You're already doing that with TM, so how can folks blame TM? It's all about the driver right

By the way, despite only making five runs in the car, I have matched GMs times for a Z51 coupe, with TM as well.

 

In the stock C5Z I beat the Chevy spec by 6+ tenths. In the C6Z with TM I've beat it by just 4 tenths.

You are in a small group that's matched or beat the C6 spec. On the C5Z without aggressive TM, hundreds of owners beat the spec.

Ranger

 

Maybe GM's test driver has been reading your posts and has gotten better since his C5 days

 

I'd never suggest just turning it off. There are times the sensors and PCM is much smarter then some drivers and it has been shown where TM was turned off that cars got away from driver and crashed.

As the performance is increased then proper path is to retune the TM, TC and TCC so that the new performance can be used but the safety functions still protect the car and driver.
Also let's not forget TM's main purpose to protect drivetrain from abuse/stress and turning TM off will have a long term impact on parts downstream of flywheel

 

A) Anyone who's car got away and crashed is more likely to be due to Traction control and/or active handling being turned off as well. I have a hard time accepting that someone driving a 400 hp car looses control because TM didn't kick in. They don't deserve to be driving a car like this if that is the case (which I doubt). I've been driving fast vehicles since many, many years before TM was even a possibility. Driving fast vehicles fast always has the concern of it getting away from people.

Second, the argument that it is designed to save parts is still a strange concept to me. I've always undrstood the desire for TM to soften the shifts of an automatic car. But if the car is built with 400 hp, the drivetrain should be able to take it. Do you know how much raw torque muscle cars of the 60's had? Rather than figure out how to take away some of that torque, they build the drivetrain to handle it.

I really have a hard time accepting that a manual transmission car needs TM to save parts. Besides, if in fact that is the case, then GM missed the mark. Look at the rash of rear end failures on 05s, and how many people report that they still have problems with axle hop.

 

That's for sure the real reason the have the accident is because they rely on AH andTC to save them and it doesn't work

 

Jim I really do think that there guys out there who purchase a Corvette and have been driving a family sedan for years. (just look at some of the threads on this forum, not all of us are gear heads). They feel TC/AH will save the rears if the car gets away from them. Then there are the guys who step up to a faster car and really can not handle the power.

I know you were around when the AC Cobras came out. The Magazines of the day always commented how a lot of them became tree ornaments. It is quite possible that TM and abuse mode have a another role besides saving the drive train …….. save the driver Hey go figure.

With regard to the 60's those cars did not have independent rear suspensions (except the Corvette ) and the tires were from hunger. You would light the tires up really easy on a stock muscle car. We would destroy U joints, clutches and converters on occasion but it was not the norm. This was usually the result of driver error like: dumped the clutch at too high RPM, slip the clutch too much, power brake the trans too long. It is not easy to drag race a IRS car. You can never tell when you may experience wheel hop. It is just the nature of the beast

In any case we have the ability to tune out some of the TM and abuse mode. So instead of trying to drive around it…… it is time to tune around it.

Hey for once we have taken an argument turned it into a useful discussion and come to a conclusion where we all happen see the others position and reach an agreement that TM exists....... must be some record

 

Dennis


They do not know how to drive & the car gets away from them.

 

I think I beat the Chevy spec for automatics by over 4 tenths as well.

 

Like I said he is confusing TM with TC. I really don't buy much of what boosted has to say on this subject. Sorry, like I said no offense but he has some things mixed up.

 

Well I was .8 slower than the chevy spec, that must be a record too.

 

although, i'm still a bit confused as too what it is and what causes it.

anyone care to sum it all up ?

TM (torque management), TC (traction control), AM (abuse mode).

would it be possible if we took each item seperately and explained the workings of each.

if we can agree upon a definition it would be much easier to figure out.

for example, could we define each, then detail the components used ?

tm=torque management:
what is torque management (please explain in the simplest terms) ?
what causes a TM event, what are the symptons ?
how is it regulated ? how does it know when to activate/deactivate

tc=traction control:
what is traction control (please explain in the simplest terms) ?
what causes a TC event, what are the symptons ?
how is it regulated ? how does it know when to activate/deactivate

AM= Abuse mode:
what is Abuse Mode (please explain in the simplest terms) ?
what causes a AM event, what are the symptons
how is it regulated ? how does it know when to activate/deactivate

what is the volumetric efficiency of the engine when a TM event occurs ? if tm is limiting the engine to 25% of it's power (efficiency) there is 75% of the power left on the table.

it's beginning to sound like we have agreed that the car is using the same software for both versions of the car (manual and automatic), anyone know or able to prove this ? and that the 'safeguards' from the auto apply to the manual (as related to the powertrain minus the transmission).

 

Good post, let's see official stuff not cut and past from some website or a print screen generated by the edit software or some tuner that charges 500 to get rid of it.

 

Just find a track where the DA is -2000 feet and you too will become the WORLD'S GREATEST DRIVER!

 

Good post. I want to comment on your last paragraph as to what we have agreed to.

I think we need to understand the software (duh?). You say it is "using the same software for both versions". I can agree that probably is true, but with a disclaimer. The software may be the same, but the "items" or "settings" may be different.

As a simple example that I know to be true - On C5's, the software controls things such as the tire pressure monitoring system. Do you know that with LS1 Tech you can go into the software and turn on Tire pressure monitoring on a C5 Z06 and if you have the sensors on the wheel that it will begin working just like a non-Z06?

The reason I use this example is that some people are showing print screens and using them to prove various things. My point is, just because a screen exists and shows values does not mean they are activated on all cars. They might be active on A4/A6 cars, but not MN6 cars, for example.

 

Well the DA was 3-4K feet so you are right it was wx related. But my car only pulled a SAE corrected 314 RWHP on the dynojet. So the A6 at least in my case has some serious parasitic loss. And I have a feeling the TM is alive and well also.

But I am not complaining, I am a dial in drag racer and this thing ran two dead ons and missed another by .01 giving me a first place. I thought my C5's could run the number but the C6 is even better.

At least the TM is consistent in its method.

 

Hey, EVERYONE is more than welcome to make passes at any track they choose.

Btw my times were run at roughly -300 to -400 feet.

 

SO,do I want torque mang'mn't or do I not want it????

 

TM is there to protect the drive train. And it's easy to find frequent posters here who are incapable of discerning it invocation. Others here, including myself, began writing about the TM toll after our first passes in the car.

If you (1) haven't noticed TM thus far and (2) aren't trying to make the fastest passes possible in your car, then I suggest not worrying about TM. Instead, be thankful that it will reduce the chance of breakage...unless you make the car wheel hop.

Ranger

 

That's up to you to decide...I personally have NO use for it in a high performance sports car and want all (or at least most) of it gone.