SpartanSV

To be fair, they both use the same Bosch sensor so if the sensor failed on the mtx-l it would fail on an aem.

OP has a MS3 though which means AFR over can bus without a separate module on AEM x-series. It's really really nice.

Spaceman Spiff

​​​​​​
My understanding was that the control algorithm for the embedded heater in the sensor it proprietary to each mfg. This could potentially impact reliability across products with identidical sensors.

18psi

iTrader: (76)

you can't possibly be this dumb. try again
Never, not once have I had this issue with aem. tons with innovate, never with aem.

people just want to justify their bad decisions so I'll let this thread carry on.

SpartanSV

That's entirely possible but it seems to me that would be pretty hard to **** up. I assumed the element was something as simple as a coil of nichrome wire and the controller fed power to the element for a set length of time when the controller was powered on. I haven't put a meter or scope on one to know for sure though, and info seems sparse. Do you have any info you can link?

Full_Tilt_Boogie

iTrader: (1)

Your whole point is that the gauge being dirt slow doesnt matter because as long as its logging quickly and without high latency, thats all you need to tune. Right?
So why even bother with a gauge? Just use something like the Spartan.

I have an MTX-L installed in my car but I really dont need it. I never really need to look at it, but at least when I do I see whats happening at that moment, not half a second ago.
For tuning I typically use my LM-2 which is dead handy when Im working on random **** where Im not able to log AFR in the ECU... assuming it even has an ECU.

As for Innovate being allegedly the shittiest products ever according to forum group-think, In the past 10 years Ive had a handful of issues with bad controllers and sensors getting killed prematurely. All LC-1s. They run the heaters too hard and dont turn off.

Years ago I tested an AEM and LC-1 with a benchtop PSU. The LC-1 pulled significantly more current while heating up and didnt seem to ever shut off the heater circuit. The AEM probably heats up a lot slower, which like I mentioned previously, is a good way to save sensors when people leave their ignition on without running the engine.

18psi

iTrader: (76)

The gauge is for eyeballing from time to time after the car is tuned in case something happens, kinda like a warning light. Unless you set up a really effective failsafe in the ecu, it's actually really useful. It's not used to tune with, obviously. Also it's still nowhere near as slow as you're making it seem. Also even with the "uber fast" mtx-l and lm2 your physical/human response time will still not be anywhere near effective or relevant.

In summary, you're making a nearly worthless feature justify a terrible flaw that's plagued this gauge/series for years now.

It is what it is. We'll just agree to disagree. I've not replaced a single sensor in the 10+ years or had this issue Dead wrong. it's exactly the opposite. all aem's I've tested warm up in at least half the time as Innovate

btw have you ever used the aem x series? you'll be surprised

SpartanSV

Verrrrrry interesting. I would have expected there to be no current regulating circuit in the controller. I assumed current was simply limited by the resistance of the element which would mean the same current regardless of the controller. Did you use the same sensor for both, and did you let it cool between tests?

I clearly need to do more research.

18psi

iTrader: (76)

https://10carbest.com/best-wideband-gauges

18psi

iTrader: (76)

also:
AEM X-Series Wideband AFR Controller Tested: Fastest Responding Wideband Confirmed! | Speed Academy

Full_Tilt_Boogie

iTrader: (1)

Never owned one. Tuned some cars with them but never paid much attention to the display.
I had the old AEM UEGO and it was very user friendly but you'd be cruising at 14.7, put your foot down and the engine would have twisted up 1500 rpm before the screen refreshed. The analog output seemed fine though.

Its probably just PWM'ing the heater circuit. This was no joke like probably 8 years ago or so, so I dont remember too many specifics. Im pretty sure we recorded a video about it but idk where it is. I recall putting it on youtube but I dont see it.

Ive been considering ditching the MTX-L for something like a spartan, but maybe Ill try the AEM X just to see what the fuss is about.

SpartanSV

**** me that makes way more sense. I'll throw a scope on mine some time.

18psi

iTrader: (76)

oh btw speaking of innofail, just today YET ANOTHER of my tuning customers had his innovate sensor die YET AGAIN. placed far away from engine on a low boost bp6d.
@muthagoose can share his experience with terrible innov-hate. I haven't seen more failures out of any other brand of wideband except the failtastic ebay chineesium ones

wackbards

iTrader: (2)

I've had absolutely rotten luck with my innovate LC-2. I'm burning out sensors so fast I'm getting whiplash, and those LSU4.9's ain't cheap. Multiple engines, multiple exhausts, all with sensor mounted at 12 o'clock before the cat. Cold damp start does it, which has made tuning cold start a painful and expensive process. If you let it warm up to temp before start? Death. If you stall cuz your startup sequence is wonky, and try to start it again without letting it cool back down? Death.

​​​​​​Interesting to hear that AEM isn't so horrible.

sixshooter

iTrader: (12)

Interesting. I wonder if the lc1 uses a different setting for controlling that heater than the lc2. My oxygen sensor is only the second one in 10 years on lc1.

wackbards

iTrader: (2)

Sounds like Rev's hypothesis is that Innovate is **** & miss with their FW:

https://www.miataturbo.net/ecus-tuni...3/#post1501532

Based on this consensus, I'm going to stop blaming my sensor deaths on my own tuning abuse, and walk away from innovate.

New config will be: LSU4.9->AEM 03-300 X series->MSlabs CAN WB02->MS3PNPPRO FW 1.4.1

Sounds expensive? I just added it up, and I've bought $350 dollars worth of sensors in 3 years.

SpartanSV

Are you running anything else over CAN? Are you opposed to switching to 1.5.1?

If the answer is no to both of those you don't need the WB module if you just want AFR over CAN.

wackbards

iTrader: (2)

Engine states gives me the fear. Also, the WB CAN module puts out a fakey 14.7 signal if a sensor craps out, and I don't think there's any other way to get that feature.

Also, I already have one in hand.

2N0B0dy1

iTrader: (1)

AEM ordered. I got the Innovate because my cousin has run them in two of his cars an never had an issue. Guess he got lucky.

Anyone have any experience with this? I was trying to read up on it in the ms forum. Im still on 1.4.1 fw just because im scarred to change it. I seem to recall reading the 1.4.x firmware being more stable than the 1.5.x fw. Could be totally off though..