Might be different on the L405, but I’m sure on the L322 someone said that the adaptive dynamics system doesn’t come live until the car is in D and moving. Might not be an issue if you just want raw readings though. Only a thought.

 2011 Range Rover Vogue SE 4.4 TDV8

Previous cars :
2003 Range Rover Vogue TD6
1999 Discovery Td5 ES
1995 BMW M5 3.8 6 speed
1992 Range Rover 3.9 Efi Vogue
1992 BMW M5 3.8
1988 BMW 735i SE
1989 Ford Sierra XR4x4 2.9i
1981 Ford Fiesta Supersport

Yes it's the same on the l405, it's not active until you engage drive and begin to move.

Just not sure if it's normal or odd for one accelerometer out of the 3 to report a lower m/s2 value although they all report the same voltage.

I will have a look at the live data on that and see if they all report the same.

Last edited by MarianaWestminster on 5th Nov 2023 11:16pm. Edited 1 time in total

The only output from the accelerometers is the voltage which is then translated to acceleration so I don't understand why the different acceleration from identical voltages. The calculated acceleration discrepancy might be an error in the tool's calc from voltage but if extracted pre-calculated then while not moving the results should all be the same when voltages are identical.
I'll check my L322's later today. I've previously displayed the voltages but not the calculated acceleration.

It is possible that accelerometers need to be calibrated once fitted to account for any variations in the produced voltage for a given acceleration.

Edit: This might explain why the LR diagnostic tool requires the vehicle to be stationary for L322 CVD calibration, possibly to calibrate the accelerometers, whereas the IIDTool's function requires a (IIRC) 20 second drive to calibrate how to smooth the ride over bumps, but couldn't possibly calibrate accelerometers while moving.

Thanks Graeme, that would be useful.

I didnt realise the m/s2 are calculated and not actual values but it will be interesting to know if other cars report differences when it seems like they should all be the same.

Interesting points re calibration, it's not available for the l405 in SDD nor is it available on the IID (confirmed with GAP directly)

Just to add, Pat at GAP told me they've had other people complaining about damping/ride quality issues on 2010+ cars but as yet nobody has figured out why.

He said he was going to speak with engineering about it and emailed me again today asking for my VIN number.

He didn't say what he wanted it for but I'll update if it goes anywhere.

The voltage display is rounded to 2 decimal places so it wouldn't take much to show slightly different acceleration values. Furthermore I would expect the change in values would be used in the CVD algorithims and looking at my L322's values that reached 3600 m/s while driving on a bumpy track, very small values are likely to be insignificant anyway.

I graphed mine's values but I'm still trying to get hold of the saved file.

Update: My IIDtool can only show acceleration for the L322's front 2 accelerometers and voltage for all 3. My graph shows both front going from 0 to 3250 with some spikes well above the 3250 graph limit, with some returning to zero within 1 second. The spikes can rise more quickly than they fall and vice-versa, indcating that the damping forces can be changed between shock compression and extension.

So Graeme are you suggesting the differences I see in the sensors at standstill aren't likely to have much of an impact on the system?

The only difference I can see between our cars is that your values start at 0 whereas mine are at 250, 350 and 350 m/s2.

(Comparing L322 to L405 here obviously)

Still trying to work out in my head if there is a connection between all 3 hard riding cars I've owned...

I consider that the difference at stand-still will be totally insignificant given the values that are derived from the sensor voltages as vertical movement occurs, judging by the graphs from my sensors. Your acceleration discrepancy is in all likelihood due to showing voltages to only 2 decimal places.

Mine's 0 start is on the graph where the high value is 3250 but static acceleration varied between 0.250 m/s and 0.650 m/s.

Ah I understand now, I thought you had meant yours show 0 m/s2 static but my mistake I had understood.

So looks like that's the accelerometers ruled out as a wonky input to the system.

Back to the drawing board again, only thing I have to check right now is height sensors manually for any mechanical binding.

Manually checked both front height sensors tonight by disconnecting them from the control arm and sweeping through the available range of movement by hand.

No voltage drops or spikes on either, the erraticness of one of the graph may be due to me moving the front right faster than I moved the front left.

The front left sensor didn't move as freely as the front right but wasn't 'binding' it felt more like 'sticksion' if that's understandable?

Front left:




Front right:





I will remove the rear wheels tomorrow morning to access and check rear sensors.

Yes, there is normally a little bit of stiction/friction to the sensor arm. I suppose it'll be the seals and what not, as that will also smooth out jitter movement too. V8 or else ...

I expect there is meant to be some Fisha but the left side more so than the right.

Suppose I can compare the 'sticksion' of the rears to the fronts tomorrow when I check them.

GAP have supplied me with the latest updates for the CHCM and CHCMB.

I'm going to update both and see if it makes a difference

Fingers crossed...  Pete
I now have permission from the boss to use Y.O.L.O. Enjoy life
__________________________________________________
2014 L405 Autobiography SDV8 4.4 Loire Blue Ebony interior
2011 L322 Vogue SE 4.4 TDV8 Baltic Blue. Sold
2012 L322 Autobiography 5.0 Supercharged Ipanema Sand Sold
2002 L322 Vogue 4.4 V8 Epson Green (Fatty Offroader) Sold
-Click for Project Fatty off roader-

Thanks Haylands, being unable to sleep last night I ventured outside in the very early hours and tried to update the modules.

The IID aborted the flash on both and gave me some error codes which I've forwarded to Pat at GAP.

Will update.