your unit didnt fair well in this test, oh well its just a test and im sure there will be others down the road that test in a different way and yours wont be shown up quite as bad.........stop crying and get over it.


I would still by my innovate lc-1 over again no matter what this "test" showed.

 

most of the tunners that i know that are just amazing tuners they use the motec one , i ask they because i want to buy a wideband and they told me u can get the FJO or Zeitronix

for example i have in my car the AEM UEGO and the tuner conect his widebamd ( motec) and i saw the difference.

so is weird to see the fjo and zeitronix so bad in that "test"

 

Greased palms at its best. This very own site we are on is an advertising business. Its a touch subject so we'll leave it at that.

 

yeah true

conclusion : buy the wideband that you think its the best one

 

IIRC, Innovate challenged you to host a ZT2 vs LC1 shootout and you declined. This happened on SoCal EVo forum. They challenged you to use caliberated gases as was done in this test and you declined. You cited the JULY 2004 IMPORT TUNER article as gospel.

http://www.socalevo.net/index.php?op...topic=37759.60

Rather than ***** and whine over the results of this shootout, pick up the phone and call Innovate and schedule a one-on-one test between your ZT2 and the Innovate LC1 using caliberated gases. Have independent observers present when the test is conducted. This will tell you once and for all which metter is more accurate.

I know you will NOT do that because you are concerned that the results would be similar to this one. You would rather complain about this study and about commercial bias than accept the challenge that Innovate threw your way.

 

Zeitronix is not concerned over accuracy. How many stock turbo 10 second Evo's have come from the use of a Zeitronix? :raises hand:

While Innovate and yourself spend your time with this marketing campaign, Zeitronix is busy "innovating" their own systems with features out of the box for $279 that Innovate has only dreamed about.

There is nothing like zeitronix on the market for accuracy, features, displays, programmable warning's and safeguards and methanol injection compatibility.

There is not a more bulletproof, SAFE, accurate wideband available for use with meth/alky injection available.

Aquamist themselves, (the highest end alky-injection system manufacturer) have purchased zeitronix units from us just this month.

That should tell you all you need to know about quality, accuracy and reliability.

 

Replaced my PLX R-500 with the ZT-2 with warning and couldnt be happier. The safety features of the ZT-2 cannot be paralled.

 

The marketing campaign comes from YOU. Let us see:

1. Who was it that added text to an article published back in July 2004 to make it look like the ZT2 was competing against a Horiba unit? It was you Scott and you DID NOT tell anyone about it, until you were caught in the act. You porbably even added the text that suggests that the Horiba is $35,000 and that it is used by OEMs.

2. Who was it that HID the FACT that in the same July 2004 Import Tuner article the LM-1 was voted as the meter for best tuning on the track? It was you Scoot and you DID NOT tell anyone about it.

You are the one that is into marketing BS, not me. I simply posted this article AS IS.

 

Zeitronix was competing against a Horiba unit that at the time cost approximately $35k.

No one was caught in the act of anything, however you enjoy trying to make it look like there was deception. The notion that you are attempting to make it look like we added colored text and imply that that was original formatting is deceptive in itself and defamatory. The article was highlighted where accuracies in AFR were within very close range and facts about the benchmark test unit were left out. The numbers themselves are difficult to understand without the notations.

It is not hard to see that I added COLORED text to the black text article in a different font and size. There is text written outside of the article as well. The article is hosted on MY OWN SERVER.

The facts of the article are accurate. None of the facts have been altered.

I never read any article noting the innovate was the best anything at the track.

 

You made a good choice. There is nothing like the features of the ZEITRONIX available, period. Regardless of price, no other wideband tuning partner even has the capacity to do what ZEITRONIX ZT2 does.

 

How did they come up with that ridiculous scoring?
Units that do not offer any logging capabilities scored for software as "poor" (NTK, AEM) and at the same time "fair" (PLX M300).
How in the world did they test and grade the software, which does not exist?

This sponsored "test" is really running on flat tires.

 

Solid points indeed. How to you compare the best software and logging program included with the zeitronix to a competing wideband that does not even offer such software or logging capability at all?

Ask FordMuscle because, somehow they were able to do it.

 

Scott, why does this sound similiar to the "I've tuned 3494309 evos and none of them have ever blown up so my tunes work" line of reasoning that you yourself like to cry down?

I'm not taking either side here but just saying that if Zeitronix is going to come on this forum and keep a lot of noise about the tests and Innovate has already extended the offer to go and do a shoot out then they should go and do it.

At the end of the day the customers will hopefully have some better data to choose a wideband based on its accuracy. If they want to choose it based on ease of use, or extra features or whatever else then thats a different story all together I think.

 

The point was the zeitronix accuracy has been proven under the most extreme conditions on the edge of sane tuning with experimental fueling, meth injection and mid 30's boost. I am not sure there is a better test than the real world tests we have proven yet to "blow up". This is with one bung, one sensor under REAL condtions not fabricated to "mimic" actual conditions.

I have no information regarding any "call out" by one manufacturer over another to face to face test units.

What I can tell you from a BUSINESS perspective, I had been asked to be put on the spot against another well known tuner at a local dragstrip for 3 passes each on a random test car.

The other tuner contacted me and we both agreed that we did not see a benefit from such a test regardless of how confident one tuner was or is over the other.

Whatever business decisions these wideband manufacturers decide to do, it really has ZERO impact on how I have used and will continue to use ZEITRONIX products in under real world conditions.

The fact that we have some of the best feedback via custom tunes, eflashes tells us all we need to know about the wideband we have selected to use to confidently tune the Evo's that come to us. It works, it has proven more reliable vs. the local mustang dyno's innovate so much so that the dyno has recommended zeitronix to other visitors even though they are an innovate dealer.

 

We have spoken to Mr. Mike Kojima the author of the Fordmuscle shootout and got first hand test details. According to Mr. Kojima his article was edited prior to the publication.

The tests were done using Innovate methodology and Innovate equipment.

There were several major flaws in the test, including but not limited to the way the O2 sensor was exposed to the test gases.

One of the major test flaws was reading the AFR value from the Zeitronix Zt-2 analog output using the Innovate logger. There is a voltage drop on the power-ground wire caring 12W of O2 sensor heater power and offsetting the AFR value. Reading the AFR value from the Innovate digital output but logging a raw Zt-2 voltage using Innovate logger subjected the Zt-2 AFR reading to the voltage drop, noise and Innovate logger analog to digital conversion offsets and conversion time.
The Zeitronix ZDL datalogging software should have been used to read the digital AFR value from the digital output of the Zt-2; not any other product brand.

Using the Innovate analog logger to read the Zt-2 (and other wideband meters) analong AFR value gave Innovate LC-1 unit, a half track length advantage in this 1/4 mile race. We either start from the same line or this test is not valid at all. This is an absolute violation and unscrupulous action.

The same goes for the "latency" measurement. The Zt-2 AFR readings were obtained by using the Innovate logger and software.

The Zeitronix ZDL software was not used in the test but scored the lowest.
For those who use our ZDL software know that hitting Enter starts logging, Enter stops. What's easier? "Clap on, clap off"?
Let me point out again that the other unit, which does not come with any logging software scored higher in the "Software" category.

Moreover, the Zt-2 scored the lowest in "ease of use" category. In order to get the AFR value from the Zt-2 all it takes is two wires to be connected to +12V and ground plus the O2 sensor placed in the exhaust stream. The Zeitronix LCD display plugs and powers up directly from the Zt-2.

As you suspect, Fordmuscle is sponsored by Innovate.

Eng
Zeitronix Inc.