Go Back  CorvetteForum - Chevrolet Corvette Forum Discussion > C7 Corvette > C7 Tech/Performance
Reload this Page >

C7 Throttle Body response, getting to know it

Notices
C7 Tech/Performance Corvette Technical Info, Internal Engine, External Engine, Tech Topics, Basic Tech, Maintenance, How to Remove & Replace
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

C7 Throttle Body response, getting to know it

 
Old 03-13-2019, 09:32 PM
  #121  
Yourconfused
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: May 2018
Location: Austin Texas
Posts: 214
Thanked 28 Times in 22 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Poppacapp View Post
Nobody who puts a PTB on their car is doing it because they want more performance from 0-30 degrees throttle. They do it for WOT flow performance and combine with a ported Intake manifold for average of 16rwhp gains. The only ones who would worry about that are those that are OCD about throttle response with a stock tune. All of this is fixed with a proper tune.

TM is affected by Torque not airflow, hence Torque Management. If increased airflow causes the ECM to see higher torque values than the tune calls for then it will limit, which generally results in throttle closure.
Tunes polish up mechanical deficiencies, coming from someone who deals with tuning of industrial systems for a living, and therefore Geoc2468 has a valid point in my eyes. OCD? Probably, lol, but valid nonetheless. No disrespect to you.

Last edited by Yourconfused; 03-13-2019 at 09:34 PM.
Yourconfused is offline  
Old 03-14-2019, 10:56 AM
  #122  
[email protected]
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
 
Mike@SolerEngr's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 2018
Location: South Alabama
Posts: 175
Thanked 56 Times in 32 Posts
Default

Another review here:

https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...post1599042999

This one goes further into also validating the tuning vs. mechanical discussion and resolutions proposed in this thread.
__________________
Mike,
Soler Performance LLC.
[email protected]
www.solerengineering.com
Mike@SolerEngr is offline  
Old 03-14-2019, 02:21 PM
  #123  
speedsquad
CF Member
 
Member Since: Oct 2012
Location: Vermilion Ohio
Posts: 54
Thanked 16 Times in 12 Posts
Default

[[email protected];
"Airflow and power are linearly related. Everything else constant, you can draw the same conclusions from either one of them. Yes, it is delivering as much more power as airflow earlier in the blade travel, and torque management does not change the pedal mapping, although I think we all know it intervenes sometimes to protect drive line among other things".

Exactly! A simple flow bench test of the various ported throttle bodies, at blade opening positions up to 40 degrees, will prove the Solex throttle body improves low end flow. It is no different than flowing a cylinder head port at lower valve lifts.
Regarding torque management, it only comes into play during transmission shifts to increase longevity of drive line components. Most likely, this is not an issue at throttle positions under 40 degrees.

Last edited by speedsquad; 03-14-2019 at 08:22 PM.
speedsquad is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to speedsquad For This Useful Post:
[email protected] (03-14-2019)
Old 03-14-2019, 06:58 PM
  #124  
Higgs Boson
CF Senior Member
 
Higgs Boson's Avatar
 
Member Since: Jul 2007
Location: Texas Hill Country
Posts: 9,528
Thanked 966 Times in 628 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by speedsquad View Post
Exactly! A simple flow bench test of the various ported throttle bodies, at blade opening positions up to 40%, will prove the Solex throttle body improves low end flow. It is no different than flowing a cylinder head port at lower valve lifts.
Regarding torque management, it only comes into play during transmission shifts to increase longevity of drive line components. Most likely, this is not an issue at throttle positions under 40%
That is not the case with E92/E92A ECMs and T87/T87A TCMs.

Last edited by Higgs Boson; 03-14-2019 at 06:59 PM.
Higgs Boson is offline  
Old 03-14-2019, 08:15 PM
  #125  
speedsquad
CF Member
 
Member Since: Oct 2012
Location: Vermilion Ohio
Posts: 54
Thanked 16 Times in 12 Posts
Default

Higgs, predicted torque (slow actuation) I could see, somewhat, but is it not the case that spark retard is only a function of immediate torque (fast actuation) as when the engine is at higher or full throttle positions?
At throttle positions under 40 degrees while gradually accelerating, any torque management would be hardly noticeable, unlike when you can actually feel it at full throttle.

Last edited by speedsquad; 03-14-2019 at 08:30 PM.
speedsquad is offline  
Old 03-14-2019, 09:12 PM
  #126  
Ghostnotes
CF Senior Member
 
Ghostnotes's Avatar
 
Member Since: May 2017
Location: Pasadena Texas
Posts: 382
Thanked 19 Times in 16 Posts
Default

[QUOTE=speedsquad;1599044624][[email protected];
"Airflow and power are linearly related. Everything else constant, you can draw the same conclusions from either one of them. Yes, it is delivering as much more power as airflow earlier in the blade travel, and torque management does not change the pedal mapping, although I think we all know it intervenes sometimes to protect drive line among other things".

Exactly! A simple flow bench test of the various ported throttle bodies, at blade opening positions up to 40 degrees, will prove the Solex throttle body improves low end flow. It is no different than flowing a cylinder head port at lower valve lifts.
Regarding torque management, it only comes into play during transmission shifts to increase longevity of drive line components. Most likely, this is not an issue at throttle positions under 40 degrees.[/QUOTE]

Absolutely wrong.
Ghostnotes is offline  
Old 03-15-2019, 01:22 AM
  #127  
[email protected]
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
 
Mike@SolerEngr's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 2018
Location: South Alabama
Posts: 175
Thanked 56 Times in 32 Posts
Default Please Clarify

Ghostnotes, Higgs Boson, how about we finish the issue w/ torque management sooner than later?

I'm willing to go line by line of code, variable by variable. Not with what we think, but with what we know, and when we run out of things we know, we stop it there.

You can potentially save members from a bad product and this company from bankruptcy, or, you can help validate the product and reassure members. All noble goals. Or maybe there is another reason for posting. What's your goal?

You are senior members and your comments have weight here. However they were very general and I don't see how they'll help if not clarified. In fact, right now they inspire fear of the "mighty" torque management w/ the addition of this kind of mod.

I'd propose we start w/ simple questions:

1) Is there an issue w/ torque management when an LT5 TB is installed on an LT1 or LT4 engine? Y, N, IDK

2) Is there an issue w/ torque management when any other throttle body other than stock (i.e PTB) is installed on any of our engines? Y, N, IDK

3) Is there an issue w/ torque management with this specific design? Y, N, IDK

Thank you very much,
__________________
Mike,
Soler Performance LLC.
[email protected]
www.solerengineering.com

Last edited by [email protected]; 03-15-2019 at 01:24 AM.
Mike@SolerEngr is offline  
The Following User Says Thank You to [email protected] For This Useful Post:
Perf n Restore (03-15-2019)
Old 03-15-2019, 08:32 AM
  #128  
Ghostnotes
CF Senior Member
 
Ghostnotes's Avatar
 
Member Since: May 2017
Location: Pasadena Texas
Posts: 382
Thanked 19 Times in 16 Posts
Default

I have my final ho7se inspection at 9. When i get back i will.

However i have already explained most of it in earlier posts. Its not complicated.
Ghostnotes is offline  
Old 03-15-2019, 09:15 AM
  #129  
[email protected]
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
 
Mike@SolerEngr's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 2018
Location: South Alabama
Posts: 175
Thanked 56 Times in 32 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Ghostnotes View Post
However i have already explained most of it in earlier posts. Its not complicated.
Is this it?

Originally Posted by Ghostnotes View Post
Because your torque model has changed. If you are inducing more air at a given angle that is different than the calculated tables,that translates into increased air which translates into torque then adjustments would be recommended. This will also increase MAF g/sec for a given frequency, which means your trims will need to be adjusted.

Again the TB may operate within acceptable ranges and not set a code but i would bet that your fuel trims,slight off idle torque trims need slight adjustment along with VT.
It will learn but only according to the tables it looks up, so it will see increased LTFT trends to compensate for the increased air. Now if you tell it that it has increased air/torque at given areas, the amount of change according to the process variable required will be less, resulting in better efficiency.
Does this apply also to LT5 TB on LT1/LT4 engines? Or; PTB's on any of our engines?

Is this a problem GM forgot to handle w/ a DTC?

Is your only concern efficiency? I keep getting 15 mpg city (spirited), and high 20's hwy. But I'll look closer and ask members testing to catch the loss if any. I expected lower efficiency b/c of the improved responsiveness, that comes at a cost. Fun is not free, the price is very reasonable though.

Update: Just logged STFT and LTFT, expected to see some high single or double digit % within comp. limits (+/-20%?). But STFT was symmetrical +/- 1,2,3,4%, and LTFT at 0.39%. AFR parameter = 1 (stoich). The amount of change appears very small and averages ~0 long term, this should be very efficient. As if the ECM set the new TB as the new normal. Looks like the compensation is dynamic. Does it get any better than that?

Looking forward to your answers!
Thanks,
__________________
Mike,
Soler Performance LLC.
[email protected]
www.solerengineering.com

Last edited by [email protected]; 03-15-2019 at 06:35 PM.
Mike@SolerEngr is offline  
Old 03-15-2019, 11:10 AM
  #130  
[email protected]
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
 
Mike@SolerEngr's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 2018
Location: South Alabama
Posts: 175
Thanked 56 Times in 32 Posts
Default

...and another excellent review...

https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...post1599049356

Thanks,
__________________
Mike,
Soler Performance LLC.
[email protected]
www.solerengineering.com
Mike@SolerEngr is offline  
Old 03-15-2019, 07:10 PM
  #131  
Ghostnotes
CF Senior Member
 
Ghostnotes's Avatar
 
Member Since: May 2017
Location: Pasadena Texas
Posts: 382
Thanked 19 Times in 16 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
Is this it?



Does this apply also to LT5 TB on LT1/LT4 engines? Or; PTB's on any of our engines?

Is this a problem GM forgot to handle w/ a DTC?

Is your only concern efficiency? I keep getting 15 mpg city (spirited), and high 20's hwy. But I'll look closer and ask members testing to catch the loss if any. I expected lower efficiency b/c of the improved responsiveness, that comes at a cost. Fun is not free, the price is very reasonable though.

Update: Just logged STFT and LTFT, expected to see some high single or double digit % within comp. limits (+/-20%?). But STFT was symmetrical +/- 1,2,3,4%, and LTFT at 0.39%. AFR parameter = 1 (stoich). The amount of change appears very small and averages ~0 long term, this should be very efficient. As if the ECM set the new TB as the new normal. Looks like the compensation is dynamic. Does it get any better than that?

Looking forward to your answers!
Thanks,
If that is the case then yes it is very close. You are running MAF only correct.

I never questioned or said it would not work, as stated in my prior post,but physical airmass/volume is absolute in say an A/B test. Meaning if you were to swap them in your driveway on a sunny day at 80*, sea level with 70% humidity it will require compensation.We don't use IAC's anymore so compensation to maintain constant idle speed is controlled by blade, timing and fuel. If you are moving more air, you will require more fuel, idle or part throttle.

But the stock tables will see the difference and compensate, especially in the idle region, which translates to more torque, which is an increased error factor in the process which will trigger the error correction in which the PID settings will correct for in accordance of how much change and how fast the rate of change is .
If your trims are in fact that close from idle to where your flow rates and the factory rates finally intersect at part throttle, then that would have to conclude that the factory calibration is off.

Last edited by Ghostnotes; 03-15-2019 at 07:19 PM.
Ghostnotes is offline  
Old 03-15-2019, 08:19 PM
  #132  
speedsquad
CF Member
 
Member Since: Oct 2012
Location: Vermilion Ohio
Posts: 54
Thanked 16 Times in 12 Posts
Default torque management issue

[QUOTE=Ghostnotes;1599047015]
Originally Posted by speedsquad View Post

Absolutely wrong.
Ghostnotes, After reading several of your posts above regarding the newer ecm's, as Higgs also mentioned, I stand corrected with regards to torque management.

Last edited by speedsquad; 03-15-2019 at 08:20 PM.
speedsquad is offline  
Old 03-15-2019, 09:03 PM
  #133  
[email protected]
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
 
Mike@SolerEngr's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 2018
Location: South Alabama
Posts: 175
Thanked 56 Times in 32 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Ghostnotes View Post
If that is the case then yes it is very close. You are running MAF only correct.

I never questioned or said it would not work, as stated in my prior post,but physical airmass/volume is absolute in say an A/B test. Meaning if you were to swap them in your driveway on a sunny day at 80*, sea level with 70% humidity it will require compensation.We don't use IAC's anymore so compensation to maintain constant idle speed is controlled by blade, timing and fuel. If you are moving more air, you will require more fuel, idle or part throttle.
You said, "I bet it will need re-calibration" b/c compensation was too much...I agree w/ the rest, no question about that.

Originally Posted by Ghostnotes View Post
But the stock tables will see the difference and compensate, especially in the idle region, which translates to more torque, which is an increased error factor in the process which will trigger the error correction in which the PID settings will correct for in accordance of how much change and how fast the rate of change is .
If your trims are in fact that close from idle to where your flow rates and the factory rates finally intersect at part throttle, then that would have to conclude that the factory calibration is off.
If the factory calibration is off, then, if I put an OEM TB back in my car I should not get zero LTFT; right? I really doubt that is going to be the case, but I can check if you want.

Also, it would be an special kind of wrong calibration, b/c it matches our throttle body airflow.

There is yet another possibility, the calibration is not static. Once the ECM learns a new TB it sets that airflow as the new zero reference.

Thanks,
__________________
Mike,
Soler Performance LLC.
[email protected]
www.solerengineering.com

Last edited by [email protected]; 03-15-2019 at 09:19 PM.
Mike@SolerEngr is offline  
Old 03-16-2019, 12:32 AM
  #134  
Yourconfused
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: May 2018
Location: Austin Texas
Posts: 214
Thanked 28 Times in 22 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
Is this it?



Does this apply also to LT5 TB on LT1/LT4 engines? Or; PTB's on any of our engines?

Is this a problem GM forgot to handle w/ a DTC?

Is your only concern efficiency? I keep getting 15 mpg city (spirited), and high 20's hwy. But I'll look closer and ask members testing to catch the loss if any. I expected lower efficiency b/c of the improved responsiveness, that comes at a cost. Fun is not free, the price is very reasonable though.

Update: Just logged STFT and LTFT, expected to see some high single or double digit % within comp. limits (+/-20%?). But STFT was symmetrical +/- 1,2,3,4%, and LTFT at 0.39%. AFR parameter = 1 (stoich). The amount of change appears very small and averages ~0 long term, this should be very efficient. As if the ECM set the new TB as the new normal. Looks like the compensation is dynamic. Does it get any better than that?

Looking forward to your answers!
Thanks,
What car do you drive? Not sure if it is a Z or not as the MPG#s are low. I average 20-21 city and 28-30 hwy. I go for fun runs sometimes and get low numbers but overall I get over 20 combined. My car is a A6 LT1. Crawling along at 7mph doesn't help the city driving that I do at all and I am impressed with the numbers despite the fact that.
Yourconfused is offline  
Old 03-16-2019, 03:21 PM
  #135  
tyho
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Jan 2015
Posts: 318
Thanked 22 Times in 20 Posts
Default

How well would this work on a Z51 M7 with a MSD intake manifold, also ARH mid length headers, Halltech cai and B & B bullet exhaust? Car is tuned and has a light weight Katech fly wheel.
Also what is the size of the TB ... 103 or something else, stock size? I couldn't find the size in the posts.

Thanks, looks like a great product.
tyho is offline  
Old 03-16-2019, 03:55 PM
  #136  
[email protected]
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
 
Mike@SolerEngr's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 2018
Location: South Alabama
Posts: 175
Thanked 56 Times in 32 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by tyho View Post
How well would this work on a Z51 M7 with a MSD intake manifold, also ARH mid length headers, Halltech cai and B & B bullet exhaust? Car is tuned and has a light weight Katech fly wheel.
Also what is the size of the TB ... 103 or something else, stock size? I couldn't find the size in the posts.

Thanks, looks like a great product.
Thanks, Tyho. If your intake manifold screw hole pattern accepts the stock TB, then it will accept ours (87 mm, stock size). Your tune is the only wild card. You have nothing to lose nevertheless. If it does not work for your setup, or you simply don't like it, you have a 30 money back warranty and free shipping both ways.

What TB do you have right now?
Mike@SolerEngr is offline  
Old 03-16-2019, 05:33 PM
  #137  
tyho
CF Senior Member
 
Member Since: Jan 2015
Posts: 318
Thanked 22 Times in 20 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by [email protected] View Post
Thanks, Tyho. If your intake manifold screw hole pattern accepts the stock TB, then it will accept ours (87 mm, stock size). Your tune is the only wild card. You have nothing to lose nevertheless. If it does not work for your setup, or you simply don't like it, you have a 30 money back warranty and free shipping both ways.

What TB do you have right now?
Stock OEM TB. I will speak with my mechanic to see what he thinks about changing it over. I don't race, but like to lighten the car by about 150 lbs, and make it more efficient. Do you ship to Toronto, Ontario?

Last edited by tyho; 03-16-2019 at 05:36 PM.
tyho is offline  
Old 03-16-2019, 10:13 PM
  #138  
[email protected]
Supporting Vendor
Thread Starter
 
Mike@SolerEngr's Avatar
 
Member Since: Dec 2018
Location: South Alabama
Posts: 175
Thanked 56 Times in 32 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by tyho View Post
Stock OEM TB. I will speak with my mechanic to see what he thinks about changing it over. I don't race, but like to lighten the car by about 150 lbs, and make it more efficient. Do you ship to Toronto, Ontario?
Yes, PM sent.
__________________
Mike,
Soler Performance LLC.
[email protected]
www.solerengineering.com
Mike@SolerEngr is offline  
 


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: C7 Throttle Body response, getting to know it


Sponsored Ads
Vendor Directory

Contact Us - About Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: