Scangauge I I

[Hoovie]

Posted about the Scangauge I I and decided to take the plunge and buy one

Ordered from the company mentioned - www.ukobd.co.uk yesterday afternoon (about 2:45pm) and it arrived this morning Special Delivery, so 10/10 for promptness. A great start

I also ordered the Blendmount which is a little kit of stuff that allows the gauge to be mounted over the mirror neatly - the one which suits the Toyota Mirror mounting is out of stock so that will be a couple of weeks yet - which is fine as it actually gives me time to see if I need that or not really :P

I'll post some pics of the install and the setup as I go along.....

[Hoovie]

Well, the install is done - only took about 20 minutes in total, including routing a cable, wrapping up the excess and fixing the scangauge to the chosen mounting place.

Mounted Scangauge onto Mirror with supplied Velcro Pads

The Blendmount does exactly the same thing except it connects via a clamp, so I will almost certainly be cancelling the blendmount order :)

Used a standard Network CAT5 Ethernet cable with RJ-45 plugs and tucked it behind headlining (you can just make out the green cable in the next photo maybe), down front pillar cap and then dropped to the drivers kick panel where the ODB connector is located (on the RAV4.2 at least). Then connected that cable to the supplied Scangauge cable.

I think I could have just used the single provided cable on its own as it is 6 foot long, but this way is a little more flexible and I had the extra cable kicking around anyway.

Close up of the Gauge

The gauge is very visible in that location and easily reachable to change the gauges on view when desired.

Out of interest, the 4 gauges selected to be on show here are as follows:

RPM - Engine RPM obviously - idling at 705rpm, so engine nicely warmed up

cWT - Coolant Water Temp in Celcius - 83 Deg - no idea if that is high, low or normal, but I do know it is 83 Deg Cel

cIA - Air Intake Temp in Celcius - 31 Deg - same as Coolant Temp situation, good, bad? dunno, but I know ;)

IGN - This is potentially a very interesting one - Ignition Timing

According to the guide, the more advance there is, the better the economy and power - and it is set by the air intake temp, load on engine and octane rating of fuel. So I am thinking by monitoring this, it may be possible to actually see what benefits there are (as oppossed to 'gut feeling') in using higher octane fuels like Super Unleaded or Shell V-Power?

After having a very brief play, I think the amount of information that can be gleaned from this is pretty impressive and can be used to check the general health of your car before problems start occuring.

I'll post some pics of where the connectors are, etc, a bit later on

[zoom jones]

Great post. Tempted by this myself. Good to see it in action and hear positive feedback with regard to the functionality it offers. Thanks

[Hoovie]

I haven't actually had a chance to drive the car anywhere since fitting it, mind :D

There is a question still about which models it is compatible with - there was a requirement in Europe to have petrol cars from 2001 support the OBD connection, so you could be out of luck, but I don't think so

Have a look by the kick panel for a largish white socket with nothing connected to it - if you have one of those, probably ok.

[Hoovie]

Couple of observations so far - the MPH reading on the scangauge appears to be a lot more accurate then the speedometer (my Speedo is about 10% high compared to GPS) - the scangauge speed can be calibrated anyway, but looks like it is starting out well

It is a US device and has settings for Liters and Gallons - not US Gallons and Imp Gallons. The unit does support Imperial Gallons but to get to it is quite convoluted - and given the way we buy petrol here anyway, I have decided to go metric and have a Miles per Litre configuration :) You can have MPG still, of course ;)

[anchorman]

This is it on a 4.2 marked here in green;

The accelerator is at the bottom and the bonnet pull is towards the right.

Hoovie

It will certainly be interesting to see what happens. Lower grade fuels are more volatile than high grade and tend to explode rather than burn in a controlled manner. In the first case, any explosion or rapid heating of the combustion charge can cause a secondary flash of the fuel in the cylinder. This sends a shock wave that meets in the middle which you will know as pinking or the correct term "detonation". In extreme cases the fuel can flash even before the spark is introduced like a diesel and that is referred to as "pre-ignition". They have quite the wrong effect by fighting the correct combustion process which should be a controlled and consistent burn that pushes the piston down on the entire power stroke. The engine runs better when it is more advanced (to a degree) as if the spark is introduced when the piston is approaching the top of the cylinder on the compression stroke (BTDC - before top dead centre), it gives the charge enough time to build up a good head of pressure to force the piston down on the power stroke. This all happens very quickly (50 times per second at 6000RPM) so timing the spark is critical. Now if you put a low grade fuel in that just goes "bang" when the spark is introduced the engine will detonate and the shock waves are picked up by a knock sensor on the cylinder block. If it senses knocking it will !Removed! the ignition and although the knocking (which could otherwise blow a hole in the top of a piston) is reduced, so is the performance because by the time the fuel has reached optimum temperature/pressure the piston is at the bottom and the car feels to have run out of breath!

So! The better the fuel the less risk of detonation and in theory you should see a higher number displayed (under like for like conditions) equating to better fuel consumption. The engine also runs better (thermally) when it is as near to melting as you can get without it actually melting. Think of it as a fire burning machine that has a secondary benefit of producing power! The higher the temperature the better the combustion and the better the power. The cooling system thermostat is set to open at 82 deg C so that display appears to be astonishingly accurate. The air intake temperature is measured by the Mass Airflow Meter (MAF) which uses a hot wire in the intake airflow and the amount by which the wire is cooled is measured by the resistance in the wire. That information is used to make minute adjustments to the air/fuel ratio which should be between 15:1 and 18:1 by weight for the best efficiency. Air temp has an affect on density so again a higher intake temp will result in a lower mass of fuel being injected.

My only problem would be not crashing while I was gazing up at that lot!!!

Keep us informed.

[dave.m]

looks good mate, looking forward to the results you get.

[Hoovie]

What would be really good is a way to save all this data and download to a PC for analysis 'off-line' - I saw a similar gauge that did this, but was a lot more expensive.

I do like analysing info - got a Solar Hot Water system that polls 4 temp sensors every 5 minutes and I download that to Excel! I can tell when anyone in the house had a shower in the last year

[chatman]

I do like analysing info - got a Solar Hot Water system that polls 4 temp sensors every 5 minutes and I download that to Excel! I can tell when anyone in the house had a shower in the last year

Geek Geek Geek................... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

I'm still using the tin bath and the toilet is at the end if the garden......Takes me ages ..................

[Ravke]

Water at 0°C is frozen

Water at 100°C is boiling

[Hoovie]

Great

[Hoovie]

Been for a nice drive out to play with the Scangauge and seen some things some of you guys may be interested in ....

Accuracy of Speed Reading

Did a test with the cruise enabled so I could keep a constant speed and at 50 MPH on the GPS (which has got to be most accurate), the scangauge fluctated between 50 and 51, so close enough to be spot on, I would say; the Speedo on the car was 54mph

Fuel Usage

A common question is about saving fuel by coasting down hills and when coming to a stop.

Looking at the scanguage info, it confirms a couple of things I have read - It seems the fuel supply to the engine is turned off in that no-load situation! so when I was going down a hill and had my foot off the gas, the readings were 9999MPL (Miles Per Litre) - that is a similar situation to the OBC where the highest figure is 99.9MPG. The BHP reading for the power the engine is putting out was Zero HP at theis time, so my conclusion is that there is no fuel saving whatsoever in leaving the car to coast and leaving it in gear is both more economical AND of course, safer!

Another question which has been posed on RAV4World is how much fuel is used when idling - and the Scangauge can answer that as well! To get a fully accurate scanguage requires a couple of fuel fillups to allow fine calibration, so I have not have it installed long enough for the info to be 100% spot on, but it will be pretty close ....

According to the scanguage, my warmed-up 2.0 VVT-i is idling at 700rpm and uses 0.77lph (Litres per Hour) (=0.17Gallons/Hr).

So at £1.14 a litre, if you leave your car idling for 15 minutes waiting for the Mrs to change her coat/shoes/etc, she's just cost you 22p

HorsePower

My RAV is the RAV4.2 2.0 VVT-i which is meant to be 150BHP. Setup the Scanguage to read the HP generated and you can see the figures going up as the revs go up.

Sticking my foot down and accelerating hard (fortunately I have lots of quiet roads to play with here :D ), the HP reading peaked at 160.

I am not that mechanically minded to be sure what that really means, but if it equates to the true BHP of the engine, then it is pretty accurate and means the engine is still nice and good (which at 31,000 miles I would hope so!). Would the figure be a bit higher then the official spec have anything to do with the TTE Sports Exhaust? The car has seemed a little more 'eager' since that was fitted :) Or is it just engineering tolerances and the official power quoted is conservative?

And I also got from the gauge that my drive out to play around with it cost me £8.93 in fuel, so at the moment it is not a money saver, but a money burner :D

[chatman]

Good stuff Hoovie.... Puts a few questions to bed...

Would be good to see one working on a 4.2 model D4D and also the newer 4.3 mode; 2.2 Diesel....

Just to compare things.....Unfortunatly mine does not have the OBDII port and will not accept it (being a 2002 model) :censor: :censor: as only the Mr T ones will read it....

So what we need to know Hoovie, is when is the wife getting the new Kitchen and full wardrobe of clothes....... :yes:

I had too do a lot of washing up and hoovering to counter ballance me getting the Mountain Bike :rolleyes:

[Hoovie]

Put it this way, Chatman ....

R4SBADLTWSWID5DC!!!

'nuf said?

[chatman]

Put it this way, Chatman ....

R4SBADLTWSWID5DC!!!

'nuf said?

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[Zwart_Verso]

I am thinking about buying a Scangauge II for my Verso (1.8 petrol), the distributor has confirmed it is compatible with my car. BUT looking around the internet I see some reports of problems with ABS lights and/or Motor management warning lights that come on and communication errors being generated. The last thing I want to do is muck-up the motor management computer.

I have found no specific Toyota issues but l saw one post on a Lexus forum saying be sure to connect with the engine running (which is what the user manual says) otherwise the ABS light flashes.

Has anybody here come across any problems with using a Scangauge, any thoughts, advice etc. would be most welcome.

Thanks, Andy.

[Hoovie]

always worked on mine since I had it (which is not very long).

[Hoovie]

Another update on usage ....

drove to my office today - about 125 miles and is first reasonably long distance journey and was playing around with the scanguage to see what it could tell me.

A wealth of information is provided on this - I know the average economy for the specific trip, as well as for the tank of fuel so far, I know the maximum RPM engine went up to (how useful that is, who knows ;) ), also max speed and average speed, max coolant temp during the journey - could be handy for troubleshooting?, Monitoring the voltage so easy to tell if electrical system is getting enough charge.

Tells me how much petrol used up in tank, how muhc is left and estimated range left in both time and distance - It even tells me the cost in petrol of the journey (£19 I think one way ).

So all in all, I reckon this little box is a very hand bit of kit - part geeky, part useful, part invaluable (esp when it comes to when a error code needs reading) and worth the money.

I did cancel the mounting as using the velro pads to attach above the mirror is nice and secure and is in a pretty ideal place for both controlling and viewing.

Prob do one more update to say how accurate the scangauge is re the fuel usage. my OBC is particually bad I think (up to 20% out) and from what I can see form the readings, the Scanguage functions in this area feel way more accurate, but the tank fill up I will be doing tomorrow heading home will confirm this one way or the other

[rave]

Hi Hoovie! Do you know if the Rav 4.2 2004 with D4D engine has OBD2? I found on Scangauge for 105 Pounds, Thanks

[zoom jones]

Hoovie, does it give you the outside temp?

[Hoovie]

I know just where you are going with that question ;)

I have not found the option and I suspect the answer is no. Add a outside temp gauge would be fairly easy to do I reckon - St Thicket has been investigating that info along with other stuff

[Hoovie]

Prob do one more update to say how accurate the scangauge is re the fuel usage. my OBC is particually bad I think (up to 20% out) and from what I can see form the readings, the Scanguage functions in this area feel way more accurate, but the tank fill up I will be doing tomorrow heading home will confirm this one way or the other

Filled the tank at 3/4 empty as per the calibration instructions.

I used a different petrol station so the brim fills could be slightly different, but the scores on the doors are as follows:

Scangauge 2 calculated the Fuel Used since last fill as 32.2 Litres; Actual Fuel put in tank to brim it was 36.3 Litres - so the Scanguage data was 12.7% low.

That is not that surprising considering the cars own OBC in the radio is between 17% and 25% out (just checked my figures since March!) and the data feed is probably from the same source

The good thing about the Scangauge is that it provides the ability to carry out this calibration process, so I am expecting the difference between the Scanguage consumption figure and the real figure come next fill-up to be within a couple of percentage points.

A nice feature of the Data is that when the calibration is done, the Miles per Litre data and Costs for that last tank of fuel get adjusted in Real Time.

BTW - this calibration correction is how the unit goes from US Gallons to Imperial Gallons - for example, if you used 10 gallons of fuel, the first time you REFUEL the car, the Scangauge will think you used 13.3 Gallons as it is initially running in US Gallons - making the Gauge appear 25% high in the reading. So correcting the amount to 10 from 13.3 will apply an adjustment to all the consumption calculations and effectively make the unit run in Imperial Gallons.

In the UK, this will still be a pain as when you fill up, you have to know the quantity in Gallons so have to convert litres to gallons to get the right value to see if any subsequent calibration is needed.

Also, the unit works to one decimal position - so the calibration is much more accurate in the litres setting as the smallest step is 0.1 Litres, which is obviously a lot smaller then 0.1 Gallons, so IMO, the litres setting is both easier to use and more accurate.

Not sure if anyone still awake now

Reckon that is about it about the Scangauge 2. Any questions you got which you think I may be able to answer, ask away

[local hero]

Reckon that is about it about the Scangauge 2. Any questions you got which you think I may be able to answer, ask away

When i had a 4.2 D4D..the OBC was very accurate with regards fuel consumption,(brim 2 brim) but my 4.3 is well out, I think i would like to try one of these in mine at a later date.. Hoovie its a pity you didn't have it before you fitted your TTE exhaust, you could have seen if there was any BHP gain, as Remus who make it, claim a useful power increase, also i would like to see what a difference my "CHIP" makes, and also i tried a K+N filter in mine and couldnt notice any difference, Anchs has tried it in his with the same result. I think it would be very interesting, but not sure if it sounds a bit complicated...

[Hoovie]

Reckon that is about it about the Scangauge 2. Any questions you got which you think I may be able to answer, ask away

When i had a 4.2 D4D..the OBC was very accurate with regards fuel consumption,(brim 2 brim) but my 4.3 is well out, I think i would like to try one of these in mine at a later date.. Hoovie its a pity you didn't have it before you fitted your TTE exhaust, you could have seen if there was any BHP gain, as Remus who make it, claim a useful power increase, also i would like to see what a difference my "CHIP" makes, and also i tried a K+N filter in mine and couldnt notice any difference, Anchs has tried it in his with the same result. I think it would be very interesting, but not sure if it sounds a bit complicated...

Stew, you are spot on about installing the Scangauge before the TTE Exhaust - I really, really, wish I did .

I am actually sure the TTE Exhaust has made a difference - the car really does feel 'freer' and more powerful, and it sure sounds good now :D

I still have the old exhaust (not sure what to do with it!) so potentially I could put it back and compare, but while interesting, would be a waste of money (as I would get a exhaust place to do it probably)

Don't be put off by a fear of not being able to set it up or use it - it really is straightforward

[anchorman]

Reckon that is about it about the Scangauge 2. Any questions you got which you think I may be able to answer, ask away

When i had a 4.2 D4D..the OBC was very accurate with regards fuel consumption,(brim 2 brim) but my 4.3 is well out, I think i would like to try one of these in mine at a later date.. Hoovie its a pity you didn't have it before you fitted your TTE exhaust, you could have seen if there was any BHP gain, as Remus who make it, claim a useful power increase, also i would like to see what a difference my "CHIP" makes, and also i tried a K+N filter in mine and couldnt notice any difference, Anchs has tried it in his with the same result. I think it would be very interesting, but not sure if it sounds a bit complicated...

To be honest Stew I fitted the K&N after having bought 2 new replacement filters from Kingo but at the time it was a futile attempt to try and limit the daily increases in fuel costs. I didn't get to doing any valid comparisons as the noise drove me mad and the genuine filter was refitted.

I remember you making the same comment about the noise. I was very grateful for the filter but it is reserve stock at the moment! It was good if the wife tried to talk me into calling in at the shops because if I put my foot down she I knew I couldn't hear her and stopped trying to talk!!!

I also tried a tank of Tesco weasel pee (proper name rymes with "hiss") with 5p a litre off but that was the first and last. I will be canverting it back from Ford Transit van noise mode tomorrow when I head off through Sheffield to visit daughter No1 at Hull.

Cheers