I myself have a scanmaster. But i have also heard many great things about turbolink. My scanmaster is great only thing wish i could record some of my data. Instead of having to guess on my o2 counts. Could some of you turbolink users give me some of your thoughts of how you like it. I would appreciate it thanks
scanmaster vs turbolink
- Thread starter 87gnstock
- Start date
Welcome!
By registering with us, you'll be able to discuss, share and private message with other members of our community.
blackbuick87
Senior Member
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2002
- Messages
- 3,205
I dont have TL but I plan on doing the same thing you are, once I get the funds to buy a laptop. I am at the point now where SM has helped me tune my car and keep me from blowing it up, but I need to be able to record runs to take the next step. With the kind of support Ken gives you really cant go wrong
BLACK6PACK
1 sec reaction King
- Joined
- May 24, 2001
- Messages
- 4,849
The scanmaster is great for daily driving, but if you want to get the most out of your car, then a recordable scan tool is a must.
I have the scanmaster and Direct Scan. My car is headed for the high 10s and the 1 frame per 1.5 seconds was just not fast enough for me. That would only be about 7-8 frames of data for an entire run. I went with direct scan mainly for the update rate. I get 18 frames per second that way, which gives me close to 200 frames of data vs 8.
Either one of them are great for logging data, but IMO neither can replace the Scanmaster for everyday driving.
I have the scanmaster and Direct Scan. My car is headed for the high 10s and the 1 frame per 1.5 seconds was just not fast enough for me. That would only be about 7-8 frames of data for an entire run. I went with direct scan mainly for the update rate. I get 18 frames per second that way, which gives me close to 200 frames of data vs 8.
Either one of them are great for logging data, but IMO neither can replace the Scanmaster for everyday driving.
Just to pick nits ... it's 1.2 seconds per frame. not 1.5.
If you use the Fast Update Patch that v3.0 supports, it's about 3 times faster (it's not really frames, just certain things are sent more often by the chips).
We're working on the P4 stuff now and it is approaching 14 frames/sec for P4 cars with 63 bytes of data (vs 25 for the TRs).
If you use the Fast Update Patch that v3.0 supports, it's about 3 times faster (it's not really frames, just certain things are sent more often by the chips).
We're working on the P4 stuff now and it is approaching 14 frames/sec for P4 cars with 63 bytes of data (vs 25 for the TRs).
BLACK6PACK
1 sec reaction King
- Joined
- May 24, 2001
- Messages
- 4,849
Ken,
I didn't mean to sound like I was knocking the TL setup. One of my friends is running it, and it is a very nice setup. The fast update thing for scanmaster/turbolink makes a BIG difference.
The only problem is that some of the bigger guys in the TR world refuse to put the fast update code in the chips. Needless to say, I don't buy thier chips anymore.
I didn't mean to sound like I was knocking the TL setup. One of my friends is running it, and it is a very nice setup. The fast update thing for scanmaster/turbolink makes a BIG difference.
The only problem is that some of the bigger guys in the TR world refuse to put the fast update code in the chips. Needless to say, I don't buy thier chips anymore.
Mile Hi GN
Member
- Joined
- May 23, 2001
- Messages
- 184
TurboLink is a good scan tool, couple it with it's exclusive boost sensing hardware and it's a great scan tool.
Being able to record all the sensor data as well as boost and how it relates to the other sensor data is a big plus, at the track and for diagnostics. Being able to review pre and post change data files is invaluable.
Scanmaster is ideal for daily driving but it won't be long before you'll want to dig a little deeper than Min O2's, Max KR and their associated MPH's. Especially for diagnostics and certainly at the track.
A big advantage of TLink is it's portability. Record a pass in your car, move it to your buddies GN and record his pass - compare the data files in the pits. I have track and diagnostic data files from 2 GN's in addition to mine on my hard drive. The comparison is always interesting.
The slower frame rate has it's limitations, and the faster you go at the track the more limiting it becomes. There can be times when you have some weird problem that is random and brief and TLink will have a tough time capturing it.
My needs have changed so I'm moving to Direct Scan, but I have used TLink since May of 1997, and it has served me well. It was once said that TLink is sufficient for 90% of the TR's out there, I think that's about right.
Being able to record all the sensor data as well as boost and how it relates to the other sensor data is a big plus, at the track and for diagnostics. Being able to review pre and post change data files is invaluable.
Scanmaster is ideal for daily driving but it won't be long before you'll want to dig a little deeper than Min O2's, Max KR and their associated MPH's. Especially for diagnostics and certainly at the track.
A big advantage of TLink is it's portability. Record a pass in your car, move it to your buddies GN and record his pass - compare the data files in the pits. I have track and diagnostic data files from 2 GN's in addition to mine on my hard drive. The comparison is always interesting.
The slower frame rate has it's limitations, and the faster you go at the track the more limiting it becomes. There can be times when you have some weird problem that is random and brief and TLink will have a tough time capturing it.
My needs have changed so I'm moving to Direct Scan, but I have used TLink since May of 1997, and it has served me well. It was once said that TLink is sufficient for 90% of the TR's out there, I think that's about right.
