Piston Slap: According to the Throttle Position Sensor…
Brian writes:

Sajeev,

This is a weird one, but I figured you would enjoy it. I have owned an ’88 Accord LX-i five speed hatch for a while. One day, driving along, I noticed that it seemed to be coasting easier than normal. When I approached a red light, I found out why: 3,000 rpm was my new idle speed. I stopped, and before I could even think of why this was happening, the idle returned to normal. Once underway, 3,000 rpm was again the new idle speed. Subsequently, I tried many things. This is not related to the brakes, not related to the throttle input, not related to absolutely anything other then wheel speed. In the most stark example, idling on a slight incline, I can just release the parking brake and, once rolling, the idle jumps to 3,000 rpm. Using only the parking brake to stop once again, the idle returns to normal. No CELs or anything else strange happens during this.

I found that it would idle normally if I disconnected the IACV. This worked fine, but when using the A/C it can no longer compensate, so that was not ideal. I also could make it work if I disconnected the speedometer cable, so I did that for a while before really missing my speedometer and cruise control. I tried another way, which was to disconnect the electrical connections between the speedometer and the rest of the gauge cluster. This works, but I get no cruise control, and a CEL only if I coast with no throttle input for too long, which is strange.

I have tried bleeding the IACV, replacing the IACV, replacing and adjusting the throttle position sensor, replacing the entire gauge cluster (which had the same issue, but seemed to change the high idle RPM weirdly enough, but still wonky-high). Also, I did check all grounds and the solder joints in the ECU.

Here is my long standing build/upkeep thread, and here is a terrible video.

Read more
  • W Conrad I'm not afraid of them, but they aren't needed for everyone or everywhere. Long haul and highway driving sure, but in the city, nope.
  • Jalop1991 In a manner similar to PHEV being the correct answer, I declare RPVs to be the correct answer here.We're doing it with certain aircraft; why not with cars on the ground, using hardware and tools like Telsa's "FSD" or GM's "SuperCruise" as the base?Take the local Uber driver out of the car, and put him in a professional centralized environment from where he drives me around. The system and the individual car can have awareness as well as gates, but he's responsible for the driving.Put the tech into my car, and let me buy it as needed. I need someone else to drive me home; hit the button and voila, I've hired a driver for the moment. I don't want to drive 11 hours to my vacation spot; hire the remote pilot for that. When I get there, I have my car and he's still at his normal location, piloting cars for other people.The system would allow for driver rest period, like what's required for truckers, so I might end up with multiple people driving me to the coast. I don't care. And they don't have to be physically with me, therefore they can be way cheaper.Charge taxi-type per-mile rates. For long drives, offer per-trip rates. Offer subscriptions, including miles/hours. Whatever.(And for grins, dress the remote pilots all as Johnnie.)Start this out with big rigs. Take the trucker away from the long haul driving, and let him be there for emergencies and the short haul parts of the trip.And in a manner similar to PHEVs being discredited, I fully expect to be razzed for this brilliant idea (not unlike how Alan Kay wasn't recognized until many many years later for his Dynabook vision).
  • B-BodyBuick84 Not afraid of AV's as I highly doubt they will ever be %100 viable for our roads. Stop-and-go downtown city or rush hour highway traffic? I can see that, but otherwise there's simply too many variables. Bad weather conditions, faded road lines or markings, reflective surfaces with glare, etc. There's also the issue of cultural norms. About a decade ago there was actually an online test called 'The Morality Machine' one could do online where you were in control of an AV and choose what action to take when a crash was inevitable. I think something like 2.5 million people across the world participated? For example, do you hit and most likely kill the elderly couple strolling across the crosswalk or crash the vehicle into a cement barrier and almost certainly cause the death of the vehicle occupants? What if it's a parent and child? In N. America 98% of people choose to hit the elderly couple and save themselves while in Asia, the exact opposite happened where 98% choose to hit the parent and child. Why? Cultural differences. Asia puts a lot of emphasis on respecting their elderly while N. America has a culture of 'save/ protect the children'. Are these AV's going to respect that culture? Is a VW Jetta or Buick Envision AV going to have different programming depending on whether it's sold in Canada or Taiwan? how's that going to effect legislation and legal battles when a crash inevitibly does happen? These are the true barriers to mass AV adoption, and in the 10 years since that test came out, there has been zero answers or progress on this matter. So no, I'm not afraid of AV's simply because with the exception of a few specific situations, most avenues are going to prove to be a dead-end for automakers.
  • Mike Bradley Autonomous cars were developed in Silicon Valley. For new products there, the standard business plan is to put a barely-functioning product on the market right away and wait for the early-adopter customers to find the flaws. That's exactly what's happened. Detroit's plan is pretty much the opposite, but Detroit isn't developing this product. That's why dealers, for instance, haven't been trained in the cars.
  • Dartman https://apnews.com/article/artificial-intelligence-fighter-jets-air-force-6a1100c96a73ca9b7f41cbd6a2753fdaAutonomous/Ai is here now. The question is implementation and acceptance.