Selecting an Automotive Oscilloscope

[Techniker]

All,

I am interested in buying an automotive oscilloscope. As a student, being able to buy a truly automotive oscilloscope (with the bells and whistles of the automatic sensor-specific presets) is out of the question for budget reasons, so I am planning on buying a cheaper portable oscilloscope- there appear to be some decent handheld, and if worse came to worse, USB scopes out there.

My question is- what should I be looking for in an oscilloscope? Being an engineer undergrad by education, I understand that with the new CAN systems, I need at least five times the bandwidth, so I am thinking something with at least 5 MHz (I have found one that seems to be rated for 8 MHz). Do you agree with this?

There was one automotive oscilloscope I was looking at recently, but its bandwidth was rated at 1 MHz. This is too low for more modern vehicles and moving into the future, agreed?

As for the sampling frequency, I have found one also rated at 40 MSa/s which seems quite good to me. Unfortunately, the oscilloscope that I am looking at, only allows for one channel, how nice is that second channel to have? I can imagine a few situations where it would be helpful (particularly for triggering?).

In summary, I have two choices:

Scope A: True "automotive" oscilloscope- rated at 1 MHz bandwidth, 25 MSa/s, two channels.

Scope B: Regular handheld oscilloscope- rated at 8 MHz bandwidth, 40 MSa/s, one channel.

I generally want to rule out the USB-style devices (such as the Picoscope), chiefly because I don't want to have to worry about my laptop or netbook in the shop.

Thank you in advance,
Techniker

 

[Mr.Nutcase]

All,


I generally want to rule out the USB-style devices (such as the Picoscope), chiefly because I don't want to have to worry about my laptop or netbook in the shop.

Thank you in advance,
Techniker

Toyota uses the Picoscope, it is designed for auto use.
they use the Panasonic toughbook, it real strong
So does Nissan use the toughbook for the consult 3,

 

[Techniker]

We use Toughbooks in our EMS service- they hold up to their name.

When I was saying that I wanted to avoid the USB-based devices, I was really going back to the student preface at the beginning of the post- I am trying to keep costs to a minimum- we're talking a shoestring budget here. I know, I know, you get what you pay for, but those are my choices. I can't allow my side-job and tool budget to encroach on my ultimate career (any more than I already have).

Thank you for the thoughts.

-Techniker

 

[Stick]

Being an engineer undergrad by education, I understand that with the new CAN systems, I need at least five times the bandwidth, so I am thinking something with at least 5 MHz (I have found one that seems to be rated for 8 MHz). Do you agree with this?

Most problems with CAN systems are a termination or wiring fault that can be diagnosed with a multimeter. No real need for a scope there, because you don't really need to be looking at the contents of the CAN signal.

There was one automotive oscilloscope I was looking at recently, but its bandwidth was rated at 1 MHz. This is too low for more modern vehicles and moving into the future, agreed?

Unless you are doing stuff like secondary ignition, 1MHz is probably fast enough for 95% of automotive scope use. My Snap-On Vantage Pro is 3MHz, and I can't think of anything I've missed compared to a faster scope, and I can generally break waveforms down to significantly higher resolution than I need.

Unfortunately, the oscilloscope that I am looking at, only allows for one channel, how nice is that second channel to have? I can imagine a few situations where it would be helpful (particularly for triggering?).

Depends entirely on what you are looking at. Most of the scope use I do is one channel at a time, but two channels are nice to have, especially for triggers, cam/crank correlation, figuring out bad components like injectors or coils based on firing order, etc.

In summary, I have two choices:

Scope A: True "automotive" oscilloscope- rated at 1 MHz bandwidth, 25 MSa/s, two channels.

Scope B: Regular handheld oscilloscope- rated at 8 MHz bandwidth, 40 MSa/s, one channel.

Between the two, I'd go with Option "A" just for the second channel. The sampling frequency isn't quite as big of a deal for most things.

 

[Techniker]

I actually do want to do secondary ignition readings. Would Option A still be a viable choice?

 

[bgott]

Vantage Pro. The connector database is great! I bought mine off of craigslist for half the price of a new one.

 

[Danglerb]

I want a scope myself, but I am goofy and like to look at things I'm not supposed to, and I am not on a "real" budget, just cheap.

If you don't need it, right now, why not just wait, scopes are going to get a lot better and cheaper over the next year or so in the portable market. Its also a likely 3 step purchase, tablet or small PC, scope module, various adapters and probes, each being a chunk of change.

 

[Stick]

I actually do want to do secondary ignition readings. Would Option A still be a viable choice?

I don't see why it wouldn't be.

To be honest, I've gotten away from secondary ignition analysis for all but the most problem child vehicles. Most problems with secondary ignition will also show up on the primary side of things.

 

[Stick]

Out of curiosity, what kind of budget do you have?

$3-400 would buy a used heritage Vantage or similar, and while it's not a true "labscope" (it's a power graphing meter), it's fast enough to check out most waveforms.

Right around $1k you can find a used Vantage Pro, or a Fluke 192/194/196 scope pretty easily. If you go with the Vantage Pro, it doesn't need to be the latest and greatest update either, the only thing the updates get you is connector views and the like. I prefer working off of actual wiring diagrams, which you should have available through any decent info system like AllData or Mitchell.

A brand new 2 channel Picoscope kit from Autonerdz is ~$1600 and would cover pretty much everything (high amp/low amp probes, probes, attenuators, etc), and they probably have the best support/training available.

Plenty of deals out there, especially if you can pay cash for the scope rather than finance it.

 

[diesel research]

Techniker, is "scope A" a CJ4?

 

[Techniker]

Techniker, is "scope A" a CJ4?

It is not, though after looking at the specs for a CJ4 I can see why you would think that.

Alternatively to all of these, why couldn't I just use a regular portable lab scope like this: http://www.ebay.com/itm/OWON-portab...s=63&clkid=2411684542576101556#ht_6124wt_1037

-Techniker

 

[Techniker]

I don't see why it wouldn't be.

To be honest, I've gotten away from secondary ignition analysis for all but the most problem child vehicles. Most problems with secondary ignition will also show up on the primary side of things.

Are there any drawbacks where that 1 GHz bandwidth would cost me?

 

[Stick]

Alternatively to all of these, why couldn't I just use a regular portable lab scope like this: http://www.ebay.com/itm/OWON-portab...s=63&clkid=2411684542576101556#ht_6124wt_1037

The biggest problem that I see with a "portable" bench type scope is storage. The way I work is to have the scope recording what's going on, and then go back and analyze what I recorded. With the Vantage Pro I'll often sample at a high resolution and then look at the info 4, 8, or 16 screens at a time. When something catches my eye, I'll go back to a 1x view to get a better look.

I know some of the bench type scopes have "storage", but it seems to be limited to storing a couple of individual screens worth of info, rather than a ton of buffered screens. For how I work, that's a pretty big drawback.

Are there any drawbacks where that 1 GHz bandwidth would cost me?

I think you mean 1MHz there. While I'm pretty up on using scopes, I don't know nearly as much about the technical specs and how they relate to real life use.

For whatever it's worth, most of the "fastest" events you'll be looking at will be in the 1.5-3ms range. I'd imagine that 1MHz bandwidth would be more than fast enough to capture an accurate waveform.

Edit: Correct my math if it's wrong. From what I remember from my Pro Audio days, 2ms = 500hz. Assuming you have a scope with a 1MHz of bandwith and 25MSa/s, you'd capture the signal just fine.

 

[Techniker]

I think you mean 1MHz there. While I'm pretty up on using scopes, I don't know nearly as much about the technical specs and how they relate to real life use.

For whatever it's worth, most of the "fastest" events you'll be looking at will be in the 1.5-3ms range. I'd imagine that 1MHz bandwidth would be more than fast enough to capture an accurate waveform.

Yes, 1 MHz, wishful thinking on my part. Actually, I can imagine a lot more nightmares with 1 GHz than just 1 MHz.

 

[diesel research]

Here is an interesting low-power unit to try and get your feet wet.

$299.00

The uScope! A single channel, pocket-sized, digital storage oscilloscope that ¡s small, quick, and powerful. Automotive presets get you going quickly. Ideal for the Flat Rater that wants the ultimate run and gun lab scope for pin point testing. Ideal for the student that is ready to start scope'n.

The uScope is powered by an easy to use automotive specific interface that includes automotive presets and reference waveforms.

The bottom line: When you just need to run a quick test to verify the "signal" is working as the engineer intended, why spend time pulling out and setting up your "big boy Scope" when you can do it faster with the uScope?

Put the power of the uScope in your hand (and shirt pocket).

Secondary ignition, injectors, mass air flow, crank, cam, TPS, 02, CTS you name it it'll scope it. The uScope is also perfect for your law amp probe, secondary ignition pickup and pressure transducers.

Contents:
-uScope Digital Storage Scope
-6' Shielded ST3 Test Lead (Green)
-6' Secondary Capacitive Pickup
-Green pin tip probe
-Black pin tip probe
-Green gator clip
-Black gator clip
-2Gb Micro SD Card
-USB Cable

http://www.aeswave.com/products/Product.asp?i=1099

Very limited in some aspects, but I suppose a cheaper way to review/analyze needs and perhaps learn/practice more before buying the big guns....

 

[diesel research]

I am surprised this hasn't caught more attention.

 

[Techniker]

Pulled the trigger on an automotive oscilloscope on Ebay (this was the choice A, I referred to earlier- I just didn't want to post it- GarageJournal members have a lot more disposable income firepower than I do!):

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/_W0Q...54QQsspagenameZSTRKQ3aMEWNXQ3aIT#ht_500wt_957

Mac Tools ETS 2800- 2 channels with external trigger and optional kV probe. 1 MHz bandwidth with 50 MHz sampling (25 MHz sampling when using both channels).

What do you think? I'm pretty excited about it!

-Techniker

 

[Stick]

Mac Tools ETS 2800- 2 channels with external trigger and optional kV probe. 1 MHz bandwidth with 50 MHz sampling (25 MHz sampling when using both channels).

What do you think? I'm pretty excited about it!

Not too bad for around $200.

Now you just need to join us in this month's how-to thread over in Free Parking.

 

[smogtech]

Here is an interesting low-power unit to try and get your feet wet.

$299.00

http://www.aeswave.com/products/Product.asp?i=1099

Very limited in some aspects, but I suppose a cheaper way to review/analyze needs and perhaps learn/practice more before buying the big guns....

i had a chance to play with one these during a training seminar. very powerful for how small it is. takes better waveforms than some of the bigger scopes. better than the old snap on vantage for sure. the main downside is it being only one channel. but for most the stuff you are going to run across it will do fine. thinking about getting one these fpr my box soon as lugging around the modis isnt always convenient.

 

[williaty]

Darn, the OP made his decision too easily! I was hoping for a bunch more discussion since I'll be picking one out for myself in the next couple of months.

 

[Olafur]

Here is an interesting low-power unit to try and get your feet wet.

$299.00

http://www.aeswave.com/products/Product.asp?i=1099

Very limited in some aspects, but I suppose a cheaper way to review/analyze needs and perhaps learn/practice more before buying the big guns....

I could be mistaken but this unit looks like one available on ebay for less. Specs are the same. Don't know how much the accessory package is worth.

 

[smogtech]

I could be mistaken but this unit looks like one available on ebay for less. Specs are the same. Don't know how much the accessory package is worth.

comes from hong kong. Its probably a knock off. Not sure how good it will actually be. For an oscilloscope I wouldn't get a knock off. You need it to be pretty accurate. Were talking about things that are measured in milliseconds and 10-20 milliseconds off could lead to the wrong diagnosis.

 

[Olafur]

I think both are made in Asia. Quite possibly in the same factory. The one widely found on ebay is running open source oscilloscope software.

The AES version is not:
" The uScope is powered by an easy to use automotive specific interface that includes automotive presets and reference waveforms."

This and the sensor/leads is what makes up the price difference.

Higher bandwidth 4 (2 analog) channel version is also available for less than $200. Here is one.

Considering they are aimed at the electronics crowd accuracy is probably up to specifications. Higher than required for automotive diagnostics. But I would test it against another scope or frequency counter to be sure.

 

[Techniker]

Darn, the OP made his decision too easily! I was hoping for a bunch more discussion since I'll be picking one out for myself in the next couple of months.

Oh trust me, I've spent months, if not over a year agonizing over this. I just decided to jump.

-Techniker

 

[Stick]

Darn, the OP made his decision too easily! I was hoping for a bunch more discussion since I'll be picking one out for myself in the next couple of months.

My recommendations in post #9 still stand.

Pick out a budget, then a scope.

 

[Techniker]

Next question...for choosing a low current probe. I'm looking at a few right now.

One can measure down into the single mA range; unfortunately, its probe loop diameter is about 6 mm. I am concerned that this could be too small.

The other one I am looking at will go into the tens of mA range; the downside to this is that the loop diameter is 23 mm- which I am concerned is much too large for checking things like fuel injectors or just using a current loop fuse buddy.

Thoughts?

 

[Stick]

Next question...for choosing a low current probe. I'm looking at a few right now.

One can measure down into the single mA range;
The other one I am looking at will go into the tens of mA range;
Thoughts?

If you need single mA accuracy an amp probe is the wrong tool for the job, the better solution is to put a meter inline with the circuit and measure current directly. The downside is that most scopes don't have an amp function (hence the use of amp probes). Realistically though I've never needed single mA accuracy out of an amp probe for scope use, most circuits don't go that low and if they did you would be fighting the noise floor of the amp probe to be able so get a useable signal anyway.

If you're going to spend $$$ get the Fluke or Snap-on low amp probe. If you just have $, this generic one is fine.

Don't sweat the size of the clamp, you can almost always find a way to make it fit, or open up the harness a bit with a razorblade.

 

[Techniker]

If you need single mA accuracy an amp probe is the wrong tool for the job, the better solution is to put a meter inline with the circuit and measure current directly. The downside is that most scopes don't have an amp function (hence the use of amp probes). Realistically though I've never needed single mA accuracy out of an amp probe for scope use, most circuits don't go that low and if they did you would be fighting the noise floor of the amp probe to be able so get a useable signal anyway.

If you're going to spend $$$ get the Fluke or Snap-on low amp probe. If you just have $, this generic one is fine.

Don't sweat the size of the clamp, you can almost always find a way to make it fit, or open up the harness a bit with a razorblade.

This is probably a stupid question, but will a small probe (the 6 mm for example) still be able to really measure the current if the clamp is open at all? On that same note, if I go with the 23 mm clamp, will I still be able to use it on a dinky 4 mm wire or will the clamp barely notice the wire is there?

-Techniker

 

[williaty]

The clamp senses magnetic flux. It doesn't care what size the wire is in terms of being able to detect current flow or not. However, the closer the hoop of the clamp is in size to the size of the conductor, the higher the accuracy. Yes, the amp clamp needs to be fully closed for proper function.

 

[Stick]

Open jaws on an amp probe is a no-no.

6mm=~1/4" or so, which should be enough to measure a 8-10ga wire depending on insulation thickness. The 23mm clamp would measure a tiny 28ga wire just as well as a huge 000 battery cable.

Why not just link the amp probes you are looking at and save all the beating around the bush? Or just go with the generic amp probe that AESwave sells, which hundreds of people over on iATN.net use without problems.

 

[Techniker]

The clamp senses magnetic flux. It doesn't care what size the wire is in terms of being able to detect current flow or not. However, the closer the hoop of the clamp is in size to the size of the conductor, the higher the accuracy. Yes, the amp clamp needs to be fully closed for proper function.

So these are AC/DC clamps, therefore I assume they are Hall effect-type. I know the size of the wire doesn't really matter as long as current is flowing, but what I'm more interested in is whether or not the clamp had to be closed. I couldn't think of how it could measure the current with any real degree of accuracy without being closed, but with what Stick said, I was starting to question myself. You answered my question there so thank you!

 

[K5blazer83]

I bought an old Vantage a while a back and I can't say that I regret it. Most of Snappy's scopes are good. Vantage, Vantage Pro, Modis etc.

I can say I'm NOT a fan of the Ethos though. It's annoying to use and slower than dog-****.

 

[chaseRPM]

the uScope is the same as the DSO nano v2 which is a single channel handheld scope .. the DSO quad is a 4 channel (2 analog & 2 digital) .. got one on the way..

 

[bran1har]

Really what you want is something with a graphing multimeter function; that is what you will use 99% of the time. OTC Perception.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/SPX-OTC-Per..._Automotive_Tools&hash=item19da4cd87f&vxp=mtr

 

[johnsimkins999]

All,

I am interested in buying an automotive oscilloscope. As a student, being able to buy a truly automotive oscilloscope (with the bells and whistles of the automatic sensor-specific presets) is out of the question for budget reasons, so I am planning on buying a cheaper portable oscilloscope- there appear to be some decent handheld, and if worse came to worse, USB scopes out there.

My question is- what should I be looking for in an oscilloscope? Being an engineer undergrad by education, I understand that with the new CAN systems, I need at least five times the bandwidth, so I am thinking something with at least 5 MHz (I have found one that seems to be rated for 8 MHz). Do you agree with this?

There was one automotive oscilloscope I was looking at recently, but its bandwidth was rated at 1 MHz. This is too low for more modern vehicles and moving into the future, agreed?

As for the sampling frequency, I have found one also rated at 40 MSa/s which seems quite good to me. Unfortunately, the oscilloscope that I am looking at, only allows for one channel, how nice is that second channel to have? I can imagine a few situations where it would be helpful (particularly for triggering?).

In summary, I have two choices:

Scope A: True "automotive" oscilloscope- rated at 1 MHz bandwidth, 25 MSa/s, two channels.

Scope B: Regular handheld oscilloscope- rated at 8 MHz bandwidth, 40 MSa/s, one channel.

I generally want to rule out the USB-style devices (such as the Picoscope), chiefly because I don't want to have to worry about my laptop or netbook in the shop.

Thank you in advance,
Techniker

glad to see techs want to use a scope for diagnosis, I think pc based is the way to go because soon all communication with the vehicle will be pc based, scan tools will be no more. if you are worried about theft of your pc, go to staples and get a cheap one just for that. I would be more worried about theft of the scope. I like the screen size, I could not use the portable ones now, I am going with the pico 4 channel, along with ease software for my scanning, there are some great videos using the pico scope at their site, things you can do with the pc based can't be done or seen properly with a mini scope if you go to their site look at the video of the masseratti, (not sure the spelling) its a lebaron with a 3.0 ltr engine, the site also has a library of good patterns to view.
good luck

 

[Tech7]

It is now almost three years later I guess but I'm looking at a similar scope and wondering how this one worked out.

I'm looking at a MAC Tools ET 3840. I believe it has two channels and has a database for cars up to the early 2000's. It has a glitch logging mode of some kind to catch slight variations.

Has anyone had experience with this particular one?

I'm trying to find something that I can use to catch possible glitches in the MAP signal on a 2002 Cadillac. It is roaring with high rpm's.

Thanks!

 

[ndoran]

I use a Tektronix TDS2004B, it has 4 channels can save to memory stick, connect to a computer and printer plus it can be controlled by a computer. Nice and light easy to move around. It is 60MHz. I bought it for electronics work but it handles anything on a car. You can pick them up used - got mine for $500 with 4 probes. Current probes can be bought for a reasonable price

 

[dw85745]

I believe this is an old thread, but hoping for the best.

1) Could someone explain why not to go the USB route with a scope and computer?
2) I saw one scope HANTEK 1008C PC USB 8CH Automotive Diagnostic Digital Oscilloscope/DAQ/Programmable Generator that selling on Amazon. Supposedly with the 8 channels you can monitor about all sensors at once. Any good, too slow, etc?

 

[3 Gun Shooter]

I believe this is an old thread, but hoping for the best.

1) Could someone explain why not to go the USB route with a scope and computer?
2) I saw one scope HANTEK 1008C PC USB 8CH Automotive Diagnostic Digital Oscilloscope/DAQ/Programmable Generator that selling on Amazon. Supposedly with the 8 channels you can monitor about all sensors at once. Any good, too slow, etc?

Connection issues, I have my GDS (GM) and IDS (Ford) talking to my computer through a USB, both have connection issues at times, the IDS is real bad. I'd rather run them wireless but the company I work for does not believe in lap tops or wireless connections.

 

[vintage nut]

Would a standard electronics bench oscilloscope work? I picked up two recently for free from an old ham radio opperator/mechanic friend of mine who wanted them out of his shop. One is a two channel crt tektronics (from the 60s, and accounting for inflation it would have been 50 grand new... LOL) another is an old sencore oscilloscope/vextorscope combo. Also like a lab grade machine. Heck if you were local to me I'd give you one lol

you can never have too many tools