[WolfPlayer]

Wow.

I worked on this table a bit and had someone with ProTUNER modify this table according to my specs. This table is the table responsible for closing the throttle at 7000rpms. Namely, at 6900rpms with the accelerator to the floor the ECU will be commanding 100% throttle. However, at 7000rpms with the accelerator to the floor the ECU will be commanding only 25% throttle. I reset mine to have 100% throttle at 7100rpms and then 5% at 7200rpms. However, this was NOT the biggest change I made to this table. It was just a side benefit. So, what was the biggest change ...

I have always HATED how touchy the throttle is. Come to find out ... the ECU is programmed to give 30% throttle in the very low RPMs even though you are only pressing on the throttle about 10%. This sucks for me. I could never seem to always get the clutch engagement perfect. Most of the time it was ok .. but not always. WOW, what a difference after fully remapping this table. Part throttle driving is now an absolute dream. I have so much more control. The car feels a little less responsive because I had adapted over the past 2 years to the non-linear mapping the stock ECU utilizes. In modifying this table, I didn't fully linearize this table ... but I did make the lower throttle percentages about 2/3 of what they were. You'd have to see it to understand. In fact, I love this so much, that I am going to make it even more linear. Like I said, it takes a little bit of time because the car does feel less responsive (even though it is NOT). Just give it a little more gas and kablowy: things are totally normal .... except with more control. This approach means it takes more pedal movement to create more throttle opening. To get the same response you have to push on the pedal more. However, the side benefit is that you have A LOT more control with regard to the smaller throttle openings. Love it, Love it, Love it.

t

[R4ND0M_AX3]

I just wish that all of this stuff was available to us ST users without having to borrow someones PT.

Good find.

[cnstman]

would this explain why when i am using cruise control and i go up a hill i get a boost spike? seams like if the throttle was instantly going to 30% instead of 20 or 25 or whatever, it would cause my condition. my 18g builds boost so fast, and i have a 15psi wastegate installed so i can get full boost (15 psi anyway) part throttle if i do not watch it.

[TheMadScientist]

I have a totally linear TPS tabled base map if someone wants to try it. I have not tried it yet.

TMS

[WolfPlayer]

Originally Posted by TheMadScientist

I have a totally linear TPS tabled base map if someone wants to try it. I have not tried it yet.

TMS

TMS, I would like to suggest that although you think you have a totally linear TPS tabled base map, I don't think you do. Please don't take that as a negative comment! Let me explain ...

The Throttle Duty table is absolutely not TPS in / TPS out (or accelerator angle vs. throttle angle). Not even close. Linearizing this table will produce something more similar to what I got ... which, obviously, is not linear. The stock calibration, as it turns out, is actually fairly close to linear except at the start and end. To be honest, I haven't figured out how this table works and I have tried a couple different calibrations at this point. The values are definitely duty cycles and do NOT correspond to either throttle angle or accelerator angle. I tried to correlate a given Duty Cycle to a given throttle angle. Guess what? Doesn't work. I back-calculated the duty vs. throttle angle for both the stock map and my modified map. The values don't match - and they should match if duty cycle can be linked to a throttle angle. The table almost doesn't make any sense to me at this point. Look at the table titles: It is THROTTLE vs. Duty Cycle. There is no mention of accelerator angle. Maybe there is another table that actually has the accelerator vs. throttle angle, with this table controlling more of the duty action. Who knows. I just know that changes to this table don't work as one perceives they will. I am going back to a stock-like table with the following modifications ...

1) All column values do not taper as RPMs increase. The same duty is held.
2) The drop to 25% throttle at 7000rpms will be removed. I will have a drop to 5% throttle at 7200rpms (starting at 7100rpms). This will be done for all RPMs (not just 100%).
3) The first column's duty cycles will be cut in half in an attempt to decrease the sensitivity on takeoff.

I would recommend that everyone learn from what I did because there is no sense wasting a base map flash. Linearizing this table will only make the actual throttle vs. accelerator much more NON-linear than stock. Heck, just take a look at my graph above. I've reverted to the stock throttle table until my newest changes have been worked into the base map (along with a bunch of others).

In conclusion, there is no doubt that this table has an affect on accelerator vs. throttle angle. It is just that changes to this table will not work out as you anticipate when trying to achieve a very specific goal. If this were a realtime map then I would be all over it. However, I will have about 5 flashes working with this table. I'm not going to do much more experimenting.

ALSO, Nick has his graph labeled as TopSpeed throttle. However, make no mistake, that is a stock throttle plot. I reverted to an older base map last night and did my own plot of stock Accelerator angle vs. throttle angle and achieved the same exact plot.

t

[daemon]

I haven't really studied the accelerator pedal, but assume it is using some sort of potentiometer to determine that angle. We are probably all assuming that it is a linear pot., but there is a chance it isn't. Just a random thought.

[chawklit]

I too didn't like how much throttle the stock car had at such little input. Yet with an upgrade to the AP stg2 this seemed to help some.

But now the throttle response seems a little laggy. Could this be resolved through modifying those tables with a protune?