Lambda sensor controller

Is it for use with the standard Ford ECU?

If so, you need something with a 0-1volt output signal to keep the sensor readings for the ECU happy.
Although if you arent after a gauge, why deviate from the standard ECU sensor?

Wideband or narrow band…..?

You can connect narrow band direct to most ECUs, whereas with wideband, unless you have a new/posh ECU you’ll need a stand-alone wideband controller.

Innovate, 14.7, AEM …….
Or just found this lot

ldperformance.co.uk/product-category/lambda/

about whom I know nothing except their prices are more reasonable than most!
Nick

Sorry, wideband is what I am looking for.
I saw the LD ones but some of the reviews are not complementary. It suits my requirements though.

Thanks for the answer Nick.
Being somewhat ignorant on this subject could you please explain the difference between the 4.2 and 4.9 sensors.
Thanks

Narrowband or conventional lambda sensors have been around for decades and are designed to sense the stoichiometric condition which is the perfect ratio or air to fuel (AFR, 14.7 for petrol) to give a theoretical complete burn. They are designed this way to be used to fine tune engines with catalytic converters which give best emissions results. So while great at detecting the stoichiometric point, they are not at all accurate at sensing actual air/fuel ratio once you move away from this point. As you actually really want and engine to work over a wider range, typically a richer mixture (mid to high 12s for NA, maybe lower for forced induction) gives best power, whereas under cruise conditions a leaner mixture (15 - 16) will give better economy. Wideband sensors are able to accurately measure AFR from 10:1 to 20:1, so having one of these on your car when your tuning is like working in full daylight rather than murky moonlight! Plus with a suitably equipped ECU and a sensible target table you often have a self-tune option available.

Most modern petrol cars (post 2010 say) have wideband sensors as they allow more accurate control and cat technology has improved to give better performance over a wider mixture range anyway allowing the management to get the best from the engine performance wise and emissions wise. In theory anyway!

As to the difference between the Bosch LSU 4.2 and 4.9 sensors, I don’t really know without going away and looking it up.

4.2 was the first and works pretty well. The sensors (the real ones anyway) are quite expensive. Not very many used OEM.

4.9 came later and is presumably a development of 4.2. The sensors seem to be cheaper, which might be because they have wider applications as OEM and made in greater numbers.

The controls are different, though some later aftermarket controllers can be configured for either, which I would consider a nice-to-have feature. 4.9 likely to be more future proof.

Nick

Nick, many thanks for your time and input, much appreciated.

The 4.2 sensors seem to be a bit harder to source quality replacements now compared to the 4.9.

May be something to bear in mind

Be sure to use a relay switched live feed from the battery to ensure you get a good strong supply to feed the sensor - don't just pick any old switched live feed, that sensor heater needs a good supply. Not doing so can lead to a failed sensor very quickly - its a mistake I made last year.

Also mount the sensor vertically in the exhaust if you can or at the very least at either 3 or 9 o'clock. Moisture via exhaust condensate also burns them out very quickly.

Appols if I'm "telling granny..."

Round here if you mounted a lambda at 6 o’clock position it'd get wiped off on a pothole long before it got the chance to fail
Theres a reason i drive a Range Rover 🙄