Originally Posted by
B00STJUNKY
To help clarify the question, are you expecting that Throttle Position Sensor voltage should be higher than 3.8 to be considered at WOT, and following pedal? Or is it that you are seeing Throttle Position Sensor voltage hit WOT conditions (3.8 volts) before your pedal position is actually at WOT command? I ask because I see that your Trans Pedal is showing 100% pretty much exactly when your TPS voltage reaches WOT conditions (3.8 volts - which is possibly/probably the intent of the control method for tcm to follow TB WOT conditions, rather than pedal itself), but then I also see that your TPS voltage is reaching WOT state before Throttle % ever reaches WOT conditions.
I can say given the experimentation I've done with my '06 JGC SRT-8 that the smaller you make your airflow values in the throttle tables, the more the TB opens given a pedal position. So, say you went to multiply the stock TB flow values by .5 (effectively halving the flow values per pedal position), and say that before altering airflow values, 20% pedal would result in 15% TB opening at a given NV Ratio. Now, after halving the airflow values, the same 20% pedal would result in 30% TB opening at the same NV Ratio.
It's a case of the PCM using a strategy something like this. The driver demand table (pedal percent power request) says that at 20% pedal, we expect to see 23% of max power delivery. Power is calculated from a combination of constants (engine size vs V.E. - I'm sure that's a simplified statement) and variables (atmospheric and other conditions) and a derived airflow is reached for that power request. PCM looks at the TB airflow table, and using the target airflow calculated from the power percent request along with all the other aforementioned constants/variables, it picks the Throttle Position Percentage that matches that calculated required airflow to reach driver demand.
So, looking at it in that fashion, you can see why driving down the TB Airflow model will result in an overly sensitive pedal. And vice versa, drive the TB Airflow model up, and you'll end up with a laggy pedal. And I think within the wording "TB airflow model" lies the key to understanding the strategy. If you look at those TB airflow tables as "airflow models" rather than "request tables" (which we've established they aren't), it becomes clear as to why things respond the way they do when you mess with them.