Has anyone seen this wideband wideband O2 system

Isn't cheap, but at $279 the best I have seen. I'm not sure it is fast enough since the sample rate is 74/sec seems it will fall short at upper RPMs.

It includes the output to simulate the narrowband O2. Should allow accurate self tuning unless I am missing something has it all for $279

Another one suggested to me is Another O2 system

But the one I linked first allows multiple inputs (RPM, Throttle Position sensor, MAP, Boost, AFR, etc) to be collected and linked in time.

Seems the other has has narrowband output, but I'm not sure it provides these collection capabilities.

 

No one has an opinion?

 

I have the Innovate LM-1. Although, had I known before I ordered, I would have ordered the LC-1. You can hook LC-1 directly into HP Tuners. You can do the same with the LM-1, but the LC-1 is cheaper. My experience has been good with the Innovate product. G/L.

 

Thanks but doesn't that require a board to convert RPM data? The one I linked seems to have it all for $279.

I am asking I am not certain

Thanks for input

 

If you have HP Tuners, then all you need in the LC-1. HPT will log everything for you. If you don't have it, then you need the LM-1 and the rpm converter. From my experience, it's better off to have HPT and the LC-1. But if you don't plan on tuning at all, that may not work for you. Good luck.

 

The Zeitronix Zt-2 seems to be the best bang for the buck. I'm interested in this one also. I did a search on here and there is not much info.

 

I guess I didnt specify. My intention is to tune my NA LT1 and then a supercharged LT1. I presently have Datamaster, Tunercat and would like a wideband to aid in 'proper' tuning.

My excuse is that this should save dyno expense and provide similiar results for NA car and get the Supercharged setup close enough to justify the expenditure.

It is a hobby so doesn't make sound economic sense but as a hobby it isn't that bad I hope anyway.

Thanks for input was extremely helpful.

 

I use the Dynojet Wide Band Commander. 2-1/16" gauge on the A-pillar. Logging capability built in too. Very nice setup!

 

That is a nice setup but from what I saw it is $579. I am sure it has great feature but I am trying to do it on the cheap. Since I have a laptop I have a larger investment that should save some by not requiring a guage.

Thanks for the input

 

Check in the N2O TEch forum. One of the supporting vendors there was promoting a dual-band wide-band controller. I asked him how it compared to the Altronics O2 Alert, he indicated the unit cost less and had more features. Might be worth a "search".

This is the Altronics unit:

http://www.altronicsinc.com/pages/o2alert.html

 

I think mine was only $475 or so. Still expensive I guess, but worth it IMO.

 

Great ideas but makes the @279 look cheap now. The others are great IF you need the features, personally I do NOT.

I do like the one that can be dual channel but I can 2 X 279 and still beat that setup. If I need or wanted to shut down at a lean point that only requires an op amp and bingo.

Thanks again for inputs but from what others have suggested and my requirements I havent seen anything that matches the setup I suggested.

Thanks again

 

"Unequaled state of the art digital technology. No, not the least expensive, but unsurpassed pro quality monitoring accuracy at a very amateur price. "

Ok tell me what the 'digital technology' system will achieve that the system I mentioned will not?

"Something you won't get with the lesser priced analog choices."

Ok be specific tell me what I will get that is lacking for the other system. I want to make the right decision and facts will make the decision obvious.

"The old guard state of the art Horriba (analog) is not in the same ballpark as this digital Innovate product."

Wow from your post I can't wait to read all the features it has that the system I asked about doesn't.

I DEFINATELY look forward to hearing the information that verifies your statements.

Thanks
Jack

 

Ok so the LM-1 costs more than the alternative I suggested. So, given that is a fact where are the specifics on it’s capabilities compared to the wideband system I linked? I stated I feel the unit I linked is slow how fast (samples/second is LM1)?

So now you are saying the Innovate system is closer to twice as expensive, so what superior capabilities justify the additional cost? The system I linked has RPM capability and other inputs that we all know after reading the link.

The $279 unit is a wideband unit, and is all that is required to collect tuning data.

The price includes the wideband, controller and software for data collection. What are you talking about? It has all that is needed to collect WIDEBAND data with RPM. Did you not read the link I provided or not understand it?

What else is REQUIRED? Yes many sensors could be added, but to accurately tune AFR the linked system is sufficient unless someone shows specific data required that it will not provide.

The unit I posted is a wideband. Yes the stock units are a simple switch. That is why we have this discussion.

I requested information about units. If one unit is superior here is the time to CLEARLY show examples NOT manufacture’s claims, or smoke screens.

Gary so are you telling me the LM1 will allow fuel trim measurements and changes?

Using Nyquist theorem 74 cycles a second will ALLOW AFR measurements at ~4400 RPM for ONLY each bank!

To be able to determine idle trims of course means ~4400/4 = 1100 RPM. So to determine cylinder trims at WOT and 4400 RPM would require as a MINIMUM a sensor that is 4 * 74 cycles a second. Then of course we would have to discuss how to hold an RPM point to collect sufficient data for the data to be statistically sufficient to be useful to change trims. To say the least that is another can of worms.

IF a system is superior it should be easy for anyone to be specific about the system without anger or other silliness often seen on line.


I don’t care if one is analog or digital I only care about price and performance. I consider it a black box and standing outside I only care of results. I am a Electrical Controls engineer so please save the hyperbola, I help write the BS so many hang their hats on.

Sounds like you are saying it is better, but you can’t tell us how? Well just trust me won't cut it.

In God we trust, all others pay cash, and show data to prove their point. I am an Engineer and not impressed without DATA.

What is sample rate? How many sensor samples read per system output? etc.

What is that supposed to mean? Seems to say the design takes into account component tolerances? All decent designs do.

So how does this compare to sensor calibration contained in the other unit?

What wideband sensor does it use? I was told they both use the same wideband sensor. Since you do not believe this what sensors does each unit use?

How is the LM1's calibration superior? Seems both will use the same principals from physics.

Explain I bet many would love to hear all about the items you brought up.

If you answer questions and provide specifics it might. I’m sure many would love to hear the details, as you have posted you have simply caused more questions and made the LM 1 look inferior from your lack of specifics and reliance on buzz phrases.

Another example of specifics people want to hear data on.

I have no axe to grind. I want specifics. If one is superior I would like to see the data many love their unit, but no one has shown me data to justify their claims.

As a controls engineer I help write the claims being stated here. Sales promotion is important for sales of any unit, BUT the wording is always mere play on words and seldom is any product much different than the other.

Unless of course you ask those that own it, then or software with patent pending algorithms become superior to even Eienstein’s theories.

I asked for specifics, and would still like to read specifics. If you can NOT provide SPECIFICS then simply do not respond. I personally do not care what system is best. I want SPECIFICS to evaluate the systems, many simply repeat the manufacture’s claim which tells me that buyer does not understand the process they are trying to discuss.

Thanks for the insight.

 

I figured you would understand what I stated. Now you want to compare a better unit with suggested options to a bare bones alternative without any options. Apples to oranges. I guess I didn't explain it well or you misunderstood.

I requested information about units. If one unit is superior here is the time to CLEARLY show examples NOT manufacture’s claims, or smoke screens.

Smoke screen? LOL. I'm not selling anything here, just bringing to your attention a superior product. No, not my opinion. The idea was to get you (if interested) pointed in the right direction if you chose to learn more. It is easier to say I am merely blowing smoke than to do the homework and prove otherwise.

Sounds like you are saying it is better, but you can’t tell us how?

Not at all. As posted, beyond discussion here. If you want to learn more, why wear out my legs (or fingers)? I have nothing to gain if you buy Innovate.

Seems to say the design takes into account component tolerances? All decent designs do.

Not true. Homework will bear this out unless you chose to in this instance, believe mfr. claims.

The $279 unit is a wideband unit, and is all that is required to collect tuning data.
I don’t care if one is analog or digital I only care about price and performance. I consider it a black box and standing outside I only care of results.

Several pros that understand the capabilities of the LM-1 have chosen it for that reason. The average enthusiast is primarily concerned with just AFR, and an average of several cylinders at that. As an engineer I'd think you'd appreciate superior engineering and not label it just a 'black box'.

EDIT: Was just attemptiong to help out, not become a whipping post.