Cadillac Owners Forum banner

1 - 20 of 24 Posts

·
Registered
CTS-2003, 3.2 automatic
Joined
·
635 Posts
Discussion Starter #1

·
Registered
2003 CTS 3.2L, Luxury Sport, Diamond White
Joined
·
659 Posts
You're right, there is a lot of free play in both the accelerator and brake pedal on the CTS. I've noticed that as well. My 09 Chevy Traverse has much less free play for both and of course it is MUCH slower than my CTS, but "feels" more responsive due to less free play.
After weeks of driving the CTS, I'll jump in the Traverse and be jerking passengers around because I'm not used to the pedals requiring fiber adjustments.

Now, I do kinda hate just how over-responsive and "tight" the pedals are on other cars. To be honest, they don't allow for as much of the fine-tuning ability that I have on the CTS.

Still, this device looks interesting if there is one for a CTS.
 

·
Registered
2006 CTS sport model/package
Joined
·
1,058 Posts
That module you are looking at is a pile of crap. Make the pedal tighter....maybe. But the other claims they make?

Better acceleration
More torque in the low speed range
No more strain on the engine


Those claims are retarded! They might as well put on there that it gives gains of 75hp and and goes back in time at 88mph!!!!
 

·
Registered
2003 CTS 3.2L, Luxury Sport, Diamond White
Joined
·
659 Posts
Blayne said:
That module you are looking at is a pile of crap. Make the pedal tighter....maybe. But the other claims they make?

Better acceleration
More torque in the low speed range
No more strain on the engine

Those claims are retarded! They might as well put on there that it gives gains of 75hp and and goes back in time at 88mph!!!!
Well I personally like the concept of it all, such as reducing play in the pedal. Ignore the other stuff...I mean products make false claims constantly these days so I guess I rarely notice it.

What I don't like is how it'll feel in reality...think about it. You'll reach full throttle when your pedal is only halfway down. It will feel...broken. And the fact it has variable settings isn't good...you'll never get used to it! It's still interesting but I don't trust the execution at all.


Also, Sandalet, it is not Euro and Jap cars that have tighter pedals with less play, it's all up to the model. I've seen many American cars with much tighter throttles and countless foreign cars with looser throttle, and vice versa. Just depends on the design, and the CTS happens to be on the looser side. I kinda prefer it to be honest.
 

·
Registered
CTS-2003, 3.2 automatic
Joined
·
635 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
This device really works. My friend C63 AMG. It changes modes depending on driving style and are very pleased. I can not get used to the amplitude of the gas pedal CTS. This is a design flaw.
 

·
Registered
1968 Eldorado
Joined
·
29 Posts
My friend installed one of this on his Audi S5 and it made quite a difference, he complained how unresponsive the pedal to throttle body was and this thing did made a huge difference.

Last drift event I attended with the my CTS one of the things that sucked was when I tried to "feather" the pedal it was a huge laaag between me pressing the pedal and the engine's response. After that I did some experimentation while driving. I just quickly pumped the gas pedal 30% to 50% and the car didn't even noticed it. So I am very interested on this pedal booster. I know its not going to give me any extra power, but I know it does gives you a better pedal response.
 

·
Registered
Volant, VMAX, RX catch can, tranny cooler... RIP
Joined
·
518 Posts
Anything that reduces lag is a good thing. Making the pedal more responsive would be a good start... getting the throttle to respond to the pedal faster is what I want.
I am tired of my car taking the time to consider whether or not it "agrees" with the input I am giving it. Fly-by-wire cars suck for that reason. You would think that you could move electrons faster than a lever can move a steel cable, but no. Who ever decided to remove the direct link from your foot to the throttle was an *******. Plenty of cars ran plenty well, and ARE STILL running plenty well, with that simple, even possibly archaic, set-up. Cam phase sensors and catalytic converter temperature readings honestly have nothing to do with how much gas I want... and I cannot stress this enough, I WANT (it is all about me)... so there are not any other inputs necessary and thusly, there should be ZERO computing time. Give me a one-for-one input, and give it to me NOW. That is how I want my throttle. That is how I want my steering.

Cadillac makes an excellent machine, but it is still just a machine, and therefor should do as it is told.
 

·
Registered
06 CTS Sport/Luxury package
Joined
·
9,803 Posts
DavidBoren said:
Anything that reduces lag is a good thing. Making the pedal more responsive would be a good start... getting the throttle to respond to the pedal faster is what I want.
I am tired of my car taking the time to consider whether or not it "agrees" with the input I am giving it. Fly-by-wire cars suck for that reason. You would think that you could move electrons faster than a lever can move a steel cable, but no. Who ever decided to remove the direct link from your foot to the throttle was an *******. Plenty of cars ran plenty well, and ARE STILL running plenty well, with that simple, even possibly archaic, set-up. Cam phase sensors and catalytic converter temperature readings honestly have nothing to do with how much gas I want... and I cannot stress this enough, I WANT (it is all about me)... so there are not any other inputs necessary and thusly, there should be ZERO computing time. Give me a one-for-one input, and give it to me NOW. That is how I want my throttle. That is how I want my steering.

Cadillac makes an excellent machine, but it is still just a machine, and therefor should do as it is told.
Here's a lollipop for you.



Hopefully that'll make you feel better.

KOT
 

·
Registered
CTS-2003, 3.2 automatic
Joined
·
635 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
I understand what can be done with one lollipop, but how to use the second?
 

·
Registered
Volant, VMAX, RX catch can, tranny cooler... RIP
Joined
·
518 Posts
Do I get both lollipops? Because if I only get one of them, I totally have dibs on the one with the ribbon...

WTF, over? I didnt mean to come off as whinny or spoiled, I just think that machines are here to do our bidding, and I shouldnt have to wait to see if the the adding-machine between the gas pedal and the throttle "agrees" with me before it "decides" to comply. Responsiveness is an absolutely crucial part of any machine you are going to be in hurling down the street at 100 feet per second (70mph).

I do not understand how a 1979 Ford F-150 shows more immediate response to right-pedal input than a 2005 Cadillac CTS. Obviously, even with the lag, my CTS is a million times faster, but i wasnt talking about acceleration, i was talking about the time it takes the throttle to respond.
 

·
Registered
CTS-2003, 3.2 automatic
Joined
·
635 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
I did a little experiment. We start the motor, 650 rpm, maximum sharply presses and releases the gas pedal, watch the tachometer needle. Result: Cadillac-less than 1,000 rpm. Chrysler PT-Cruiser -2200, BMW 528 - 2600 Toyota Camry 3.5 - 1900 ...
 

·
Registered
1968 Eldorado
Joined
·
29 Posts
I did a little experiment. We start the motor, 650 rpm, maximum sharply presses and releases the gas pedal, watch the tachometer needle. Result: Cadillac-less than 1,000 rpm. Chrysler PT-Cruiser -2200, BMW 528 - 2600 Toyota Camry 3.5 - 1900 ...
Haha, on my 91 Subaru SVX It goes almost instantly up to 4,000RPM!!! Lol
 

·
Registered
1968 Eldorado
Joined
·
29 Posts
It is strange that it started up at all ...
Hahaha, you probably don't know how reliable this things are, the only problem is the automatic transmission, but mine has been swapped with a manual, so weak link is gone!

But yeah, with the CTS the needle barely moves...
 

·
Registered
CTS-2003, 3.2 automatic
Joined
·
635 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
Hahaha, you probably don't know
I know, I had a 2006 Legacy 3.0 MT. I sold it before replacing the spark plugs, my mind is too weak, I can not see that the car take off the wheel to change the spark plugs
 

·
Registered
07' CTS-V | 07' Lux 3.6 Volant-Borla-Vsways | 08' CTS 3.6 DI Performance
Joined
·
969 Posts
Anything that reduces lag is a good thing. Making the pedal more responsive would be a good start... getting the throttle to respond to the pedal faster is what I want.
I am tired of my car taking the time to consider whether or not it "agrees" with the input I am giving it. Fly-by-wire cars suck for that reason. You would think that you could move electrons faster than a lever can move a steel cable, but no. Who ever decided to remove the direct link from your foot to the throttle was an hineyhole. Plenty of cars ran plenty well, and ARE STILL running plenty well, with that simple, even possibly archaic, set-up. Cam phase sensors and catalytic converter temperature readings honestly have nothing to do with how much gas I want... and I cannot stress this enough, I WANT (it is all about me)... so there are not any other inputs necessary and thusly, there should be ZERO computing time. Give me a one-for-one input, and give it to me NOW. That is how I want my throttle. That is how I want my steering.

Cadillac makes an excellent machine, but it is still just a machine, and therefor should do as it is told.
First of all, it's drive-by-wire not fly-by-wire. Perhaps what you intend to do is fly, we're sorry but these cars are incapable of that, perhaps you're confused about what this car can and can't do ;)

And I'm sorry to say, but you make it sound like all automotive engineers know nothing about what they're doing and you know it all. Trust me there are reasons unfortunately beyond your comprehension that necessitate drive by wire / electronic throttle by wire.

The automobile of today is not that of yesterday, these cars are not that simple to engineer with all the electronic systems in them and the driver in full control over the throttle position doesn't make the implementation of more modern systems more simple.

Does electronic throttle control come with some disadvantages? Yes and is there a system that doesn't have pros and cons? And all drive-by-wire systems behave or are calibrated in the same way some are better than others and certain models of Cadillac might behave better than others. And the way these vehicles were engineered and calibrated also depends heavily on the demographic that this car was marketed to, that is a necessary business decision. But we don't hear many people especiially here on the forum complaning about the throttle in the CTS, I drive my car with a very heavy foot and I for one like the way it's calibrated and my dirving is in tune with it and it doesn't take joy away from my driving and I know many that feel the same.

Drive-by-cable is becoming more expensive and difficult to engineer as more electronic systems are introduced into these vehicles.

These systems are introduced into the vehicles due to market demand for technologies such as emissions control, ABS, torque management, stability control, traction control and so on, it's not only the companies that are just pushing them unto people, these systems require more engineering from the companies side, it's what people want at the end (indirectly) that drives such changes.

Unless you want to see by show of hands or should I say electronic hands?? hehe who doesn't want these systems in their vehicle!
 

·
Registered
'07 CTS 3.6 FE5 Blk/Blk 'Nadine'
Joined
·
1,165 Posts
I had some pretty nifty cars before all this new fangled indirect/wire stuff came on the scene .
Just sayin' . :D
 
1 - 20 of 24 Posts
Top