[Skydive]

Hi guys,

I've been reading a lot here about the AFR data and the deltas between the logs coming from the Procede, and data coming directly from sensors. This is of concern to me. I have a pretty solid understanding of AFRs and what they mean, and I really appreciate the work that Shiv and his team do with the Procede, which is an incredible achievement. However, I'd like to know just how accurate the AFR data we can get from the Procede is. If it's truly inaccurate, I don't see how one can reliably tune using it as a basis and I am uncomfortable trying to do any sort of Lamda tuning until I better understand what's coming from the tool I have. I don't have an outboard wideband at the moment, so I'd like to see some data from the detractors who allude to inadequacies in the Procede data. So far, I have seen only veiled references.

I will say this: In the Audi 2.7T realm, we learned that wideband data gathered from tailpipe sensors, or hanging from dynos is notoriously innacurate for a number of reasons. It is important to use data gathered at real-world part throttle loads (ie: on the road), and this requires properly placed sensors. To do this, we typically used a proper wideband in a purpose placed, pre-catalyst bung. (That said, it was especially important on the Audis because the factory sensors were narrowband.)

If you have no data to share, (accompanied by logs which reflect it), I'd prefer you not share at all. You're welcome to interpret and comment upon whatever real data does show up, but please, lets make this a learning opportunity rather than yet another flash vs. piggyback or Vishnu vs. Cobb spat.

Thanks,
-Michael

[Bash]

in

[OpenFlash]

I'll have some factory WB vs Dyno wideband comparison data comparison results to post up later today. It will be gathered from a Hellblazer420's Procede+DCI+PWM meth 6MT on a dynojet. I'll also show how to get the AFR logs to match up with whatever aux widebind you are using. As well as demonstrate the calibration difference between the a factory sensor and an aftermarket sensor.

Cheers,
Shiv

[Skydive]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

I'll have some factory WB vs Dyno wideband comparison data comparison results to post up later today. It will be gathered from a Hellblazer420's Procede+DCI+PWM meth 6MT on a dynojet. I'll also show how to get the AFR logs to match up with whatever aux widebind you are using. As well as demonstrate the calibration difference between the a factory sensor and an aftermarket sensor.

Cheers,
Shiv

Awesome. This should be very helpful to a lot of people. Thanks Shiv! (I would assert that roadgoing logs would be best because of the load issues, so the correlation will be most interesting.)

-Michael

PS: Please send me those Hellblazer files as soon as you're happy with them, too. We're running the same setup, save the fact that I'm stuck with a 6AT ;-)

[dzenno]

Procede's calculated AFR logs used to be really bad a couple months ago which Shiv can attest to and since then he's recalibrated them using his LM-1 as well as introduced the new fueling resistors which is now called/part of the rev2.5 version...they used to show 0.8-1.3points richer than actual external widebands would register...in some of my last testing 2-3 months ago, after his latest recalibration, the procede and LM1 AFR logs still have issues showing correct values immediately post shift and at part throttle...once you're through that area they are very close to each other...so in summary, based on what I've captured (and I can share this data if anyone likes), I wouldn't rely on part throttle/post-shift AFR procede logs but thereafter its reliable

To prove/disprove any of this get your own wideband...i ran too long on upgraded turbos without knowing my true AFRs until I bought dual Innovate LC-1 units...funny thing was back then I was asked hey why do you need two, just one is fine well, its not, and its always better to have two so you can trust them more...

One more thing that I have to say is that there will be bank to bank AFR deviation with the procede plugged in by as much as 0.5-0.8 points...you'll see that bank1 will run richer than bank2 very often...i never understood why that was and it would come and go but this happens on a bunch of cars I saw running the procede...try logging both banks, maybe the issue is also resolved now but I wouldn't know...on my current setup I never get bank to bank variance anymore even with the most aggressive setup that I've now got going at 19.5-20psi held to redline with AFRs down at high 11s-12.0 and timing solid as rock on 50/50 meth

Looking forward to seeing what's new on this procede front..

[Skydive]

Hi Dzenno,

Can you post the data you have from when you were running the Procede, and advise as to the particulars of your LC1 installation?

Thanks!

[dzenno]

Originally Posted by Skydive

Dzenno,

Can you post the data you have from when you were running the Procede, and advise as to the particulars of your LC1 installation?

Sure, as soon as I get some time for it...I have a split exhaust (one pipe for each bank) and I've got one Innovate LC-1 wideband on each pipe with the bungs installed right after the downpipe flang that joins the downpipe and the midpipe...procede has a single 0-5v analog input for wiring a sensor like this in so back then I'd have the bank2 LC-1 sensor wired in there...at the same time I've also used Innovate's LogWorks software which takes the digital signal directly from both LC-1 controllers and hooks up using a USB cable to a laptop with really high resolution

Maybe Shiv can post them, he should have quite a few logs in his emails from me...data is on another laptop I use in the car and in some emails obviously so a bit of a hassle and I've got nothing to prove...

honestly, best thing is for you is to just get an Innovate LC-1 and see for yourself and compare...they're about $200 including controller, bung and sensor...best $200 you'll spend and you'll have a picture of your AFR that doesn't include any bias calcs which to me was money well spent but I wish I didn't have to and could read stock widebands as that made my tune even more expensive to run

[PlutoniumTans]

Originally Posted by dzenno

Procede's calculated AFR logs used to be really bad a couple months ago which Shiv can attest to and since then he's recalibrated them using his LM-1 as well as introduced the new fueling resistors which is now called/part of the rev2.5 version...they used to show 0.8-1.3points richer than actual external widebands would register...in some of my last testing 2-3 months ago, after his latest recalibration, the procede and LM1 AFR logs still have issues showing correct values immediately post shift and at part throttle...once you're through that area they are very close to each other...so in summary, based on what I've captured (and I can share this data if anyone likes), I wouldn't rely on part throttle/post-shift AFR procede logs but thereafter its reliable

To prove/disprove any of this get your own wideband...i ran too long on upgraded turbos without knowing my true AFRs until I bought dual Innovate LC-1 units...funny thing was back then I was asked hey why do you need two, just one is fine well, its not, and its always better to have two so you can trust them more...

One more thing that I have to say is that there will be bank to bank AFR deviation with the procede plugged in by as much as 0.5-0.8 points...you'll see that bank1 will run richer than bank2 very often...i never understood why that was and it would come and go but this happens on a bunch of cars I saw running the procede...try logging both banks, maybe the issue is also resolved now but I wouldn't know...on my current setup I never get bank to bank variance anymore even with the most aggressive setup that I've now got going at 19.5-20psi held to redline with AFRs down at high 11s-12.0 and timing solid as rock on 50/50 meth

Looking forward to seeing what's new on this procede front..

lc-1 basically just shows AFR ? it doesn't control anything am I correct ? Compatible with piggys as well ? Thanks !

[Skydive]

Thanks Dzenno. I may well go the LC-1 route, but this thread is part of my research for just such a decision. I look forward to your data, and that which Shiv has said he will provide.

Anyone else?

[Skydive]

Originally Posted by PlutoniumTans

lc-1 basically just shows AFR ? it doesn't control anything am I correct ? Compatible with piggys as well ? Thanks !

Yes.

http://www.innovatemotorsports.com/products/lc1.php

I think I have some PLX stuff around, and if I can make it play well with the LC-1s I might do that, but I hope I won't have to, which is what this thread is for.

[PlutoniumTans]

I'm def getting this as well, all my sti boys always tell me about it

[dzenno]

Originally Posted by PlutoniumTans

I'm def getting this as well, all my sti boys always tell me about it

Highly recommended!

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by Skydive

Awesome. This should be very helpful to a lot of people. Thanks Shiv! (I would assert that roadgoing logs would be best because of the load issues, so the correlation will be most interesting.)

-Michael

PS: Please send me those Hellblazer files as soon as you're happy with them, too. We're running the same setup, save the fact that I'm stuck with a 6AT ;-)

Will do. We are on the dyno now. Just starting off with a defined version of the FBO maps, the car was a monster on the drive down.

Update: the dyno wideband sensor needs to be replaced. Trying to snag a replacement in time. If not, the wb data I'll have to wait until the next dyno session. Although I should have enough data from the last two sessions to write something semi-useful.

[Jeff@TopGearSolutions]

What's the consensus on the AEM Uego?

[dzenno]

Originally Posted by Jeff@topgearsolutions

What's the consensus on the AEM Uego?

Better than any calculated AFRs for sure and seems to be easier to maintain than the Innovate units which call for periodic free air calibration...AEM are apparently self-calibrating but I don't know if I'd trust that claim...Innovate are basically the norm out there..

[Jeff@TopGearSolutions]

Originally Posted by dzenno

Better than any calculated AFRs for sure and seems to be easier to maintain than the Innovate units which call for periodic free air calibration...AEM are apparently self-calibrating but I don't know if I'd trust that claim...Innovate are basically the norm out there..

Yea I mean I know a bunch of guys with the AEM in other platforms so thats why I started offering it on my site. I think the Lc-1 is the go to because of its cheaper price point perhaps.

[dzenno]

Originally Posted by Jeff@topgearsolutions

Yea I mean I know a bunch of guys with the AEM in other platforms so thats why I started offering it on my site. I think the Lc-1 is the go to because of its cheaper price point perhaps.

AEM are a bit easier to install and get going with as they don't require heater/air circuit calibration which literally takes 60seconds but some people may find it confusing...i chose to trust what seems like a better wideband itself and chose to suck it up in terms of calibration and just accept the fact it needs to be done every once in a while but I have easy access to a lift to do it...for your avg Joe I'd recommend the no hassle AEM and its good enough but less range AFR wise than the Innovate

[Skydive]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

Update: the dyno wideband sensor needs to be replaced. Trying to snag a replacement in time. If not, the wb data I'll have to wait until the next dyno session. Although I should have enough data from the last two sessions to write something semi-useful.

Bummer. I hope you can pull it off. If not, will you be tuning the car sans lamda? :-(

[subieworx]

Originally Posted by dzenno

Better than any calculated AFRs for sure and seems to be easier to maintain than the Innovate units which call for periodic free air calibration...AEM are apparently self-calibrating but I don't know if I'd trust that claim...Innovate are basically the norm out there..

We have been using AEM AFR gauges for years and like them. They are reliable and very easy to install compared tot he Innovate WB's.

[E3r2E9r]

Originally Posted by dzenno

AEM are a bit easier to install and get going with as they don't require heater/air circuit calibration which literally takes 60seconds but some people may find it confusing...i chose to trust what seems like a better wideband itself and chose to suck it up in terms of calibration and just accept the fact it needs to be done every once in a while but I have easy access to a lift to do it...for your avg Joe I'd recommend the no hassle AEM and its good enough but less range AFR wise than the Innovate

Originally Posted by subieworx

We have been using AEM AFR gauges for years and like them. They are reliable and very easy to install compared tot he Innovate WB's.

Had AEM on my last car and it was problem free.

[dzenno]

Sure, nothing against AEM at all, they seem to be working out just fine for a lot of people out there...I think enrita here runs the UEGO on his car

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by Skydive

Bummer. I hope you can pull it off. If not, will you be tuning the car sans lamda? :-(

The last time I was here, I calibrated the Procede AFR readings to be within .2 AFR point of the external wideband. I'm not concerned with any delta. I was just going to provide info for others. Will be back next week though. 1st run Procede+DCI+pwm meth was 402whp btw