Do you even hear yourself? What you just said is by definition improving the the throttle response because it gets remapped and you like it more. Unless you're suggesting that you're a masochist and enjoy a worse throttle response?

Heck, their own website even says:

 

Yes - hmm, I don't see any reason for us to turn this towards animosity - I didn't mean to insult/offend you.

Let me explain what _I_ mean by "throttle response" - I mean the SPEED [not how far] at which the throttle can physically open is controlled by the car's computer.

Even if you replaced the throttle with a SWITCH that instantly went from 0% to 100% the computer might open the throttle at a speed which feels "slow" from my perspective.

The Sprint Booster cannot change the computer's programming, that is to say, it can't make the computer open the throttle faster that it is programmed to do it.

What the Sprint Booster can, and does, do is this: it makes the computer think that the throttle has been pushed down further. So, when you push the throttle half way down, once you added the Sprint Booster, it may be remapped to as if it were 3/4 of the way down instead.

 

You are not using the definition correctly or don't really understand what the device does. The "map" controls the throttle response "everything that happens when you push the pedal". The device changes the map therefore its changing the throttle response just as their add & fiatlux have said.

To break it down if you only have to move the pedal 1/4 of its range to get 1/2 of throttle movement its physically opening the throttle faster then the original pedal to throttle ratio. The ECU is not holding back or maintaining the movement of the throttle valve to the rate it was before the device was installed. Its completely remapped the TV opens to its 1/2 throttle position in motion with the new pedal being pressed to the 1/4. The TV does not catch up with the gas pedal at some time in the future. The 1/2 & 1/4 move take place in the exact same timeframe or it would not work.

On your switch example it would be like throwing a light switch, instant 100% TV plate open. Its an electronic device & reacts to changes so fast from our human perception is instantaneous. In real life with an on/off switch it would be 100% open quicker then you could physically push the pedal to the floor.

 

No, why are you forgetting about the computer in between you and the throttle potentiometer? With drive-by-wire, various factors such as the traction control system, or programming intended to increase fuel economy prevent any sort of near-instant full open throttle that could have previously been achieved with an old car's throttle, once you pressed the throttle to the floor, the cable connecting the pedal to the throttle had pulled the throttle fully open.

I understand the device [Sprint Booster] perfectly. Why do you want to call the throttle map, and the response the same thing? The reason I really WANTED the sprint booster in the first place, is not directly addressed by what it actually does. I wanted my car's throttle to open FASTER, not to simply reduce the effective pedal throw needed for a given amount of throttle press read by the ECU.

I'm talking about the rate at which the car's computer will open the throttle, not the amount once it's finished - thus how fast it responds to input. Sprint booster cannot make the throttle open any faster.

Perhaps the cars you own don't perceptibly slow down the speed of the throttle opening the way it is in the TLX - I perceive quite a frustrating delay. One of the ways that the sprint booster helps is that, from what I read, the TLX computer adjusts according to your "driving style" including how aggressive the throttle response is (how fast it opens, as opposed to a more steady/gradual opening, which saves fuel and makes the car more "smooth", someone who tends to mash the throttle could be presumed to want a more exhilarating engine response - someone like me, wishes to at least have the ability to make the engine rev up very quickly if I press the throttle far.

 

Nothing is missing pedal to new box to ECU to TV.

The unit sends false throttle position signals to the ECU just like any normal JB4 tune sends false throttle position, boost & other sensor signals to the ECU. You really think when you change throttle positions the TV valve does not move faster or slower based on how fast you push the pedal or far it has to move? You push the pedal real sloooooow from idle to WOT & the TV will open real slooooow. Slap the pedal down & the TV moves very very fast from idle to WOT. No big mystery on how it works,

According to their adds the unit does this:

Low (50% sensitivity increase), Medium (75% increase) and High (100% increase). At each increased setting the engine responded faster to his foot depressing the accelerator pedal. How do you suppose this variation can take place if it was not changing the signals it is sending to the ECU?

On the cable pull system or rod push system before that the design of the bell crank that converted the back & forth motion of the cable or rod to rotary motion at the butterfly shaft determined how much the throttle butterflies opened or closed based on the position of the foot pedal. They could open the butterflies faster for each portion of movement at one end of the travel & slower at the other end for each portion of movement.

Generally high performance cars were pretty linier where low horsepower engines had faster wider opening early in the pedal push to make the slugs feel "peppy", sound familiar? The shape of the piece & position of the holes in the bell crank that held the cable or rod connector in relation to the hole that mounted the bell crank to the butterfly shaft changed the mechanical advantage of the foot pedal to the butterflies operation. Tri Power units even had slip ways so the end cars did not open at all till after half throttle & all 3 were fully opened at the same time.


Throttle linkage adjustable Bell Crank.

All they have done with Drive By Wire is computerized the function not changed it.

 

GM Tri-Power system on my GTO & StingRay you can see the slip connection between the center carb & the end card to the right in the black box. The middle carbs butterfly shaft was connected to the throttle pedal with a rod. The end carbs were connected to the middle with the slip connection. When you opened the throttle the stud would move along the slot then open the right end carb which was linked to the other left carb with a rod on the back side of the picture.

 

Do you honestly think that car companies have not taken advantage of computer controlled DBW systems to intentionally introduce throttle lag and rev limiting to increase fuel efficiency and reduce emissions?

There are various circumstances where modern cars, including my Acura TLX, ignore the position of the throttle to varying degrees and lengths of time. It's not as simple as a digitally sampled pot sending a signal directly to a fast servo - in between the throttle input and the position sent to the throttle servo is a computer which is programmed to intentionally delay response to the drivers input and systems such as traction control, VSA, etc. are also able to cut throttle (sometimes to a level which is drastic, disconcerting, even dangerous).

Besides attempts to reduce emissions and increase fuel efficiency, throttle response may be intentionally lagged to reduce stress on engine components which could be induced by sudden engine revving.

Sure, all these reasons and results may be a good thing to put on most cars, applied on average drivers, but I don't want them, I notice and am significantly bothered by my car not responding to my input quickly and obediently.

 

There is no logical reason to increase throttle lag off idle from a standing start. If there were it would be common place. My non turbo cars are all instantaneous. The turbos don't feel instantaneous in some cases because the turbo needs to spool up. That said most performance cars have launch control apps to spool up the turbo before the brake is released.

If you feel a lag over the road when you mash the gas blame the transmission not the throttle. Yes they will shut down the power at red line etc but its not the throttle getting cut its the ignition & timing.


Follow the vertical yellow line next to the red (Pedal Position) one far left. Yellow is the TV position. Top of the chart is WOT. Hit a major shortfall on octane due to excessive turbo boost around 110 & the engine had to pull in its horns to prevent detonation (knock). Show me where the throttle valve was reduced from WOT during the event. All management of the issue by the ECU was through timing & fuel adjustments. Throttle stayed at WOT the whole time till I released the pedal.

I was rolling during JB4 beta testing when this happened & the result of the pull back had I not been well belted in would have been a face plant onto the steering wheel.

 

There are multiple reasons including: to increase fuel economy to meat EPA targets, to make the car feel more "smooth" which either the marketing or engineering dept. (or both) felt would appeal to the anticipated target market, to increase drive train reliability (reducing costs of repairs to the manufacturer when the cars are still under warranty), to allow softer more vibration damping engine mounts which might be stressed by sudden revving of the engine. Also, traction control definitely limits throttle response under many circumstances.

Perhaps you have cars which are either not affected, or, less significantly affected by these design factors? But many people are unhappy with many different makes and models of cars with what they perceive as "throttle lag" - you may be correct that this is rarely due precisely to the throttle being opened at a slower rate, but I am certain that is something that is intentionally done by some manufacturers, at least some of the time, in some cars on the market today.

With my particular car, the 2018 Acura TLX 3.5L V6 "P-AWS" version, the extent to which there was a lack of control that I felt over the various factors leading to how quickly/how much power is sent to my wheels, was such that I became extremely frustrated. (I should re-write that sentence as it's obtuse, but I'm tired and need to go off and do some other things).

The most extreme example was in cases where I was either stopped, or nearly stopped, and then suddenly needed a good amount of torque to make a turn and get out of the way of oncoming traffic. Other cases included, how, in just general use, most every time I accelerated "off the line" the power delivery felt sluggish, and, it felt like an excessive amount of engine revving was required before I actually felt acceleration - this sense that my engine speeding up and yet not feeling the car push forward was frustrating and distracting to my driving experience - a variety of factors were all affecting this including both the transmission and the throttle control, as far as I can tell. The combination of both turning off Traction Control and adding a Sprint Booster helped make the car "feel" more how I want it, which is more responsive to my input. I like and appreciate both having torque applied to the wheels faster, and, not having my throttle cut by Traction Control in situations where the cut felt entirely too drastic/unreasonable, even to the point of making the car dangerous to drive.

 

OK am done with this argue with C&D. Will just say my 20 year old V6 pickup has no lag when I step on the gas the truck is slow but it goes when you step on the gas. I would not expect any Acura currently made to be quick off the line the engines have no torque. The TLX V6 has 267lbft @ 4500 RPM. The 4 cylinder BMW 330 has 295lbft @ 1550RPM. The TLX has 35 more horsepower but its torque, gearing & traction get you off the line. 330 0-60 5.2 TLX 0-60 5,7

BTW THE C&D V6 road test said this:

"our all-wheel-drive test car promptly responded to all manner of throttle inputs, and an audible growl answered our heavy right foot. Too bad the automatic hesitated to downshift when we called for a quick pass at highway speeds."

 

Got timed out.

Both cars will run the 1/4 @ 100mph showing the TLX's greater horsepower all most makes up for the lack of torque at the start but it can't make up all the .5 second ET deficit it has to 60 so it loses by .3 seconds. If the race were another few hundred feet longer the TLX would win.

 

So did the wires every get fixed

 

I'm guessing he's keeping the SH-AWD TLX...

 

So, the insurance company and the dealer were supposed to work out things like how much they're paying for the repair, then get back to me - they haven't gotten back to me yet. I honestly don't care if they take two months, if they are letting me put miles on their loaner instead of my own car for the whole time.

Definately not - so, I did have some fun mashing the throttle in turns - laying down the power in turns the SH-AWD certainly excels vs. the P-AWS, but, no freakin way would I pay ~$10K to move up to this car from mine. The weight savings and whatever else means that, in the hands of a skilled driver, the FWD can slightly beat out the AWD on the track. Now, I'm not saying my skill compares to professional drivers by any means, but I will say that if I had the SH-AWD, I would miss out on the feeling of "being on the edge [of control]" that you get even more w/a RWD car, but still get some w/a good quality FWD car.

But you like talking about cars?

Yes, even if I don't have the fastest car, I still wanna feel it move as soon as I push the gas - what I keep saying is it's shocking how far they have managed to remove that feeling from the TLX if you simply drive it off the lot, with traction control left on, without the car having "learned" that you like mashing the gas pedal, etc., it's particularly obnoxious, IMO.

I don't always know exactly what I'm talking about on this subject, but I'm pretty sure that my comments about the sluggish response of this car that I've owned for a couple years now are pretty solid and well reasoned out? The "audible growl" of the Aspec is pumped in through the speakers. I've never found hesitation when using the paddle shifters - I don't usually need to use them for highway passing, the car has typically been amply responsive in those circumstances - though I suppose they could be accustomed to cars which are even better in that regard (without the TLX issues related to VCM and clumsy transmission behavior in certain cases).

By far, my biggest disappointment in the TLX is the low torque below 2,000 RPM - thankfully, most of the time, that can be addressed by downshifting w/the paddle shifters.

I am repeating this line:
This is enough to make me cry - I'm pretty much stuck w/this TLX, can't afford to dump it and take a big loss, I am _SOOOO_ sad about it's lack of low end torque, and sad that Honda/Acura would sell an over $30K car marketed as "Precision Performance" with such a lack of torque in the low end

 

You put out your thoughts very well.


I had a dealer loaner 2018 Odyssey several months back, and honestly, I found it fast as hell and the engine also had a deep growl... Definitely a fun to drive minivan. Dare I say, alsost sporty, if it wasn't for it weighing 4.5K lbs...

While the van, and several V6 Accords I've driven had great torque, my 2008 TL had none... I could barely chirp the tires, and 2-3K rpm were dead. It came alive at 4K, however..

 

If you want a lot of torque, don't get a Honda...

 

Well, I'm pretty much stuck with it, and considering that over the past 30 years, the average cost of my cars is probably under $10K per car, I'm pretty happy w/this TLX overall - it's quite a nice car.

Also, I've usually owned 4 cylinder cars in the past - I've mostly gotten over my early disappointment w/the J35 engine's lack of low end torque simply by learning how to (somewhat) get the most out of what I've got.

Thanks.
My previous car was a Toyota Sienna - yeah, it's certainly not a sports car, but I actually enjoyed how it drove, for what it was. If I had kept the Sienna it would have been fully paid off now, and, the kids would be happier having a ton of space and separate seat rows. Strangely enough, I actually got better gas mileage in the Sienna than I do in my TLX. About the only downsides were: it ate through tires faster (it's heavier) and it doesn't look quite as cool? The Acura has a different effect on women, that's for sure - but that's not really a "benefit" for me - kek (I'm not gonna cheat on my wife).

Just the other day, as I drove past a fairly attractive woman, instead of doing the usually pulling her shirt down over her butt as I went past, she flicked her shirt UP, with both hands! :lmao:

 

Quite the story there...

Reminds me of this lunatic named rocky boy a couple of years ago the claimed he had and RDX and would rate womem on a 1-10 scale. He thought he was cool. It was funny. We believe he was someones fictional character...

As for the Sienna, those 2GR-FE Toyotas are pretty sweet! Tons of torque.

We drove a V6 Rav-4 a few years ago and could not get it above 3K RPM without exceeding 40 mph!

That particular Odyssey van got around 24 mpg on regular fuel.

If you ever go back to a van, I'd definitely give it a look!

As for the TLX, have you tried holding the throttle down a little bit more to make it hold gears?

My Kia with a 6AT loves to jump up gears constantly. I've learned to modulate the throttle as I accelerate, but still, it shifts so early. Sometimes, it has to drop back down a gear so it can match the engines power better, even though I barely pressed the accelerator down more. It'll start in 1st, then 2nd, 3rd, back to 2nd, then back to 3rd and immediately 4th while accelerating at about 25% throttle from 0-50 mph.

The tuning is stupid.



As far as I remember, the van had the J35/ZF-9 combo and perfomed relatively well when I drove it in my style.



I'd still love to drive a TLX one day.