Pedal comander vs Pedal monster

They cannot make HP and TQ claims legally on their website because of threat of getting sued if they cannot live up to their claims. Anyone knows this. Now you should convince the Boomer bros up there it actually does something. Glad you are seeing the light.

 

Driving the ZR1 doesn't make
my "prius" any bigger either.

 

I am not seeing any new light. It is you who should be seeing the light. I have repeatedly said that the box can only change the 0 to 100% pedal position curves, which the website confirms. You are the one who continually said it does not work that way. Do you want me to quote those posts or give you the post numbers?

It does not change the HP or torque output from the hybrid system drive. How can the intermediate box create more HP or torque when all that it is doing is sending a voltage signal to the ECU, which corresponds to 0 to 100% request for power from the car? Where is the addition HP or Torque coming from that you believe the box is providing? After the ECU receives the input voltage, it knows the total amount of power that is being requested. The ECU determines how much of that power should come from the ICE and how much should come from the electric drive motors. This is not rocket science. It is a very easy concept for most people to grasp if they understand science and control systems.

 

You're wasting your breathe.

If he actually believes what he wrote in post 102, and is using it as a basis that advertisers and manufacturers are telling the truth, he is a lost cause.

They cannot make HP and TQ claims legally on their website because of threat of getting sued if they cannot live up to their claims. Anyone knows this

Actually, most people with real world knowledge know manufacturers of gimmick items are full of ????....
So what HP and TQ claims were made by the manufacturer?

 

They get harrassed and sued by trash DIY consumers like all of you, that's why they don't claim anything concrete about their products other than functionality.

 

Yes, it works that way,,, but,,,
WHO CARES...
It doesn't do anything until your right foot requests the power YOU want by the feel in the seat of your pants.

YOU are always the
PEDAL COMMANDER.

Save your dollars on fooling yourself that something different is happening.

Go to a fancy restaurant!
Go on a quick vacation!

 

Bill is willfully ignorant and arguing in bad faith, can't tell if this stooge is serious or not. He's making Brian seem like Albert Einstein at this point.

 

Thanks for the compliment.

I did not see any response from you concerning my post #103. Are you ready to acknowledge that the only thing that the box can do is change the throttle response curve for 0 to 100% pedal position, and it does not increase the HP or torque output from the hybrid drive system?

Happy New Year to you.

 

You are so correct about the 'bad faith' !
I have no faith in that gizmodic you love so......
And I'm sorry you wasted your money on it. And your time defending your purchase.
You and your partner (if there is one) could have had a good time with all that money....

I understand sensors and signal/data wires and control module inputs.
Remember, my career was in Airline and Business Avionics.
Did you see the recent news story about the King Air that landed by itself after the Pilot became incapacitated and the
Emergency Landing System was activated?
I was at that company for 15 yrs during the development and certification of that system. It took years...

I can't wait to get my Comma Four installed in my, new to me, '19 L Eco!! And begin the future of Hands Free driving.
It's an Auto Pilot system and adding navigation capabilities to it will be fun!

I can point to that system and demonstrate what it is doing!
You can't do that with your Gizmodic because the Right Foot it doing the actual Control/Input.

In conclusion, again,,,,

The Right Foot of the Driver determines the amount of power/acceleration the car is producing.

Nothing Else Matters.

I am not arguing. "Just the fact Ma'am."
Happy New Years !!

(extra points for knowing where this quote came from!)

 

No wonder planes crash, with low IQ people like you working on them. Again, Even Brian sort of understands the concept..maybe he can teach a washed up old engineer who skated his way through his career without really knowing anything to collect his paychecks.

 

@Bill Norton , please do not send this thread down the deep dark hole that I talked about in post #91 because that is the direction this thread is headed. It is not beneficial for anyone.

 

To answer the OPs original post #1...don't waist your time. The only way to increase power is to crack the boxes, change out hardware and tune. Those are the facts.

 

Well said! Indeed, Brian's made several posts in this thread demonstrating complete understanding of the concept.

I especially like the one I missed while traveling, where he reposted the graphs from the website of one of the vendors:

The vendor's own graphs make clear that the device is taking an input signal (how far is the pedal pressed, 0% to 100%), and producing an output signal, also 0% to 100%, which is how far it tells the ECU the pedal has been pressed. That is, of course, all it can do, because it sits between the pedal and the ECU, takes the only signal the pedal ever produces, and supplies the only signal the ECU ever expects from it.

That vendor offers not just several different levels, but three different families of "response curves", which can best be seen as a step-by-step journey through recognizing and addressing the drawbacks that are most glaring in the first approach.

In this family—assuming the vendor's art department drew the graphs accurately—the first 10% of pedal travel is reported unchanged. Then there's a sharp change in the response slope, until (in the most drastic "race" curve) the ECU is told the pedal is fully depressed when it's only 25% depressed, and then the whole remaining 75% of pedal travel makes no difference to the ECU input!

All of these mappings are complete, in that they turn every possible 0% to 100% input into some 0% to 100% output, and continuous, without any sudden jumps. But they're first-order discontinuous: the slope takes a sharp jump first at 10%, and again where the output meets 100% and the slope becomes zero from then on.

Their next family of choices tackles the biggest drawback a driver would notice with the above: the fact that all of the possible control input has been compressed into an early fraction of the pedal travel, and all the rest of the pedal travel (the last 75% in "race" mode!) is useless. That could easily be annoying to a driver.

In this family, they've given you back more of the original pedal travel, by adding another slope discontinuity, somewhere around 20% pedal travel. So you have unchanged pedal response from 0% to 10%, a sudden higher slope from 10% to 20%, another jump back to the original slope at 20%, so the final jump where the slope goes to zero only comes later, like around 55% pedal for the "race" setting. Even so, that still leaves the last 45% of pedal travel being useless. But that's a lot better than 75% being useless in the first approach.

The next family eliminates the problem of useless pedal travel at the top.

These curves all remain continuous and increasing and only reach 100% output at 100% input. The racier ones move more of the pedal response to the early travel, but they all still have something left for the remaining pedal travel to do. So, this family fixes the drawback of wasted pedal travel seen in the earlier two families.

Also, these maps are first-order continuous—the slope changes smoothly—except, still, for that first abrupt change of slope at 10%.

Edit: well, looking again, "race" is 1st-order continuous all the way to the top (excepting that first jump at 10%), but the other choices still do have a second slope discontinuity where they rejoin the original line near the top. Assuming that really is their design, and not just something their art dept drew wrong for the website.

Drivers who avoided math might not have the language to say "gee, that response curve has a first-order discontinuity around 10%", but probably still will notice it and think "man, something feels goofy around 10% pedal".

If you iron out that last drawback, and make your family of curves fully first-order continuous from end to end, going from 0% at 0% to 100% at 100% and wasting no pedal travel in between, you end up with curves like Toyota gave you in gen 3:

All different ways to play the same game of mapping a 0% to 100% pedal position signal into a different 0% to 100% pedal position signal, but illustrating that there can still be worse and better ways of doing it.

Thanks to Brian for collecting the necessary graphs.