DIYEFI.org Forum

HelmutVonAutobahn wrote:The ADV, according to the datasheet's warm-up procedure, is MUCH more resistant to thermal shock damage. This is why it can heat up as fast as it does. But, it seems to pay a price in other respects.

DelSolid wrote:

Hentai wrote:I would "suspect" it has to with the point of the ADV, being for pre turbo applications. I've seen one in a oem car. Also I believe the design tolerates higher temps than the 4.9 and 4.2 does. It would surprise me in order to meet the goals it was setup for that was one of the penalties it had to take.

There are 2 distinct versions of the LSU ADV, the normal "LSU ADV" and the "LSU ADV preTurbo" one. They have different part numbers and slightly different specs. Its not safe to assume that all ADV sensors are preTurbo ADV's. And the max allowable back pressure for both the ADV's and the 4.9 is 2.5 bar, so the ADV preTurbo is not rated for any higher pressure capability than the 4.9.

Here are the temp and back pressure specs for the 4.2, 4.9, ADV and ADV preTurbo sensors.

Bosch temp specs.png

DelSolid wrote:That is really interesting and doesn't jive with the document I have.

It looks like one of the pre-release spec sheets that were floating around.
Look at the attached 4.9 Bosch sheet dated July, 13, 2007 and the fact that it is listed as the First Edition, yet it is dated 2 years later than yours.
Looks like even Bosch isn't sure what the correction should be!

TCI_LSU4_9 sensor 2 16 10.pdf

Tre-Cool wrote:1st post, so i'll make it a strong one.

I've been tuning mostly factory GM based ecu's for over 8 years or so, so have used a few different sensor kits, so these are my impressions.

1st wb was an LC1, it died after 4 months. (this was back in 2006 or so)

Moved onto using some of the PLX SM-afr kits, was primarily using the serial output back then before modding them to use serial comms into my efilive flashscan cable. It's only at this point do you find out how bad the difference is between the analog to serial data. even a large difference between the display guage and analog signal was enough for me to give up on them.

Started using the Techedge 2j2 (never ended up upgrading to the 2j9) again used these primarily for the direct serial output into efilive.

Started using the MTX-L as permanent gauges & for tuning in a few cars due to it's small form factor. Generally had 2 permanently mounted in the car on v8's, 1 for each side of the motor. Generally they have been pretty good but over time they started getting lots of E8 errors, probably due to the heat as they are mostly running on supercharged v8's. Still using LSU 4.2 sensors though.

Started buying the ecotrons ALM kits, 1 x alm-led and 3 other guage kits. the response and data I was getting was much better then the previous stuff, but I put this down to the 4.9 sensor if anything. Retuned a few cars from other shops and fuel economy has always improved on the cars & closed loop fuel trims get's within 3%. Probably not much to do with the sensors/kits but more to do with how the previous tuners were reading from tailpipe or the sensors they were using.

I even removed the old LSM-11 "wideband" from my dyno and put in the ALM-LED in it's place, I don't get much difference between wideband readings from what I fit in the car header to reading out of the tailpipe on the dyno. the LSM seemed to read leaner and leaner after each run, but it's a pretty old sensor.

Now looking at the new AEM x-series line & the 14.7 kits to test out.

Cheers
Dave