P38A Calibration blocks
- Thread starter j_rov
- Start date
This site contains affiliate links for which LandyZone may be compensated if you make a purchase.
- Posts
- 2,092
- Location
- Mull of Kintyre
Wammer's guide in the Technical Section has diagrams and best bet is to make them from a broom handle and then wrap with masking tape to fit bump stops. At least worked for me
- Posts
- 18,963
- Location
- Buckinghamshire, UK. ('95 DT)
I've got some but quicker to make unless you are close.
Datatek
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 43,947
- Location
- Near Poitiers SW France
Waste of time IMO, just use a measuring stick.
RangeRoller dt
Well-Sprung Member
- Posts
- 14,263
- Location
- Trapped inside my head @ LZ asylum
^^^ you can just use a tape and take measurements from centre of wheel to arch lip.
Measurements for this are also in Wammers’ EAS guide.
Make sure your tyre pressures are correct first
Measurements for this are also in Wammers’ EAS guide.
Make sure your tyre pressures are correct first
- Posts
- 4,458
- Location
- Rotherham
^^^ plus 1 on the tyre pressures and make sure you are on level ground
I made two front and two rear blocks, Standard, from 30mm wooden dowel (size will sit right inside the bump stop). Fronts 10cm long, Rears 10.5cm long. [How are you going to write the heights to the ECU ?] On Nanocom you just insert the blocks into the bump stops, and then write Live settings to Stored settings for Standard height. For the other heights I then just did the maths to set each corner, from the Standard corner settings I got with the blocks - which avoids faffing around with different blocks for each ride height. Level ground/ tyre pressures don't matter this way, and you don't need to run round and round and round and round the car with a tape measure, as you try and double guess the self-levelling/ bare patches on the sensors. High +4cm, Mway -2.5cm, Access- 6.5cm, but each ride height has an acceptable range, and if you try to write values outside this range EAS will throw a fault - so for each ride height take the existing value for one corner (say front left) and then set the other corners relative to FL, using the known relative adjustments for each corner which were saved at Standard
Last edited:
- Posts
- 18,963
- Location
- Buckinghamshire, UK. ('95 DT)
On the Nanocom the heights are displayed as bit counts between 0 and 256. I have no idea if the movement causes a linear scale or not.
When I did mine I lowered it on to the blocks eack time and took a photo of the readings with my phone. Had a helper doing the blocks so didn't take long. Then I just entered the readings for the required height and saved.
When I did mine I lowered it on to the blocks eack time and took a photo of the readings with my phone. Had a helper doing the blocks so didn't take long. Then I just entered the readings for the required height and saved.
)
Datatek
Well-Known Member
- Posts
- 43,947
- Location
- Near Poitiers SW France
As the sensor readings are bit c
As the sensor readings are bit counts counts, they do not relate directly to cm and it's rare for the readings to be exactly the same across an axle, so " doing the maths" as you say is unlikely to give accurate levels.
Well, it's not rocket science...My standard height on blocks is FL 112, FR 106 RL 109 and RR 109 so from the rear axle i have to add 3 to get a FL reading, and subtract 3 to get the FR reading... so then I just take the rear axle data in each height setting and make the same adjustment for the front axle. It certainly beats the hassle of making and fitting another 3 sets of blocks, or aimlessly running around the car with a measuring stick
- Posts
- 18,963
- Location
- Buckinghamshire, UK. ('95 DT)
Ah, you are assuming it is flat if both rears read the same? We're talking Land Rover here with panel gaps a large rat can crawl through. The reason for the blocks and different readings is because the height sensor angle and who knows what else might not mirror exactly and because the resistance either side might not match the bit count might be different too. Essentially you're comparing the outputs of 2 rheostats in possibly slightly different positions converted to a 0-256 scale.
- Posts
- 58,170
- Location
- Preston Lancs.
Front bit readings should be within 2 bits side to side.
Grrrr... no , I assume its flat because I had two identical length calibration blocks underneath the bump stops, at standard ride height the fact that the rear sensors/ potentiometers both gave the same reading is a happy coincidence. If you read above, I am advocating the use of the blocks, but just saying that you can avoid using blocks for all the other ride heights, by adopting the same reading variances for the other ride heights. That takes into account that my sensors are old and decrepit etc and maybe they should be within 2 steps of one another at the front, but they're not, cos they're old, and I'm not going to replace something that works perfectly well. This technique was to perhaps help J-rov, and the fact is, it worked and takes half the time. Ultimately no-one cares if Access height or High ride height are a little off anyway. Clearly you and wammers are already happy with the way you do this, and that's fine too.
Last edited:
- Posts
- 58,170
- Location
- Preston Lancs.
Fronts are to be no more than 2 bits apart for a reason. But carry on if you are happy.
Last edited:
- Posts
- 58,170
- Location
- Preston Lancs.
Ok carry on, you know more about the EAS than i do obviously.
I doubt that, but I don't see how it can be an issue how the sensors read, if they are being physically calibrated against each other? You said there was reason, so maybe I'm missing something ? The not invented here syndrome is just starting to grind me down
- Posts
- 58,170
- Location
- Preston Lancs.
As said you carry on.
