PATCH: NLTS + Valet + KnockCEL
#721
Evolved Member
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NNJ
Posts: 2,544
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tephra - one suggestion/idea. I have NLTS and I love it but I encounter one problem. When I rev match or heel toe shift, when blipping the throttle, I often activate the NLTS limiter by accident. I have the NLTS TPS threshold set at 99% but I still hit it some times. Its just when I'm in a rush and blipping the throttle quick I sometimes push it all the way down.
Would you be able to make it so that you can set a LOAD that you have to be above in order to enable NLTS. Users could set it to around 140 or so, that way you are always above this while NTLS shifting but for rev matchign you can floor it and not hit NLTS.
What do you think?
Would you be able to make it so that you can set a LOAD that you have to be above in order to enable NLTS. Users could set it to around 140 or so, that way you are always above this while NTLS shifting but for rev matchign you can floor it and not hit NLTS.
What do you think?
#722
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
dudical26: I do the exact same thing (blip the throttle on a downshift, and hit the TPS threshold). I'd set the TPS threshold higher than the 95% I have it at now, but I really don't think it would make much difference (as you've probably noticed at 99%).
I would kill for a fixed-RPM style of NLTS, rather than an RPM-offset style. It'd solve the downshifting problem, would let me target a specific shiftable RPM (ie. an RPM the transmission likes to go into gear at, not necessarily a static offset of the RPM I'll be at when I shift, something I experienced when doing a track day: I noticed that my shift points moved around quite a bit), and would completely eliminate the "whoops, I accidently brushed the clutch" accidents that I know everyone here experiences from time to time when they're in a hurry (even if they'll never admit it).
But it could just be my bias showing (and I whined about this when I first loaded the ROM earlier in the thread, so this is the last I'll say about it). The benefits of having any form of NLTS available far outweigh the usability concerns I have with it right now, so I'm obviously not switching back to the old ROM.
I would kill for a fixed-RPM style of NLTS, rather than an RPM-offset style. It'd solve the downshifting problem, would let me target a specific shiftable RPM (ie. an RPM the transmission likes to go into gear at, not necessarily a static offset of the RPM I'll be at when I shift, something I experienced when doing a track day: I noticed that my shift points moved around quite a bit), and would completely eliminate the "whoops, I accidently brushed the clutch" accidents that I know everyone here experiences from time to time when they're in a hurry (even if they'll never admit it).
But it could just be my bias showing (and I whined about this when I first loaded the ROM earlier in the thread, so this is the last I'll say about it). The benefits of having any form of NLTS available far outweigh the usability concerns I have with it right now, so I'm obviously not switching back to the old ROM.
#723
you guys can't be hitting 90% or even 60% tps when downshift blipping surely???
dudical - I think the load stays hi - the boost does so I assume the load does as well, guess a log will prove it...
have you guys considered extending the clutch switch so it doesn't engage so high up?
dudical - I think the load stays hi - the boost does so I assume the load does as well, guess a log will prove it...
have you guys considered extending the clutch switch so it doesn't engage so high up?
#725
Evolved Member
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NNJ
Posts: 2,544
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you guys can't be hitting 90% or even 60% tps when downshift blipping surely???
dudical - I think the load stays hi - the boost does so I assume the load does as well, guess a log will prove it...
have you guys considered extending the clutch switch so it doesn't engage so high up?
dudical - I think the load stays hi - the boost does so I assume the load does as well, guess a log will prove it...
have you guys considered extending the clutch switch so it doesn't engage so high up?
I have looked at my NLTS logs and I stay above 170 load during shifts. If you allow the user to configure it that would be best, but I would say to set it at 140 load just to be safe.
I have also tried to extend the switch a bit by putting extra foam on the clutch pedal.
#727
oh I see what you mean - getting my self confused...
I could put in some logic so that NLTS only works when you are accelerating (ie your speed is increasing).
However I am less inclined to make too many conditions on the NLTS just incase it doesn't activate when the user thinks it will and you end up screwing your driveline...
I could put in some logic so that NLTS only works when you are accelerating (ie your speed is increasing).
However I am less inclined to make too many conditions on the NLTS just incase it doesn't activate when the user thinks it will and you end up screwing your driveline...
Last edited by tephra; Oct 25, 2007 at 07:58 AM. Reason: spulling
#728
Evolved Member
iTrader: (17)
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: NNJ
Posts: 2,544
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
oh I see what you mean - getting my self confused...
I could put in some logic so that NLTS only works when you are accelerating (ie your speed is increasing).
However I am less inclined to make too many conditions on the NLTS just incase it doesn't activate when the user thinks it will and you end up screwing your driveline...
I could put in some logic so that NLTS only works when you are accelerating (ie your speed is increasing).
However I am less inclined to make too many conditions on the NLTS just incase it doesn't activate when the user thinks it will and you end up screwing your driveline...
However, I think just making it so load has to be above 100-140 would be safer. Since you are always above that while using NLTS
#730
A thought about the coming (?) 'auto-valet mode'.
Good idea, but for a permanent protection of the car, wouldn't it be better to use something else than a rev-limiter? I am guessing it wouldn't be a big problem to cut ignition or fuel (or both) instead?
This way the rev-limit activation could be used just when needed, like when lending out the car or something. (By the way, is it possible to not have the engine light flashing? Perhaps only when the rev limiter is hit? But still flash to confirm function on/off).
In addition one could have an automatically activated anti-theft function, so you would have to do something to start the car everytime (for example touching the pedal twice, or once shorter than the rev-limit activation/deactivation. But it should accidentaly be switch off when a "thief" tries to start the engine wile pressing the gas pedal at the same time.).
Good idea, but for a permanent protection of the car, wouldn't it be better to use something else than a rev-limiter? I am guessing it wouldn't be a big problem to cut ignition or fuel (or both) instead?
This way the rev-limit activation could be used just when needed, like when lending out the car or something. (By the way, is it possible to not have the engine light flashing? Perhaps only when the rev limiter is hit? But still flash to confirm function on/off).
In addition one could have an automatically activated anti-theft function, so you would have to do something to start the car everytime (for example touching the pedal twice, or once shorter than the rev-limit activation/deactivation. But it should accidentaly be switch off when a "thief" tries to start the engine wile pressing the gas pedal at the same time.).
#731
Evolved Member
iTrader: (2)
The sequence of events where I bump into this is:
(With heel-toe, I have less of a problem, but I suck at heel-toe shifting because my freakishly large feet trip all over themselves. Yeah, that's right, I get all the ladies. )
duducal's suggestion of having a load check would probably work in this case, since under decel you'll be under vacuum; remember, the point in this use case isn't to use NLTS, it's to slow the car down.
- pop off the gas, intake goes to vacuum
- start braking hard
- blip the throttle (heel-toe, or via left-foot-braking)
- clutch in, shift, and get back on the brakes if left-foot braking
- miss the apex because you just clutch-braked and it scared the crap out of you/caused you to oversteer badly
- tell passenger to hold on to something
- wait for tow truck
(With heel-toe, I have less of a problem, but I suck at heel-toe shifting because my freakishly large feet trip all over themselves. Yeah, that's right, I get all the ladies. )
duducal's suggestion of having a load check would probably work in this case, since under decel you'll be under vacuum; remember, the point in this use case isn't to use NLTS, it's to slow the car down.