people i know aren't either.
No just like others still waiting for the 2 to be compatable but this day in age the Diablo datviewer 3.1 is just as good but would be nice to overlap your AF with your RPMS, you know what else would be nice is for it to show WHICH GEAR your in when datalogging
You have to understand that they're basing their deviation of AFR accuracy to the ms of response time. That means that since the processing is slower they give it a .75 AFR offset which is misleading. For example, if it's 400ms slower than a 100ms unit that means the difference in AFR could be .75 off from real time to outputed time. Whatever, It's actually moot because I still believe the Innovate is a more quality application. Like I said, I was just throwing that out there. I was surprised to learn that Innovate has come down so much because a while ago their LM-1 was 3 times the price as the Zeitronix unit. Zeitronix uses a Bosch UEGO sensor. It's plenty accurate. Don't believe all the graphs you read.
Umm, especially the Ford Muscle results. Note that they didn't include or make available any raw data and didn't really describe their test methods. Basically what you got was their subjective conclusions. Some of those test for accuracy were done by holding a sensor by hand up to the nozzle of the canister of known gas mix and opening the valve... No doubt though that the Innovate products are top quality products. So are some of the others that didn't fare nearly so well in that shootout.
actually they did describe the test methods if you read the entire article, i just put up the results. a lot of people (including manufacturer's that were rated poorly) complained about these issues and they were addressed in subsequent articles/issues of the magazine. i don't have the links readily available for those follow-up articles at the moment though, i'll see if i can find them. this though was the first shoot out of its kind and it's good to see someone actually addressing the question other than those that make the products (who of course think that they're the best). vvvv90-i understand what you're saying about processing time and lag, but the reality is that if it's .75 off it's .75 off, i honestly don't care if it's because the processor is slower or it's inaccurate, it's still wrong and that's a huge number to be off by. if i go lean for just a second i want to know about it as fast as possible. so even if it's lag that they're measuring as a error in reading, it's not acceptable imo.
Well then maybe I'll just shut up and eat my words. Last time I read a wideband shootout A.) There wasn't even that many on the market and B.) Zeitronix came out just as accurate as the LM-1, so I'm not going to say anymore. However, being .75 off is definitely not acceptable, but that's not exactly what I meant. What I meant was the perceived curve at any given point in time.
