Fixing Jerky Throttle Response with ATR

[aaronc7]

Wanted to make a new thread with the jerky throttle "fix", maybe for a good sticky candidate or at least easy for guys who are searching to get there answers/solutions once this area starts filling up with more threads. There's nothing I hate more than having to wade through pages of BS in a thread, trying to find my answer to something.

There very well may be more "smooth throttle" fixings and discoveries to be had, but this seems pretty significant and VERY easy to implement, so I thought it was definitely worth letting everyone know about.....anyone can do this fix.

--------------------------------

Jerky throttle response (part throttle is like full boost or similar) seems to be mainly linked to one or two tables in the ECU, thankfully.

Under your Load tables, check out your "Throttle - Requested Load A" and "C" variation tables (they should be identical). If it looks like this, then you are probably having jerky throttle response, which you probably are already well aware of:

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u...%203/ATR/1.jpg

Here's the fix. I noticed in the official v103 Stage 2 + SF 93 FMIC map, the throttle response was MUCH smoother and better to drive around. I found that this table was the only main difference (at least relevant to throttle response) to another map which was nearly identical, except had very jerky throttle response. It seems like Christian knew about it..I mean obviously he made these changes, but decided not to implement them in all maps for whatever reason. It's been tested and verified by others and myself that you can simple copy and paste over the A and C tables over to your current map and throttle response will be greatly improved. So if you want to fix this in 2 minutes, go to Cobb's site and download the v103 map mentioned above. Here's what your table should look like after the "fix":

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u...%203/ATR/2.jpg

Here's a link to Cobb's map list site: cobb . MAZDASPEED3 accessport . map listing

-----------------------------------------------

OR, just copy and paste this into your "Throttle - Requested Load A" and "Throttle - Requested Load C" tables under the "Load Tables" folder

0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00
0.64	0.46	0.34	0.19	0.19	0.19	0.19	0.19	0.19	0.19	0.19	0.19	0.19	0.19	0.19
0.67	0.68	0.61	0.38	0.38	0.38	0.38	0.38	0.38	0.38	0.38	0.38	0.38	0.38	0.38
0.68	0.77	0.80	0.58	0.58	0.58	0.58	0.58	0.58	0.58	0.58	0.58	0.58	0.58	0.58
0.69	0.80	0.90	0.77	0.77	0.77	0.77	0.77	0.77	0.77	0.77	0.77	0.77	0.77	0.77
0.69	0.81	0.94	0.96	0.96	0.96	0.96	0.96	0.96	0.96	0.96	0.96	0.96	0.96	0.96
0.70	0.82	0.95	1.15	1.15	1.15	1.15	1.15	1.15	1.15	1.15	1.15	1.15	1.15	1.15
0.70	0.83	0.96	1.35	1.35	1.35	1.35	1.35	1.35	1.35	1.35	1.35	1.35	1.35	1.35
0.70	0.82	0.97	1.54	1.54	1.54	1.54	1.54	1.54	1.54	1.54	1.54	1.54	1.54	1.54
0.70	0.83	0.97	1.73	1.73	1.73	1.73	1.73	1.73	1.73	1.73	1.73	1.73	1.73	1.73
0.70	0.83	0.97	1.92	1.92	1.92	1.92	1.92	1.92	1.92	1.92	1.92	1.92	1.92	1.92
0.70	0.83	0.97	2.12	2.12	2.12	2.12	2.12	2.12	2.12	2.12	2.12	2.12	2.12	2.12
0.70	0.83	0.97	2.31	2.31	2.31	2.31	2.31	2.31	2.31	2.31	2.31	2.31	2.31	2.31
0.70	0.83	0.97	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50
0.70	0.83	0.97	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50
0.70	0.83	0.97	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50
0.70	0.83	0.97	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50

[buddhabum]

Neat, nice find.

[itzl0l]

good work man....DEFF STICKY this


now did this change anything with the other issue u were having?

[aaronc7]

first post updated with exact code.... now you can just copy and paste this directly into your map of choice.

[tagkat]

Boost doesn't seem to come on as quick. With this map.

[evidence]

Originally Posted by tagkat Boost doesn't seem to come on as quick. With this map.

Well before youd get max boost at 30%+ throttle for a quick second, what's most likely happening now that this isnt the case is your feeling the delay of your foot actually covering the 60% of the pedal left to go wot and actually get that same boost. I'd guess Mazda has the car jerky like this from the factory to combat that natural delay and make the car feel peppier.

[dread]

once you get used to it the car drives so much better. Feels like an NA car.
Very linear power.

[evo2ms3]

Originally Posted by dread once you get used to it the car drives so much better. Feels like an NA car. Very linear power.

+1. Christian just applied this to my e-tune today, and it's exactly what I was looking for with partial throttle. It HAS to be like this on my backroads, so much smoother. First time I can make an AP map hold 5,10,15,20, whatever psi with direct throttle increase. Awesome find.

[tagkat]

It runs great....now just need more power 8)

[HighSun_Murder]

Good Intel! How do i get my AP to make maps like that on my laptop?? i still view my data logs in excel.

[dread]

you need to download accesstuner race

[dread]

ok I tried a slightly different calibration for throttle requested loads tables a and c. This gives more load throughout and maintains the smooth throttle. I like it even better.

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
0.64 0.46 0.34 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
0.67 0.68 0.61 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41 0.41
0.68 0.77 0.80 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62 0.62
0.69 0.80 0.90 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82 0.82
0.69 0.81 0.94 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02 1.02
0.70 0.82 0.95 1.22 1.22 1.22 1.22 1.22 1.22 1.22 1.22 1.22 1.22 1.22 1.22
0.70 0.83 0.96 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42 1.42
0.70 0.82 0.97 1.62 1.62 1.62 1.62 1.62 1.62 1.62 1.62 1.62 1.62 1.62 1.62
0.70 0.83 0.97 1.82 1.82 1.82 1.82 1.82 1.82 1.82 1.82 1.82 1.82 1.82 1.82
0.70 0.83 0.97 2.02 2.02 2.02 2.02 2.02 2.02 2.02 2.02 2.02 2.02 2.02 2.02
0.70 0.83 0.97 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22 2.22
0.70 0.83 0.97 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42 2.42
0.70 0.83 0.97 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50
0.70 0.83 0.97 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50
0.70 0.83 0.97 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50
0.70 0.83 0.97 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50 2.50

[Sacrilicious]

dread, i'm at work right now, but i just wanted to clarify: can i just copy and paste what you just posted directly into ATR? i'm just hoping the spacings between the entries are correct so that they line themselves up in ATR...

[Fobio]

Dread, how did you come up with this? just trying to understand the logic of the changes made for personal understanding.

[dread]

Yes you can copy the values into the throttle requested load table a and c, just make sure the graph still looks smooth. All I did was increase the values from the table aaron posted giving adding slightly more load at even increments. For example he is requesting 2.31 load at 75% throttle. My map request 2.42. You can increase these values more but would need to reach max load at a lower throttle value to keep the values linear.

[Sacrilicious]

awesome...i'll paste in these changes with my next MAF update so that i can see if i like them better...

[dread]

Its not a huge difference but the car opens up a bit sooner. You may want to add more load. I will probably end up adding more at some point. I want to see how I like this after the map settles in.

[Sacrilicious]

ya, i'm not looking to go crazy on the load mapping right now. i've noticed that the less aggressive load ramp up appears to help with my LTFTs, which makes sense, since sudden jumps in load must make it hard to keep accurate record of how much air is going through the intake.

[fostersafb]

I just wanted to point out an observation. I pasted both Aaronc7's adjusted table and dread's into the table on ATR and the new values make a huge difference in how they graph out. From 2000 rpms the TPS and load values create a completely linear path up to 100% TPS. The Cobb map was very uneven, undulated a lot and at about 65% TPS abruptly jumped up to 100%.

I'm no expert in this but i'd like to understand why the 2 tables would be so different? Is there a reason the orig. tables weren't linear like the ones you guys posted?

[Sacrilicious]

Originally Posted by fostersafb I just wanted to point out an observation. I pasted both Aaronc7's adjusted table and dread's into the table on ATR and the new values make a huge difference in how they graph out. From 2000 rpms the TPS and load values create a completely linear path up to 100% TPS. The Cobb map was very uneven, undulated a lot and at about 65% TPS abruptly jumped up to 100%. I'm no expert in this but i'd like to understand why the 2 tables would be so different? Is there a reason the orig. tables weren't linear like the ones you guys posted?

nonlinear tables that ramp up very quickly make the car kick you in the arse when it applies power. christian remapped to this because people bitched up a storm about how v102 "took away the wild child". the honest truth is that a more linear throttle mapping is better for control, but if the customer won't stop bitching about something...just give them what they want and call it a day...=/

[fostersafb]

Originally Posted by Sacrilicious nonlinear tables that ramp up very quickly make the car kick you in the arse when it applies power. christian remapped to this because people bitched up a storm about how v102 "took away the wild child". the honest truth is that a more linear throttle mapping is better for control, but if the customer won't stop bitching about something...just give them what they want and call it a day...=/

If thats the case then I'm embarrassed to be associated with the guys wanting a "wild child". Did he really tune the car to explode like that? I agree, linear is better it just seemed strange to me that the 2 configurations were so different. I expected slight changes not anything drastic like that.

[Sacrilicious]

Originally Posted by fostersafb If thats the case then I'm embarrassed to be associated with the guys wanting a "wild child". Did he really tune the car to explode like that? I agree, linear is better it just seemed strange to me that the 2 configurations were so different. I expected slight changes not anything drastic like that.

you don't need to be embarrassed, because it's mostly a personal taste thing. i wonder sometimes about what kind of additional strain it puts on our powertrain, but i bet it's not anything to worry about. keep in mind that the stock throttle mappings were rather non-linear as well. i think the main point of the nonlinear mapping is just to get the car spooled up ASAP, which doesn't necessarily provide the most drivability, unfortunately.

[MZRDISI4]

It sounds like it was really a "sprint booster" per say but the boosting was actually implemented into the ECU tuning. Not surprising at all considering things like that make the car seem much faster and more responsive.

[Fobio]

I never wanted the "boost taper" that haltech/Christian did for 1.02. And in the soapbox hal basically said as much that guys wanted the kick in the pants. The linear throttle is better for driveability and I'm glad now with atr I can choose between the two if needs be.

[fjames]

My gut reaction is it wasn't a Christian decision, it was a corporate decision to listen to just one group of people. I think Cobb looked at the ots maps as "Branded" maps and developed and marketed them accordingly. A brand has to have recognizable characteristics, appeal to a certain customer etc. Why they chose the least informed is anyone's guess.

[Fobio]

Originally Posted by fjames My gut reaction is it wasn't a Christian decision, it was a corporate decision to listen to just one group of people. I think Cobb looked at the ots maps as "Branded" maps and developed and marketed them accordingly. A brand has to have recognizable characteristics, appeal to a certain customer etc. Why they chose the least informed is anyone's guess.

sometimes the least informed tends to be the loudest, but I don't fault anyone for doing what they did/did not do. during the 1.02 releases, it was heady times, and looking back and realizing how much of a "work in progress" this car has been, it does make me appreciate the work that's gone in and continues to go in to the platform.

I do wonder if the throttle smoothing slows down throttle response since car might run richer instead, causing a lower EGT and thus slower turbo spool? My LTFT are within +/- 5% but the car doesn't feel like it's running rich at all...

[dread]

I did some more driving with my updated throttle settings and the power definately comes on quicker and the smoothness is maintained. I may end up pushing it more, but I am pretty content with how it drives now.

[Fobio]

I know this sounds really bad...but dread, I can't copy and paste your table onto my atr...it just won't do it.

[evidence]

Originally Posted by Fobio I know this sounds really bad...but dread, I can't copy and paste your table onto my atr...it just won't do it.

I think a direct paste replaced the tab delimiter with a space, here is his values in a code table to preserve the tabs:

0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00	0.00
0.64	0.46	0.34	0.20	0.20	0.20	0.20	0.20	0.20	0.20	0.20	0.20	0.20	0.20	0.20
0.67	0.68	0.61	0.41	0.41	0.41	0.41	0.41	0.41	0.41	0.41	0.41	0.41	0.41	0.41
0.68	0.77	0.80	0.62	0.62	0.62	0.62	0.62	0.62	0.62	0.62	0.62	0.62	0.62	0.62
0.69	0.80	0.90	0.82	0.82	0.82	0.82	0.82	0.82	0.82	0.82	0.82	0.82	0.82	0.82
0.69	0.81	0.94	1.02	1.02	1.02	1.02	1.02	1.02	1.02	1.02	1.02	1.02	1.02	1.02
0.70	0.82	0.95	1.22	1.22	1.22	1.22	1.22	1.22	1.22	1.22	1.22	1.22	1.22	1.22
0.70	0.83	0.96	1.42	1.42	1.42	1.42	1.42	1.42	1.42	1.42	1.42	1.42	1.42	1.42
0.70	0.82	0.97	1.62	1.62	1.62	1.62	1.62	1.62	1.62	1.62	1.62	1.62	1.62	1.62
0.70	0.83	0.97	1.82	1.82	1.82	1.82	1.82	1.82	1.82	1.82	1.82	1.82	1.82	1.82
0.70	0.83	0.97	2.02	2.02	2.02	2.02	2.02	2.02	2.02	2.02	2.02	2.02	2.02	2.02
0.70	0.83	0.97	2.22	2.22	2.22	2.22	2.22	2.22	2.22	2.22	2.22	2.22	2.22	2.22
0.70	0.83	0.97	2.42	2.42	2.42	2.42	2.42	2.42	2.42	2.42	2.42	2.42	2.42	2.42
0.70	0.83	0.97	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50
0.70	0.83	0.97	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50
0.70	0.83	0.97	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50
0.70	0.83	0.97	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50	2.50

[dread]

how do you do the code thing

[pidass]

you can paste into ATR. First select all the values in dread's code block and copy. Then in ATR select the first cell (top left) by left clicking and then scroll all the way down and right so that you can see the last cell (bottom right). Hold shift and click the last cell, now every cell should be selected (the graph at the bottom should be solid white). Now just hit CTRL+V and it will paste the new values.

[dread]

I know how to paste into ATR I am Dread. My question was how do I post the code on here so you guys can use it.

[MZRDISI4]

liek this [code][ /CODE]

duh

[dread]

haha thanks

[bova]

have you guys done anything with the close loop to open loop delay?

[Fobio]

yeah, once you do the code quotes it keeps the cell format. I pasted evidence's code and it worked out just as dread's table is. thanks again!

Originally Posted by bova80 have you guys done anything with the close loop to open loop delay?

Yes...I like how it quickly goes into the 10's w/ my AFR @ WOT.

[bova]

what did you set it at? i might have missed it.

[Fobio]

I'm just using SLS's settings on a tune that Christian did for him.

[bova]

ok i was asking what value did you use for the delay. i think cobb has it set at 30ms

[Fobio]

SLS's settings are @ 15, I believe

Originally Posted by SLS MS3 A couple of months ago Christian had me experiment with some Closed Loop table changes to see how the car responds. After making the changes, it felt like my car became more eager to go fast. Here are the changes for anyone that wants to try them. Closed Loop - Exit Delay A 15 Closed Loop - Exit Delay B 40 Closed Loop - Exit Delay C 40 Closed Loop - Max Load D 2500 - 1.55 3000 - 1.57 3500 - 1.57 4000 - 1.40 4500 - 1.40 5000 - 0.40 5500 - 0.33 Closed Loop - Max Throttle B 2500 - 60.00 3000 - 60.00 3500 - 60.00 4000 - 60.00 4500 - 60.00 5000 - 60.00 5500 - 60.00 6000 - 60.00 6500 - 60.00 7000 - 60.00 Closed Loop - Max Throttle C 2500 - 60.00 3000 - 60.00 3500 - 60.00 4000 - 60.00 4500 - 60.00 5000 - 60.00 5500 - 60.00 6000 - 60.00 6500 - 60.00 7000 - 60.00 Closed Loop - Max Throttle D 2500 - 60.00 3000 - 60.00 3500 - 60.00 4000 - 60.00 4500 - 60.00 5000 - 60.00 5500 - 60.00 6000 - 60.00 6500 - 60.00 7000 - 60.00