1/4 mile times on AP or MSF maps

[dread]

Did you guys see the dyno from the guy on the mazda3forums. The guy lost 10hp and 17 torque with the stage 1+ ms cai map. He returned his ap. Read the thread it's pretty convincing. I would post a link but my iPhone doesn't cut and paste. Fuck you Steve jobs.

[rodrigo]

I think a lot of us bought the AP based on their reputation for making modest increases without sacrificing reliability (I know I did based on what my Subaru pals told me , without having prior knowledge of the company) and while we have seen improvements in reliabilty (there is less knock that stock and that is 100%) there hasnt been an improvement in performance.... so what do we do?......throw rocks at Cobb and still have a slow car, or give them information that they need so they can make us customers happy, I cannot afford to jump from this intake to that intake, of from TMIC to FMIC then to another FMIC .... we each make due with what we have.... I have an AP so thats what I will make due with (and hopefully someday soon the investment will be worth it)

[rodrigo]

Originally Posted by dread Did you guys see the dyno from the guy on the mazda3forums. The guy lost 10hp and 17 torque with the stage 1+ ms cai map. He returned his ap. Read the thread it's pretty convincing. I would post a link but my iPhone doesn't cut and paste. Fuck you Steve jobs.

That doesnt surprise me, proof is when the tire hits the road.

[JeepJockey]

Wish people would invest in a DashHawk so we could see what is going on these "test" runs and "dynoes". I mean that Dyno he did the car just fell on its face around 5500 this looks nothing like Ztuner's v101 dynoes. He did gain HP and TQ on the v101 dyno by the way.

Something happened, boost fell off, knock retard all of the above who knows but a log would be nice to see.

[rodrigo]

Originally Posted by JeepJockey Wish people would invest in a DashHawk so we could see what is going on these "test" runs and "dynoes". I mean that Dyno he did the car just fell on its face around 5500 this looks nothing like Ztuner's v101 dynoes. He did gain HP and TQ on the v101 dyno by the way. Something happened, boost fell off, knock retard all of the above who knows but a log would be nice to see.

what exactly do you want to see on the "test" runs in regards to engine monitoring?.....maybe I can accomodate.

[dread]

dyno looks normal to me.

[dread]

what happened to laloosh and hal? Maybe they are having makeup sex.

[JeepJockey]

On the back to back tests Stock v101 vs Staged 101 would like to see Boost, AFR, TPS, WastegateDC, SparkAdvance

Some combination of those two, I mean on a back to back run lets see what the Stock v101 AFR, throttle, Boost, look like and then the Staged v101 AFR,throttle , and Boost look like see if we can determine a possible cause of slower.

We know what the STock car is supposed to do so if that Stock v101 tune is not getting into the 9's in AFR it ain't stock.

[JeepJockey]

Originally Posted by dread dyno looks normal to me.

WHAT ?!? LOL dread when have you seen a MS3 dyno fall on its face at 5200 like that? I mean in 250 RPM it looses 20 or so HP when it shouldn't be loosing it yet. Something happened.

By the way I am not making excuses for the dyno just saying something is happening when the MSCAI map is loaded that a nice log might show.

[rodrigo]

Originally Posted by JeepJockey On the back to back tests Stock v101 vs Staged 101 would like to see Boost, AFR, TPS, WastegateDC, SparkAdvance Some combination of those two, I mean on a back to back run lets see what the Stock v101 AFR, throttle, Boost, look like and then the Staged v101 AFR,throttle , and Boost look like see if we can determine a possible cause of slower. We know what the STock car is supposed to do so if that Stock v101 tune is not getting into the 9's in AFR it ain't stock.

the stock v.101 runs way richer than any stage 1 released, v.100, v.101 and msf. I do see 10's and 9s , boost I have stated countless times I can hold boost on v.101 that I cannot duplicate in any stage 1 map........ tps , wastegate duty and advance I have not kept an eye on. I thought about getting a dashawk but seeing as the AP has netted me a whopping zero gains in HP I am a little "worn out " with electronic gadgets that don't do shit.

with all due respect of course.

[dread]

either way the torque is still lower in the midrange

[rodrigo]

Originally Posted by dread what happened to laloosh and hal? Maybe they are having makeup sex.

they are both cranking the mbc to 110%

[JeepJockey]

What boost are you "holding" with the stock map to 5500?

[rodrigo]

Originally Posted by JeepJockey What boost are you "holding" with the stock map to 5500?

14-14.5 or so, depends on the gear, with stage 1 the boost drops to 13 and below by 5k (which is in no small way one of the reasons why knock doesnt show up close to shifting rpm like on the stock maps)

[Haltech]

MBC is all i use... but yeah, the v101 maps arent doing anything. The 102's are looking much better... Once more data appears, we will decide what direction is the correct direction to be heading in.

[rodrigo]

Originally Posted by Haltech MBC is all i use... but yeah, the v101 maps arent doing anything. The 102's are looking much better... Once more data appears, we will decide what direction is the correct direction to be heading in.

and that ladies and gentlemen is what should keep all us "believers" (because face it after the 30 day money back is gone there arent that many more $$ sound choices) from going insane in the membrane!!!

[JeepJockey]

Originally Posted by lenny127 14-14.5 or so, depends on the gear, with stage 1 the boost drops to 13 and below by 5k (which is in no small way one of the reasons why knock doesnt show up close to shifting rpm like on the stock maps)

No wonder the shit is slower.

v102 beta log


http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/e...2cStage1-1.jpg

Put the cursor on 5500 holding 17.55 PSI



Of course on the MSF FT Maps i only held 16.2 PSI at 5500

[dread]

what looks better about the 102 maps

[Haltech]

Originally Posted by lenny127 and that ladies and gentlemen is what should keep all us "believers" (because face it after the 30 day money back is gone there arent that many more $$ sound choices) from going insane in the membrane!!!

Well keep this in mind... im much more of a hardass than a lot of you. I guess i have been spoiled coming from a Ford background and having more tuning options than you could shake a stick at. Sitting in a staging lane, reviewing the previous run and making live edit to the map for the next run. It really doesnt get any better than that.

However, this car's ECU is a prick. It's way smarter than anything Ford themselves could ever invent. Take the Ford GT for example. Side oil squirters, dry sump oiling system, DUAL fuel injectors and they programming on the ECU is STILL a stock EEC-V with the same tables as a Lightning, Mustang, whatever.

Now... lets talk about the AP. I was NOT happy to see it be a failure. We all had some hope before it launched. When i saw the type of testers they chose, my stomach began to sink. However.. i approached Cobb and said, lets get it fixed. What can i do to help you guys along.. This is what im doing, trying to help. Others may have given up on the whole AP and in a way, i really dont blame them. But, im committed to my word and my word is to get this thing fixed, even if i have to own one personally.

So here we are... creating dialog. trying to get data to get this thing fixed. Sure, Me, dada, laloosh fight over it and we always will. Theres nothing wrong with it to be honest, but if the device was being ignored, than the pissing matches can be warranted... We all have our cars set to a direction.. whether you use a MBC/Clamp, SB or AP, eventually, it will all get worked out, that i believe. Dyno's are good for only getting that tune to be usable.. street/track data is where the fine tuning comes into play to get the map dialed in.

[4thStroke]

AP hasnt proven to be faster?

I was consistantly quicker with the MSF FT S1+ map vs stock, even as my boost air temps kept climbing.

Granted, it wasnt much, but it was quicker.

I dislike OTS maps as it is, I believe everyone should be dyno tuned once they have their long term modifications done. I will be getting Pro tuned once I have the car where I want it to be and wave goodbye to OTS. I didnt pay this $700 for OTS maps... its the only way to custom tune this car (unless you ask a certain individual, he will tell you the AP will never hold a custom tune) by flashing, fuck piggybacks, they may be making more power right now, but the AP will be able to control the car any way the tuner decides. It will be able to do what a piggyback can do for a little more money (less in some cases) and a hell of a lot more.

[JeepJockey]

Originally Posted by Haltech . We all had some hope before it launched. When i saw the type of testers they chose, my stomach began to sink.

Thankyou. I put at least 50% of the AP success/failure on the people that "beta" tested the maps.

[rodrigo]

Originally Posted by JeepJockey No wonder the shit is slower. v102 beta log http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/e...2cStage1-1.jpg Put the cursor on 5500 holding 17.55 PSI Of course on the MSF FT Maps i only held 16.2 PSI at 5500

I could be off, each gear is different, I will test it out in each gear (except 6th and get back to you, I just know that with the stage 1 maps I am on the fwy going 80mph , floor it in 6th and with stock v.101 I hold 16psi for a while until it settles to 15 but with the stage 1's it will jump to 15 or so then 14 by 4k and by 5k I am not even paying attention anymore .

[JeepJockey]

Yeah check it out and see... this is a 2nd - 4th pull I don't have a log of single gear pulls from certain RPMs.

This is where the DH would come in handy just so you could log your 0 - 100 pulls and see the different values.

[rodrigo]

Originally Posted by JeepJockey Thankyou. I put at least 50% of the AP success/failure on the people that "beta" tested the maps.

I think while that might be true, any one of us can make assumptions about a map being faster or slower by "feel" and be wrong. The MSF map felt punchier from idle and seemed to fizzle out in the higher rpms but based on my findings (for myself speaking) the stock v.101 out ran it in every step of the way. If I didnt have a device to help me determine factual findings maybe I would have been one of those saying " the tires want to rip off the car with this new map" type of statements. after the fact everyone is an expert, if you know what I mean

[JeepJockey]

Agreed thats why "those type of people" shouldn't have been the ones BETA testing the fucking AP.

[rodrigo]

Originally Posted by JeepJockey Yeah check it out and see... this is a 2nd - 4th pull I don't have a log of single gear pulls from certain RPMs. This is where the DH would come in handy just so you could log your 0 - 100 pulls and see the different values.

I know, and I would love to have one to show you guys and perhaps someone with lots more experience than myself could explain to me why exactly the stock map runs stronger. But honestly while the g tech will log from a performance point of view, the engine monitoring is done via looking at the Ap and marking on a piece of paper whats happening at what rpm (pretty fossil like)

[JeepJockey]

Well you have done toooo many runs and if you say you remember the stock tune holding higher boost longer over the staged maps then something is wrong.

[rodrigo]

Originally Posted by JeepJockey Agreed thats why "those type of people" shouldn't have been the ones BETA testing the fucking AP.

well, whats Cobb gonna do ? psych evaluations to see if you are mature enough to give objective input ......... fuck , we all got excited about this Ap and behaved like impatient children at the ice cream shop..... and I think the reslult is partly our own fault. But hey, as long as Haltech is representing we seem to be moving forward now with better force.

[dread]

every map feels nearly the same after a tank of gas. Hal it sounds like Cobb doesn't know what tables to modify to get power from what you are saying. Is that true. The 102 maps don't feel 20 hp more powerful than the 101 maps on my car. So I wouldn't give everyone the impression that they will be making a lot more power. I would like to see some new dyno's from Cobb. I still think the 102 maps need more work before release.

[rodrigo]

Originally Posted by JeepJockey Well you have done toooo many runs and if you say you remember the stock tune holding higher boost longer over the staged maps then something is wrong.

I know, I am not disputing that I hold more boost stock over stage 1, you asked how much and seeing as I do not have a dashawk I would like to answer you in specifics. But make no mistake, holding more boost doesnt necessarily mean that you are faster, look at it this way : you hold 15psi but you are running pig rich, I hold 14.5 psi and I run lean on the edge.... it might very well be possible that I am making more power than you and making less boost. thats why I really pay no attention to boost, because for that to be the sole indicative of performance it would have to be the sole parameter that was changed when these maps were developed

[JeepJockey]

Understood, but it is important for these maps to hold boost as intended by COBB if you are not seeing and holding the boost over stock then the map isn't performing as it should?

[rodrigo]

read the map notes....what do they say?? "Boost Targets:
~16.5psi peak boost pressure tapering down to ~8psi by the 6700
RPM redline, +/- 1.5psi."

I sure as shit never came close to 6700, so who is to say where we are supposed to be at say at......6200rpm or 5500..... I dont know.

[rodrigo]

Now compare that to an 07 wrx stage 1 map : "Boost Targets: ~13.5psi +/- 0.7psi peak boost pressure tapering down
to ~9psi, depending on vehicle and conditions. "
or an 07 sti : " Boost Targets:~16.5psi +/- 0.8psi peak boost pressure tapering down
to ~14psi, depending on vehicle and conditions. "


I know , different turbos different efficiency ranges, safe to say they belive our little turbo is not capable (maybe from a reliability point of view) of holding boost the same way others can and they are simply trying to get more HP by efficiency of tuning rather than by just cranking up the boost.

[JeepJockey]

Who knows, I just know what the logs I have done show. Next time you are out testing it would be interesting to know how your boost is comparing between maps. I realize this isn't the only power making value in the map, but it is a pretty big component of it.

[JeepJockey]

Originally Posted by lenny127 Now compare that to an 07 wrx stage 1 map : "Boost Targets: ~13.5psi +/- 0.7psi peak boost pressure tapering down to ~9psi, depending on vehicle and conditions. " or an 07 sti : " Boost Targets:~16.5psi +/- 0.8psi peak boost pressure tapering down to ~14psi, depending on vehicle and conditions. " I know , different turbos different efficiency ranges, safe to say they belive our little turbo is not capable (maybe from a reliability point of view) of holding boost the same way others can and they are simply trying to get more HP by efficiency of tuning rather than by just cranking up the boost.

Sure after 5500 all bets are off boost is going down there is no disputing that but up to 5500 COBB maps should be holding more boost than stock period.

[rodrigo]

Originally Posted by JeepJockey Who knows, I just know what the logs I have done show. Next time you are out testing it would be interesting to know how your boost is comparing between maps. I realize this isn't the only power making value in the map, but it is a pretty big component of it.

Ill try and get back to u , one eye on rpm to shift consistently , one eye on the AP to see boost and one eye for the popo....... do the math..... need some help here. I will see what I can do..... Maybe I wake up tomorrow and Haltech has v.102 MSF maps out.

[94jedi]

Originally Posted by dread every map feels nearly the same after a tank of gas. Hal it sounds like Cobb doesn't know what tables to modify to get power from what you are saying. Is that true. The 102 maps don't feel 20 hp more powerful than the 101 maps on my car. So I wouldn't give everyone the impression that they will be making a lot more power. I would like to see some new dyno's from Cobb. I still think the 102 maps need more work before release.

I'm going to have to echo Dread's sentiments here. V100's aside, the difference between all the subsequent maps seems to fade as time passes. I don't think it happens as abruptly on my car as it seems to happen w/ others but it does "seem" like it. I think I would rather err on the side of being to harsh in judging these maps than being too eager to give praise.

[rodrigo]

Originally Posted by JeepJockey Who knows, I just know what the logs I have done show. Next time you are out testing it would be interesting to know how your boost is comparing between maps. I realize this isn't the only power making value in the map, but it is a pretty big component of it.

I tried last night and I cannot give you enough specifics for it to be legitimate. I tried from 2750 rpms and up in 3rd gear 4th gear and 5th gear and it varies even within the same gear. AT 5k in 5th I was holding 15.8psi
in 4th maybe 15.5 or so, but again it will change enough within each gear on an exact run that I cannot tell you with certainty. The best way I can compare it is this...... v.101 stock at 80mph (which I think it's 3k rpm) when going WOT will hold 16+ until about 5k .......with the msf wont even hold 16psi and tapers off sooner. Sorry I cannot get into specifics but the reslutls would be bogus.

[94jedi]

I wish I had some track numbers to post from last night but after waiting an hour or so, they called it due to some drizzle and a few lightning sightings.

[dread]

that sucks, I was hoping for some data.