If the sensor was 'sticky' and the computer thought the brake was still depressed, wouldn't the brake light be illuminated?Quote:
Originally Posted by letherm
Printable View
If the sensor was 'sticky' and the computer thought the brake was still depressed, wouldn't the brake light be illuminated?Quote:
Originally Posted by letherm
My problem was when I took my foot off the brake and pressed the accelerator. The first time it happened I nearly required a change of underwear. I was a an intersection turning right across oncoming traffic with plenty of room until it just sat there for what seemed an eternity. :o:o:o The dealer simply adjusted the gap between the sensor and the brake or at least that's what they told me. Still have hesitation sometimes but I let the car roll a touch before I take off. I certainly would not cut across traffic with little room to spare.Quote:
Originally Posted by laughto
Martin
I believe there are actually two switches in the brake switch. One for the lights and one that sends the signal to the computer to indicate the brake is pressed. The problem occurs when some carbon build up on the light circuit goes into the switch for the computer. It then sends a signal for a longer period of time to say that the brake is on. Its not until that signal clears tbat you suddenly get throttle response back. This may only take a second but when you want throttle at a roundabout it feels like ages.Quote:
Originally Posted by laughto
I have this problem occurring more and more these days, and I have a switch sitting in my "in car spares" collection, which I think I may see about fitting today. The car is 175,000 km on the original switch, which is why the spare is always carried in the car.Quote:
Originally Posted by RoverLander
Edit: Just did the swap - the old switch is the FoMoCo part, with the slightest blackening on one of the contacts, so cleaned it up, bent the contacts a touch and reassembled to throw in the spares with a "used" label on it.
I will see if the new switch has improved the throttle response from a standstill
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoverLander
OK, so I thought about this for a while and was certain that I'd tried a left foot on brake/right foot on accelerator hill start way back when I got my first D4 in early 2010. I think the car went off pretty well. But I hadn't actually checked the revs.
So tried this today in my MY13 D4 and though and behold, left foot firmly on brake pedal and right foot on accelerator ...... the engine revs and the car tries to pull. The engine doesn't appear to be retarded at all.
Surely that debunks the brake switch theory?
Doing this will actually improve response as you get the turbo(s) spooling by adding load to the engine.Quote:
Originally Posted by Celtoid
I know that so far, replacing the switch has not made a difference to my 3.0's launchability.... Sand mode on the other hand, is another story!
I do know though, with my other car (Saab 9-5) and previous Saab models, the ECU has a brake input so that if the brake is depressed, the boost is restricted to "Base Boost" - about 6psi. No idea why this is, except that it is a great tool to find out if the wastegate control solenoid is faulty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalil
"All fittings come with a lifetimewarranty and have a million dollar cover and we have never had a claim in 39years. We are the official Mini Cooper, Audi and VW Rally team ECUreprogrammers in the UK and as such work closely with the manufacturers so wedo not go over their recommended tolerances. As such, if you do not want totell them it has been done, they will never know."
I have no vested interest in this whatsoever but I have read this stuff before and Roo Systems have similar lines ....
Their quote....
“This goes even further than that. If you have an engine failure andthe manufacturer can prove it was caused by our products that’s on us as well.”
Firstly, just 'cause you support a rally team does not make an OEM approved specialist (especially if the cars were built in the 80s...LOL) ..... maybe abit of journalistic licence there.
It would also be interesting to analyse the T&Cs around the 'Million Dollar' cover claim.
Secondly, regarding "the OEM will never know" (Superchips) claim, inthis thread ....
http://www.aulro.com/afvb/d3-d4-rrs/230830-tdv6-sdv6-3-0l-power.html
... a few posts in, Tombie discusses how certain manipulation of the ECU creates an indelible record that can only be detected by the OEM's Diagnostic Tool. This comment was specific to re-mapping. This Mr Chips guy was asked about that by another party and stated that he knew nothing about it and had to check with his UK counterparts. His later reply was a tad defensive stating something about all Internet Experts being Experts, etc ... blah, blah, blah but admitted that his UK contacts had stated that it was partially true. He fluffed it off as him never seeing it here so it must be only 2016 models. Well of course he hadn't seen it .... that was the point of the other post!
So, taking the above into consideration, let's play devils advocate about thewarranty claims by these companies....
Scene 1
Owner walks into Land Rover with damaged engine/transmission/drivetrain andstates the above warranty claim from remapping company. Land Rover laugh.
They won’t make any effort to prove it. Why should they, the owner has let acompany that has 0.0001% of the R&D budget thatJ LR have modify his car? They might rightly state that RooSystem’s know their (RooSystems) gear but do not fully understand Land Rover products. Land Rover expressly warn about modifying without approval (Warranty becomes void).They state, get RooSystems to prove their kit didn’t cause the issue, you paid to get the car modified, not them.
Owner becomes piggy in the middle. So what does owner do?
That’s pretty much where it would end with the owner being out of pocket for an engine, driveline or transmission (or all) repair.
Scene 2
Owner has to decide who to sue and for what?
JLR (one of the most successful companies in the world) for? You can’t order them to ‘prove’ the RooDevice made their engine fail. You’d have to sue them for not covering the warranty, even though you completely ignored their clearly stated warnings.
Maybe the owner decides to go for the ‘softer’ target, even though they signed a piece of paper that states that the owner must get the OEM to prove that it wasa RooSystems issue.
Owner once again, stuck in the middle.
Scene 3
Probable Reality.
The warranty line is BS, but it’s solid enough to cover RooSystems/SuperChips/etal only. ‘’Proof’ is ambiguous and you’d never get JLR to budge. The only real proof is the fact that the owner modified the car and probably has no way of hiding that. If the owner choses to sue JLR for a failure to commit to warranty and they did actually ‘prove’ that RooSystems were at fault, I’d bet RooSystems would then counter the JLR claims, on the very point of proof. Once again you’d be in the middle and very, very, very much out of pocket. How much do you think this would cost you? I seriously doubt it would get that far.
People have been modifying cars from spec for a long time, some with issues and some without .... across the spectrum I'd imagine. With major/critical mods, I think it's fair to say you run a risk of losing your warranty when you do this. But if you are happy with that, the car is out of warranty or you think the risk of issue is low.... well then that's OK and that's why plenty of people do it.
I'm not challenging these guys ability to do what they say but I'm questioning their comments around the cover the owner is afforded should something go wrong.
Just food for thought.
Very wise words Celtoid brings me back down to reallity, driveline & warranty worth a lot more than extra power and economy at this stage. Still got 3 years warranty left :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by aus86inch
Thanks mate,
As I've stated, I can't really comment on the actual physical/mechanical risk, I just think folks should go into these things with their eyes wide open.
Some people are comfortable with that risk, but at least they have considered it.
Cheers.
Good point...however i know that changing the brake switch fixed my problem. Could it be that a bad contact in the brake switch causes a very rapid pulsing on the brake sensor circuit for the computer. This somehow causes a delay in reacting to throttle input. Im guesing this but several people seem to have had good results in changing the brake light switch. Its also a relatively easy and cheap thing to try. I hope you find the cause soon as i undrstand how frustrating a delayed throttle response is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Celtoid