Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 86

Thread: Torque Request Rate Limits

  1. #41
    Senior Tuner Higgs Boson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Texas Hill Country
    Posts
    3,264
    Quote Originally Posted by ic3man5 View Post
    I ended up doing this last night on my 15 Silverado, min/maxing the tables. I'm not sure what to think about it yet, I do have a strange jump in the throttle now if I'm rolling about 1 mph and I quick tap the gas it jumps forward really quick. Seems like the limiters are for initial roll in of the torque.
    that is why they are called torque rate limiters.....

    and a normal car does apply power when you tap the pedal, so.....sort of the goal here.

    if you like your vehicle to not respond when you apply throttle then leave it stock or calibrate the tables to your liking. easy enough.

    and depending on how heavily you have compensated with other tables at low speed, you could certainly get unexpected results if your "jump forward" is extreme. if you're saying your car responds when you give it gas now then I would say you're on the right track.

  2. #42
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by Higgs Boson View Post
    that is why they are called torque rate limiters.....

    and a normal car does apply power when you tap the pedal, so.....sort of the goal here.

    if you like your vehicle to not respond when you apply throttle then leave it stock or calibrate the tables to your liking. easy enough.

    and depending on how heavily you have compensated with other tables at low speed, you could certainly get unexpected results if your "jump forward" is extreme. if you're saying your car responds when you give it gas now then I would say you're on the right track.
    I've really only tuned the transmission side and driver demand tables are stock, the "jump forward" is extreme, doesn't feel natural at all. It kinda feels like its still trying to predict that I'm about to WOT and then lets off. I do have the idle bumped up about 200RPM from stock so maybe that is messing with it in some way.

  3. #43
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by ic3man5 View Post
    I've really only tuned the transmission side and driver demand tables are stock, the "jump forward" is extreme, doesn't feel natural at all. It kinda feels like its still trying to predict that I'm about to WOT and then lets off. I do have the idle bumped up about 200RPM from stock so maybe that is messing with it in some way.
    Okay I have a better description this time after driving it again today. Its not a jump forward, its feels like a rich stumble and then picks up like it should. I can hear the engine stumbling over itself for like half a second.

  4. #44
    Tuning Addict 5FDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Rogers, MN
    Posts
    9,809
    Support got back to me and added my 2016 Silverado OS to the newest beta. I'll just need to download it and start trying it out.
    2016 Silverado CCSB 5.3/6L80e, not as slow but still heavy.

  5. #45
    Senior Tuner Higgs Boson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Texas Hill Country
    Posts
    3,264
    Quote Originally Posted by ic3man5 View Post
    Okay I have a better description this time after driving it again today. Its not a jump forward, its feels like a rich stumble and then picks up like it should. I can hear the engine stumbling over itself for like half a second.
    possibly correlation is not causation.....

  6. #46
    Quote Originally Posted by ic3man5 View Post
    Okay I have a better description this time after driving it again today. Its not a jump forward, its feels like a rich stumble and then picks up like it should. I can hear the engine stumbling over itself for like half a second.
    what are you doing to the table? maxing it out?

  7. #47
    Tuner
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    White Hall, Arkansas
    Posts
    68
    The TRRL settings made my truck react quicker, and that's it. Makes me feel like i'm in a lighter vehicle. I'm pretty sure it shouldn't be causing a stumble.

  8. #48
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    18
    Quote Originally Posted by nicul15 View Post
    what are you doing to the table? maxing it out?
    yes, I maxed the tables out, I put them back to stock for right now until I can play with it some more. I do have a lot of drive line slop on my truck so maybe I'm just feeling that, its hard to explain and only does it when you are at idle, under 2-3mph and "poke" the throttle quickly. I noticed I can't do that on newer models (2017+) even stock because it has a lot faster reaction, maybe my pedal sensor is starting to fail or something... lol.

  9. #49
    Potential Tuner
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Posts
    5
    Does anyone know if this will fix the lag on a 2018 CTSV? I dont get full throttle til 33 mph. 50% from 0-18mph and 60% from 18-33 then full throttle after that.

  10. #50
    Senior Tuner Higgs Boson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Texas Hill Country
    Posts
    3,264
    try it.

    but there are other things to adjust that can help with that issue. it's not really a "change this table" solution in many cases.

    everything fits together and moves together with these tunes. usually it's best if you change one thing, you need to adjust other things when it comes to the relationship between airflow and torque.

  11. #51
    Tuning Addict 5FDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Rogers, MN
    Posts
    9,809
    I played with it a little today.

    I disabled the increasing rate limit torque drop down, not really sure if I noticed anything there.

    Set the increasing predicted normal table to the max setting of 6,041.9 and left the tap up/down table alone because I don't use tap shift ever.

    Changed the decreasing predicted normal by like 10-20%, just to not over do it right away.

    Overall I don't really know if I can tell much different. Maybe it's a little more responsive at steady speed when I brap the throttle but my truck was already pretty good before hand. Perhaps a stock vehicle without the many changes I've made to mine would show more in the seat of the pants.
    2016 Silverado CCSB 5.3/6L80e, not as slow but still heavy.

  12. #52
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    18
    I figured out my stumble issue, it was an actual physical problem with the foot pedal. The stumble I was feeling was the pedal actually not doing anything, removing these limiters brings out the issue a lot more.


  13. #53
    Potential Tuner
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by 5FDP View Post
    They emailed me back, they said they sent my file to an engineer to look at it. Haven't got an email back since Wednesday.
    Email me your file, let me have a looksy.
    ROB-MIX@LS2K-TUNED.DE

  14. #54
    Tuning Addict 5FDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Rogers, MN
    Posts
    9,809
    Quote Originally Posted by Eurotuner View Post
    Email me your file, let me have a looksy.
    ROB-MIX@LS2K-TUNED.DE
    They got me all squared away and everything works. Did you still want the stock file from my truck anyway just to look at?
    2016 Silverado CCSB 5.3/6L80e, not as slow but still heavy.

  15. #55
    Can anyone who is testing these tables comment on whether they are stock natural aspiration or aftermarket forced induction, etc?

  16. #56
    Tuning Addict 5FDP's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Rogers, MN
    Posts
    9,809
    I'm sorry if I don't get what you mean by that.

    They are tables that are available on my stock 5.3 Silverado as well as tables I've seen when looking at corvette/camaro calibration files.
    2016 Silverado CCSB 5.3/6L80e, not as slow but still heavy.

  17. #57
    Basically, if you are using these tables, what is your setup? NA, TC, SC will all react differently I?m guessing. I am working with a PD SC on NA OS, so I am mostly interested in using that setup in stock NA OS. I have not used these yet. Will report my findings when I do. Anyone else using my setup, I would like to hear from

  18. #58
    Finally

    Does it change something ??

  19. #59
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Posts
    12
    There is an updated pedal assembly for Silverados too. Mine was the old part number(#20972082), ordered the new one(#23362231) that supposedly helps with the lazy pedal feel too.
    Last edited by Little B; 01-19-2020 at 08:49 PM.
    New to tuning, but not to cars. Just here to learn!

  20. #60
    Tuner in Training
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Location
    Bonita Springs
    Posts
    29
    I did this mod yesterday and it seems to definitely make a difference in pedal feel. I'm going to put the dd table back to stock and see if it changes much, but what I can say is now the truck is shifting at light/mid throttle without tq mgt interruption. I'm getting like 22 degrees on shifts and thats to hard for a part throttle shift. Maybe once I Put the dd tables back to stock it will calm it down a bit. Anyone else have this issue? I only maxed out tables 9515 and 9516.