I'd like to install a wideband A/F gauge in my car just for safety reasons. When I switch over to E85, I'm going to be near the max for my A1000 pump.

I have the LM-1 but would like to see it in realtime, trying to look at the box is too hard.

The ones I have seen are around 300 bucks. Ridiculous. Is there a cheaper one?

 

since u already have the sensor u can pick up an plx sm-afr for around 225$'s

 

Batass,
I understand your concern about the cost, but don't forget the WBO2 sensor is the most critical engine tuning tool. I personally bought the FAST dual WBO2 controller for the added benefit of being able to check the dual wide bands on the FAST ECU. I also bought a Autometer WBO2 guage which comes with another WBO2 sensor (five in all). Yes it is overkill, but ensuring the proper A/F ratio is the only way to guage an engine tune. Bare in mind, I do not like the Bosch WBO2 sensors and prefer the NTK labgrade ($600 ea.)units that come with the FAST fuel injection systems for their increased accuracy and resistance to leaded fuels.

By the way, FAST offers the same dual WBO2 controller for alcohol engines which would be your best bet. It will allow you to look at both engine banks real time while the engine is running.

 

I just got a analog gauge from innovate, the same ppl that make the LM1. They have 100 dollar gauges and it looks pretty sweet. G series they call them, G1, G2, G3, G4 and G5... but they have the same features basically, just different looks to them i think.

I got the G3 to go with my LC-1. So far looks great but i havent tested it yet.

it plugs into the LM1's or LC1's analog outputs, the output that has 0-5v i think meaning 7.35 to 22 air/fuel ratio

i can get pics if you like. It aint digital but it sure beats the digital prices

Edit: they also have a digital gauge for same price.... didnt see that till now

 

Here's some info on the FAST alcohol compatible dual WBO2 controller:
Link: http://www.fuelairspark.com/Products...er/alcohol.asp

 

he's only doing alcohol injection to cool the blower's intake charge down. does that still require a alcohol compatible wideband sensor? Its not like the whole motor is running off alcohol

 

i run the AEM uego setup, haven't actually installed it yet, but it'll read in real time. I plan on just mounting my digital camara to the mount i made on my roll bar and recording tach and A/F that way. I'm cheap like that.

 

Orr89RocZ,
I made that assumption given he said he was going to switch over to E85. Besides, I think it would be pretty hard to tax an A1000 pump pumping alcohol as a supplemental fuel for a chemical intercooling effect.

It isn't entirely necessary to use an alcohol specific WBO2 sensor, but the controller displays lambda not X:1 A/F ratio which is more appropriate for alcohol burning engines.

 

oh my, i totally missed that. definately an issue. thats 70-85% alcohol content depending i think it is. My bad i overlooked that fact

E85 require more fuel to make same power as gasoline, so it would have to pump alot more. A1000 tho is good to 700-800whp i think it was

 

Right, E85. I didnt even think about the lambda. A gauge thats meant to be accurate at 10-15:1 might not read well at 7.5. I like the analog, but digital might respond quicker. I don't know much here.

I'm only running about 10-11 psi. Just enough to get solid 9's. I'm also running a carb and single plane intake, so my cylinder-cylinder consistency should, in my logic, be better than a FI intake.

I talked to Brett at Aeromotive, and told him I was shooting for close to 800fwhp on gas, and then switching to E85. He said the pump should handle it, but keep an eye on fuel pressure and A/F.

 

Batass, I'll let you know how the E85 conversion goes. My carb will be back from CSU this week.. I need to put everything back together and check it out.

 

I think it'll be great, the conversion is cheap, and the extra power should be substantial.

From my own calculations and what I've read, E85 puts 5% more BTU's into your cylinder. At 750hp thats 40hp. Plus the cooling effect on the rammed air.

I'm going to rig up an IAT sensor to see the actual difference.

Here's a link to this CHEAP! gauge
http://www.innovatemotorsports.com/x...7&cat=0&page=1

I don't see why this wouldn't work for me, of course it wouldn't be my main tuning tool.

xpndbl3-I like your style! A camera would be cheaper than buying the 100 dollar cable for my box, AND I wouldnt have to wait to get home to read out the record.

 

Batass,
My experience has shown that even a good single plane intake (i.e. victor, Brodix, SB2, etc.) will suffer from deviations in port flow from one runner to the next. I was just pointing out that monitoring only one bank gives you half the picture. Bear in mind though, that even with two WBO2, one in each bank, you will still be looking at an average across four cylinders. The ideal approach would be to mount one WBO2 sensor in each collector tube (expensive and impractical).

I will be mounting a type-K thermocouple in each primary tube and monitoring EGT temps via the FAST computer. This, in conjunction with the WBO2s and sequential operation, will allow me to tailor the fuel curve for each cylinder independently.

As far as the lambda reading goes, you are right. Alcohol will give lower lambda readings at stoich than gasoline. I thought a WBO2 unit designed for alcohol burning engines would be right up your alley.

 

Actually your right, I was just looking at flow numbers for a victor jr, and the deviation from one port to the next was 30-40 cfm!

The deviation for the Professional Products intake I have was only like 5. My engine builder said he has consistently seen more power with this intake over edelbrock's. The ports look like crap, but maybe it has to do with the consistency?

A WBO2 for alky would be right up my alley, but money is short, just started school again, and gas and tires are eating at my bank.

I just want a decent gauge, I can't try and look at this box anymore, it's gonna kill me. Car is too fast to look too far from the windshield.

 

Yep, i also agree here. i've seen some flow numbers for various manifolds and the deviations was astonishing in some ports. Porting them out to have similar flow in all ports would be imperative i'd say for best performance

 

With forced induction it might not be as big of a deal. But here's something I know. When guys sc or turbo stock LS1's and push them, the number 7 piston is usually the one that fries. The theory is that the intake doesnt handle being force fed well, and the number 7 gets too much air.

 

most intakes with TB in front have problems with number 7 and sometimes 5. But LS1's are NOTORIOUS for number 7 problems with boost and sometimes n/a applications as well.

 

I believe this is why striaght runner intakes like a tunnel ram work so well. The deviations from runner to runner are minimal and most, if not all, runners are a straight shot to the intake port on the cylinder head. I had Hogans build an intake very similar to a tunnel ram with a plenum on top. I will take some pictures with the lid removed to give you an idea of how well it was laid out. You can clearly see each intake valve looking straight down each port. Internally the port on the plenum side starts out with a 3"x 2" cross section and narrows/tapers to match the intake port.