Pedal Commander - Throttle Response Controller PC27 ?

[swatski]

I generally stay away from those type of gizmos, but this particular item is getting really good reviews on a MUD site for improving sluggish LC200 (landcruiser) drive-ability. Not that it is terrible, but made me think.

Like this:
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07CKF3G1M/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?smid=A1OR8ZNTLJTQHM&psc=1

Wonder about it - is it potentially detrimental to an ECU?
And also - would it help with 1.8 boat throttle response? Not sure if it is available for Yamaha, but probably could be; while expensive, still MUCH cheaper than the Maptuner X and reflash - which is the only currently available way to smooth out throttle response (that I know of).

--

 

[2kwik4u]

Interesting product.

I ran something VERY similar years ago on an S-10. It was a product the Grand National guys were using that sat between the TPS sensor, and the ECM. Those were cable driven throttle blades, and often times the TPS voltage would "wander" off of the 5V reference for various reasons. The "TPS trigger" or whatever it was called, sat there and would report 5V (WOT) to the ECM anytime the actual TPS signal read at 4.5V or higher. The impact to performance on my S10 was nothing. I didn't realize at the time that it had a much more repeatable TPS sensor. The GN guys though, the improved reporting of the TPS voltage "tricked" the ECM into using the PE (power enrichmnet) tables, and the car generally running more consistent under full throttle.

This device you have above is a little different. Best I can tell from some quick googling is that it sits between the ECM and the electronic throttle and essentially "remaps" the throttle in real time based on the input from the ECM, and whatever offsets you have programmed. I tend to dislike these types of systems based on a couple different points. The first is that the ECM would now be making decisions based on false data. It thinks there is a particular throttle opening, and is reading from a particular fuel/timing map for that opening. This could potentially lead to a heavily loaded, high timing situation which we know leads to predetonation or engine knock. The second is troubleshooting inline devices like this are difficult. It easy to go back to stock if needed, but it's one more thing to have to rule out when chasing a problem.

In terms of the hardware itself. So long as it doesn't overdrive the electronic throttle, or send stray voltages back to the ECM, it shouldn't physically hurt anything. If others have used it, and haven't reported those kinds of issues, then you should be in the clear.

Is there an aftermarket tuning solution for the Toyota platform similar to MapTunerX for the Yamahas, or EFILive/HPTuners for GM? If so, that is the best way to remap an electronic throttle, but is often more expensive than the device above by 2-3x, and requires more expertise to know which values to change and how they effect the trucks tune. The latter of course can be learned through trial and error if you are so inclined to invest the time.

 

[Mainah]

I am not sure if gas pedals on non cable cars are digital or analog these days. I have messed with carbs and throttle boddies on cars just never the gas pedal beyond intalling aftermarket heel/toe plates on manual sports cars. Given cost my guess is just a 5v ref analog potentiometer similar to the eseries throttles or the aps. @Ridesteady could implement something like this as in an upgraded version where the curve could be selected when not in rpm or gps mode.

 

[Adrian @ JB Solutions]

They have great reviews on the Ram forums. I don't think it would do anything for boats with throttle cables.

 

[2kwik4u]

They have great reviews on the Ram forums. I don't think it would do anything for boats with throttle cables.

This would sit between the ECM and the Throttle plates itself, not between the throttle handles and the sensor.

Should work in premise on the Yamaha. Getting the I/O correct would be the issue (voltages and such)

 

[swatski]

@Ridesteady could implement something like this as in an upgraded version where the curve could be selected when not in rpm or gps mode.

I want one for my landy, but in the meantime...

@Ridesteady if you are listening, something like that - a TPS (APS?) plug-in - to smooth out the throttle response curve (which is awful) in all the non-E series Yammies with APS could be a big hit!
It could even be made adjustable, could be great for learners/guest captains etc.

--

 

[swatski]

Is there an aftermarket tuning solution for the Toyota platform similar to MapTunerX for the Yamahas, or EFILive/HPTuners for GM? If so, that is the best way to remap an electronic throttle, but is often more expensive than the device above by 2-3x, and requires more expertise to know which values to change and how they effect the trucks tune. The latter of course can be learned through trial and error if you are so inclined to invest the time.

This is what got me started thinking of it:
https://forum.ih8mud.com/threads/pe...le-controller-thoughts.1090957/#post-11911507
The relative beauty is price point (vs reflashes and tuners) and absence of warranty considerations (assuming the damn thing works and does not do anything crazy). And - it seems super adjustable over a wide range. Really surprising it has not been more popular somehow as some cars/trucks could use this - in lieu of messing with ECU software, electronic transmission control etc.

--

 

[Mainah]

Another option would be machining a new variable arc cam with a lobe that flatens off for the aps. That would remove the dead spot at the start of the throttle lever range then taper the response in the middle.

As for ridesteady it should be fairly easy since all of the hardware needed is there in the current system. Would just need options to select the curve when not in gps or rpm mode. Not trivial to program and test though.

I like the cam option the best as that would be universal. I know we have some cad / machinist types on here that could whip up this up. At the right price point I would buy.

 

[swatski]

Another option would be machining a new variable arc cam with a lobe that flatens off for the aps. That would remove the dead spot at the start of the throttle lever range then taper the response in the middle.

Yes, that is what gmtech did, pretty impressive mod it was. Not trivial, but very cool the way he executed the design.

--

 

[Ridesteady]

Hmmm. In theory this is something that Ridesteady could do, assuming that the amount of throttle desired doesn't exceed the amount of throttle normally given at that particular throttle lever position. That is, Ridesteady can only "reduce" throttle due to the built in hardware limiter.

But yes, it would require a fair amount of time to implement and test. And there's always issues that pop up, regardless of how seemingly trivial something might seem.

From what I recall, just comparing the throttle valve position vs. throttle lever position (APS) in YDS, the response seemed to be pretty linear. I wonder if the issue is that the throttle body opening is too large, so that it gives too much air to the engine too early for people who live in lower altitudes. But then, they have to design to worst-case, so that it can hit maximum power at all altitudes. Just guessing here...

 

[2kwik4u]

So, been thinking about this for a day now. Was considering the effect of "lying" to the ECM about throttle position, the effects of that, and the results one should expect.

First off, what's controlled by TPS? Throttle opening, transmission shift points, cruise control operation, traction control, and air conditioning operation.

Throttle opening is the obvious one, and that's really what we're trying to affect. A "remapped" desired vs delivered throttle actuation. We want more (or potentially less) opening on the engine for a given input at the pedal.

The transmission shifting seems trivial at first, more throttle input will hold gears longer typically, and that also leads to a more responsive driving feel. Upon deeper thought there are also "tip in" tables that determine when to downshift and how many gears to drop. This is typically done by a table with change in TPS over change in time as the contouring variable. Remapping will change this variable as you will inherently give more (or less) throttle per a given time. This is what makes the "kickdown" feature work. I'm curious of how this works in practice and the long term effects. Where the vehicle might have only dropped one gear before it might now drop two. I know some GM transmissions had issue with that sort of shifting in years past, I wouldnt have any concern in a ZF equipped vehicle. More research us needed there I think.

A/C impact is going to be small, depending on how each vehicle reacts. I know my GM kills the condenser at 85% demanded, so pulling out in traffic often yields a heat wave from the vents in the summer. No damage, just comfort consideration.

I suspect similar reaction from cruise and traction control. No real danger in damage just some potential for erratic behaviour that isn't initially obvious.

Overall, for $300 I think I'm out. It's roughly 1/2 the price of a custom tune for my truck and with that tune I get significantly more in-depth changes to timing/shift/throttle/fuel tables. I've had success in the past with "input changers" for other sensors, most notably O2 sensor delete devices when running without emissions equipment (for track use only of course), but this one seems very expensive with a bit more potential hardware damage at stake.

If someone here runs one on a late model GM Fullsize I would love to hear about it.

 

[Mainah]

Hmmm. In theory this is something that Ridesteady could do, assuming that the amount of throttle desired doesn't exceed the amount of throttle normally given at that particular throttle lever position. That is, Ridesteady can only "reduce" throttle due to the built in hardware limiter.

But yes, it would require a fair amount of time to implement and test. And there's always issues that pop up, regardless of how seemingly trivial something might seem.

From what I recall, just comparing the throttle valve position vs. throttle lever position (APS) in YDS, the response seemed to be pretty linear. I wonder if the issue is that the throttle body opening is too large, so that it gives too much air to the engine too early for people who live in lower altitudes. But then, they have to design to worst-case, so that it can hit maximum power at all altitudes. Just guessing here...

The movement of the binnicles in the middle of the foward range seems to have a lot more imact tgan any other spot in tge range. It could be that the binncles have more cable pull in that part of the range which causes what we experience. It could also be that is just where we are wanting finer control and the whole system is in fact linear. One of those things I am not going to invest too much time into but if someone came up with somwthing to augment to my liking I would likely be a customer.

 

[Jgorm]

I think these throttle modifiers are silly. Just modulate it yourself.

 

[Ridesteady]

Thanks for the feedback, @Mainah .

Perhaps it's because I'm so lazy, but I let Ridesteady do the work most of the time, whether we're wakeboarding, tubing, or cruising. May I ask when you prefer to have manual control? My expectation would be that once someone had cruise control (that also synchronized the engines), that that would be their primary method of throttle control.

 

[Mainah]

Thanks for the feedback, @Mainah .

Perhaps it's because I'm so lazy, but I let Ridesteady do the work most of the time, whether we're wakeboarding, tubing, or cruising. May I ask when you prefer to have manual control? My expectation would be that once someone had cruise control (that also synchronized the engines), that that would be their primary method of throttle control.

Let me start by being very clear that I am very happy with ridesteady the product and the customer service @Ridesteady has delivered. The fact that @Ridesteady is chiming in and asking about one persons interface preference speaks volumes. My comments in this thread are strictly future enhancement ideas and by no way indicate any displeasure with current system. It is exactly what I expected it would be and if someone is on the fence reading about my ideas hoping that they may be implemented I say don’t wait as these are just the mussings of someone who knows what is possible but may not necessarily be practical.

The lake I am on is both large and busy at times. I find myself needing to be very active with the throttles and wheel at times for various reasons. The knob interface on ridesteady is great for tow sports on gps mode. I am not so much of a fan of that knob interface for normal cruising operation, rpm mode. Not because it does not work well (it does) but more of a personal user experience/preference thing. I like the feeling of driving with the binnicles the same way I like the feeling of driving a manual sports car over an automatic when driving for pleasure.

I have the mechanical binncle sync installed. A new mode in ridesteady to sync the engines tied to the binnicles instead of a preset rpm that would also augment the response curve for the binnicles would be really cool.

 

[Ridesteady]

Let me start by being very clear that I am very happy with ridesteady the product and the customer service @Ridesteady has delivered. The fact that @Ridesteady is chiming in and asking about one persons interface preference speaks volumes. My comments in this thread are strictly future enhancement ideas and by no way indicate any displeasure with current system. It is exactly what I expected it would be and if someone is on the fence reading about my ideas hoping that they may be implemented I say don’t wait as these are just the mussings of someone who knows what is possible but may not necessarily be practical.

The lake I am on is both large and busy at times. I find myself needing to be very active with the throttles and wheel at times for various reasons. The knob interface on ridesteady is great for tow sports on gps mode. I am not so much of a fan of that knob interface for normal cruising operation, rpm mode. Not because it does not work well (it does) but more of a personal user experience/preference thing. I like the feeling of driving with the binnicles the same way I like the feeling of driving a manual sports car over an automatic when driving for pleasure.

I have the mechanical binncle sync installed. A new mode in ridesteady to sync the engines tied to the binnicles instead of a preset rpm that would also augment the response curve for the binnicles would be really cool.

Yeah, I was thinking the same thing. About the only time I go manual is when the lake is too busy and we're cruising. And, from time to time I also like to go manual just for fun. I get that - all good points!

As always, thanks for the kind words! It's great to have so many knowledgeable, interested Ridesteady users to interact with. jetboaters.net is the best!

 

[Ridesteady]

The firmware on our Ridesteady for Yamaha Jet Boats has been updated to allow for "fulltime" engine sync. This allows those that use manual throttle for cruising (i.e. Ridesteady in "OFF" mode) to still have engine sync above 8 MPH.

I just wanted to post that here since it seemed relevant to the prior discussion.

https://www.hydrophase.com/content/updated-firmware-ridesteady-yamaha-jet-boats

 

[swatski]

The firmware on our Ridesteady for Yamaha Jet Boats has been updated to allow for "fulltime" engine sync. This allows those that use manual throttle for cruising (i.e. Ridesteady in "OFF" mode) to still have engine sync above 8 MPH.

I just wanted to post that here since it seemed relevant to the prior discussion.

https://www.hydrophase.com/content/updated-firmware-ridesteady-yamaha-jet-boats

That is fantastic news!

Basically, sounds like an equivalent of full time "single-lever"(?) Yamaha throttle in E-Series and 242X (w/fly-by-wire E-throttles), correct?

Still need to push both throttle levers, I suppose, but the engines will be in synch even if the lever positions are not perfectly aligned? If this kicks in only over 8mph - one would still be able to split the throttles (and maneuver using split throttles) at no wake speeds, reverse?

Well, the obvious question for current R-S owners:
How can we get the upgrade? Is there a new module that needs to be purchased?

--

 

[Ridesteady]

@swatski

Yes, you would have non-sync'd throttles at < 8 MPH. This would include reverse as long as you're slower than 8 MPH. Haha, I wonder if you could even do 8 MPH in reverse...would be interesting.

The upgrade for existing owners is $75, with a deposit for the 'upgrader stick'. We'll return the deposit when we receive the upgrader stick back (we'll include a postage paid bag that you can simply drop in the mail for US customers, with a tracking number).

For those that want it, you'd just an email to info@hydrophase.com stating that you would like the Yamaha firmware upgrade and we'll respond with a Paypal invoice that can be paid online.

 

[swatski]

The upgrade for existing owners is $75, with a deposit for the 'upgrader stick'.

So, the R-S module stays in the boat and we just get a memory stick to upload the upgrade? Very cool!

--