My last vehicle was a dodge dakota and one of the things that you could do is adjust the tps. I drilled out the brass fittings that hold the screws inplace and simpley turn the sensor until the voltage meter read 7 volts. Stock they where set around 3.5 or so and by bumping it up it would give you a little better throtle response. Just wanted to know if anyone has done this and what settings did you you put it at?
has anyone adjusted the TPS
- Thread starter PBW_Pro5
- Start date
I'm assuming you do this so your car's ECU sees WOT sooner? It's a great idea to give you the perception of better throttle response, but as long as you don't do it too much. If your computer sees WOT and goes into open loop operation, you may not be getting the air your computer thinks it's supposed to be, since the throttle plate isn't completely open.
If you can adjust the TPS so the ECU recognizes WOT sooner, and the plate is actually fully open, then it would be great for perceived throttle response. I think I may try it actually.
If you can adjust the TPS so the ECU recognizes WOT sooner, and the plate is actually fully open, then it would be great for perceived throttle response. I think I may try it actually.
exactly, basicaly it tricked the ECU into thinking that you have you foot on the throttle slightly. I didn't come up with the idea I saw it on a forum and tried it and it seemed to work. I would guess that you would want to do is take a reading at just slight pressure on the thottle, just to take out any slack in the thottle and then adjust the nuetral setting to that. If you over do it the ECU will dump to much full all the time. So you would need to becareful. My idea for doing it to this car is to help richen the full mixture a little to take advantage of the extra air flo with a intake and exhaust.
twilightprotege
Member
- :
- 2001 323 Astina SP20 (P5)
making a p5 richer isnt the way to go. it's already rich enough as it is!
do you think its still worth a try then? I know with the truck we would do the TPS and relocate the IAT sensor into the fender. Both of these would increase the fuel ratio. But they also helped with the stuttering off the line that the truck was known for, do to the lack of throttle response.
Last edited:
Is there a problem with your P5s throttle response already? If it's not a problem, then why bother? twilight's right, the P5 is already rich as hell. We're talking like 10:1 rich at WOT. Unfortunately with OBDII, sensor bending isn't so easy. There are a million different signals being processed by the ECU, and if one is out of whack, there are plenty more to tell the computer what's going on. And if it's not right, the computer will run even more fuel to be safe.
- :
- 2018 CX-5 GT
Ah! Ya beat me to it!!! Where are the TPS reports? 
Oh well just an idea, like I said it worked on the truck. And I wasn't sure how it would do on the proteges, so I thought I would ask before I tryed it.
Thanks
And Gen1GT don't be haten after all
"I'm assuming you do this so your car's ECU sees WOT sooner? It's a great idea to give you the perception of better throttle response, but as long as you don't do it too much. If your computer sees WOT and goes into open loop operation, you may not be getting the air your computer thinks it's supposed to be, since the throttle plate isn't completely open.
If you can adjust the TPS so the ECU recognizes WOT sooner, and the plate is actually fully open, then it would be great for perceived throttle response. I think I may try it actually."
you where the 1st to agree
Thanks
And Gen1GT don't be haten after all
"I'm assuming you do this so your car's ECU sees WOT sooner? It's a great idea to give you the perception of better throttle response, but as long as you don't do it too much. If your computer sees WOT and goes into open loop operation, you may not be getting the air your computer thinks it's supposed to be, since the throttle plate isn't completely open.
If you can adjust the TPS so the ECU recognizes WOT sooner, and the plate is actually fully open, then it would be great for perceived throttle response. I think I may try it actually."
you where the 1st to agree
Last edited:
Maybe a stupid suggestion, but what about going the opposite direction. That is, adjust it so that it never quite reaches WOT - but, the throttle plate is wide open. That way, it doesn't go into the utra-rich open loop. I have no idea what the actual consequences would be... just a thought.
Installshield 2
Gothenburg Superiority
depending on the degree in which it worked...it could potentially free up a decent amount of power...and/or scatter your engine underneath your car...the FS does not need to be as rich in open loop as it is, but it also could not tolerate high load closed loop, in which the ecu would try to keep it as close to stoich as possible...detonation and parts flying most likely...
but like Josh said, our ecu will not let it happen...it is the tyrant of OBD-II ECU's...one thing that is really going to screw this up is the MAF, which is used to measure load...the TPS sort of backs that up...but if you are at WOT, full load, and the TPS is saying your still at partial throttle...it will throw a code...
but like Josh said, our ecu will not let it happen...it is the tyrant of OBD-II ECU's...one thing that is really going to screw this up is the MAF, which is used to measure load...the TPS sort of backs that up...but if you are at WOT, full load, and the TPS is saying your still at partial throttle...it will throw a code...
If there is any delay whatsoever when the throttle plate is actually at WOT and the TPS thinks it is, I think it would be advantageous to try and adjust it. I've heard that the ECU considers WOT to be 80% throttle or more? Any know for sure?
ViVid might be onto something though? Anyone else have any ideas as to how you might bend some signals to fool the ECU into thinking there's less air than there is? I'm off to do some research on this.....
ViVid might be onto something though? Anyone else have any ideas as to how you might bend some signals to fool the ECU into thinking there's less air than there is? I'm off to do some research on this.....
twilightprotege
Member
- :
- 2001 323 Astina SP20 (P5)
wouldnt having the ecu think the throttle is always slightly depressed be a bad thing?
Not really. It's more of a switch than anything. It just shows WOT or not. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.
I've dug up some items for signal bending....
http://www1.jaycar.com.au/productView.asp?ID=KC5385
some info on it..
http://autospeed.com/cms/A_2118/article.html
I've dug up some items for signal bending....
http://www1.jaycar.com.au/productView.asp?ID=KC5385
some info on it..
http://autospeed.com/cms/A_2118/article.html
Installshield 2
Gothenburg Superiority
the tricky part is that the switch from closed to open loop occurs at a certain load point...not at an rpm...The TPS is used to incorporate the switch, but I was never really sure how...and that is old news, not sure if anyone has updated that research yet or not...WOT as far as the TPS is concerned is above 90% from what I remember...and a lot of guys claim the engine pulls harder at just under that...mostly by not allowing the switch into open loop as early (this is the notion that backs up the TPS having something to do with the switch)...but the engine will always reach the load limit needed for the switch before redline...
honestly manipulating the ECU to think there is less air is the basic idea behind every chip and piggyback...in an attempt to lean things out and make more power...But barely anything works on the EEC-V gestapo...maybe we can come up with something...and Josh you are in a better boat than we are...but I have trouble being optimistic about this whole thing...someone prove me wrong...
honestly manipulating the ECU to think there is less air is the basic idea behind every chip and piggyback...in an attempt to lean things out and make more power...But barely anything works on the EEC-V gestapo...maybe we can come up with something...and Josh you are in a better boat than we are...but I have trouble being optimistic about this whole thing...someone prove me wrong...
Interesting idea. But ultimately dangerous. You'd have no real way of measuring the adjustment to the TPS unless you were using a piggyback/stand-alone..in which case its software would allow you to manipulate it safely (maybe.) I'm not exactly sure. I don't know if a stand-alone would allow you to manipulate the TPS, but I would think so. Leaning out or 3rd gens would be kind of nice, they do run rich as all-out hell. Christ..especially now for me..The car screams for management, the wallet begs to be put out of its misery.
But hey! It'd be fun to set it up so I can wide-open at just a breath on the gas pedal. It'd be fender benders all over the place! yeeeehawww!
Seriously though, someone please send me a haltech.
But hey! It'd be fun to set it up so I can wide-open at just a breath on the gas pedal. It'd be fender benders all over the place! yeeeehawww!
Seriously though, someone please send me a haltech.
Ok, I'm surprised to see so much interest in the idea. This might help alittle to understand the theory behind what I was suggesting. Here is where I got the original idea for my truck, there is alot of people who have already done this to their vechicles. Just do a search on TPS
http://www.dodgedakotas.com/board.htm
I hope this helps, and can be something that we can inncorporate into our cars.
http://www.dodgedakotas.com/board.htm
I hope this helps, and can be something that we can inncorporate into our cars.
Doesn't help much, as there are hundreds of threads to search through. How about being a bud and finding it for us? (confused)PBW_Pro5 said:
Anyways, the Miata guys have a few good ideas so far, peep dis...
http://forum.miata.net/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=027025
The question is, is the FS COMPLETELY open loop at WOT? Are there variables? If it's preset maps, then why not LOWER the fuel pressure? If there are variables, why not try some sensor bending AND lowering fuel pressure?
C'mon guys, we're intelligent enough to crack this one.....
