Yeah, in general (not just our car, all modern drive-by-wire cars) the pedal is taken as "human intent" to the ECU, and the ECU controls throttle based on a wide variety of factors. The throttle map we have definitely does something, but obviously we lack full control without VVEL tables as well.

If you want to experiment, you can completely disable Electronic Throttle Control. At the bottom of the list of editable stuff in the UpRev Rom Editor, there's an "ETC: On/Off" setting. I've set it to off before, and when you do that the car very literally maps 1:1 between the gas pedal and the "throttle" (although still, I imagine it's more VVEL than the manifold butterfly).

Throttle response with ETC Off is awesome, the problem is it kills a lot of other functionality on the car too. You'll lose cruise control (who cares), you probably lose the (safer) Throttle Rev Limit, having to just rely on the fuel cut rev limit, and most importantly you lose Synchro-Rev-Match.

On a track 6MT car, for someone who disables SRM to heel-toe anyways, ETC Off might actually be a viable option. On my 7AT it's a no-go though, the transmission can't execute downshifts properly without its own equivalent of SRM.

No edit capability here... not without a license upgrade, but I don't know what I'm doing either.

Wow that's very interesting stuff. So there must be a lot going on with the throttle software... perhaps doing a bunch of SQL queries? :rofl2:

It's good to know about the response with ETC disabled, so it appears the VVEL actuators may have the mechanical capability to change position quickly.

True... in a sense "throttle position" is probably not relevant with our engines versus accelerator position. It's now VVEL actuator position... so what parameters are you able to log and monitor in real-time? Do you think you can record various parameters while making the video? Imagine overlaying the plots with your video. Someday I'll fetch a laptop and run Cipher to log stuff on the way to work and home.

Can't wait to see some videos! Be safe!

For these tests I'm just monitoring throttle position ong raphs generated by Torque on my phone while i drive. I could probably log that, pedal position, and some random VVEL parameters in Cipher alongside the usual rpm/speed info, but I'm not sure how I'd sync that with video.

I've only spent 5 minutes looking at Cipher. So I guess you can preselect up to 20 parameters to record. When you're ready to test, start recording on the camera, then start log recording. Stop recording on both when you're done with the test and before proceeding with the next test.

What I did was ghetto-rig my digital camera to the steering wheel with masking tape. In fact, my camera was upside down and I rotated it using the video editor (MS Movie Maker). I don't know how to overlay image over video with Movie Maker, though.

If you can't overlay the image and video, separate post is fine.

updates?

Top post updated with new results, and a new, better map. Read that post for all the updates...

Impressive work wstar

Excellent work ......repped

Nice write-up :tup:

Great work! I'd love to see some videos. No wonder I had issues getting boost to build up at times especially when starting out at very low revs, and it takes forever to rev up to redline in 2nd as if the throttle is barely opening up.

I'm sure you've given tuners a great starting point.

Even though I can't edit the ROM on my own, perhaps Sam can take a look at this and send me a new flash. Maybe I can keep the standard response for daily driving and this one can be the "sport" map.

Well, even the "naive" approach will open that up for you, supposedly. The point of this exercise is to get that benefit while retaining a smooth, predictable response. I imagine some people will actually feel like their car is slower on my map, because in theory it should smooth the acceleration curve, resulting in less Jerk and/or Jounce which, I believe, is what leads people to believe the car has a very "snappy" throttle response based on Seat-of-the-Pants. I prefer predictability.

I have some more datalogging to do to back this up, and to make some estimation about how the 3800's concept helps low RPM driving force in general (smoothed out or not).

My plan for those charts is to log basically just rpm-vs-time (plus a few other parameters for my own validation) as an accurate vehicle speed metric, do it for a 2nd gear pull flooring the pedal from 1500 RPM on a few different maps (assuming I can do that without wheelspin, otherwise I'll go to 3rd again), and then derive accel -> jerk -> jounce data from that, or at least to whatever practical limit there is in the data.

I did some data logs between the good curve and the stock map on raw acceleration with a stomped full throttle from 2k -> top in 2nd gear, and to be honest at first glance the difference isn't huge.

Of course this isn't engine tuning, this is throttle tuning, we don't expect to make the engine accelerate any faster in most of the range. What I expected was a notable difference in the acceleration in the low RPM range though, basically from allowing the virtual pedal to fully open like the real pedal did, and what I found was a relatively small one (in the right direction). Subjectively, the effect seemed a lot more noticeable though. For the short time window that matters we don't have a ton of sample points either, and there is a tiny bit of sensor -> cipher lag as well. All of that could be dampening the results.

Don't have time to run the numbers on the numbers, but I'll do that later and make some graphs.

Well, for now I'll stick by my subjective impression (which was fairly strong) that UpRev and the tuners are right: maps with a solid column (or more) of 3800 values at the end do get on the throttle quicker at lower RPMs when you stomp the pedal all the way.

The MPH and RPM data via Cipher simply isn't good enough to infer g's of accel at the fine scale needed to tell the difference between the stock and non-stock maps at low RPMs in the scenario above, and adding to the error is my inability to get the graph start points lined up precisely (same starting pedal pos + rpm, leading to same timestamp for first full-throttle sample).

I'll post up this chart here anyways so you can see what the data looks like, but the bottom line to me is "too noisy and inaccurate to tell anything from". MAP4 is stock, MAP3 is one of the 3800 maps (the 2300 one in this case, not that it matters which at full throttle):

http://www.the370z.com/members/wstar...onclusions.png

Have you driven a DE/HR car lately? I wonder if you can get your impressions with those cars in comparison to your map.

So how's daily driving coming along?

No, I've never driven the DE or HR motors. Daily driving on the "curve 2300" map is great, but so was the "curve 2700" as long as you didn't go full throttle, and the original "linear" was pretty decent as well, although it seemed a little snappy or sensitive in the upper parts. Really even the stock map is reasonable too, so long as you're always at say ~3.5K+ RPM. The tuner map was kinda awful though, lots of odd unpredictability at partial throttle.

Sorry I haven't posted a video. I actually have a good setup for shooting video out the front windshield (which I used for this), but not for recording my dash dials while driving. I'll take some video on stock vs curve2300 sometime this week though, using aLapRecorder and virtual gauge overlays for RPM and TPS, like I did for the track stuff. I just need to get it all set up again after (yet again) updating my beta android firmware.

Hmm... wonder if Sam@GTM would be willing to load your tables in one of the slots. I'd be happy to test it out for you. However, I'd be curious about the difference in the stock tables for 7AT versus 6MT.

I can keep the stock table for normal or wet weather driving, and then switch over to a snappier setup on dry days.

Digi with the version of uprev that you have do you have access to at least look at the tables? You can compare your table to the wstar's stock table on the OP. I'd too be interested to know if they are same.

Basically unless he gets a Tuner license for that cable, no, he can't see the tables.

Any updates on this? What has your adjustments done for throttle response as well?

The stock map mirrors the stock power curve, right down to the drop in power before fuel cut and then the sudden spike.

The 2700 curve actually looks to be the best to me -- how does it feel compared the 2300 curve? Too jerky at upper range?

Did you try 2500?

The 2700 Curve doesn't work right at all in the upper RPM range, it never even quite achieves full throttle opening. I don't think anybody really understands this map completely (probably because there are other related maps that UpRev hasn't decoded yet). I did try several other intermediate values, but the 2300 one came out the most ideal.

Keep in mind my criteria though:

My problem with the stock map is it doesn't allow the car to go full throttle from low RPM. Basically it restricts throttle response until the RPMs get a bit up "out of the hole" and then gradually opens the full throttle as the RPMs rise. This seems to be mostly to keep people who probably shouldn't be driving this car from stomping the pedal from a standstill and spinning out into the guy in the next lane.

The fix for this is to fix the final column of the table so that the low RPMs do the same thing at full pedal that the high RPMs do. However, you then still have to smooth the table back out in some sense, and if you don't do it right you end up with non-linear and/or jerky (and/or flat out buggy) throttle response. My goal in doing that smoothing is not "open up the the throttle as quickly as possible relative to pedal position". That's what some other people seem to want, and it's what those add-on generic electronic throttle fixups do, e.g. Why SprintBooster Works .

If I want the throttle open faster, I'll simply apply my foot faster :). Technically a technique like the sprint booster uses probably shaves 20ms or whatever off of the total response time when you stomp the pedal to the floor in a drag race, but it does so at a sacrifice to throttle smoothness in the rest of the range, which is unacceptable to me.

So, to sum it up, I think the 2300 Curve data (at least on my car/ECU) resulted in the best possible results in terms of those goals: Instant full engine throttle when you stomp the pedal down at any RPM (well, assuming no wheelspin + VDC interference, etc), and a linear, smooth pedal response throughout the pedal's range, to provide for maximum nuanced throttle control for real driving (as opposed to some other maps or the sprint booster, which will leave you with fast and slow spots in the pedal range that don't respond linearly to foot input).

Thanks for all your research wstar.

I wonder if anyone could dyno a 370z with ETC off. Should be interesting to see what happens.

Wstar thanks for posting your results! I plugged your chart into my electronic throttle and the drivability of my Z changed a pretty good bit. Im really content with your chart.

..
 

ARRRRGGGGHHH, I thought I left hexadecimals behind when I retired. Tks for the flashbacks...lol Great tech post tho

I am interested in the ETC off friving experience. Sounds like it would be the RAW experience that everyone is missing.............at a cost though. Honestly, I rarely use SRM, VDC, or Cruise. Once bad weather hit, I would be missing VDC and SRM and Cruise on that 1600-1800 mile trip home to Baltimore or back. I may check it out once I get back from leave and see how RAW it really is!

Awesome thread. sub'd for future results. I've got access to a tuner cable so if anyone wants me to modify their tables just shoot me a pm

I was reading up on this in the Uprev manual, and it sounds like the ETC table is important for determining line pressure for shifts under load. If so, what if line pressure was just bumped up across the board and ETC was off?

Very geeky gear head stuff. Subscribed for future reference when I can muster up $$ for a tune. Will be some good data to pass on to the tuner.

Wstar,thanx man so helpful. but ? So you have all the tables at 3800. I'M going to see mg tuner at 12 and wanTed to see where mine where set. I'm also going to set the fan speeds to low @185 med @200 and high@215. Is that right. thanx man.

Is it? I don't recall reading that. Line pressures are controlled by the Torque Map table, which is a different thing from the throttle table. Some people bump it by ~5-10% across the board. Raising it even a little bit too much can result in jerky shifts though. The advice I got from UpRev was to datalog (via Cipher) for any slip in the transmission. If you're getting slip, raise the Torque Map values. If you're not, don't.

I'm not sure I understand the question here. The table basically describes points in a 3D square surface. One edge of the square is set at all-3800, but the rest curves off smoothly. Just setting 3800's in the last column isn't sufficient, and neither are any of UpRev's built-in simplistic smoothing models.

Keep in mind all I've done here is experiment on my own car. I don't have other cars to compare with, test on, or look at the stock maps on, so this is mostly for people with a Tuner license who are also willing to experiment.

If you're going to have a 3rd-party tuner try to play with the throttle map from my first post, I'd advise you have them read the whole thing and compare your stock map to the stock map I posted at the bottom of that first post.

I haven't had time to fully explore the fan speed option. I'm not 100% sure how it operates relative to the table until I test it (whether the ECU interpolates between the low-temp column and the next one up, or if they're just switching points, that's my biggest concern).

In general though, the ideal for the fans for me would be: 1) Ignore whether the AC is on or off, 2) Keep the fans off at low coolant temps, 3) Turn them on full blast and leave them on, starting at about 185.

Well, there's also the speed thing. It might make sense to turn them down/off at high speed when the car gets plenty of air on its own. I'm really not sure about this point. I could see useful arguments in either direction. Maybe having them spinning at speed still helps channel more of the incoming air in the right direction (into the radiator instead of around it). Then again maybe it doesn't change anything for the radiator and just adds turbulence, or worse maybe it actually slows down the incoming air to have them on. I have no clue about this stuff, and not sure yet how I'll get data.

Hey. thanx man. really!! The reason I ask about the tables is I Think we just used 3800 across the board. to hey the TB To open full from a stop. the pedal down and hesitation kills me. LOL.

Wow I'm going in for my first tune in about a week. One week to try to comprehend some of this awesome Data. Thanks

Well the changes went good. Car feels like a different animal again, I can actualy feel the car twist coming of the line , WOT respones is back and feels WAY different, I wonder if the ECU releaned how I HAVE to drive becasue of traffic,. All I know is we reflashed it made two small fuel( Took some away) and added some timing and different car,, We also changed the fan control, My oil temps on a typical day ( 70-75 degrees) City driving -traffic would be right around 200-202 deg, After we made the changes I saw nothing over 180. :)

Tranny temps where about 165, Norm same day driving was around 185 or so,.

I added this to my throttle map on the rom editior about 2 weeks ago and it works very well,a little touchy but you get use to it.

Wstar -- any changes or updates to your throttle map? Have you tweaked it further or come up with any new insights?

Planning on trying it soon, and just wanted to know if there were any updates :tiphat:

Also, wondering if others who have tried it but don't have similar breathing mods (e.g., no headers) have found the map to work well or not? Herky Jerky? Flat spots?

Still running the same map here, I like it. I don't *think* it's the kind of thing that would change much with breathing mods, but I guess who knows. Gives me good throttle control in any case. Not as good as ETC Off, but w/ 7AT (or anyone who wants SRM and/or VDC to work) you can't do ETC off :(

Thanks!

On another note, can you give me a run down again of what happens with ETC off?

If you set ETC Off in UpRev, the ECU doesn't get to manage/interfere with the throttle at all. It's still technically drive-by-wire of course, so the signal's going through the ECU. But whatever you do to the gas pedal is what it does for throttling the engine, and it feels exactly like a normal cabled throttle. It's perfect, except for the fact that the ECU can no longer intervene in any way. I know it kills SRM and at least the throttle part of VDC, and it probably kills the soft rev limiter as well (although you'd still get the hard fuel-cut one I think). If you're tracking a 6MT car and willing to never rely on SRM and do your own heel-toe, it's probably a good setting to use.

I meant to someday experiment with whether it's even possible (or practical) to time your own throttle blips on the 7AT with ETC Off and get shifting to still work right, but I never got around to it (and frankly I'm dubious of whether there would even be a consistent timing window to aim for).

Hmm. In the Uprev tuning guide it says the throttle becomes too touchy, even for track guys, and I thought it also disables the torque management map -- I'll have to play with that some time.

Oh, I tried your map, but it honestly felt a little under responsive to what I have currently, so I went back to my last map.

Any interest in trying mine? I can post it or PM it to you. Be curious to see what the curve looks like relative to your other plots.