Scanguage II settings.

Brian_Spilsbury · Jun 4, 2008

I've been reading on the web about how to calibrate the scanguage so it gives useful information and also how you can move it from vehicle to vehicle and if you've remembered the percent correction for errors you can drop it back into your car and have it function properly.
Is it not then possible, given the similarities in most of our cars, to just preprogram in the error correction based on our combined research and have it work well out of he box?

Brian_Spilsbury · Jun 10, 2008

Can anyone look up the correction factor that they use to give them correct results for mileage, speed and distance?

RIP TDI · Jun 10, 2008

The variable that, well, varies considerably from car to car is the ECM's fuel consumption signal (i.e., volume/time not MPG). It is dependent on the IP's IQ setting, engine modifications (chip, nozzles, etc.), fuel used (D2, B20, B99) and changes dramatically with small changes in any of these items, particularly IQ. You might be able to chart Scangage fuel volume correction correlated with measured IQ, fuel used, and specific chips/nozzles, but it would have to be derived from a large number of reported data points rather than calculated.

Scangage distance correction variation (which determines speed as well) is much, much smaller from car to car and the correction percentage value is much smaller, but would still vary with different size tires.

So, the simple answer is, no, there are no correction constants for Scangage. Just be grateful that Scangage requires only one full tank for correction and not many tanks as calibrating the early MFAs requires.

Brian_Spilsbury · Jun 12, 2008

Thanks for the explanation.
I was hoping/assuming that most of the data for our stock TDI's would be similar and the calibration could be moved from guage to guage, car to car.

DbLog · Jun 12, 2008

My gauge shows about 6mpg. Guess I set it up wrong. Speed is right on for 205 55 16 with an off set of 4. This has been verified on the dyno as well as roadside radars. Still don't know why it doesn't show mpg remotely close to what I'm getting.

mchapek · Jun 25, 2008

I had thought about posting this info awhile back, as it seems like it might be a good starting point (for someone with a NEW scangauge)...to maybe get you in the ballpark. My jetta is pretty stone stock, so should be pretty close for cars in that category. I also need it whenever I pull my scangauge out of the car to check/clear codes on other cars...as it loses my settings and I need to reprogram. So anyway, here are my settings:

tank size: 16 gallons (you program it in whole gallons, so this leaves me an extra half gallon for 'security' on those 800 mile tanks!)
fuel type: diesel A
Speed offset: +4% (my odometer reads right on, my speed'O' dial is off...my speed was calibrated w/ a gps unit)
Program user colors: 0 red, 0 green, 2 blue (this gets it 'close' to the dashboard indigo blue)
Fillup offset: -13%
Speed offset: 4%

The 4 data items I leave on the screen 'normally': Engine Load, Coolant temp, Speed and mpg.

I"d be interested to hear from others if my readings are the same/close (always nice to have a comparison)

With all that said, I LOVE my scangauge! I'm sure it's paid for itsself in the last 2 years, as I now closely monitor every trip in the car. I find myself trying to eek out every mpg I can on every single trip (I'm now routinely hitting 800miles on 16 gallons...50mpg). So now I"m shooting for 55mpg (without slowing to 55 or any other unrealistic procedures). Simple things like pulling into every parking area so that I can pull out without backing up...little things like that add up over an 800 mile tank.

Joe_Meehan · Jun 25, 2008

mchapek said:
I had thought about posting this info awhile back, as it seems like it might be a good starting point (for someone with a NEW scangauge)...

I might suggest that those with a vent mod may use 17 gallons as a starting point. Of course that depends on what results you want.

It will be interesting to compare my results with yours once I get mine setup. I am now on my first tank of fuel and just started it, so it will be a while. I guess I can go ahead and do the distance adjustments. Maybe tomorrow.

Bayou_Flyer · Jun 26, 2008

mchapekSpeed offset: +4% (my odometer reads right on said:
My speedo was showing 3mph fast compared to my Garmin, but timing a 3 to 5 mile stretch of interstate showed my speedo was accurate +/- 1mph. I've accomplished the timing calculations at varied speeds and distances, and my speedometer is right on. I run factory size 225/45/17's on OEM wheels. If anything, the tires showed a slightly larger diameter when I checked the stats at the Tire Rack (which would've slowed my speedo a a tad).

I wonder if the GPS reported speed is off slightly? Since it is calculating horizontally without being able to account for terrain changes, if you're travelling 75mph uphill (or downhill) the GPS speed will be slower because your straightline speed is less than your road-going speed. What kind of accuracy do people have driving in mountainous terrain? Just a thought.

Bob_Fout · Jun 26, 2008

I found my GPS was only accurate to within 1 or 2 MPH (it only displays whole numbers), my stopwatch, mile markers and odo/tripmeter were more accurate.

This is over flat land even.

mchapek · Jun 26, 2008

I"m pretty sure the GPS is pretty dang accurate (it also has elevation data). My tires are also stock size (standard monterey alloy rims, 15x6", tires 195/65R15) though highly worn...in fact, down to the wear strips...they are bf goodrich touring tires...(came with the car). I just ordered a set of Michelen Energy's from costco...hope to put them on next week...they are the stock tire (will match my spare). It will be interesting to see if my scangauge speed calibaration stays the same with new tires or not (not sure of the overall diamater change from a new tire to a worn out one..but it must be some amount, however small). My 4% speed offset brings my scangauge to within 5 miles of my odometer after an 800 mile tank, which is about as close as I can get it.

I think for those with unmodified tdi 5-speeds, the settings I posted above will be pretty close, especially to start with. When I do move the unit to another car however briefly, I have to put the numbers back. I can even get my fillup offset in (just hit fillup, change the offset to -13.3% and hit ok)...then my mpg and consumption will be accurate, only my miles left on the tank will be wrong...however whenever I do fill it back up, I just hit 'fillup' and go ahead and hit ok on whatever it says for gallons (even though it's wrong)...as long as I keep the offset right...and then it's spot on from that point.

And for those interested in hypermiling, I think an accurate scangauge is a must...I am quite comfortable going 800 miles on 16 gallons knowing I only have a half a gallon left, as my fillups are always within 1/10th of a gallon (I fill to the rim every time, it's the only way).

Joe_Meehan · Jun 26, 2008

mchapek said:
I"m pretty sure the GPS is pretty dang accurate (it also has elevation data).

It can be very accurate. But not all are accurate. There are three primary problems.

The sampling rate. GPS units measure spots and leave a trail like bread crumbs. If you are going straight it is 100% accurate, but if you are turning, then it cuts corners.

Likewise if you are going up and down hills, plus not all GPS units will add the altitude changes into the calculation.

Civilian GPS units are intentionally dumbed down. They don't get really accurate figures, however they are rather good and I doubt if that is a problem for most of the uses we have here.

K5ING · Jun 26, 2008

Like the man with two watches, I was happy with the accuracy of my Garmin eMap until I got a "no-name-o" brand GPS from WOOT awhile back. The two don't agree with each other at all. The no-name-o one is about 1.5mph slower than the Garmin. At an indicated 70, the Garmin reads 67.5 while the other one reads 66. I'm pretty sure the Garmin is accurate, but now I don't know for absolute sure.

diesel-dave · Jun 26, 2008

I used KMPH in both my GPS and Scanguage to calibrate then i switched them back to MPH. I used a Garmin-NUVI... it's laser accurate.

Bob_Fout · Jun 26, 2008

diesel-dave said:
I used KMPH in both my GPS and Scanguage to calibrate then i switched them back to MPH. I used a Garmin-NUVI... it's laser accurate.

I have a garmin nuvi, the GPS I mentioned that off a few MPH. Mine's about 2 years old though.

diesel-dave · Jun 26, 2008

i used KM to calibrate it's a little more accurate right?

Bob_Fout · Jun 26, 2008

Yes, km are shorter than miles.

Jetta_Pilot · Jun 26, 2008

My speedo if it reads 100 K/h (62 Mph) then according to 2 different GPS units I tested it with, the actual speed is 96 K/h ( 60 Mph).
I adjust the SCII to match the GPS.

1st GPS = Garmin Nuvi350
2nd GPS = USB GPS mouse plugged into laptop running MS Streets&Trips

BTW, 1 mile is 1.6 km or 1 km is 0.6 mile.

Tsagoth · Jun 27, 2008

I just bought a Garmin yesterday, and apparently my car is bipolar. Either the SGII is exactly right, or it's off by 4. It seems to be set when the car is started and then it's consistent. So one start, the SGII will be dead on. Next time I start the car it might be off by 4. The gps wasn't turned off, so I'm assuming that its results are consistent.

mjhandy · Jul 3, 2008

I'm the same. My GPS and the SG show a similiar speed, which is higher than the speedo. I've noticed that faster i go, the greater the difference will be.

So i pretty much ignore the speedo now, and go by the SG and the GPS.

Bob_Fout · Jul 3, 2008

Yup, at slower speeds it's off [speedo vs. true speed] by 1 to 2 MPH, and up to 4 to 5 MPH at 90 to 100 MPH. I've not been over 100 MPH yet, so I can't say about faster than that.

Joe_Meehan · Jul 4, 2008

Bob_Fout said:
Yup, at slower speeds it's off [speedo vs. true speed] by 1 to 2 MPH, and up to 4 to 5 MPH at 90 to 100 MPH. I've not been over 100 MPH yet, so I can't say about faster than that.

That is about average and intentional. It is about 3-5% intentional fast. VW and likely all other makes intentionally do this to prevent problems from someone who may have been charged with speeding because their speedometer was reading a little low. The odometer should be correct. Of course a change in tyre size will change things.

Joe_Meehan · Jul 4, 2008

I don't know if they are still doing it, but at one time the US GPS system intentionally changed a little from time to time, to prevent use of the system by the bad guys. The military receivers were not affected by this so they stayed dead on. I am not sure that is still happening, but in time of war, you can expect some serious errors to show up.

tttthumper · Jul 4, 2008

K5ING said:
Like the man with two watches, I was happy with the accuracy of my Garmin eMap until I got a "no-name-o" brand GPS from WOOT awhile back. The two don't agree with each other at all. The no-name-o one is about 1.5mph slower than the Garmin. At an indicated 70, the Garmin reads 67.5 while the other one reads 66. I'm pretty sure the Garmin is accurate, but now I don't know for absolute sure.

I'd like to mention in accuracy of GPS's, my Garmin uses towers as well as satellites, to triangulate their position.

GPS signals are electromagnetic waves, which travel at light speed (approximately 300,000,000 meters per second).

K5ING · Jul 4, 2008

Your Garmin is WAAS enabled, which makes it more accurate. The point of my post was that not ALL GPS's are accurate. You get what you pay for, which is why I trust my eMap over my cheapie "Nav-Tour" one I got from Woot.

mjhandy · Jul 5, 2008

tttthumper said:
I'd like to mention in accuracy of GPS's, my Garmin uses towers as well as satellites, to triangulate their position.

GPS signals are electromagnetic waves, which travel at light speed (approximately 300,000,000 meters per second).

Mine has the same thing, but i've also noticed that the trip odomoter is different too. The SG is close to the GPS, but the dash trip is different. I haven't had a close look to see how much though. Anyone else seen this?

waawaaweenie · Jul 6, 2008

I use a Garmin in my truck and have put on close to 1 million miles with it. I have passed by hundreds of "cop in a boxes" in the mountains and on flat roads, and it is always right on the money with those. on the rare occasion there is a difference, I chalk it up as the cop in a box is wrong.

gertimus1 · Jul 7, 2008

Brian_Spilsbury said:
I've been reading on the web about how to calibrate the scanguage so it gives useful information and also how you can move it from vehicle to vehicle and if you've remembered the percent correction for errors you can drop it back into your car and have it function properly.
Is it not then possible, given the similarities in most of our cars, to just preprogram in the error correction based on our combined research and have it work well out of he box?

After reading many tips and complaints as to why they get great mileage or lousy mileage - I think it boils down to individual driving habits which vary considerably - After calling C/S at ScanGuage - they told me to use a -20 adjustment factor for my 04 TDI Jetta Wagon 5 speed - after using for 2 months it is now up to a -24 adjustment factor with my last 5,000 miles average and proven by pump credit card receipts to have given me an average of 53 MPG. my vanity plate is MPGMIZR and scan guage has increased my first overall average of 46 MPG to last 5000 at 53.

Lex4TDI4Life · Jul 7, 2008

I noticed that the cutoff value of my scangauge was set to 24. Has anybody changed this?

gertimus1 · Jul 7, 2008

Joe_Meehan said:
I don't know if they are still doing it, but at one time the US GPS system intentionally changed a little from time to time, to prevent use of the system by the bad guys. The military receivers were not affected by this so they stayed dead on. I am not sure that is still happening, but in time of war, you can expect some serious errors to show up.

Without going into a political rant - this is Bush's war and not my war and it should stop or then is it really a war or just a way for us to get worked up and patriotic to take our mind of reall issues like MPG's? - You are correct, they shut off this the purposfully inaccruate system a few years ago inside the US - the GPS's were and have always been correct as they only receive signal but the satelites purposfully were only 95% or so accurate or 5% right on due to software modifications - that meaning 95% of they time they were perfect & right on and 5% were slightly off up to a couple of hundred of yards. Many GPS's had an additional US antenna input plug that would factor out the 5% error when the antennas received signal from land based transmitters inside the US border for those who wanted extreme accuracy (accuracy was always available inside the US) it was not accurate for those trying to pinpoint waypoints from outside the US without the antennas. Depending on now how many satelites your GPS receives at one time could have a bearing on speed variances.

diesel-dave · Jul 7, 2008

Jetta-Pilot
Thanks for the math lesson...What I did was ignore the speedo...set my GPS in KM set my scanguage in KM Calibrated it..then switch both back to MPH.

I thought KM was more accurate than MPH. thats it.

Scanguage II settings.

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Top Post Dawg

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Top Post Dawg

Veteran Member

Oil Wanker

Veteran Member

Top Post Dawg

Mega-Miler

Veteran Member

Oil Wanker

Veteran Member

Oil Wanker

Top Post Dawg

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Oil Wanker

Top Post Dawg

Top Post Dawg

Veteran Member

Mega-Miler

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Top Post Dawg

Member

Veteran Member