Fast idle linkage finished.

Voila
:clapping:

A West Marine part.
https://www.westmarine.com/buy/c-sherman-johnson--lifeline-adjusters--P002_066_002_511?pCode=127714


Pic 1 on
Pic 2 off- the screw (3/16) is tight & off rotation stays put.
Pic 3 part needed.
Pic 4 now you will want this too?

The key ring is to keep the stud from turning.
There is some yellow teflon tape bound under the nut, I added to keep the nut from turning when "off".
You do have to baby-sit it & press up or down to arrive at the RPMs you want 1800 seems to be reported as good. I shoot for 2000. It is fickle to be sure.

Operation
I rotate yoke & set the rod on the "ledge" adjacent to the plug.
Play with pedal up or down to get my 1800. Not too much downward as even a slight tap will release it completely.

When done
Rotate the yoke to about vertical or beyond.

Safety musings

Hmm. I see the visual concerns you all have. Yet let someone produce the same linkage and let them then pipe up. I have tried to get it to catch "on" without using 1 hand (& foot) and I have nothing to be concerned about.
This is really a delightful out come as I too had concerns. I have chewed on this for a long time. I have size 14 shoes yet I always use my toe area and there is never a need go up on the body/structure that is not "pedal". The tightness of the pivot is a security as well as its location- an unused (at least by me) area of foot movement.

Now (do?) you all do know that the brake use cuts out any throttle input.

Yet I know it would not sell well without somehow a more visual & dedicated lockout.

Modifications

Could a "fast pin" be used instead of a bolt?
Yes. Please your Wife & others. The pin will allow for easy removal.
Do not.exceed 3/16 as the web structure will be compromised. There is a 3/16 cavity already. Drill from the passenger side to start the passage.

Yet the pin would leave a loose & floppy pivot.
The ledge of the housing structure provides such a precarious catch point as well as the the fact that the rod is floppy too there being only a nut face that relies on throttle spring for pressure to keep it from falling out of position.
 

Attachments

Last edited:

Cheyenne

UK 2004 T1N 313CDi
Sorry but I have reservations over the safety of your design!

It is NOT 'fail safe'.

You say the pivot is 'tight' but what would happen if your shoe/boot where to accidentally hit the screw when driving down the highway and knock it down and then lock you on a moderate throttle opening? Surely an accident waiting to happen.

I feel you need to add something to the design to prevent the device from accidentally engaging.

Back to the drawing board.

Keith.

Edit to add a possible modification: If you where to slip a length of tubing over the end of the bar that was longer than the bar then it could not engage on the shoulder of the plastic moulding. Just make sure it could not get hooked on anything else in the vicinity.
 
Last edited:

DRTDEVL

Active member
I agree. It needs some sort of fail-safe. That was my first thought wen looking at it, if I were to hop in with my size 13 steel toes, I would surely hit the bar and lock it in when driving.

Maybe put a length of rubber hose over it when not in use that would allow it to bend back away from the catch if inadvertently activated?
 

220629

Well-known member
First. Congratulations on an ingenious design. :thumbup:

I completely agree with the safety concerns and comments.

My suggestion would be to use a fast pin or even a simple nail to install the toggle aka yoke when needed. Remove the complete assembly when not in use. That puts everything back to OEM design.

https://www.amazon.com/Aerofast-Inc-FPSC6-20R-Ring-Handle-Diameter/dp/B002GPHSXE
Added:
For reference only. Don't pay that absurd shipping.


:cheers: vic
 
Last edited:
Hmm. I see the visual concerns you all have. Yet let someone produce the same linkage and let them then pipe up. I have tried to get it to catch "on" without using 1 hand and I have nothing to be concerned about.
This is really a delightful out come as I too had concerns. I have chewed on this for a long time. I have size 14 shoes yet I always use my toe area and there is never a need go up on the body/structure that is not "pedel". The tightness of the pivot is a security as well as its location an unused (at least by me) area of foot movement.

Now (do?) you all do know that the brake use cuts out any throttle input.

Yet I know it would not sell well without somehow a more visual & dedicated lockout.

Part https://sprinter-source.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=109183&d=1552149614

Perplexed…
 
Last edited:
First. Congratulations on an ingenious design. :thumbup:

I completely agree with the safety concerns and comments.

My suggestion would be to use a fast pin or even a simple nail to install the toggle aka yoke when needed. Remove the complete assembly when not in use. That puts everything back to OEM design.

https://www.amazon.com/Aerofast-Inc-FPSC6-20R-Ring-Handle-Diameter/dp/B002GPHSXE
Added:
For reference only. Don't pay that absurd shipping.


:cheers: vic
The pin would leave a loose & floppy pivot.
The ledge of the housing structure provides such a precarious catch point as well as the the fact that the rod is floppy too there being only a nut face that relies on throttle spring for pressure to keep it from falling out of position.
 

220629

Well-known member
The pin would leave a loose & floppy pivot.
The ledge of the housing structure provides such a precarious catch point as well as the the fact that the rod is floppy too there being only a nut face that relies on throttle spring for pressure to keep it from falling out of position.
Add a rubber cushion or other insert to keep it from being loose and floppy?

The engine is initially depowered with the application of the brakes, but is that something that should be relied upon for a design?

As I once told an apprentice who apologized for questioning one of my designs. If I can't explain/defend my ideas and designs then maybe something needs to be changed.

:2cents: vic

Added:
A captured nut and knurled cap bolt or wing bolt will provide the clamping action you say is needed.
 
Last edited:
Add a rubber cushion or other insert to keep it from being loose and floppy?

The engine is initially depowered with the application of the brakes, but is that something that should be relied upon for a design?

As I once told an apprentice who apologized for questioning one of my designs. If I can't explain/defend my ideas and designs then maybe something needs to be changed.

:2cents: vic
It is the right kind of floppy as is.

Not just initially.

Let your pin be incorporated by those concerned with safety.

I updated the OP.
 
Last edited:
D

Deleted member 50714

Guest
T1N, what year? Due to ECU programing, an IDLE STICK will not work on a 2015 OM 651. Not sure about earlier years. Your contraption is impressive but a complicated and dangerous "Idle stick."

A wise member in this forum admonished me serveral times, "If that ain't broke, don't fix it."
 

Attachments

Last edited by a moderator:
T1N, what year? Due to ECU programing, an IDLE STICK will not work on a 2015 OM 651. Not sure about earlier years. Your contraption is impressive but a complicated and dangerous "Idle stick."

A wise member in this forum admonished me serveral times, "If that ain't broke, don't fix it."
Good to know about the non t1ns. Any stick bracing from the console cover or anything but the lone throttle assembly is going float more than this one. I used a pvc stick & it just was too flexy.

I can achieve 1800 +/- 200 or so. Once warmed to normal.
 
Last edited:
I got a spare throttle pedal.
It may be working better than the 170K original. There seems to be better control after 2 days.

Also does anyone know if 2 pedals could be wired is parallel? The up idle one being tapped in only to boost speed when parked. It could be mounted for convenience.
 

220629

Well-known member
...

Also does anyone know if 2 pedals could be wired is parallel? The up idle one being tapped in only to boost speed when parked. It could be mounted for convenience.
I know that paralleling the 2 directly will not work. The ECM will be very unhappy with that.

My belief is that even if it is possible to have 2 ea. throttle controls a method similar to Cruise Control would be the route to design. That said, before going to all of that trouble just install and program the optional OEM high idle.

:cheers: vic
 
I know that paralleling the 2 directly will not work. The ECM will be very unhappy with that.

My belief is that even if it is possible to have 2 ea. throttle controls a method similar to Cruise Control would be the route to design. That said, before going to all of that trouble just install and program the optional OEM high idle.

:cheers: vic
Is it available for a tin w/ CC installed?

I cannot find it.
 

autostaretx

Erratic Member
You could conceivably wire either a 2nd pedal sensor assembly, or even a pair of ganged linear-taper potentiometers to serve as a "high idle" gadget.

Separate the two with at least a double-pole double-throw switch flipping the two "signal" wires from the floor pedal to the "fast idle pedal". Even better would be a 4-pole switch to move the grounds, too.

If you do choose to use potentiometers (a knob on the dash?), then check with an ohmmeter on the original sensor unit to see what value that "series resistor" they have in the wiper's schematic might be, and provide one ... it's probably what lets them detect "short to ground" and "short to +5v (or +12v)" conditions.

PedalSensor.png

--dick
p.s. the "high idle" option is shown on page 8w-30-2 of the 2006 service manual.
Most of the work of adding one would be telling the ECM that you have it (i.e. it was an extra-cost option back in the day). I can't think of why it would exclude (or be excluded by) cruise control.

p.p.s. note that there are *two* wiring arrangements for the pedal sensors in the service manual.
One is on page 8w-30-10 ... which DOES NOT APPLY to 2004-2006 US Sprinters.
(i borrowed its internal diagram, but substituted the correct pin-out in the above drawing)
 
Last edited:

220629

Well-known member
Is it available for a tin w/ CC installed?

I cannot find it.
:idunno:


Owner says he used "Working Speed Control" which is intended for PTO.

The basic switch needed is simple connection to an ECM pin. I don't believe that a dealership will be able to program your ECM though. It will take a higher level clone bi-directional scan tool.

Some info is here including some documentation. I didn't wade through it.

https://sprinter-source.com/forum/showthread.php?t=63382

vic
 
:idunno:


Owner says he used "Working Speed Control" which is intended for PTO.

The basic switch needed is simple connection to an ECM pin. I don't believe that a dealership will be able to program your ECM though. It will take a higher level clone bi-directional scan tool.

Some info is here including some documentation. I didn't wade through it.

https://sprinter-source.com/forum/showthread.php?t=63382

vic
Owner has a downunder tin!
 
I need to update my op.
It works even better now that I made a workaround for the botched/incomplete t21, it is mostly more consistent when I break the EGR (black #2) wire.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=OCTech.Mobile.Applications.TouchScan

This app shows the least fuel consumption with the switch opened AND then closed. Once the black wire is open, there is no turbo. But remaking it gives the least fuel rate ~.9 GPH. This is at ~1300 rpm. Also results in the least sudden speedups before fully hot (anout 10 to 15 min after full water temp is reached). I am still testing before I say no jumps up to 2500 to 3k rpm. A hard pull up on the pedel is all that is needed to get back to 1300, once the collar nut is set.


https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=OCTech.Mobile.Applications.TouchScan
 

Top Bottom