[SentraSE-R]

You made a good choice. I own both. The SG has some advantages under special circumstances, and several disadvantages, but all-in-all, I prefer the UG.

1) Both give MPG output. No diffs in refresh rate or accuracy that I can see.

2) Both gauges are backlight, and night visible. SG has color options. I prefer the crisp contrasty B/W of the UG over the pale green, purple, etc. colors of the SG.

3) Features from one to the other are close, but the SG requires you to spend hours programming xgauges to display things like barometric pressure, long term fuel trim, etc. for the communications protocol used by your specific car - and you have to do it all over again if you have a second car using a different protocol. UG finds all its gauges within a minute, no programming required. OTOH, SG lets you check a lot of parameters that UG doesn't, if you know the programming codes for your car. Since UG isn't user-programmable, you're stuck with the basics that the UG is pre-programmed to recognize.

4) Is the SGII really worth almost $100 more than an UG? That's a personal decision. I'm keeping mine in case I get a Prius, and want to know something esoteric about it, like transmission temperature. If I was buying another gauge for another car, I'd buy the UG.

5) Both SGII and UG need to be calibrated to the vehicle. It doesn't change if you have extra people in the car. Each tank differs slightly, but I pick a standard conservative calibration value and stick with it tank after tank. That way, if my UG or SG says I got 50 mpg, I know I got at least 50 mpg, and likely more. UG and SG calibration values seem to be nearly identical. 13.5% calibration gives about the same accuracy with both SG and UG. in my xB.