An ECU based reading wouldn't suffer from such variations.ĭon't get me wrong, I'm very happy with the Ultragauge for $69 or whatever I paid, and I realize I shouldn't expect the manufacturer of Ultragauge to put in the effort that Ross-Tech has to decode data from the ECU. If you calibrate it with city driving, and then do a long highway trip, it'll probably way off. If your driving conditions are very consistent, OBD2 gauges are probably quite accurate, after calibrating over a full tank. Airflow goes up (I've watched the MAF reading) and the Ultragauge assumes even more fuel is being used, which is wrong. I believe this is because the turbo vanes are adjusted to keep the turbine spinning while coasting. So, when I'm coasting in gear, the Ultragauge actually thinks I'm using more fuel. The ECU can, of course, but these tools can't detect that on a TDI at least. The ECU data should at least be quite close, and that is a better starting point, even if some calibration or fine tuning was required.Īnother problem is that the Ultragauge (and probably the Scangauge) cannot tell when the car is coasting in gear and using zero fuel. It thinks the vehicle used four times more fuel than it actually did. Click to expand.Well, out of the box, the Ultragauge is wrong by a factor of about four.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |