Whats going on everyone, I thought I would share a head to head testing I did with three different pressure transducers. In the test I used the WPS, ATS 300 psi transducer (powered by my 5v box-Jarhead Diagnostics), and the 500 PSI Snap-on transducer (powered by my 5v box as well). I used the zero function that is in the Pico software for the ATS and snap-on transducer. The peak psi on each are close (using the psi/voltage conversion). I think the ATS is a great comparison to the WPS but the Snap-on was the worst of the three.
Disclaimer- All three captures are in the same cylinder of the same vehicle using a WPS hose.
Attachments:
Last edit: 4 years 2 months ago by JarheadDiagnostics. Reason: Image was in the wrong area.
Looking at it the first takeaway a 0-300 psi will give more detail than a 0-500 but there is more to it the Snap-on must have a bit too much in-built smoothing.
" We're trying to plug a hole in the universe, what are you doing ?. "
(Walter Bishop Fringe TV show)
Wow, this is really nice to see! I can't wait to get my WPS!
The WPS and ATS by far have the best detail and resolution. The difference I see here between the WPS and the ATS is the voltage line for EVO and IVC are identical on the WPS. The ATS seems to be a tad higher in the EVO pocket than the IVO.
As for the Snap-On, which is terrible all the way around, the waveform appears 'stretched out' compared to the WPS and ATS. Since you are using the same time bases, this would leave one to measure valve event times in degrees inaccurately to CamShaft Specs. I would almost bet those towers are not quite straight compared to the others. Not Good.
Thank you very much for taking the time to do this Mr. Dills!
Weycraze wrote: Wow, this is really nice to see! I can't wait to get my WPS!
The WPS and ATS by far have the best detail and resolution. The difference I see here between the WPS and the ATS is the voltage line for EVO and IVC are identical on the WPS. The ATS seems to be a tad higher in the EVO pocket than the IVO.
As for the Snap-On, which is terrible all the way around, the waveform appears 'stretched out' compared to the WPS and ATS. Since you are using the same time bases, this would leave one to measure valve event times in degrees inaccurately to CamShaft Specs. I would almost bet those towers are not quite straight compared to the others. Not Good.
Thank you very much for taking the time to do this Mr. Dills!
No error on the Snap-On time scale --- time base is purely a scope and time spacing of peaks is an RPM function. If you put rullers on the peaks all the time space will be the same if RPM is constant. Although I am slightly puzzled by the slight upward slope of Snap-On compared to the other two on induction stroke I would have no issue of using any of the three tools although a 300psi sensor will always give more detail than a 500psi sensor on a spark ignition engine,
" We're trying to plug a hole in the universe, what are you doing ?. "
(Walter Bishop Fringe TV show)
I know this is an old thread but hopefully it gets seen. How did you zero the ATS transducer using pico?? I tried this numerous times and just get the please short circuit message on pico and nothing seems to happen. Probably doing something wrong. Thank you if this reached you
Topic Author
