• Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech

Wide Band Screen Shot

  • Thread starter Thread starter final5-0
  • Start date Start date Apr 23, 2006

final5-0

Mustang Master
Apr 6, 2003
6,817
12
79
DFW Texas
Apr 23, 2006
#1
  • Apr 23, 2006
  • #1
For some time now, I've been wondering about my wb

I got it sometime between 4 & 5 years ago so I was wondering about how it would compare with something one might be using today.

Chad (zenboy99) was kind enough to send me a datalog
sooooooooo
I just fired up Log Analyst and did the ole comparo thing

My motivation for this was to see if the newer wb's of today might display a bit more smoother results. My thinking was there might be more filtering on todays wb's

The comparo is not exactly apples to apples as I had more data events. It goes without saying, fewer data events will yield smoother displays.

My gut feeling here is Chad's displays a bit smoother
however
I thought the difference would be greater

I thought you guys might like to see what turned up

Chad
db file
PLX-300 wb
wot 2nd 2800 to 6200

Grady
dbf file
FJO wb
wot 3rd 2800 to 6200



Grady
 

zenboy99

Founding Member
May 12, 2002
2,212
0
47
Madison, WI
Apr 23, 2006
#2
  • Apr 23, 2006
  • #2
Interesting.

One thing I forgot to mention is that I never added the noise filter that was included with the wideband. Its suppose to go to the input wire (EGR wire) for datalogging. I never got a real answer from people on how much that would help.

I've got 3 more WOT datalogs that I ran today if you're interested in those too.
 

zenboy99

Founding Member
May 12, 2002
2,212
0
47
Madison, WI
Apr 23, 2006
#3
  • Apr 23, 2006
  • #3
We may have talked about this before, I don't remember. But was a 12.5:1 air:fuel ratio optimal for you?
 

final5-0

Mustang Master
Apr 6, 2003
6,817
12
79
DFW Texas
Apr 23, 2006
#4
  • Apr 23, 2006
  • #4
zenboy99 said:
We may have talked about this before, I don't remember. But was a 12.5:1 air:fuel ratio optimal for you?
Click to expand...

Yes

I made three baseline pulls with the sig combo.

IIRC, the first one was about 13.5 to 13.75 or thereabouts. I then saw the maf was pegged but the dyno guy wanted to see if I could lower the ratio.

I did nothing for the 2nd pull but knock it down to a tad over 13.0

For the last pull it was about 12.5

Each pull ... the power went up

Grady
 

blksn955.o

Founding Member
Mar 15, 2002
3,263
0
66
st.louis mo 314
Apr 23, 2006
#5
  • Apr 23, 2006
  • #5
I remember reading/searching alot on the A/F subject as I was looking for a range of good starting points to try and aim for, N/A and on the 150-175 shot I will be running.

From what I found most seem to get the most power N/A at @ 12.5-12.8, and most power adder peeps (10-12lbs of boost or up to around a 150 shot) seemed to see the best safest results at @ 11.5-11.8.

On the choppy-ness of the a/f, what causes the spikes, and on the dyno graphs how/why do they get the smoother graph? Is it the way EFI works and how the dyno shops "clean" up the numbers?

I would like to see how the innovate LM1 and LC1 would look in that comparo...talk about a good hands on in use comarison on the diff. types of W/B avail.
 

final5-0

Mustang Master
Apr 6, 2003
6,817
12
79
DFW Texas
Apr 23, 2006
#6
  • Apr 23, 2006
  • #6
Greg

I've not done any 2nd gear wot dlogs in a long time due to wheel spin issues and you just don't get as accurate results as you do in 3rd.

I would say if I dug through some of my old logs and found some 2nd gear runs, you would not have seen quite as much difference between them.

I do think Chad's wb would still show smoother results.

Another thing I was thinking about after posting this

Maybe Chad has a laptop that takes data from the Tweecer at a faster rate thus giving more data events per second than mine

Any thoughts on that

The dyno software has built in filtering I do know that for a fact.

I once saw a Dyno Jet guy zoom in on the ratio after I questioned him about a pull and you could see some spikes but they were not all that great.

As for the spikes in these logs, remember that you are working with an analog signal
and
the magnitude of the spikes are not all that great anyway.

Since I've seen a different wb display result here ..........

I think I'll just stick with my old dog ... spikes & all

Its not too hard to see I had my fuel table set for 12.5 to 1

Grady
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Request from Tweecer users
  • final5-0
  • Apr 21, 2006
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Replies
6
Views
673
1994 - 1995 Specific Tech Apr 23, 2006
5.0_GT_kid
oem block na 320/324 combo & more
  • final5-0
  • May 25, 2007
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
Replies
0
Views
1K
1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk- May 25, 2007
final5-0
Basic Spark Info For Tweecer Noobs & ???
  • final5-0
  • Oct 17, 2005
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Replies
3
Views
3K
1994 - 1995 Specific Tech Oct 17, 2005
blksn955.o
Share:
Bluesky Email Share Link
  • Mustang Forums
  • 1979 - 1995 (Fox, SN95.0, & 2.3L) -General/Talk-
  • 1994 - 1995 Specific Tech
Menu
Log in

Register

  • Forums
  • What's new
  • Media
  • Resources
  • Contact
  • Sponsor
X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?

X

Privacy & Transparency

We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:

  • Personalized ads and content
  • Content measurement and audience insights

Do you accept cookies and these technologies?