Quote:

---

Quote:

---

They make carb'd intakes for new Hemi's so I don't see why not.

---

You don't see why you can't simply remove a stepper motor from the system because you don't know, or want to know, how EFI and ECUs work. Your answer to everything is a carburetor, and that's not what the OP is trying to do here.

---

oh boy you again....I know how it all works. I was stating that there are intakes and carbs on the market for this application, if one wants to do away with the drive by wire. I didn't even get into mounts, exhaust, x-member, trans tunnel and all the other mods that will need to be done to install that driveline in an old e-body.

maybe he should read the post about EFI'ing a 5.9 before he tries to tackle this "upgrade"

I would think that you could replace the drive by wire with a cable. The engine is not going to know if it is being opened up by a cable via your right foot or a solenoid/servo via a wire.
People see these fancy nice cars in magazine and think wow that's cool I should do that. But most have no idea on how expensive and challenging the work will be. That needs to be considered before one spends dime one.

Quote:

---

I would think that you could replace the drive by wire with a cable. The engine is not going to know if it is being opened up by a cable via your right foot or a solenoid/servo via a wire.
People see these fancy nice cars in magazine and think wow that's cool I should do that.

---

It may not know how it opened, but it will know if it opens improperly compared to what was commanded. If the ECU is sending a command to a stepper motor, it corresponds to a certain throttle opening, which is fed back via a TPS signal. (I have heard some DBW systems have 2 TPS for redundancy).

If that TPS signal doesn't match the command, which it probably won't because the TPS signal is now coming from a cable-controlled TB, do you think the ECU will just ignore it? No, it will have some response, and I'd bet that response will involve a commanded drop in engien power. It's a safety issue.

It's already been mentioned that the throttle lag was programed in for drivetrain protection, so the ECM is expecting a lag in TPS feedback. MAF and MAP would confirm that throttle opening exceeded command.

This retrofit is significantly tougher than a 5.0->5.9, which is 20-year old EFI stuff.

Quote:

---

But most have no idea on how expensive and challenging the work will be. That needs to be considered before one spends dime one.

---

Quote:

---

I cant answer this but I got a question, why would you want this? Seeing Toyota has their issues with runaway throttles...I would trust a cable over a wire. good luck on what ever you choose, and be safe.

---

I agree, for that reason I’d rather have a cable.

About 10 years ago at my last job I needed to install a remote foot throttle on a GMC truck (one of the last 454s, and it was DBW EFI) and the PTO provisions in the ECM were not configured for a variable throttle. So we took a 2nd footpedal and wired relays in each of the TPS wires -- each relay switched between the corresponding wire on one pedal or the other. All the relays were triggered by the same circuit (with a few safety interlocks), and they switched over so quickly that the engine ECM didn’t know the difference.

I told you all of that so when I tell you all of this it’ll make more sense:
I would bet that a person could install one (or several) normally-closed relays inline with 'something' on the engine and wire those relays to open via a 'kill' switch on the dash. Perhaps in the power wires to the throttle stepper motor (assuming there is a return spring somewhere), perhaps in the power to the injectors (some or all), maybe to the fuel pump (although that could cause a few seconds of lean AFs and possible engine damage, but if the throttle runs away for some reason I think that could be a smaller concern). If a crafty person put some thought to it I’d bet he could create a simple electrical circuit that would allow you to kick the engine into reduced power or a closed throttle.

Probably should go for the reduced power in case you get stuck on railroad tracks.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

They make carb'd intakes for new Hemi's so I don't see why not.

---

You don't see why you can't simply remove a stepper motor from the system because you don't know, or want to know, how EFI and ECUs work. Your answer to everything is a carburetor, and that's not what the OP is trying to do here.

---

oh boy you again....I know how it all works. I was stating that there are intakes and carbs on the market for this application, if one wants to do away with the drive by wire. I didn't even get into mounts, exhaust, x-member, trans tunnel and all the other mods that will need to be done to install that driveline in an old e-body.

maybe he should read the post about EFI'ing a 5.9 before he tries to tackle this "upgrade"


People see these fancy nice cars in magazine and think wow that's cool I should do that. But most have no idea on how expensive and challenging the work will be. That needs to be considered before one spends dime one.

---

I have researched many articles on any thing that has to do with this swap. I know most of what I am in for, but I have not found any articles that address the D.B.W. issue. Probably because it realy is not an issue, the way it sounds. That being said, I have never attempted any project that even comes close to this magnitude. I feel confident that I can pull it off with the help of all of you brainiacs, [and I mean that in a good way]. I read Moparts Q&A almost every night, and I am impressed with the amount of knowledge that is shared here every day. I just wish that all of you were my neighbors so you could come over and show me, in person, the things that are way over my head when I read them on here.

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

I cant answer this but I got a question, why would you want this? Seeing Toyota has their issues with runaway throttles...I would trust a cable over a wire. good luck on what ever you choose, and be safe.

---

I would probably trust a cable over a wire also, but it is not a Toyota so I should be safe. If I do have a run away throttle, then I guess I'll get to see if I can still drive like I use to.

I agree, for that reason I’d rather have a cable.

About 10 years ago at my last job I needed to install a remote foot throttle on a GMC truck (one of the last 454s, and it was DBW EFI) and the PTO provisions in the ECM were not configured for a variable throttle. So we took a 2nd footpedal and wired relays in each of the TPS wires -- each relay switched between the corresponding wire on one pedal or the other. All the relays were triggered by the same circuit (with a few safety interlocks), and they switched over so quickly that the engine ECM didn’t know the difference.

I told you all of that so when I tell you all of this it’ll make more sense:
I would bet that a person could install one (or several) normally-closed relays inline with 'something' on the engine and wire those relays to open via a 'kill' switch on the dash. Perhaps in the power wires to the throttle stepper motor (assuming there is a return spring somewhere), perhaps in the power to the injectors (some or all), maybe to the fuel pump (although that could cause a few seconds of lean AFs and possible engine damage, but if the throttle runs away for some reason I think that could be a smaller concern). If a crafty person put some thought to it I’d bet he could create a simple electrical circuit that would allow you to kick the engine into reduced power or a closed throttle.

Probably should go for the reduced power in case you get stuck on railroad tracks.

---

Quote:

---

Also, what motors are classified as a stepper motors? That term is new to me.

---

Quote:

---

Mine is drive by wire. I went with the black box under hood from and 04 ram. I couldnt come up with a way to mount the electronic pedal that felt comfortable to me. You can see the box in the pic by the power brake booster.

---