Thread: AEM vs. LC-1

I want to buy a wideband for my VE.
I have narrowed it down to the AEM UEGO 6-in-1,and the Innovate LC-1.
Everyone knows what the AEM looks like,but heres a link to the LC-1

Square Wideband air fuel gauge, velcro anywhere, size of a keychain remote. Wideband air fuel ratio gauges help tune engines! Innovate wideband air fuel gauges are compact and accurate. - Square Wideband air fuel gauge, velcro anywhere, size of a key

The AEM is about 60 cheaper,but I like the square gauge setup better.I already have a triple gauge pod that is full,so I think it would give me more mounting options.
They both have a digital readout,but the AEM has the lights around the outside.
Is there anything else I am missing here?
Please post what you run,and why .This may help me make a decision.

Thanks
Jay

I like my AEM. Check out the thread that I started when I was looking for one: http://www.sr20-forum.com/general-sr20/14916-gauge-wideband.html

If you like the truth buy the Innovate wideband, if you want a wideband to mislead you by the AEM.

This is a quote from Klaud over at Innovate:

Here's why and how:

All Innovate widebands
The LM-1 measures Lambda 100-300 times/second and averages those measurements for logging over 1/12th second.
Averaging is done by summing up all the Lambda measurements over 1/12th second and dividing by the number of measurements.
For example if it runs at 120 measurements/second at 0.8 Lambda with one miss, it would read 9 times 0.8 and one time infinite (free air, as in a miss, reads as infinite Lambda/AFR). So you have (9*0.8 + infinite)/10. The result is still infinite and you see the spike.

Most others
Conventional Lambda meters by their design actually do not average and measure Lambda, but eta (1/Lambda). Under the same condition they would average 9*1.25 + 0 (1/infinite is 0). The resulting calculated Lambda from that would be 0.89 Lambda. In this case the ignition miss would not be visible as spike, but as just a little lean side change of AFR. Easy to miss (sic). This assumes a wideband with a response of ~8 msec. In actuality, a relatively fast conventional wideband with 100 msec response time would probably not even show a variation that large but more in the order of 0.01-0.02 Lambda.

Regards,
Klaus

There has been extensive testing on this subject, and I have to agree that Innovate produces a superior product. But AEM is actually pretty damn good for the price. I have experience with both, and Innovate does have a better response time.

I would recommend the Innovate since you like the square gauge.

From Vadim's thread:



Also no wideband discussion is complete without this. http://www.motoiq.com/MagazineArticles/tabid/59/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/12/The-Great-Wideband-Shootout-Part-1-How-do-wideband-air-fuel-sensors-work.aspx

Interesting results... Although I have a hard time believing the accuracy and latency for a couple since the way they pulled the data to measure is flawed since they used an output from the units which some do not put priority to (unlike aem and innovate who put priority to it), which increases latency and inaccuracy.

Here is another older test... Not as slick of a test, but just another one. shootout