Are Wireless Probe Ambient Sensors Accurate?

[GolfGeezer]

Interesting post/blog on Fireboard.com. It sort of re-enforces my thoughts about still needing a wired ambient probe (or two) to know when a cooker has reached the desired cooking temp - meaning, before you put the food in (which has the wireless probe stuck in it). Just IMHO.

Are Wireless Probe Ambient Sensors Accurate? - FireBoard Labs

[RichieB]

I always place wired with a wireless if using. I find a 50 to 75 degree difference, I pretty much ignore it.

[Mosca]

Yeah, I seen ‘at. I didn’t know there was a controversy.

[GolfGeezer]

Sort of. I have been bugging CI and FireBoard about making a wireless, purely ambient, probe that could be a direct replacement for wired ambient probes. Their posted data shows why IMO. Meaning, the data shows you cannot rely on wireless probes to know the desired cooking temp is reached as it is in the food until the cooker to get to desired temp, and even after placing the food with one in your cooker, it does not register accurately for a couple of hours per their posted analysis.

[RonB]

I have never paid any attention to Combustion's ambient temp, but I'm normally using the wireless probe for hot N fast anyway, so ambient temp isn't necessary ' cause the dome temp, (minus ~ 50°), is close enough.
For low and slow, I'm using a fan, so I use the Fireboard to power the fan and since I have that out, I just plug in wired probes so I have everything on 1 screen.

[yakima]

Perhaps the wireless CI ambient temp is different due to its proximity to the protein, vs an ambient temp taken at a more remote location.

My experience with Combustion has been fine.

[FireMan]

Well, are they?

[GolfGeezer]

After a couple of hours according to their posted data, the wireless ambient tracks with a wired ambient probe.

[klflowers]

I have found that the ambient probes on the TempSpike are slow to respond and are not very accurate. But it may just be that my general disappointment with the product clouds my judgment