Which gauges to pick

[Y2KW57]

See, BigJoe and DaveBen, that's EXACTLY why I think we are talking about apples and oranges!

I doubt that I am as experienced as you, but I might be just as old as you, so don't go playing the AARP card on me now, ok? 'Cause I get their bulletin too. "Sitting is the new cancer" is on the front page of this month's issue, so I'll try and be more brief!

It seems as if you both are equating the Big 3's "normal, L, R" type gauges to any and all remotely processed guage systems. Maybe you aren't, but when the only example you use is that of an auto manufacturer's guages... lame gauges that I completely agree might as well just be idiot lights... as a reason to avoid remotely processed and reported guage systems... it doesn't seem like an apples to apples comparison.

Now, I'm new here, and I don't want to ruffle feathers or be so bold. But if I sat in silence with my own opinion, I would never have the opportunity to learn from you, and have my opinion changed. That is the purpose of a forum... to discuss. And I hold zero value to my opinion, and high value to learning something new. It is through this prism that I raise the question.

If the aftermarket guage manufacturers goal is to report accurately in real time, then does it matter if the sender and or thermocouple and or pressure diaphram sends the data to a box rather than a guage housing? Either way, the data gathered from the item measured still has to be converted to needle movement for us to see it. Whether that conversion takes place behind the dial face, or in a black box doesn't seem to matter, as long as the creator of the guage system intends to report the data accurately and in real time.

We have all, through our own experience with cars since the '60s, ascertained that the automobile manufacturers do not necessarily intend for us to have accurate data in real time... to keep warranty claims down from customers concerns about operational spikes. I get that. I learned that 40 years ago.

But what I've also learned more recently, say within the last 20 years, is due to stringent Federal and State emission laws, there is a lot of interdependent engine sensor data that has to be EXTREMELY accurate to the PCM in order for the engine system to perform as mandated. Not "normal low high" but exacting and precise values measured in nanosecond intervals and resolved to tenths and hundredths.

So when considering aftermarket guages for our Superduties, it seems to make sense to bear this capability in mind. Would one dismiss as inaccurate the data stream that the multitude of sensors supply the PCM to operate the engine, just because the data that is supplied to the OEM guage cluster is damped and averaged? I don't think so. The PCM needs to see accurate realtime data. The customer (in the OEM's business model) doesn't.

But the business model of an aftermarket guage company that supports racing and towing and other severe use scenarios is different. They know their "motor head" customers want "real time data in order to compensate accordingly." They supply that data with "a needle, on a scale" podded in a "rack" of guages that can be read at a glance. That's apples. That's what we all want. There is no argument there.

Oranges is when the issue of what the Big 3 do with their factory guages is brought up. That is NOT what the aftermarket guage systems discussed in this thread appear to be doing at all, regardless of how the needles on their dial faced scales are moved.

It just seemed that a distinction between fruit needed to be made, and if I didn't step up to do it, I'd never have the opportunity to have you point out to me what I still don't understand. I hope that makes sense?

[DaveBen]

This apples and oranges debate is not really going any where. What I am saying is I learned on what was common in my days. That is what I know best. I am not a fan of the computer driven gauges that Ford uses. My opinion. These are what I am most comfortable with. I have always been one who likes direct observations and I feel pcm controlled gauges are not direct observations of what they report. I will take my apples and you can take your oranges and we both can be happy.

OK?

Dave

[Y2KW57]

Kind of an old thread, but your question wasn't answered yet (at least here, anyways) so I thought I would take a shot:

Originally Posted by rocketdog

Also, what is wrong with the stock Trans Temp gauge in the instrument cluster? Just not accurate enough? Appreciate any replies!

The OEM transmission temp guage is damped. It's needle movement, by design, is not as reactive as a "real" guage. It is damped to keep owners from panicking at sudden (but temporary) increases in temperature, and thus reduce Ford warranty costs from needless service visits from concerned owners that are still under the warranty period.

The temperature can climb rapidly in certain circumstances, such as when backing up an incline, but if the transmission cooling system is working, the temperature should fall back to normal levels before any damage is done. Rather than allow the guage to show these rises and falls, Ford damps the OEM guage needle to sit relatively still within the "Normal" indicators despite a comparatively wide gamut of actual temperatures the fluid is transitioning through.

Only when the temperature is sustained for longer periods of time, and only in the presence of other parameters (not known by me) that Ford programs the onboard modules to take into consideration, does the Ford trans temp guage finally move above the Normal range to report to the owner that there might indeed by a problem.

Most people who pay close attention to their vehicles mechanical operation would argue that by the time the transmission has sustained elevated temperatures long enough, and high enough, to actually move the Ford trans temp guage to concerning level, it is already too late to prevent the damage that might have been done.

Obviously, the engineers (or the accountants, or both) feel differently.

I have a GM truck also, with an OEM transmission temperature guage. GM's guage is not nearly as damped... if it is even damped at all. I can see the trans temp needle move all the time, and can predict the circumstances when it will move up, and when it will recede. I like this much better than a glorified idiot light.

Note that this "real time" aspect of guage reporting (versus a damped idiot light type gauge) has little to do with how the guage is "wired." The real time versus damped nature of guage reporting is not a question of whether the guage is so called "hard wired" where the gauge's sending unit signals translated into needle movement in the cylinder that holds the dial, or whether the sending unit's signals are translated in a remote module elsewhere in the truck. The problem that people have with Ford's transmission temp guage is the result of that guage functioning how Ford intended... which is damped.

My Ford came out before Ford started putting their transmission temperature "idiot light" guage in as OEM, so the first thing I did was add a transmission temperture guage. It is not damped. But it also does not pipe hot transmission fluid into my A Pillar either! The sending unit is installed in the pressure port of the transmission, and this unit converts fluid temperature into an electronic signal that get's routed to my guage in the A pillar.

I'd be just as happy using Ford's OEM transmission temperture data that is already available from the onboard modules accessible through the data link port. When I had an NGS Star 2 tester hooked up to my truck for a few days, I had one of the monitoring parameters set to TFT (transmission fluid temperature). Ford's OEM temp signal was as accurate, and as real time, as my independent "hard wired" guage. In fact, Ford's data was MORE accurate, if one considers that the digital readout resolved the actual temperature with more specificity. So a "hardwire" guage would not be necessary if you had an instrument plugged into the DLC that could read Ford's sending unit's output.

Nevertheless, the signal that Ford sends to their version of the OEM transmission fluid temperture guage for us consumers to see on 2002 and up trucks is not in real time like the pin point precise data stream available to the PCM, and therefore is not considered accurate. Only average, at best.

[DaveBen]

The stock gauges are called lie-o-meters, and for good reason.

Dave

[Dogman]

I am not keen on fords computer driven gauges too. My 04 had both and my OEM trans. temp. did not move at all but my autometer gauge was all over the place. The computer driven gauges have a set temp. and it was always at the R in normal. Which is about 130 to 180 thats a big spread temp wise.

[RSG]

This is fun...yesterday I was running some washboard gravel road for over 10 miles and decided I don't like real-time gauges sometimes, too...on my auxiiary fuel tank in-dash gauge! It was bouncing quite a bit and could benefit from a bit of "signal integration" to smooth the needle swings. In the old days, we did that with a capacitor across the leads. Nowadays, the processors can do it for us.

I for sure don't like the damped idiot lights either, but yesterday's trip reminded me that some damping can be ok? I know we're really not talking about fuel quantity in this thread...I'm just puttin' it out there!

Happy Easter!