Pocketlogger vs other guys, which one?

[studs]

I did a search, I hope this isn't a repost. Anyways i'm in the market for a logging device, I have a PalmIIIXE and I have seen the Pocketlogger in use and was very impressed. I have seen the other guys on the internet such as Palm'nstein and MMCD. I'm looking for opinions from you guys the users of these programs and what you would recommend? Is the pocketlogger worth the extra money? Thanks in advance.
-studs

 

[dthquazi1]

i personally like the format of the pocketlogger and thought it was worth the extra $$$ if i spent time with others i could get used to them as well. Its all a matter of opinion and mine is to go with pocketlogger. There are help forums and the site is very useful.

 

[talon1979]

Go with pocketlogger.

 

[Euphoric]

although the point of a the logger is not to have to use a laptop theres no reason why I cant is there? its just a basic serial cord , right?

because i have a laptop but no pda..ehehe

 

[MrToniFliTSI]

I like MMCD! Does the job for me

 

[swedeGSX]

You should take a look at this new tool

 

[kpt4321]

Originally posted by swedeGSX
You should take a look at this new tool

ECU plus cannot even begin to take the place of a logger, at least not yet.

 

[tigerstalon]

Originally posted by kpt4321
ECU plus cannot even begin to take the place of a logger, at least not yet.

I'm curious as to why you feel this way. The ECU plus looks like it captures the values from the ECU directly, and does so at 25 times per second. The pocketlogger--for 2G's--uses the OBD-II interface and can only get around 10-12 total values per second.

Are you thinking that maybe we should wait for ECU plus to work out it's v1.0 bugs first?

 

[talon1979]

I had a chance to look at the MMCD this last weekend at the track. It looks more like dsmlink than pocketlogger since it has the little up and down line scroller thingey. Anway I like pocketlogger because I am familiar w/ it. I am sure MMCD would work great too.

 

[Dyncaus]

I was looking at that ECU+ as well, how is that not better than a pocketlogger? It logs data at faster rates and it also lets you edit settings such as fuel and timing. To me it seems like it is the same as a pocketlogger and SAFC combo IMO.

 

[philipkrotch]

get a pocketlogger. i swear by it, it saved my ass.

 

[LandoAWD]

Originally posted by tigerstalon
I'm curious as to why you feel this way. The ECU plus looks like it captures the values from the ECU directly, and does so at 25 times per second. The pocketlogger--for 2G's--uses the OBD-II interface and can only get around 10-12 total values per second.

Are you thinking that maybe we should wait for ECU plus to work out it's v1.0 bugs first?

Pocketlogger captures around 50-53 samples a second, and other than the timing features, ECU+ looks fairly ordinary.

 

[studs]

Thanks for the input everybody, I am going to go with the pocketlogger, that was my original intention but I thought I would check with you guys see what you thought.

 

[tigerstalon]

Originally posted by LandoAWD
Pocketlogger captures around 50-53 samples a second, and other than the timing features, ECU+ looks fairly ordinary.

So, it looks like "Pocketlogger" (pocketlogger for 1G's) logs timing and is faster than ECU+, but "OBD-II logger" (pocketlogger for 2G's) logs less than ECU+ and is slower. Is that a fair assessment?

 

[LandoAWD]

Originally posted by tigerstalon
So, it looks like "Pocketlogger" (pocketlogger for 1G's) logs timing and is faster than ECU+, but "OBD-II logger" (pocketlogger for 2G's) logs less than ECU+ and is slower. Is that a fair assessment?

My timing statement was based on the fact that you can adjust timing (ala DSMLink) from the ECU+ program, and that would be the only immediate benefit I see.

I am unfamiliar with 2g loggers (for obvious reasons ), but I don't see this putting DSMLink out of buisness.

 

[tigerstalon]

Originally posted by LandoAWD
My timing statement was based on the fact that you can adjust timing (ala DSMLink) from the ECU+ program, and that would be the only immediate benefit I see.

I am unfamiliar with 2g loggers (for obvious reasons ), but I don't see this putting DSMLink out of buisness.

Ok. I guess as far as 1G's go, pocketlogger is still the way to go. However, for the 2G's, I see ECU+ kicking pocketlogger's butt.

 

[LandoAWD]

Originally posted by tigerstalon
Ok. I guess as far as 1G's go, pocketlogger is still the way to go. However, for the 2G's, I see ECU+ kicking pocketlogger's butt.

Apples to oranges when price comes into play.

Apples to apples would involve DSMLink.

 

[Velo7825]

LandoAWD: why would you say ecu+ would only compare to dsmlink. the link is almost twice as much as ecu+. I think the comparison would be between ecu+ and a afc pocketlogger combo.

even then the ecu+ would be less expensive and from what I've read the ecu+ gives you twice as many points to change fuel and timing compared to an afc.

I think the biggest drawback to the ecu+ is the wiring. I don't think MachV is selling an adapter harness and thats a lot of wires to splice.

Oh and can you use a wideband 02 sensor directly with dsmlink and log the afr values?

 

[MyBlack94GST]

MMCD and a cheap Palm M100 has worked awesomely for me.

 

[awd4g63]

Pocketlogger software and my Sony Clie has done wonders on my tuning.

 

[Blk_99gst]

The ECU plus looks like it captures the values from the ECU directly, and does so at 25 times per second.

Yeah, that part about capturing REAL ecu values...would be wrong. From Tom the designer of ecu+:

Unfortunately, the ECU+ can't turn off the CEL checks, since it runs externally to the stock ECU - it doesn't have access to the stock ECU internals.
Tom

The pocketlogger--for 2G's--uses the OBD-II interface and can only get around 10-12 total values per second.

I get 18 samples per second with my car. But I have logged other friends cars only getting 10-12.

 

[Blk_99gst]

LandoAWD: why would you say ecu+ would only compare to dsmlink. the link is almost twice as much as ecu+. I think the comparison would be between ecu+ and a afc pocketlogger combo.

The real key that nobody has mentioned is that the ecu plus does not see the internal numbers of the ecu. It can't see Short and Long term fuel trims, it can't clear CEL's. Let's do a quick pro con:
ecu+
pro- high sample rate, lots more data points to tune fuel at.
con-can't clear CEL, can't see fuel trims, can't see actual ecu o2 voltage. stays in one vehichle.

pocketlogger
pros-see ACTUAL ecu values, fuel trims, o2 voltage, timing. Can clear CEL. Can log other obdII cars, clear other OBDII car CEL's.
cons-lower sample rate, 10-18. Only for logging, need some other fuel control via safc or maft.

I have another post here in the ecu+ thread; talk about the ecu+'s ability (future ability) to try and read 2g knock:
http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/showthread.php?t=117609&page=2&pp=25

 

[Corman12345]

http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/showthread.php?t=90121

I like the auterra one on ebay, It can do everything that pocketlogger can do and more IMO, check it out

 

[deusxmachina]

I don't know why anyone would pay for a 1g logger with MMCD and Palm 'n Stein (Tunerstein) being free. I use Tunerstein for multiple datapoints, and I use MMCD when I want to see a big, fat knock count meter staring me in the face. I don't know what more anyone could need, nor know why anyone would pay for it. Thank you to MMCD and Tunerstein Hal.

 

[moonstation2000]

forgive my noobieness, but where can i find out about tunerstein & mmcd. I have a pocketlogger and was thinking of the ecu+. I will be upgrading injectors and thought an safcii = 300, ecu+ = 425 but does more, might be worth the money.