Wideband's which would you choose from these 3 and why? (AFX, LC-1, AEM)
04-12-2011, 07:33 AM
#1
Wideband's which would you choose from these 3 and why? (AFX, LC-1, AEM) Wideband's which would you choose from these 3 and why? (AFX, LC-1, AEM)
http://www.hinsonsupercars.com/p-946...eband-kit.aspx
Looking to have a fairly accurate wideband, and like the features of the AFX with NTK sensor, especially the calibration feature. Also it finished on top of the shoutout against 9 other sensors and that was with the bosch 02. I have been reading the NTK is even better.
http://www.innovatemotorsports.com/products/db.php
LC-1 claims to be the fastest and most accurate wideband controller on the market.
http://www.aemelectronics.com/wideba...fuel-gauge-25/
AEM UEGO wideband. Looks to be easy install and the cheapest. Only thing that I don't like is it doesn't have a calibration feature for the 02, so you never know when it is on it way out or if the sensor is degrading with time and giving inaccurate AFR. In the shootout test of 10 wideband they threw in some known bad sensors and the AEM still gave readings but was off by 3.0 AFR to lean. The AFX gauge said error which kind of has me leaning towards that one.
Shooutout link
http://tunertools.com/articles/FordMuscle.pdf
Thanks,
Chris
http://www.hinsonsupercars.com/p-946...eband-kit.aspx
Looking to have a fairly accurate wideband, and like the features of the AFX with NTK sensor, especially the calibration feature. Also it finished on top of the shoutout against 9 other sensors and that was with the bosch 02. I have been reading the NTK is even better.
http://www.innovatemotorsports.com/products/db.php
LC-1 claims to be the fastest and most accurate wideband controller on the market.
http://www.aemelectronics.com/wideba...fuel-gauge-25/
AEM UEGO wideband. Looks to be easy install and the cheapest. Only thing that I don't like is it doesn't have a calibration feature for the 02, so you never know when it is on it way out or if the sensor is degrading with time and giving inaccurate AFR. In the shootout test of 10 wideband they threw in some known bad sensors and the AEM still gave readings but was off by 3.0 AFR to lean. The AFX gauge said error which kind of has me leaning towards that one.
Shooutout link
http://tunertools.com/articles/FordMuscle.pdf
Thanks,
Chris
Last edited by chrs1313; 04-12-2011 at 07:51 AM.
04-12-2011, 09:23 PM
#3
TECH Addict
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Miami, Fl.
Posts: 2,890
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, I would go with the AFX. It's quit accurate and you can calibrate it. Plus, besides the sensors it isn't to expensive. I've read a few negative things about the LC-1 but never tested one so I cannot truly say it isn't a good meter.
I would just go with the AFX and call it day.
I would just go with the AFX and call it day.
04-13-2011, 03:07 AM
#6
I run the LC-1 on my Lightning and I love it and I will be running one on my new turbo build setup. Never had any experience with the other 2 but have read good things about the AFX. The AEM is simple but with no free air calibration I am skeptical of how accurate it will be in 6 months.
Trending Topics
04-13-2011, 07:03 AM
#10
NGK AFX without a doubt, you can recalibrate as the life of the sensor degrades, unlike other units. Here is a quote from Greg Banish
As a professional engine calibrator, I use professional equipment. (Much the same way really good mechanics prefer Snap-On/MAC/Cornwell tools) My "normal" wideband is an ECM LambdaPRO. I easily admit that this is a bit of overkill (and overspending) for the casual tuner, but I'm a bit more than just an enthusiast who's playing around with his car for fun. The whole ECM line is basically the standard of the industry for professionals. Any good professional tuner should take a look at their line before deciding to rely upon some el-cheapo mass market crap.
If you're on a tighter budget, the NGK AFX is actually made by ECM and resold under the NGK name. It has a limited output range, but still very sufficient for casual tuning work. The electronics running the controller are based off the same architecture that runs their more expensive meters.
http://www.hptuners.com/forum/showth...&highlight=afx
As a professional engine calibrator, I use professional equipment. (Much the same way really good mechanics prefer Snap-On/MAC/Cornwell tools) My "normal" wideband is an ECM LambdaPRO. I easily admit that this is a bit of overkill (and overspending) for the casual tuner, but I'm a bit more than just an enthusiast who's playing around with his car for fun. The whole ECM line is basically the standard of the industry for professionals. Any good professional tuner should take a look at their line before deciding to rely upon some el-cheapo mass market crap.
If you're on a tighter budget, the NGK AFX is actually made by ECM and resold under the NGK name. It has a limited output range, but still very sufficient for casual tuning work. The electronics running the controller are based off the same architecture that runs their more expensive meters.
http://www.hptuners.com/forum/showth...&highlight=afx
04-13-2011, 07:22 AM
#11
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Katherine N.T Australia
Posts: 620
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looking at the AFX I cant understand why people rate them. Their Lambda range is minimal and actually outside my operating areas for lean cruise. There is no digital output to log with. Even the display is pretty basic.
The LC1 well they are consistantly unreliable so i'd give them a miss.
Techedge for my next one I reckon. But my modified PLX's are still going strong and consistently match 5 gas sensors I've used on dyno's
The LC1 well they are consistantly unreliable so i'd give them a miss.
Techedge for my next one I reckon. But my modified PLX's are still going strong and consistently match 5 gas sensors I've used on dyno's
Last edited by macca_779; 04-13-2011 at 10:24 AM.
04-13-2011, 02:58 PM
#12
The AFX was built in mind to be the most accurate budget wideband unit. ECM did not want to compromise on accuracy so it does have a bit of a narrow range and no extra features. I log with my AFX through my EGR and my friend with hptuners pro logs through the MPVI Pro scanner. The PLX is another good wideband.
04-13-2011, 04:59 PM
#14
TECH Apprentice
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Denver
Posts: 313
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have the AFX and have 0 problems, very easy to install, great quality. The only downside is that its a rectangle which therefore takes away the chances of a pillar pod.
04-14-2011, 06:46 PM
#16
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Katherine N.T Australia
Posts: 620
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The AFX was built in mind to be the most accurate budget wideband unit. ECM did not want to compromise on accuracy so it does have a bit of a narrow range and no extra features. I log with my AFX through my EGR and my friend with hptuners pro logs through the MPVI Pro scanner. The PLX is another good wideband.
04-15-2011, 01:56 PM
#17
Lots of good info and experience here: http://www.hptuners.com/forum/showth...ewpost&t=10510
I personally run an LC-1 in my Buick with great success, and have ordered Innovate's new MTX-L for use with my HP Tuners Pro. Take it for what you will.
I personally run an LC-1 in my Buick with great success, and have ordered Innovate's new MTX-L for use with my HP Tuners Pro. Take it for what you will.
04-22-2011, 07:04 PM
#18
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Zanesfield, OH
Posts: 588
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am in need of a wideband so this is a great thread. Why are so many picking the AFX set up? Am I reading the article wrong? It didn't do anything well based on the comparison chart and latency and accuracy. Some please explain to me why this meter is even in this discussion. I do like the recalibration feature but not at the sake of accuracy and latency. Please educate me on this because I want to order a wideband this weekend.
04-23-2011, 02:59 PM
#20
TECH Enthusiast
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Zanesfield, OH
Posts: 588
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Correct me if I am wrong but the ability to recalibrate the sensor is pretty much required as it ages, thus in the system that doesnt have a calibration feature your reading will eventually not mean a lot because it wont be accurate.
I like that the LC-1 and the AFX has the recalibration feature but what I need to know is even after the OP posted the article everyone was still choosing the AFX over the other leaders like the LC-1 and AEM even though the data shows that it isn't better than those.
Am I missing something in that article that would sway me to the AFX over the others despite the poor performance comparably.
I like that the LC-1 and the AFX has the recalibration feature but what I need to know is even after the OP posted the article everyone was still choosing the AFX over the other leaders like the LC-1 and AEM even though the data shows that it isn't better than those.
Am I missing something in that article that would sway me to the AFX over the others despite the poor performance comparably.