Re: 2005 Santa Fe Accelerator
 

> I don't think it'll significantly affect your fuel mileage...

Since I'm doing primarily highway driving you're probably right. If I
were mostly a city driver I'd disagree.

Re: 2005 Santa Fe Accelerator
 

Mike Marlow wrote:

> Can't for the live of me understand why such a simple and reliable system as
> has been in place for every car now for years (cable) would ever be replaced
> by an electronic equivalent(?). Sometimes improvement is not really.

Yes, even though my degrees are in CS and EE, even I don't think that
EVERYTHING has to be controlled with electronics and software! It is
like the headlights on my 03 Dodge minivan. They are controlled via the
BCM rather than directly switched like my 96 Plymouth minivan. There is
a noticeable delay between flipping the switch and having the lights
change from low to high and back. I'm not really sure that having the
computer dim the headlights is really progress, especially when there is
a detectable delay. They either should use a faster processor or go
back to a relay.

I assume the Sonata is controlled by computer also, but I haven't
noticed any significant delay in the dimmer switch, unlike the throttle
which has a noticeable delay and then too much gain once it begins to
move. It also seems to be rate sensitive. It feels, to me anyway, that
the faster I move the throttle the faster it responds, but not linearly
with speed as one would expect. It seems that moving the throttle twice
as fast gets 3-4 times the rate of RPM increase.


Matt

Re: 2005 Santa Fe Accelerator
 

Mike Marlow wrote:

> Can't for the live of me understand why such a simple and reliable system as
> has been in place for every car now for years (cable) would ever be replaced
> by an electronic equivalent(?). Sometimes improvement is not really.

Yes, even though my degrees are in CS and EE, even I don't think that
EVERYTHING has to be controlled with electronics and software! It is
like the headlights on my 03 Dodge minivan. They are controlled via the
BCM rather than directly switched like my 96 Plymouth minivan. There is
a noticeable delay between flipping the switch and having the lights
change from low to high and back. I'm not really sure that having the
computer dim the headlights is really progress, especially when there is
a detectable delay. They either should use a faster processor or go
back to a relay.

I assume the Sonata is controlled by computer also, but I haven't
noticed any significant delay in the dimmer switch, unlike the throttle
which has a noticeable delay and then too much gain once it begins to
move. It also seems to be rate sensitive. It feels, to me anyway, that
the faster I move the throttle the faster it responds, but not linearly
with speed as one would expect. It seems that moving the throttle twice
as fast gets 3-4 times the rate of RPM increase.


Matt

Re: 2005 Santa Fe Accelerator
 

Mike Marlow wrote:

> Can't for the live of me understand why such a simple and reliable system as
> has been in place for every car now for years (cable) would ever be replaced
> by an electronic equivalent(?). Sometimes improvement is not really.

Yes, even though my degrees are in CS and EE, even I don't think that
EVERYTHING has to be controlled with electronics and software! It is
like the headlights on my 03 Dodge minivan. They are controlled via the
BCM rather than directly switched like my 96 Plymouth minivan. There is
a noticeable delay between flipping the switch and having the lights
change from low to high and back. I'm not really sure that having the
computer dim the headlights is really progress, especially when there is
a detectable delay. They either should use a faster processor or go
back to a relay.

I assume the Sonata is controlled by computer also, but I haven't
noticed any significant delay in the dimmer switch, unlike the throttle
which has a noticeable delay and then too much gain once it begins to
move. It also seems to be rate sensitive. It feels, to me anyway, that
the faster I move the throttle the faster it responds, but not linearly
with speed as one would expect. It seems that moving the throttle twice
as fast gets 3-4 times the rate of RPM increase.


Matt

Re: 2005 Santa Fe Accelerator
 

hyundaitech wrote:

> Auto manufacturers can control emissions better with electronic throttle.
> You stomp the pedal, the computer opens the throttle plate gradually as it
> sees fit. Prevents a large amount of fuel dumping. Then again, it also
> can prevent the car from doing what you want it to. I'm not sold on the
> idea that electronic throttle is the way to go.

But even cars with cable actuated throttles can do this as the throttle
only controls the butterfly (air flow), the computer still controls the
fuel injection.


Matt

Re: 2005 Santa Fe Accelerator
 

hyundaitech wrote:

> Auto manufacturers can control emissions better with electronic throttle.
> You stomp the pedal, the computer opens the throttle plate gradually as it
> sees fit. Prevents a large amount of fuel dumping. Then again, it also
> can prevent the car from doing what you want it to. I'm not sold on the
> idea that electronic throttle is the way to go.

But even cars with cable actuated throttles can do this as the throttle
only controls the butterfly (air flow), the computer still controls the
fuel injection.


Matt

Re: 2005 Santa Fe Accelerator
 

hyundaitech wrote:

> Auto manufacturers can control emissions better with electronic throttle.
> You stomp the pedal, the computer opens the throttle plate gradually as it
> sees fit. Prevents a large amount of fuel dumping. Then again, it also
> can prevent the car from doing what you want it to. I'm not sold on the
> idea that electronic throttle is the way to go.

But even cars with cable actuated throttles can do this as the throttle
only controls the butterfly (air flow), the computer still controls the
fuel injection.


Matt

Re: 2005 Santa Fe Accelerator
 

> Presumably, the lower compression results in better durability.

That may well be true (at least theoretically), but with gasoline at
$2+/gal (and almost certain to at LEAST double over the next decade)
it's going to take an awful lot of increased durability to even come
close to offseting that extra cost due to decreased fuel
efficiency...especially considering how long most engines go now days
without any significant maintenance anyway. Add in the fact that my
new powertrain is warranteed for 10 years and I fail to see the benefit
of sacrificing mileage (especially when the vehicle is newer, smaller
and ligher) for some potential reduction in engine cylinder wear.

Re: 2005 Santa Fe Accelerator
 

> Presumably, the lower compression results in better durability.

That may well be true (at least theoretically), but with gasoline at
$2+/gal (and almost certain to at LEAST double over the next decade)
it's going to take an awful lot of increased durability to even come
close to offseting that extra cost due to decreased fuel
efficiency...especially considering how long most engines go now days
without any significant maintenance anyway. Add in the fact that my
new powertrain is warranteed for 10 years and I fail to see the benefit
of sacrificing mileage (especially when the vehicle is newer, smaller
and ligher) for some potential reduction in engine cylinder wear.

Re: 2005 Santa Fe Accelerator
 

> Presumably, the lower compression results in better durability.

That may well be true (at least theoretically), but with gasoline at
$2+/gal (and almost certain to at LEAST double over the next decade)
it's going to take an awful lot of increased durability to even come
close to offseting that extra cost due to decreased fuel
efficiency...especially considering how long most engines go now days
without any significant maintenance anyway. Add in the fact that my
new powertrain is warranteed for 10 years and I fail to see the benefit
of sacrificing mileage (especially when the vehicle is newer, smaller
and ligher) for some potential reduction in engine cylinder wear.

Re: 2005 Santa Fe Accelerator
 

WuzYoungOnceToo wrote:
> > I experienced something a bit different from the way you are describing it
> > with my 2005 3.5L Santa Fe.
> >
> > The car would either hesitate when the gas was depressed or surge as if I
> > had tromped on it. The dealer reprogrammed the ETCS and this fixed it. I
> > believe these is a TSB out for the problem as well.
>
> It's more mechanical in nature (and yes, I realize its an electronic
> accelerator). The problem is that the pedel is very "stiff" (for lack
> of a better word) when I first begin to apply pressure to it with my
> foot. Rather than giving way gradually and smoothly, it "breaks" in
> that it just suddenly gives way. As a result, acceleration is also
> sudden and jerky from a dead stop. I can overcome it with effort by
> stiffening my foot and ankle muscles so that the pressure I apply is
> even and compensates for the sudden give by the pedel.

Re: 2005 Santa Fe Accelerator
 

WuzYoungOnceToo wrote:
> > I experienced something a bit different from the way you are describing it
> > with my 2005 3.5L Santa Fe.
> >
> > The car would either hesitate when the gas was depressed or surge as if I
> > had tromped on it. The dealer reprogrammed the ETCS and this fixed it. I
> > believe these is a TSB out for the problem as well.
>
> It's more mechanical in nature (and yes, I realize its an electronic
> accelerator). The problem is that the pedel is very "stiff" (for lack
> of a better word) when I first begin to apply pressure to it with my
> foot. Rather than giving way gradually and smoothly, it "breaks" in
> that it just suddenly gives way. As a result, acceleration is also
> sudden and jerky from a dead stop. I can overcome it with effort by
> stiffening my foot and ankle muscles so that the pressure I apply is
> even and compensates for the sudden give by the pedel.

Re: 2005 Santa Fe Accelerator
 

WuzYoungOnceToo wrote:
> > I experienced something a bit different from the way you are describing it
> > with my 2005 3.5L Santa Fe.
> >
> > The car would either hesitate when the gas was depressed or surge as if I
> > had tromped on it. The dealer reprogrammed the ETCS and this fixed it. I
> > believe these is a TSB out for the problem as well.
>
> It's more mechanical in nature (and yes, I realize its an electronic
> accelerator). The problem is that the pedel is very "stiff" (for lack
> of a better word) when I first begin to apply pressure to it with my
> foot. Rather than giving way gradually and smoothly, it "breaks" in
> that it just suddenly gives way. As a result, acceleration is also
> sudden and jerky from a dead stop. I can overcome it with effort by
> stiffening my foot and ankle muscles so that the pressure I apply is
> even and compensates for the sudden give by the pedel.

Re: 2005 Santa Fe Accelerator
 

Have Hyundai or their dealerships recognized this acceleration problem?



WuzYoungOnceToo wrote:
> > I experienced something a bit different from the way you are describing it
> > with my 2005 3.5L Santa Fe.
> >
> > The car would either hesitate when the gas was depressed or surge as if I
> > had tromped on it. The dealer reprogrammed the ETCS and this fixed it. I
> > believe these is a TSB out for the problem as well.
>
> It's more mechanical in nature (and yes, I realize its an electronic
> accelerator). The problem is that the pedel is very "stiff" (for lack
> of a better word) when I first begin to apply pressure to it with my
> foot. Rather than giving way gradually and smoothly, it "breaks" in
> that it just suddenly gives way. As a result, acceleration is also
> sudden and jerky from a dead stop. I can overcome it with effort by
> stiffening my foot and ankle muscles so that the pressure I apply is
> even and compensates for the sudden gi

ve by the pedel.

Re: 2005 Santa Fe Accelerator
 

Have Hyundai or their dealerships recognized this acceleration problem?



WuzYoungOnceToo wrote:
> > I experienced something a bit different from the way you are describing it
> > with my 2005 3.5L Santa Fe.
> >
> > The car would either hesitate when the gas was depressed or surge as if I
> > had tromped on it. The dealer reprogrammed the ETCS and this fixed it. I
> > believe these is a TSB out for the problem as well.
>
> It's more mechanical in nature (and yes, I realize its an electronic
> accelerator). The problem is that the pedel is very "stiff" (for lack
> of a better word) when I first begin to apply pressure to it with my
> foot. Rather than giving way gradually and smoothly, it "breaks" in
> that it just suddenly gives way. As a result, acceleration is also
> sudden and jerky from a dead stop. I can overcome it with effort by
> stiffening my foot and ankle muscles so that the pressure I apply is
> even and compensates for the sudden gi

ve by the pedel.