FP1 or Blackbox

[DaveW]

What are the pro's and con's of these two item?

FP1 Standard
PT Black box Standard

I already have the PT pro software but it looks to me that there box only can test at 28" WC vs FP1 38" WC.

Dave

[bruce]

I have been using/testing the FP1 setup for quite awhile and am kinda partial to it. I have not used the "Blackbox" so I can't compare it to the FP1. What I do know is this; once you go digital you will never go back to liquid manometers, the only liquid manometer I use on my bench any more is hooked up to my velocity probe (this can be done with the FP1) I like the fact I can use the FP1 to watch CFM and also probe a port at the same time so I choose to do it this way. I also use liquid manometers for carb testing.

My FP1 is hooked up to my own averaging tube setup that I make "in-house" and sell. Its hooked to an old 486sx 25Mhz laptop (I already had this laptop total cost 5 years ago $25, must run Win98 or better) and I use the simple software that comes with the FP1, I save a test in text mode and edit it for later use. I then hand edit my numbers into a simple spreadsheet that I use to compare one test to the next. The ease of use in the setup of the FP1 and the fact you can write your own spreadsheet for it makes it all the more user friendly. There are multiple users of the FP1 on this forum as well as Mouse (John) who is here to support his product. Larry has written a GREAT spreadsheet and is here to support that also (found in the spreadsheet area).

So as you can see the FP1 setup lets you go as basic or as advanced as you want, simply stated it gives you an option to use it as you see fit. But, which ever way you go digital you will never look back.

[DaveW]

Sounds easy. Do you have to calibrate the electronic unit with a liquid manometer? I have seen some pictures on the board showing flow numbers but when you say spread sheet are you using this to compare flow test or changes that you made and this unit don't come with that capability.

Dave

[larrycavan]

[bruce]

Larry pretty much summed it up.

I simply use an Excel spreadsheet to compare flow tests from time to time, I don't use the FPexcel currently for my application since I lack a more powerful laptop to run the application to its full potentail.

I show the other side of the "bare budget" operation of what the FP setup can do for someone who doesn't have alot of money to spend and still wants digital. The FP setup will go from the budget and to the ones who want to spend more money. The FP does not limit one to a specific budget, it even runs on a handheld (which is what I used for sometime while John was developing his product).

I use my own sharp edge calibration plates for calibration. Once calibrated to someones flowbench the FP I have found needs no additional calibration. My unit is very repeatable.

I also like Larry have no monetary affiliation with the FP1 product just a satisfied user who has been using it for a long time and have been happy with it.

Bruce

[Mouse]

[DaveW]

John,

Does the software have camshaft, valvetrain and other engine stuff like PT or is it just for flowbench? The software seems easy to read from looking at your web page and larry's pics from the spread sheet.

How user friendly is the software?

[Mouse]

Dave,

The FP1 software is currently based on air flow. Perhaps Larry (or anyone) can add some of those things to his Excel workbook.

John

[DaveW]

I would favor your software over the PT because the PT seems like a ton of work. Just my opinion I don't need camshaft doctor or valve train deflection when I would be flow testing. Maybe someone could comment on the PT. I have the software but havn't used it yet. ( PT PRO )

Dave

[gofaster]

I've been using the PT pro version for several years now, with a SF FlowCom interface, and it works fine. There is a lot to do with it, and the manual is pretty clear. I like the graphing and overlaying of the graphs to show where the port is going in it's development. I also like the record keeping aspects, and the amount of detail I can save about each port as well as keeping track of what I did, and who I did it for, and why I did it. The people at PT have been very helpful when I have had problems. I would probably have stayed with them, but a salesperson at SF upset me enough that I decided to give Audie my business on the new project. That decision was made before I knew about John's FP 1. I am no software expert, and am not in a position to claim that any one is better than any other, and I have no financial stake in SF, PT, FP 1, or Audie Tech.

[hotair231]

I'm new to this forum and will be able to learn alot.

Is the FP1 unit simillar to the control module of Audiie Technoloy's Flow Quick unit.

What additional features does it have over the Audie unit?
Thx,
Walt

[larrycavan]