WOW, your post indicates that you have NO idea how the ScanGauge works in general, and how the add-a-gauges work in particular. Either that, or you are thinking FWT in your head while posting about CHT.

FWT is a legislated PID and the units, scaling, and offset must be adhered to by all manufacturers. CHT is manufacturer-specific and FORD has chosen the units to be F, scaling to be 2, and no offset. Look at the MTH for the CHT add-a-gauge. 000200010000 multiply by 2, divide by 1, add ZERO. How in the world can you multiply an integer by 2 and get an odd number?????

There is little rhyme or reason as to how Ford has chosen to represent temperature PIDs. Units of C and F, scaling all over the place, sometimes offsets, mostly not. Transmission temp is in F with a scaling of 0.125. The generator and traction motor temps are in C. There are dozens and dozens of temp PIDs and no pattern I can discern.

The ONLY way you can see odd numbers for CHT is if you coded it incorrectly or your SG is messing up. Go to CMNDS, send 221624, multiply the result by two and tell me when you get an odd number. Maybe your video showing an odd number for CHT was when you were driving through Roswell on your way to CA?

 

Don't be so rude.

I can't speak if the SG is working correctly, but perhaps you have a different version of SG. Or different version of car for that matter.

I have replaced my CHT sensor with fixed resisors, and I get the EXACT VALUES on the SG that match the EXACT VALUES in the Ford Workshop manual.

It is very likely the SG ( I have ) is doing rounding. It really, truely moves in 1.8 steps.... which really looks like Celsius degrees.... but there is also your Roswell theory.

I have done nothing but help you and LL works the bugs out.
I have also found bugs with the "cutoff" feature.

If my SG is fubar... then I expect Ron at LL to give me an exchange at no cost, and you can back me up. Thanks.

-John

 

So, Carl could have said how he thinks it works without the "you have no idea". And, GPSman could have said be nice, instead of " don't be so rude".

Maybe we should al work hard to say what we think without taking a shot. And, everything we say should be positive. We will get a lot more people to participate in our forum, we will get more ideas, and it will all happen a lot faster.

Just a suggestion

 

Carl- you must be using a different code.
Perhaps you are using the generic code for CHT.
I am using the Ford Escape Hybrid specific code.
This code may be found at:
http://www.scangauge.com/support/pdfs/XGAUGE.pdf

The specific code is:
07E0221624
046285160624
3010
001200010140

Now, if this code is incorrect, only YOU Carl are the one to blame, as you claim to be the responsible party for giving the codes to Ron at ScanGauge. However, testing this code with fixed resistors, gives very accurate, predictable, and repeatable results.

When the CHT is cold, is shows tenths ( xx.x ).
When the CHT is above 100, it rounds, which includes odd numbers.

An apology from you and more so Gary Gattis would be appropriate, and appreciated. Either say you were wrong, or say we were both right, or just say I was right all along. I don't care. All I know for sure is all the information is accurate that I posted. If you made an error, it's not my fault.

Here are the exact numbers reported, in 1.8 degree F (or one degree C ) moves:
84.2
86
87.8
89.6
91.4
93.2
95
96.8
98.6
100
102
104
106
108
109
111
113
115
117
118
120
122
124
126
127
129
131
133
135
136
138

 

Okay... I just tried both the Ford generic code, and the one listed specifically for the FEH. They are both very close, but do not match.

They both match closely at the hot side, when the resistance is very low, but they drift apart when the temperature is cold, and resistance is high. This is probably mathmatical error from the two different methods of calculation, but since we all really care most about when the CHT gets hot, both are similar enough to use either one for general reference.

But for specific reference, I suggest we agree to use just one, such as when we try to find rules for EV. This may explain a lot why there has been dis-agreement ( and not just me / my car ) in what various people are seeing in their cars. Since Ron at ScanGauge has posted two different codes, people at random ( not just me ) are using random codes ( out of 2 choices ) and they do NOT match exactly.

I never knew ( and looks like no one else knew either ) that there was a difference before tonite. I figured I could use either one. The difference is about 6 degrees when hot, and about 30 degrees off at room temperature. The generic code is always slightly colder, but I have reason to believe this is the one Ford references in their Workshop Manuals.

So, to keep it simple, and so we can always talk Apples to Apples, I will suggest we all use the GENERIC FORD CODE for CHT.

However, taken as a whole group, I'll venture the majority of users were using the code under FEH, and very few people were using the generic code Carl was using. Now that I have explored both ( never had reason to doubt the FEH one before ) I think the generic one is best.

The generic Ford code for CHT is:
07E0221624
046205160624
3010
000200010000

I hope this is a lesson of "check things out for yourself" and don't just believe everything you read blindly.

-John ( mystery solved, I hope.... )

 

Yes, this explains it. Your coding was wrong. I don't use what's posted on the SG website, since it is just what I have given LL. In all the posts above I assumed you were using the MTH of 00020001000 that I use and listed in these posts. I checked the SG list and found 3 more errors, although two of them are just in the Battery Module Temp descriptions. I will call Ron tomorrow and tell him about the errors, and also to remove the AWD one, as it appears not to work.

I think Bob actually pointed out this error way back in September or so, and also identified an error in the CAT add-a-gauge at that time. It is a shame that I didn't notice that the CHT hadn't been corrected on the SG site. Mea Culpa. Mine always requires 190F to go EV, with the incorrect coding it would read 203F for that condition. And yes, it frustratingly sticks at 188F on many occasions.

 

Soory, I didn't know Carl was offended by my comments. I guess I was critical, when I suggested we NOT be critical.

 

This explains YOUR coding was "wrong".

Mine was different, by no fault of mine.
I was following the directions perfectly,
Thank you very much.

GaryG all the data ( or over 90% ) of everything we need to program the PID's is in the Helms Workshop Manual(s). I was using PID's with only my ScanGaugeI way before I had the SGII. I just could not program them to show as live gauges. Ron ( perhaps at Carl's request ) changed the software to include xGauge.

xGauge was the greatest benefit to us all, thanks to Ron at Linear Logic.
He made an already useful tool, more useful.
Before this, I was getting really good at reading Hexadecimal numbers in my head... but Gary, that's probably way over your head, so I won't get into that.

 

You missed the point.
I was not talking about the SG or Xgauges at all.

I was talking about the PID's.
You can read PID on the original ScanGaugeI, but it isn't easy, or fun.

I was working on compiling a list of PID's with Hybrid's Plus in Boulder, CO in March of 2007. They had some from sources other than the Helms Workshop Manual, and I had the Workshop manual. There was a lot of overlap, but there were some differences too. I had about 120 listed, before Carl even started posting... but I had no way to display them in real time.

But back in March of 2007, I had to use the tools and laptop provided by Hybrid's Plus to read the codes. Hybrid's plus wrote their own, custom software also to read the codes, but you needed a big, bulky laptop in the car too.

Then I pointed out the ScanGuage. They liked it, and the small size. Now ( because I hooked them up with Linear Logic ) Hybrids Plus is an authoirized ScanGauge dealer. You can walk in and buy a ScanGauge from them off the shelf... with or without a battery pack upgrade. The ScanGauge is now an added feature to every PHEV conversion thanks to my involvement.

Thats what I was talking about my dear boy...
Carl did not invent the PID system... It is standard equipment, and anyone can read it... with, or without a ScanGauge.

 

Carl is responsible for the FEH data on the LL website, right and wrong.
Carl even agrees. I have no beef with Carl. I thank him for his time.
What's your beef? as you have made no meaningful contribution to this thread!