Chevy Colorado & GMC Canyon banner

1 - 14 of 14 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
has anyone noticed a dead spot on accel. at about 1/4 pedal. it even does it sitting in driveway in park if you push the pedal down it will rev to about 2000 rpm then go flat for about 1/4 more pedal is pushed down then it will rev up more?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,115 Posts
Search for "Chuggle" "Chug" or lag and you'll find plenty of threads on the topic.

Yes it's a very well known and documented issue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,605 Posts
has anyone noticed a dead spot on accel. at about 1/4 pedal. it even does it sitting in driveway in park if you push the pedal down it will rev to about 2000 rpm then go flat for about 1/4 more pedal is pushed down then it will rev up more?
That dead zone is a known LLT/LFX issue on the Camaro forum. My wife's and I old Camaro's did it, and my Z71 does it, but not as pronounced. The way I fixed it on my LFX Camaro was to install a different throttle body with a CNC machined throat, that was smoothed out to the butterfly. The claim was a turbulence air pocket is caused by that little lip, coupled with the butterfly's gap at that position, hiders smooth, direct airflow into the TB. Or, judiciously apply more pedal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,304 Posts
  • Like
Reactions: RatRacer

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,280 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,115 Posts
I was reading about Electronic throttle controllers the other day, I wonder if those would help with this situation.

https://www.carid.com/articles/why-should-i-add-throttle-controller.html

Maybe @CarID can offer their thoughts on on this?

.
Most of the tunes increase the throttle response similar to what a controller would do. The sport mode on Trifecta is totally different than stock or the eco mode. It actually takes some getting used to the increased response.

Interesting article though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,280 Posts
Most of the tunes increase the throttle response similar to what a controller would do. The sport mode on Trifecta is totally different than stock or the eco mode. It actually takes some getting used to the increased response.

Interesting article though.

I joined a Facebook group for the Aussie Holden Colorado & I saw some people talking about the throttle controllers so that's what brought it to my attention. The newer vehicles with the "drive by wire" have a different feel than the older mechanical accelerator pedal feel so maybe that's throwing some people off. Although I'm not saying the trans programing for fuel economy is not a problem.

Knock on wood, but for whatever reason I haven't noticed any "Chuggle" or throttle dead spots on my truck. Maybe some of it is the truck (trans programing) adapting to how the driver drives, but it could also be the driver learning what input the truck needs to get the desired results.

I'm actually quite impressed with the HP they get from the naturally aspirated 3.6L engines in our trucks, light years ahead of the 4.3L Vortec I had in my 2001 ZR2 & probably more power than many V8's that were in the mid 80's trucks. Heck a 71 Chevelle SS with the min 350 2 barrel was only rated at 245 gross HP, our truck would of been GROUND POUNDERS back in the day! LOL
.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,304 Posts
I joined a Facebook group for the Aussie Holden Colorado & I saw some people talking about the throttle controllers so that's what brought it to my attention. The newer vehicles with the "drive by wire" have a different feel than the older mechanical accelerator pedal feel so maybe that's throwing some people off. Although I'm not saying the trans programing for fuel economy is not a problem.

Knock on wood, but for whatever reason I haven't noticed any "Chuggle" or throttle dead spots on my truck. Maybe some of it is the truck (trans programing) adapting to how the driver drives, but it could also be the driver learning what input the truck needs to get the desired results.

I'm actually quite impressed with the HP they get from the naturally aspirated 3.6L engines in our trucks, light years ahead of the 4.3L Vortec I had in my 2001 ZR2 & probably more power than many V8's that were in the mid 80's trucks. Heck a 71 Chevelle SS with the min 350 2 barrel was only rated at 245 gross HP, our truck would of been GROUND POUNDERS back in the day! LOL
.
My 1995 C1500 with the 4.3L had 195 HP at 4600 RPMs and 260 ft-lbs torque at 2800 RPMs.

My 2001 Tahoe with 5.3L had 285 HP at 5200 RPMs and 325 ft-lbs at 4000 RPMs. (Curb weight, 2WD is 4,828 lbs)

My 2015 Canyon has 305 HP at 6800 RPMs and 269 ft-lbs at 4000 RPMs. (curb weight, 2WD is ~4,200 pounds, 86% of the Tahoe.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,280 Posts
My 1995 C1500 with the 4.3L had 195 HP at 4600 RPMs and 260 ft-lbs torque at 2800 RPMs.

My 2001 Tahoe with 5.3L had 285 HP at 5200 RPMs and 325 ft-lbs at 4000 RPMs. (Curb weight, 2WD is 4,828 lbs)

My 2015 Canyon has 305 HP at 6800 RPMs and 269 ft-lbs at 4000 RPMs. (curb weight, 2WD is ~4,200 pounds, 86% of the Tahoe.)
Definitely less Torque out of the smaller displacement engines & to get the higher HP numbers they have to spin them up to a little higher RPM.

Still, fairly impressive IMO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,458 Posts
Could this also be related to VVT?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,207 Posts
No

You do realize that when in park, there's an engine rev limiter?


.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,844 Posts
No

You do realize that when in park, there's an engine rev limiter?


.
I hold my foot down on the accelerator in park and my engine won't rev all the way up and explode. Stupid GM. Someone should fix that!
 
  • Like
Reactions: CaryBosse
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Top