Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

I'm gonna venture a guess into that jerky feel you get when coming off the throttle in a manual...

I've noticed it heaps too, coast along in 1st gear with half throttle, then take your foot off the accelerator, and you'll feel a real jerky situation.

Not sure, but its something to do with your ECU turning off your injectors when there's no throttle input, then it upsets the gearbox and all the slack in the drivetrain (clutch, gearbox, diff, final drive etc.). The jerky feeling is the shock that by turning off the injectors, the engine is no longer turning the drivetrain and the wheels, but rather the car's motion along the road causes the wheel to turn the drivetrain and engine instead... The shocking back and forth is all the slack in the drivetrain being taken up and let off etc...

Anyone get my drift?

Edited by turbo x-trail
  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I here what your saying X-trail, sounds very plausible. Best way to combat it is if you are coming completely off throttle in such a low gear, clutch in a little and problem solved. Because you are then no longer engaging the driveline

You've read it a few times and still didn't know what he was talking about?

How about you shut up now.

Yeah it's not to do with speed bumps as such or the jerky spaz clutch action that beginners/learners have.

I was thinking it may be something to do with my seat position also, like it's giving my leg/foot too much freedom (or something) to move back/fwd or up/down involuntarily?

What I am basically saying is...hit bump and G's force foot on throttle, car accelerates...acceleration moves weight back and foot lifts off throttle a bit, car then decelerates, weight moves forward and foot is forced on throttle...car accelerates moves weight back and foot lifts off and process repeats.

Like I said it's in 1st and 2nd mostly. If I'm in 3rd then there seems to be more a dampening effect, as the car doesn't accelerate or decelerate so much with the same throttle inputs.

What I am basically saying is...hit bump and G's force foot on throttle, car accelerates...acceleration moves weight back and foot lifts off throttle a bit, car then decelerates, weight moves forward and foot is forced on throttle...car accelerates moves weight back and foot lifts off and process repeats.

wtf is your seat sitting on a single spring bouncing around in your cabin? :)

On a semi-related note... has anyone ever had trouble with atmospheric BOVs causing your car to shudder hardcore when you release the throttle slowly? Does that mean it's too tight?

I think I had a turbosmart on for a while for funsies but have gone back to a stock GTR bov.

I just drove to subi and did some experimenting on the terrible roads around there.

I think my driving style has been to control the throttle with the middle/arch of my foot, this means that any involuntary movements of my foot due to acceleration/deceleration have quite alot of leverage over the throttle. If I use my toes or ball of foot then bumps have less effect.

It just feels a bit unnatural and I'll have to get used to it.

not sure what its called but know how you prevent it

its called "throttle control" - it sounds stupid I know..

(dad taught me when I started 4WDing)

Wait so you dont know what its called... but its called throttle control :)

Lol i love how this thread is two pages of trying to figure out what the OP means haha.

I have definitely experienced what X-Trail was saying, with the too low revs causing the car to lurch horribly. Because of that, i engine brake down to about 20kms if im slowing to a stop, but i don't bother going to 1st, i just put it in neutral otherwise it jumps a bit.

But i don't see how going over a bump would cause that. From what Joe is saying it is the bump causing the car to bounce up which brings the accelerator up against his foot (I can't imagine it is G-forces pushing your foot down lol, that would be some insane vertical G's), and then this occurs several times causing the car to lurch... Am i on the right track Joe?

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Hi all,   long time listener, first time caller   i was wondering if anyone can help me identify a transistor on the climate control unit board that decided to fry itself   I've circled it in the attached photo   any help would be appreciated
    • I mean, I got two VASS engineers to refuse to cert my own coilovers stating those very laws. Appendix B makes it pretty clear what it considers 'Variable Suspension' to be. In my lived experience they can't certify something that isn't actually in the list as something that requires certification. In the VASS engineering checklist they have to complete (LS3/NCOP11) and sign on there is nothing there. All the references inside NCOP11 state that if it's variable by the driver that height needs to maintain 100mm while the car is in motion. It states the car is lowered lowering blocks and other types of things are acceptable. Dialling out a shock is about as 'user adjustable' as changing any other suspension component lol. I wanted to have it signed off to dissuade HWP and RWC testers to state the suspension is legal to avoid having this discussion with them. The real problem is that Police and RWC/Pink/Blue slip people will say it needs engineering, and the engineers will state it doesn't need engineering. It is hugely irritating when aforementioned people get all "i know the rules mate feck off" when they don't, and the actual engineers are pleasant as all hell and do know the rules. Cars failing RWC for things that aren't listed in the RWC requirements is another thing here entirely!
    • I don't. I mean, mine's not a GTR, but it is a 32 with a lot of GTR stuff on it. But regardless, I typically buy from local suppliers. Getting stuff from Japan is seldom worth the pain. Buying from RHDJapan usually ends up in the final total of your basket being about double what you thought it would be, after all the bullshit fees and such are added on.
    • The hydrocarbon component of E10 can be shittier, and is in fact, shittier, than that used in normal 91RON fuel. That's because the octane boost provided by the ethanol allows them to use stuff that doesn't make the grade without the help. The 1c/L saving typically available on E10 is going to be massively overridden by the increased consumption caused by the ethanol and the crappier HC (ie the HCs will be less dense, meaning that there will definitely be less energy per unit volume than for more dense HCs). That is one of the reasons why P98 will return better fuel consumption than 91 does, even with the ignition timing completely fixed. There is more energy per unit volume because the HCs used in 98 are higher density than in the lawnmower fuel.
    • No, I'd suggest that that is the checklist for pneumatic/hydraulic adjustable systems. I would say, based on my years of reading and complying with Australian Standards and similar regulations, that the narrow interpretation of Clause 3.2 b would be the preferred/expected/intended one, by the author, and those using the standard. Wishful thinking need not apply.
×
×
  • Create New...