Digital oil temp gauge - Forscan

[Joe Gonsalves]

I don’t have anything related to oil in any of the gauges. From memory there’s Vacuum, Cukinder head temp, battery voltage, transmission temp and possibly one more that I can’t remember.

These are what the 2021 manual says you should have. You may be right in that you need to enable them in ForScan first if they are not shown as options. I have a 2021 GT/CS and they are all there to choose from.

Sponsored

 

[The Latman]

These are what the 2021 manual says you should have. You may be right in that you need to enable them in ForScan first if they are not shown as options. I have a 2021 GT/CS and they are all there to choose from.

I’ll check my manual, mine is the 2018 GT so the first refresh model. I’ve read elsewhere and it’s been confirmed on here that for some reason the RHD stangs didn’t get the sensor.

 

[Vlad Soare]

The manual is generic and shows everything a Mustang might have. What you actually have is a different story. Depending on country, engine, transmission, trim level, some of those options may not be present.

The oil temperature gauge is not available in non-US Mustangs, be they LHD or RHD.
The oil pressure gauge is not available in RHD Mustangs.
The axle oil temperature is hidden in non-US Mustangs, but can be turned on with ForScan.

No Mustang has an oil temperature sensor. Those that have a gauge for it (i.e. those made for the US market) are actually approximating it based on other sensors and some clever computing.

 

[Zooks527]

There's no oil temperature sensor. The displayed temperature is inferred.

I don't think this argument has the legs people seem to give it.

The oil termperature on the bus is calculated by looking at a variety of conditions around the engine as opposed to calculating it by measuring the voltage at a general use sensor stuck in a single point in the oil system. I really don't see that as being much of an improvement.

 

[Vlad Soare]

I don't think this argument has the legs people seem to give it.

The oil termperature on the bus is calculated by looking at a variety of conditions around the engine as opposed to calculating it by measuring the voltage at a general use sensor stuck in a single point in the oil system. I really don't see that as being much of an improvement.

Fair enough. I'll give you that a smart, carefully applied algorithm, based on a variety of conditions, has the potential to be more accurate than a single, fixed temperature probe.
But just to play devil's advocate, we don't know how advanced Ford's algorithm is, and how many conditions it considers. And seeing that the gauge doesn't display more than just three broad zones, 'low', 'normal' and 'high', I have a suspicion that the extrapolation method may not actually be too advanced.
But for us, Europeans, the point is moot anyway.

 

[Zooks527]

Fair enough. I'll give you that a smart, carefully applied algorithm, based on a variety of conditions, has the potential to be more accurate than a single, fixed temperature probe.
But just to play devil's advocate, we don't know how advanced Ford's algorithm is, and how many conditions it considers. And seeing that the gauge doesn't display more than just three broad zones, 'low', 'normal' and 'high', I have a suspicion that the extrapolation method may not actually be too advanced.
But for us, Europeans, the point is moot anyway.

True enough. I do have the GT350 gauge set installed in mine though, and it scales from 100F to 350 F in 50F increments. As I don't track my car, I've never seen it much above 200. I use it more as a "if it's still under 150, don't hammer on it" reminder, to make sure things are running at the appropriate clearances.

 

[jheissjr]

I didn't follow sorry. Do you mean the algorithm is more accurate than the temp sensor?

 

[Zooks527]

I didn't follow sorry. Do you mean the algorithm is more accurate than the temp sensor?

I'm saying that any discrete sensor value you assign to temperature in a dynamic system is at best a representation of the temperature at that single point (subject to the accuracy and repeatability of the sensor) and may be less representative of the overall engine situation than a calculated value using multiple factors.

Oil temperature varies massively through the engine. The oil temperature at the rockers is different from the cylinder walls is different from the sump, and so on. Doing an algorithmic value may be better that trying to decide which accessible point where you can jam a sensor will work.

Now, that assumes it's a detailed algorithm looking at multiple factors. If it's something trivial ("time * rpm * fudge factor"), it may not be. Since no one external to Ford seems to know exactly how the bus value is calculated, we can't make a hard decision one way or the other. In that case, just use the number we have provided that it seems to be repeatable.

 

[jheissjr]

Documentation of Ford engine controls says engines with a temp sensor installed compare the temp sensor to an inferred value as a rational check. The sensor is used instead of the inferred value and I guess that means a sensor is more accurate than the algorithm. The temperature from the PCM on the S550 must be the inferred value.

EOT- Engine Oil Temperature

 

[Zooks527]

Documentation of Ford engine controls says engines with a temp sensor installed compare the temp sensor to an inferred value as a rational check. The sensor is used instead of the inferred value and I guess that means a sensor is more accurate than the algorithm. The temperature from the PCM on the S550 must be the inferred value.

EOT- Engine Oil Temperature

I'm not sure I'd make that guess. In that reference, the algorithm is being used to determine if the sensor is malfunctioning. I don't think that necessarily makes a statement one way or the other.

It's possible that after some extended period of time using the algorithm to backcheck a physical sensor, enough data was obtained to determine that both methods constantly gave the same value and they deleted the physical sensor as superfluous and to remove a potential point of failure. It's equally possible that the same data set determined that the algorithm was "just good enough" and the physical sensor was dropped for cost reasons.

 

[GTP]

Analog gauge lol

 

[overheadmanifoldsprocket]

I could never get oil pressure to work on a RHD / UK.

If I remember correctly, I think I came to the conclusion that the sensor is missing due to the RHD specific filter housing ?

WD

I'd be surprised if that was the reason, because there's always a pressure switch (for the warning "light") and I'd expect that and the sensor to be one unit. It could be wiring routing related I suppose.

My current facelift 2018 UK car (digital dash) doesn't have oil pressure / temperature, but my pre-facelift 2017 UK (analogue dash) did - which kind of dispels that theory too.

I still miss my analogue dash, we didn't get a choice with the facelift models here...

Sponsored