Doesn't that sound awefully familiar? Which is exactly why mine is not connected to my MS.

Will you be going a different route with the WB or stay with the LC-1?

 

Just wired in my new LC-1... In for decision.

 

It sat four months, I'm not bent out of shape about it. I should have checked it initially. I've never had a problem other than this which I don't call a problem when it sits for a quarter with no battery. I have another LC-1 and it's going in the daily too.

 

LC-1 crew :(

 

I've had nothing but success from my 2 LC-1s.

 

LC1 working for me as well.

 

My experience with the LC-1 and LM Programmer is that the settings will stick the first time if you input them as lambda values. It was only when I entered them as AFRs that it gave me crap. I have no idea why, but it just seems like the software no habla AFR muy bien.

 

As long as we're commenting about Widebands...I've had a PLX M300 for years and I've never had any issues with it. It's been in 3 different cars (and hung it in the back of my pit bike exhaust when doing carb tuning) and it will be going in the 4th one here soon.

 

LC-1 Since 2006, no issues. fairies.

 

Usually only have problems when you tune on cars that are way too rich and don't get it close to stoich soon enough, or the wideband is too far down the exhaust from the exhaust housing. I had an LM-1 I used to tune cars with the exhaust clamp and went thru quite a few o2 sensors over the years.

 

See, here in lies the problem with the innovative products.

Some one has a huge headache with it, either with grounds, installation, calibration, or something else, and posts about it. A potential buyer says "oh no! I shouldn't buy this!" But then 10 people come in and say "it works fine fairies". So then said potential buyer says "ok! I'll buy it cause it can go one point higher and lower than a AEM!"

See the fail?

My point is you never see these threads about the AEM Uego...

 

My LC-1 has been working well since I changed the firmware.

Mine shipped with ver. 1.10 (every LC-1 made since 10/2007 has this firmware). Ver. 1.10 is just God awful -- always giving timing errors. Innovate is STILL shipping product with this firmware and KNOWS that it causes problems. From that standpoint, I would have to agree with the AEM crowd. I can't conceive of shipping product for nearly 5 years with defective firmware.

Now, how do I know that Innovate knows ver. 1.10 sucks? Because I downloaded ver. 1.20 Beta from their website! I've been using it since July and it works great. No issues.

Want ver. 1.20 Beta? Or maybe the original ver. 1.00 (which worked a whole lot better than 1.10)? Then go here:

https://www.miataturbo.net/megasquirt-18/war-peace-me-my-lc-1-a-58873/

 

LC1 didn't work for me, it was 2pts off from TS, tried to calibrate correct, but gave up and bought an AEM.

 

LC-1 Since 2005, no issues. fairies.

Install it right and it'll be fine.

 

AEM UEGO 4 years, no issues, no calibration, just works.

 

that's a voltage offset issue, not MS or LC-1 issue.

 

Firmware ver. 1.00.

 

Firmware version 1.00.

Are we seeing a pattern here?

 

Nope. The issue I bitch about with the UEGO isn't the reading range (If you're at either of those extremes, your tune is fucked up anyway), its the painfully slow read rate. It's way too smooth to not be averaging samples.

^This to the max. Downgrade the firmware from the shitty buggy 1.1 crap, Properly install it and you'll be fine. No more Error codes, no crazy offset problems.

 

LC1s 'work' (assuming you don't run into the firmware issue) But their output has always seemed a little noisy... I've got a 14point7.com SLC OEM in the eval kit and it rocks. I wanted to hook up the i2c, but have been to cheap to buy all the jbperf stuff necessary, plus the analog out is peachy anyway... Seems more stable and faster than an lc1, and its cheaper (minus gauge). Still, I would probably upgrade to one of the lsu 4.9 sensor setups if there was a cheap option out there.