In reply to alfadriver:
The difference being if the battery goes flat I don't become a passenger in a crash. Electronics have a single-point failure system. The electrons disappear (dead battery, shorted wire, programming goes buggard) and the item fails. With mechanicals you would need multiple things to go wrong. (Brakes would have to have a cut line on BOTH circuits to stop working at all, throttle cable would have to snap off AND the return spring would have to break to cause a stuck WOT that couldn't be pulled, etc).
And don't try to tell me that DBW pedals are designed to give better performance, as anybody who's ever driven ANY DBW car can attest to. Go out to the parking lot where you work, get in an F-150, give it partial throttle in a kick-down to pass situation and see what happens. Eco BS, that's what happens. I've driven enough hundreds of cars to know what the programming is actually doing, and performance ain't it.
I know you love all the fancy electrons, but the HMI really should still have a direct mechanical component or back up (such as the manual emergency brake on the hydraulic system, notice I've always said to have that backup, as I do not trust hydraulics either, even though they are dual-circuit master cylinders).
Again, if you really want to see real-world failure rates, go look at the NTSB files and do some serioud reading on flight controls in aircraft. The FAA takes that stuff seriously, and I damn yell hope the carmakers start to do it as well. The first time the steer-by-wire Mercedes plows into a car killing little Timmy because the electrons stop working there is going to be a bloodbath.
Maybe it is because that the majority of what I worked on everyday were DBW vehicles and when work was over I went and drove my archaic 95 model home. To me, there is a difference. A parallel here is in quality control has no place for operator feel in determining quality, IMO. But in my classes, it is talked about A LOT. Feel is subjective to the inspector. The next guy in line doesn't have the same "feel" as the last guy, so the passed part is now rejected. Is there a place for "feel" in QC? Vehicle operations?
You are reading too much into what I wrote. I mean when I push down the pedal to get up the hill, I expect to see the revs increase, lockup released, and if warranted, a downshift. I can go up the same grade with a DBW vehicle and get the similar responses, but the whole process is lacking. I feel the need to press the pedal further to get to the same point in time as my cable'd throttle to maintain my speed.
Javelin wrote:
In reply to alfadriver:
The difference being if the battery goes flat I don't become a passenger in a crash. Electronics have a single-point failure system. The electrons disappear (dead battery, shorted wire, programming goes buggard) and the item fails. With mechanicals you would need multiple things to go wrong. (Brakes would have to have a cut line on BOTH circuits to stop working at all, throttle cable would have to snap off AND the return spring would have to break to cause a stuck WOT that couldn't be pulled, etc).
Well, how many failures would it take for the electrical system to fail? Dead battery is not an electrical failure. It won't start, but there are many parts of the system that require a failure. Some of them don't fail as often as mechanical systems.
And don't try to tell me that DBW pedals are designed to give better performance, as anybody who's ever driven ANY DBW car can attest to. Go out to the parking lot where you work, get in an F-150, give it partial throttle in a kick-down to pass situation and see what happens. Eco BS, that's what happens. I've driven enough hundreds of cars to know what the programming is actually doing, and performance ain't it.
I have two, and know for certain that the ETC is not tuned for fuel economy. Fuel economy is programmed into the entire system. The failed kick down has nothing to do with ETC, but the transmission, in your example. It would do exactly the same thing had it been a wire throttle.
And we do have a signficant difference in your "driven engouh hundreds of cars." If you want, I can play the very arrogant angle. In fact, I do know what is actually going on.
I know you love all the fancy electrons, but the HMI really should still have a direct mechanical component or back up (such as the manual emergency brake on the hydraulic system, notice I've always said to have that backup, as I do not trust hydraulics either, even though they are dual-circuit master cylinders).
Again, if you really want to see real-world failure rates, go look at the NTSB files and do some serioud reading on flight controls in aircraft. The FAA takes that stuff seriously, and I damn yell hope the carmakers start to do it as well. The first time the steer-by-wire Mercedes plows into a car killing little Timmy because the electrons stop working there is going to be a bloodbath.
Again, your preception is that System A is better than System B, when I'm pretty darned sure that you have not been through a real failure plus mitigation analysis. I'm very aware of the FAA and the NTSB data systems- thankfully not for a long time now. But your question if the data is paid attention to or not really does illustrate that your preception isn't reality. You also don't seem to know that every OEM keeps track of a lot more real world data than is reported to the NHTSA or the EPA.
Been there, done that, still know to ask a lot of doubting questions. But not to belive that after proper analysis old A is better than new B.
Come work in the industry sometime, now that you are finished with school. May learn something.
alfadriver wrote:
Especially since you don't seem to know what the failure mode really feels like.
You are such an ignorant prat. Instead of telling people what they should think of your cars, maybe you should take their suggestions towards making a better product. Typical engineer.
All everyone is saying is they want the electronics to emulate a mechanical connection. They don't want 20% throttle to be 40%, or vice versa. They don't want the transmission to not manually shift when they say so. They want the car to do what it is expected to. They want there to be fail-safes that actually work, and a very valid point was brought up as to how electronics work if there is no power (but instead of answering that, you simply counter with how do mechanical devices work if broken, they don't, there are backups).
I'm the arrogant one for not working in the industry? Look, I'm trying to show you my point of view here, but go re-read your posts...
I understand that kick-downs are an ECO crap thing, BUT SO IS THE BLOODY DBW PEDAL!! Just go drive the new Fiesta around and tell me with a straight face that that throttle isn't trying to eek every last damn mile from a drop of fuel. The throttle in that car does whatever it wants, whenever it wants, regardless of my pedal input, even with the manual trans.
Now, back to my original argument, which is that fully electronic systems do not have enough of a failsafe. You can tell my systems analysis all you want, and I don't care if you can electronically recreate "feel", the fact of the matter is all it it takes in ONE electrical fault and that system is deader than a doornail, period. With ASSISTED systems, you still have a mechanically attached failsafe backup, and that's the point! Obviously you will never change your mind, even after the steering-less Benz t-bones you and your family because the iPod shorted out the steering column and the steering wheel became decoration.
Electrical failures do happen more often. Why do you think Navy boats have wired talk systems for emergencies and battle? Why do you think cars with keyless entry still come with a key? Do you get it yet?
sigh
I'm out. 
Every DBW car i've driven has pissed me off massively.
That said, i've only driven manual transmissioned cars with DBW. The rev hang is beyond infuriating and makes me feel like i'm driving the car wrong, when clearly.... i'm not.
I refuse to buy a car with an automatic transmission, and based on my experiences, i refuse to buy a manual with DBW.
Looks like i'm "doomed" to drive my 90s-era cars for the rest of my life. Oh no.
/useless luddite babbling tangent.
In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac:
For once I could not possibly agree with you more! PS - The Mazda5 has a throttle cable through 06. Also no traction control or stability control. You know, just in case.
Vigo
MegaDork
2/9/11 1:56 p.m.
Thread TLDR, but
No surprises here with that report. I think people who know half a E36 M3 about cars all knew it wasnt the code.
And even after all this time noone has suggested changing the way you turn the engine off.. Noone has suggested that anyone with a driver's license should be required to grasp the concept of the N setting on the shifter.
Noone has suggested that people simply be more educated about the proper way to use the damn brakes, wherein you dont vent all your vacuum assist to atmosphere by repeatedly pumping the brakes while the engine is WOT... JUST DONT LET OFF. The idea that any of those cars could overpower the brakes without driver mishap is a farce.
The whole thing is just one grand, deadly embarassment showing how lethally undereducated our masses are when it comes to operating vehicles.
In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac:
Agreed. But if you can find a SW "hack" for the PCM, you can write that out or reduce it severely.
To everyone else:
Don't get me wrong again. I am probably going to be "stuck" with DBW on my projects, I'm cheap and stock TB's are DBW, and they will work as intended. But stock DBW have such a response lag to it, that makes it not "fun" as compared to cables. Make that change to the response time and DBW is fine.
Javelin wrote:
In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac:
For once I could not possibly agree with you more! PS - The Mazda5 has a throttle cable through 06. Also no traction control or stability control. You know, just in case.
Heh, thanks... good to know. 
I literally stopped a test drive of the new Civic Si short when i finally noticed that no matter what i did, i couldn't shift the car properly unless i took almost two seconds for every shift.
I asked the salesman with me "Will you guys fix this if i say i'm going to buy it?" (I wasn't about to, the interior made me vomit uncontrollably, visibility was awful, and i HATE the "new" rear suspension, but figured i'd ask.)
"Fix what? That's how they all are, it's supposed to be like that."
Do not want. Unfortunately, he was right. Every single last new Civic Si i've been in did it. The Ion Redline i drove a couple weeks ago did it. The last couple years of the 7th gen Celica GTS did it. It's awful, and i hate it.
I can only think that it's being done to force people to shift slowly as a way to try and preserve the crappy manual transmissions that are being churned out today, or as a way to burn up clutches faster to make more money for the parts divisions. Myself, i don't buy a manual transmission'd car to drive like my entire interior is filled with caramel.
Ranger50 wrote:
In reply to 92CelicaHalfTrac:
Agreed. But if you can find a SW "hack" for the PCM, you can write that out or reduce it severely.
To everyone else:
Don't get me wrong again. I am probably going to be "stuck" with DBW on my projects, I'm cheap and stock TB's are DBW, and they will work as intended. But stock DBW have such a response lag to it, that makes it not "fun" as compared to cables. Make that change to the response time and DBW is fine.
I've heard that, and there was a local honda dealer that was even reflashing to take care of the problem on those particular cars. I was in one car "before" and "after." The owner was happy, but all i saw was the placebo effect. There wasn't a change. He was just dumb enough to believe what he was told.
Just to note: I have seen ads by aftermarket companies that sell in line "plug and play" boxes that are supposed to increase the throttle response time to a DBW car.
triumph5 wrote:
Just to note: I have seen ads by aftermarket companies that sell in line "plug and play" boxes that are supposed to increase the throttle response time to a DBW car.
Yep, there's a few of them out there.
But the point stands that we shouldn't have to turn to aftermarket and void our warranties to make the friggin' gas pedal work right...
And even after all this time noone has suggested changing the way you turn the engine off..
Apparently you missed the threads where we beat that to death.
Noone has suggested that anyone with a driver's license should be required to grasp the concept of the N setting on the shifter.
Apparently you missed the fact that a lot of these cars
A. Don't have an N on their shifters, and
B. Are electronically locked out of neutral when the car is moving and under power.
HiTempguy wrote:
alfadriver wrote:
Especially since you don't seem to know what the failure mode really feels like.
You are such an ignorant prat. Instead of telling people what they should think of your cars, maybe you should take their suggestions towards making a better product. Typical engineer.
All everyone is saying is they want the electronics to emulate a mechanical connection. They don't want 20% throttle to be 40%, or vice versa. They don't want the transmission to not manually shift when they say so. They want the car to do what it is expected to. They want there to be fail-safes that actually work, and a very valid point was brought up as to how electronics work if there is no power (but instead of answering that, you simply counter with how do mechanical devices work if broken, they don't, there are backups).
Ok, so you are all ok with boosted brakes and steering.
Ever seen what happens when that goes out? You may not be so happy about that.
Is that clearer?
yes, I'm an arrogant prat, especially when people pretend to know what is going on, when they do not. I try to tell them that those are preceptions, but it's insisted that it is reality. It's not, it's your damn preception. Get it?
Again, you want the throttle to do what you want- how do you REALLY know it's not??? Seriously. Are you monitoring the throttle angle to see what it's doing?
The biggest complaint for ETC is "lack of response"- when the reality is that the tranmission isn't working like you want. I know that you can get full throttle when at part pedal, but the trans wont downshift. Again- you precieve that it's the throttle, and it's not.
that's what I'm trying to tell you. Your preception of the problem is WRONG. If you hate me for it, I could care less. If you want to belive something that is wrong- forgive me for trying to tell you otherwise.
But they are your windmills to fight, I guess.
foxtrapper wrote:
And even after all this time noone has suggested changing the way you turn the engine off..
Apparently you missed the threads where we beat that to death.
Noone has suggested that anyone with a driver's license should be required to grasp the concept of the N setting on the shifter.
Apparently you missed the fact that a lot of these cars
A. Don't have an N on their shifters, and
B. Are electronically locked out of neutral when the car is moving and under power.
That is ALL about execution, and not about the technology.
alfadriver wrote:
HiTempguy wrote:
alfadriver wrote:
Especially since you don't seem to know what the failure mode really feels like.
You are such an ignorant prat. Instead of telling people what they should think of your cars, maybe you should take their suggestions towards making a better product. Typical engineer.
All everyone is saying is they want the electronics to emulate a mechanical connection. They don't want 20% throttle to be 40%, or vice versa. They don't want the transmission to not manually shift when they say so. They want the car to do what it is expected to. They want there to be fail-safes that actually work, and a very valid point was brought up as to how electronics work if there is no power (but instead of answering that, you simply counter with how do mechanical devices work if broken, they don't, there are backups).
The biggest complaint for ETC is "lack of response"- when the reality is that the tranmission isn't working like you want. I know that you can get full throttle when at part pedal, but the trans wont downshift. Again- you precieve that it's the throttle, and it's not.
That already sounds like the throttle not doing what i want.
Pedal part way down = part throttle. Period. End of story. No other way to slice it. If it's doing anything other than part open when the pedal is part way down, it's broken, doesn't work correctly, was designed wrong, whatever you want to call it.
alfadriver wrote:
HiTempguy wrote:
alfadriver wrote:
Especially since you don't seem to know what the failure mode really feels like.
You are such an ignorant prat. Instead of telling people what they should think of your cars, maybe you should take their suggestions towards making a better product. Typical engineer.
All everyone is saying is they want the electronics to emulate a mechanical connection. They don't want 20% throttle to be 40%, or vice versa. They don't want the transmission to not manually shift when they say so. They want the car to do what it is expected to. They want there to be fail-safes that actually work, and a very valid point was brought up as to how electronics work if there is no power (but instead of answering that, you simply counter with how do mechanical devices work if broken, they don't, there are backups).
Ok, so you are all ok with boosted brakes and steering.
Ever seen what happens when that goes out? You may not be so happy about that.
Is that clearer?
yes, I'm an arrogant prat, especially when people pretend to know what is going on, when they do not. I try to tell them that those are preceptions, but it's insisted that it is reality. It's not, it's your damn preception. Get it?
Again, you want the throttle to do what you want- how do you REALLY know it's not??? Seriously. Are you monitoring the throttle angle to see what it's doing?
The biggest complaint for ETC is "lack of response"- when the reality is that the tranmission isn't working like you want. I know that you can get full throttle when at part pedal, but the trans wont downshift. Again- you precieve that it's the throttle, and it's not.
that's what I'm trying to tell you. Your preception of the problem is WRONG. If you hate me for it, I could care less. If you want to belive something that is wrong- forgive me for trying to tell you otherwise.
But they are your windmills to fight, I guess.
Again, you refuse to LISTEN to what people are saying. Go test drive a new MANUAL TRANS Fiesta. Guess what? THROTTLE LAG. How is that the transmissions fault? It's a stick shift!
Javelin wrote:
I'm the arrogant one for not working in the industry? Look, I'm trying to show you my point of view here, but go re-read your posts...
I understand that kick-downs are an ECO crap thing, BUT SO IS THE BLOODY DBW PEDAL!! Just go drive the new Fiesta around and tell me with a straight face that that throttle isn't trying to eek every last damn mile from a drop of fuel. The throttle in that car does whatever it wants, whenever it wants, regardless of my pedal input, even with the manual trans.
Now, back to my original argument, which is that fully electronic systems do not have enough of a failsafe.u can tell my systems analysis all you want, and I don't care if you can electronically recreate "feel", the fact of the matter is all it it takes in ONE electrical fault and that system is deader than a doornail, period. With *ASSISTED* systems, you still have a mechanically attached failsafe backup, and that's the point! Obviously you will never change your mind, even after the steering-less Benz t-bones you and your family because the iPod shorted out the steering column and the steering wheel became decoration.
Electrical failures *do* happen more often. Why do you think Navy boats have wired talk systems for emergencies and battle? Why do you think cars with keyless entry still come with a key? Do you get it yet?
*sigh*
I'm out.
Very good ASSumption. Wrong, though. Takes a lot more than one failure to fault a good ETC system. Well, outside of the one behind the wheel.
BTW, you are taking data with the throttle? Know with full certainty that the throttle plate isn't following your demands, or even over doing your demands? Love to see your data to show that.
Is the Fiesta trying to get all of the fuel out of it possible- sure. But you are still assuming that the throttle is lagging your pedal. Which probably isn't the case.
Javelin wrote:
alfadriver wrote:
HiTempguy wrote:
alfadriver wrote:
Especially since you don't seem to know what the failure mode really feels like.
You are such an ignorant prat. Instead of telling people what they should think of your cars, maybe you should take their suggestions towards making a better product. Typical engineer.
All everyone is saying is they want the electronics to emulate a mechanical connection. They don't want 20% throttle to be 40%, or vice versa. They don't want the transmission to not manually shift when they say so. They want the car to do what it is expected to. They want there to be fail-safes that actually work, and a very valid point was brought up as to how electronics work if there is no power (but instead of answering that, you simply counter with how do mechanical devices work if broken, they don't, there are backups).
Ok, so you are all ok with boosted brakes and steering.
Ever seen what happens when that goes out? You may not be so happy about that.
Is that clearer?
yes, I'm an arrogant prat, especially when people pretend to know what is going on, when they do not. I try to tell them that those are preceptions, but it's insisted that it is reality. It's not, it's your damn preception. Get it?
Again, you want the throttle to do what you want- how do you REALLY know it's not??? Seriously. Are you monitoring the throttle angle to see what it's doing?
The biggest complaint for ETC is "lack of response"- when the reality is that the tranmission isn't working like you want. I know that you can get full throttle when at part pedal, but the trans wont downshift. Again- you precieve that it's the throttle, and it's not.
that's what I'm trying to tell you. Your preception of the problem is WRONG. If you hate me for it, I could care less. If you want to belive something that is wrong- forgive me for trying to tell you otherwise.
But they are your windmills to fight, I guess.
Again, you refuse to LISTEN to what people are saying. Go test drive a new MANUAL TRANS Fiesta. Guess what? THROTTLE LAG. How is that the transmissions fault? It's a stick shift!
data?
yes, I'm listening. are you?
foxtrapper wrote:
B. Are electronically locked out of neutral when the car is moving and under power.
Same with reverse, at least with DCX products. As long as you are above something like 8mph, reverse will not engage, but the lights will come on. 
Really the whole argument here boils down to WHO should be in control..... Case in point, I worked on my friends wife's Liberty one day for what felt like a slip while in OD driving down the highway. Clearly it is a TCC problem, was only partially applying. Now if this POS 42RLE wasn't an electronic controlled transmission, I would have ripped out the valve body installed a better TCC control spring for the solenoid and been out the door, but no. Chrysler said WE KNOW MORE THEN YOU. Replaced the TC per the hotline and shipped it out without repairing a freaking thing. What I really needed was control over the programming to force the TCC into a FULL lockup not a partial as indicated on my scan tool. This overall lack of control is frustrating when you know the solution but can't prove it, or get anyone to recognize it either. This is why new cars suck.
alfadriver wrote:
Javelin wrote:
alfadriver wrote:
HiTempguy wrote:
alfadriver wrote:
Especially since you don't seem to know what the failure mode really feels like.
You are such an ignorant prat. Instead of telling people what they should think of your cars, maybe you should take their suggestions towards making a better product. Typical engineer.
All everyone is saying is they want the electronics to emulate a mechanical connection. They don't want 20% throttle to be 40%, or vice versa. They don't want the transmission to not manually shift when they say so. They want the car to do what it is expected to. They want there to be fail-safes that actually work, and a very valid point was brought up as to how electronics work if there is no power (but instead of answering that, you simply counter with how do mechanical devices work if broken, they don't, there are backups).
Ok, so you are all ok with boosted brakes and steering.
Ever seen what happens when that goes out? You may not be so happy about that.
Is that clearer?
yes, I'm an arrogant prat, especially when people pretend to know what is going on, when they do not. I try to tell them that those are preceptions, but it's insisted that it is reality. It's not, it's your damn preception. Get it?
Again, you want the throttle to do what you want- how do you REALLY know it's not??? Seriously. Are you monitoring the throttle angle to see what it's doing?
The biggest complaint for ETC is "lack of response"- when the reality is that the tranmission isn't working like you want. I know that you can get full throttle when at part pedal, but the trans wont downshift. Again- you precieve that it's the throttle, and it's not.
that's what I'm trying to tell you. Your preception of the problem is WRONG. If you hate me for it, I could care less. If you want to belive something that is wrong- forgive me for trying to tell you otherwise.
But they are your windmills to fight, I guess.
Again, you refuse to LISTEN to what people are saying. Go test drive a new MANUAL TRANS Fiesta. Guess what? THROTTLE LAG. How is that the transmissions fault? It's a stick shift!
data?
yes, I'm listening. are you?
How about this? I've never once driven a cable throttle manual transmission'd car that had rev hang between shifts.
EVER DBW manual transmission'd car i've ever driven or ridden in has had massive rev hang between shifts.
Explain. Whether it's because of the pedal or not, it doesn't matter. The throttle is staying open longer than i have my foot on the pedal. Revs absolutely will NOT hang if the throttle closes at the same time my foot comes off the pedal. Basics of engine theory make that painfully obvious, and i'm so dumb i don't even understand 90% of it. I do know that you need air to rev a motor, and that's pretty applicable here.
Data hell, go DRIVE THE FREAKING CAR. Hell, watch a damn test drive on the internet. Hooking a computer to it only tells you what the sensors want to say, not that they are correlated in reality. The program is written for at hal-throttle in a certain RPM, only open 43%, but it's always going to show hunky-dory to you.
You want real world data? Drive an 04 GTO and an 05 GTO back to back. The 50 extra HP in the 05 doesn't come out at all because the DBW sucks compared to the wired TB in the 04. In fact, the world record 1/4 mile time for a showroom stock GTO is in an 04's hands, because the driver could actually modulate the throttle the way he wanted, and not how the computer thought he wanted.
But it doesn't matter, because you'll just ignore everything put in front of you and ask for more data. It's like arguing with a brick wall.
