[gmarch]

I haven't seen anyone mention this here (could be my searching skills), but have an Ultragauge mounted in my car, and I have one of the gauges showing engine temperature (water).

What I noticed, and it must be fore emissions, is that when I'm in Efficient engine mapping, the coolant temp rises to about 225F. When in Sports or Sports+, the temp drops to about 175F. Although, today, it was 45F outside, and it only dropped to 200F.

Has anyone else noticed this?

[bearminimum]

sport and sport plus runs the auxiliary coolers and main cooling fan harder. it's meant to keep the car cooler when driven hard by giving it additional cooling capacity. You can actually hear the fans activating when you switch modes

[ROASTM]

Yes - when in sports + (I believe only sports+), the system increases the cooling ability (not sure what all this entails), but the oil temps and coolant temps both decrease relatively significantly - when I'm in sport+, my oil temp comes down to the first dash on the digital display in the cluster, and when in efficient or sport, the oil temp typically stays between the first and second dashes.

[pz619]

Efficient and sport should have the same cooling maps. Sport+ should enable the max cooling features.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by pz619

Efficient and sport should have the same cooling maps. Sport+ should enable the max cooling features.

I believe this is correct. This is also what frustrates me about the throttle mapping. Sport+ is stupidly sensitive. Efficient is the only one close to linear. I apologize to another poster who I disputed on this in another thread. I was wrong; after more time with the car I can definitely say that Efficient is how the throttle should behave all the time.

[MooMooM2]

Yah thats what I notice too and why I always run the car on efficient or sport before the oil comes to temp since it will do it way faster.

[captain slowly]

Interesting. My car goes into sport+ the second I start the car not because I live my life a quarter mile at a time, but because I love the throttle response. Wonder if I'm hurting it long term...

[AlpsRider]

Originally Posted by captain slowly

Interesting. My car goes into sport+ the second I start the car not because I live my life a quarter mile at a time, but because I love the throttle response. Wonder if I'm hurting it long term...

I'm a bit OCD about cold engines. I drive my car super easy until the oil temp goes up. You can still drive it easy in Sport+ but it is a challenge!

[Mar1usz]

Yes noticed the temp difference in different modes as well. If you run in Sport + and put your hand on the intercooler it will feel cool to the touch.

[captain slowly]

Originally Posted by AlpsRider

I'm a bit OCD about cold engines. I drive my car super easy until the oil temp goes up. You can still drive it easy in Sport+ but it is a challenge!

I'm easy on it until its up to temp, but I just can't stand the throttle response in efficient so its always in sport+. Today I even tried to be in efficient for a while, but its just so dull... the only thing I can see it being useful for is a long highway trip so at least it'd be quieter.

[MooMooM2]

Then run it in sport until its up to temp, it will get there sooooooo much faster than if you start it in sports +

[Davil]

Originally Posted by chris719

I believe this is correct. This is also what frustrates me about the throttle mapping. Sport+ is stupidly sensitive. Efficient is the only one close to linear. I apologize to another poster who I disputed on this in another thread. I was wrong; after more time with the car I can definitely say that Efficient is how the throttle should behave all the time.

Yes with you there. The throttle is just binary in Sport+. Plus you get those ridiculous look at me firework sounds (at least in my old '18 model anyway).

In the CS I also love efficient. Almost feels naturally aspirated, turns off ASD, and exhaust sounds the same in every mode in this car, deeper, louder and best of all no fireworks.

[AlpsRider]

Originally Posted by Davil

Yes with you there. The throttle is just binary in Sport+. Plus you get those ridiculous look at me firework sounds (at least in my old '18 model anyway).

In the CS I also love efficient. Almost feels naturally aspirated, turns off ASD, and exhaust sounds the same in every mode in this car, deeper, louder and best of all no fireworks.

I wish there was a way to control throttle response independently of mode. AFAIK even BM3 doesn't let you mess around with throttle response.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by AlpsRider

I wish there was a way to control throttle response independently of mode. AFAIK even BM3 doesn't let you mess around with throttle response.

One could probably design a device to attempt to correct the throttle curve by altering the output of the pedal position sensor. The problem would be that you probably have already lost significant resolution on the back-end. I would assume the signal is digitized and probably not with more than a 12 or 14-bit ADC.

Anyone know how the pedal position sensor works on an M2? I assume it's Hall Effect or some kind of inductive sensor rather than an old school potentiometer. If it's analog output, there is at least the possibility of making it feel more normal.

https://www.infineon.com/dgdl/AppNot...ng_Rev.1.0.pdf

It would do the opposite of what those piece of crap Sprint Booster type devices do.

[AlpsRider]

My main gripe is that I like to use Sport+ on hot days in the mountain twisties because the oil coolers keep the temps lower. However the sensitive throttle response of Sport+ lead to unintended power surges in tight corners.

[ASAP]

I warm the car up in Sport and then almost exclusively drive in SP+.

Never use efficient... the laggy throttle just bothers me to no end.

[Enabled]

The throttle response is definitely (and easily) editable in the tune. A simple scaling device may fix it in one spot, and really mess it up in another, especially for non-linear curves, and speed/gear depended throttle maps.

I dislike efficient mode because there is so much software prefiltering for power entry, which is perceived as lag. This is also combined with some anti traction loss software routines as well, it's not just throttle response at play in efficient mode.
Sports+ is a bit too touchy yes.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by Enabled

The throttle response is definitely (and easily) editable in the tune. A simple scaling device may fix it in one spot, and really mess it up in another, especially for non-linear curves, and speed/gear depended throttle maps.

I dislike efficient mode because there is so much software prefiltering for power entry, which is perceived as lag. This is also combined with some anti traction loss software routines as well, it's not just throttle response at play in efficient mode.
Sports+ is a bit too touchy yes.

Yeah, I wouldn't recommend a simple scaler, but a high-order polynomial fit or a deep look-up table.

Still, it's much less preferable than altering it in the firmware as you mention. I wasn't aware there are traction control implications in Efficient. Is that observed behavior or how did you find that out?

The main issue with any scaling device if you are trying to "attenuate" is the loss of resolution because there's effectively a gain in the firmware after you've attenuated which means your minimum step is probably much larger than the LSB.

[Enabled]

Yea, my latest dive into the tune involves some of the torque entry delays that are programmed in the efficient modes. This is that lag that you feel in efficient mode when floored, which is completely different in sport mode.

[AlpsRider]

Originally Posted by chris719

Yeah, I wouldn't recommend a simple scaler, but a high-order polynomial fit or a deep look-up table.

Still, it's much less preferable than altering it in the firmware as you mention. I wasn't aware there are traction control implications in Efficient. Is that observed behavior or how did you find that out?

The main issue with any scaling device if you are trying to "attenuate" is the loss of resolution because there's effectively a gain in the firmware after you've attenuated which means your minimum step is probably much larger than the LSB.

The M2C allows control of the traction control modes indepent of the sport or effecient mode. The OGM2 has a different system.

[chris719]

Originally Posted by AlpsRider

The M2C allows control of the traction control modes indepent of the sport or effecient mode. The OGM2 has a different system.

MDM and DSC on/off, yes. Enabled has an M2C and he seems to think there are other things going on.

[AlpsRider]

Originally Posted by chris719

MDM and DSC on/off, yes. Enabled has an M2C and he seems to think there are other things going on.

Torque entry delays are possible. You can reduce torque with the Stage 1 map also, % by gear.