Piggyback (interceptor) vs Flash tune vs Standalone an unbiased viewpoint

[chrisyng]

All these silly AP vs Cobb threads.. This forum has really broken up into 2 camps and you will find it hard to get an unbiased viewpoint..

However can we agree that both these products are after the same thing? to adjust factory tune parameters to achieve the end user's goals...
They just go about them in 2 different ways...

At the moment the SB has the advantage because of it's flexibility.. dependent on the person tuning's skills, you can potentially extract as much peak power as possible (To the limits of the SB itself)

The AP is disadvantaged in that there is not end user control of the tune. One must rely on the tunes put out by Cobb.. This will not give FULL potential of your specific application just because of all the different variables with vehicle condition, climate conditions, etc ... However it SHOULD be able to some power/driveability improvements to most people..
If and when CObb releases the ability for end users to modify their own tunes, the Cobb will come closer in the flexability of the Standback...

So in my opinion, it comes down to which method of adjusting factory tune is better? Signal manipulation or actual changes to the factory maps?

Here is a quick article on a reputable automotive site that discusses the diffrences in the diffrent tuning methods.. hopefully this article can help some on the fence decide which product they would feel more comfortable with...

LINKY

Just as aside.. I feel that if Cobb would actually Confirm or Deny the fact that they will release software for mazda owners to manipulate the tunes themselves, it would put out alot of the back and forth bickering regarding the 2 products..

[Haltech]

Originally Posted by chrisyng All these silly AP vs Cobb threads.. This forum has really broken up into 2 camps and you will find it hard to get an unbiased viewpoint.. However can we agree that both these products are after the same thing? to adjust factory tune parameters to achieve the end user's goals... They just go about them in 2 different ways... At the moment the SB has the advantage because of it's flexibility.. dependent on the person tuning's skills, you can potentially extract as much peak power as possible (To the limits of the SB itself) The AP is disadvantaged in that there is not end user control of the tune. One must rely on the tunes put out by Cobb.. This will not give FULL potential of your specific application just because of all the different variables with vehicle condition, climate conditions, etc ... However it SHOULD be able to some power/driveability improvements to most people.. If and when CObb releases the ability for end users to modify their own tunes, the Cobb will come closer in the flexability of the Standback... So in my opinion, it comes down to which method of adjusting factory tune is better? Signal manipulation or actual changes to the factory maps? Here is a quick article on a reputable automotive site that discusses the diffrences in the diffrent tuning methods.. hopefully this article can help some on the fence decide which product they would feel more comfortable with... LINKY Just as aside.. I feel that if Cobb would actually Confirm or Deny the fact that they will release software for mazda owners to manipulate the tunes themselves, it would put out alot of the back and forth bickering regarding the 2 products..

I know for a fact, Cobb will be releasing the software for end user tuning. I just cant comment if it will be free and the timeframe.

That article doesnt state who they are saying is more difficult to the tune via flash.. Import or Domestic? Not exactly the most detailed article and its not US based. Things in the UK are MUCH different than here in the USA.

[chrisyng]

I believe that the article implies that Flash tuning has the ability to be the best method so long as the tuner is working with a fully cracked ECU.. It is generally widely known that Subaru's ECU was fully cracked sometime ago and Cobb has access to nearly every facet of the factory programming.. this would account for the success with their AP on the subies.. however, it is also generally known that maza ecu's have been a pain backside to crack.. I'm not sure if Cobb has commented if they fully cracked the ECU and fully understood it's complete programming yet.. We know they have control of timing, boost, fuel, but what other systems? open/closed loop transition? knock system?

The AP in my books has not reached half it's potential yet, and it's current state is jsut a stop-gap to hold us over until we get more control.. and that is just fine with me

[smakdown61]

Originally Posted by chrisyng I believe that the article implies that Flash tuning has the ability to be the best method so long as the tuner is working with a fully cracked ECU.. It is generally widely known that Subaru's ECU was fully cracked sometime ago and Cobb has access to nearly every facet of the factory programming.. this would account for the success with their AP on the subies.. however, it is also generally known that maza ecu's have been a pain backside to crack.. I'm not sure if Cobb has commented if they fully cracked the ECU and fully understood it's complete programming yet.. We know they have control of timing, boost, fuel, but what other systems? open/closed loop transition? knock system? The AP in my books has not reached half it's potential yet, and it's current state is jsut a stop-gap to hold us over until we get more control.. and that is just fine with me

Cobb has completely reverse engineered the ms3 ecu and has full access to anything it contains. From what I understand, the problem is that the actual ecu logic has increased in complexity these days. Everything now seems to be based on load calculations, gear, bat, etc... making it more difficult to make the car do what you want. A fully cracked ecu flashed is always better than a piggyback.....but that's only assuming one has the knowledge to know what they are doing when changing ecu parameters. I think cobb went through a longer than thought learning process with tuning an ecu like this one, which can account for the shitty first few maps (along with the bad basemap). Christian seems to have a good hold on the 1.03 maps so far. There have been like 18 beta revisions for some stages and they keep getting better every time.

[palerider]

Originally Posted by smakdown61 Cobb has completely reverse engineered the ms3 ecu and has full access to anything it contains. From what I understand, the problem is that the actual ecu logic has increased in complexity these days. Everything now seems to be based on load calculations, gear, bat, etc... making it more difficult to make the car do what you want. A fully cracked ecu flashed is always better than a piggyback.....but that's only assuming one has the knowledge to know what they are doing when changing ecu parameters. I think cobb went through a longer than thought learning process with tuning an ecu like this one, which can account for the shitty first few maps (along with the bad basemap). Christian seems to have a good hold on the 1.03 maps so far. There have been like 18 beta revisions for some stages and they keep getting better every time.

This is just flat out misinformation..... up until the last couple weeks they werent even using the proper basemaps for the ms3. They HAVE NOT fully cracked the ecu... that is clear and that is why after 7 adjustments on chris ap logs he still made what would have only expected from a stock ecu car with stock boost...287whp.

that article was very good in that it made clear that flash tunes are only as good as the ecu is cracked..... and as far as what Christian claims?

hois claims are EXACTLY the same now as they were in may on v100. three more versions, 6 more months and the story is the same... and we still dont have power.

maybe someday we will. i liked that article alot.

[bova80]

chris's tune means nothing to this topic, he didn't let christian spend anytime on it besides the facets he asked for and then simply stopped even though christian would have went farther. had he shown datalogs from both the cobb run and the cp-e run to compare timing and what not i would believe into it more but i just don't.

anyways, that was a good read.

[Haltech]

Originally Posted by palerider This is just flat out misinformation..... up until the last couple weeks they werent even using the proper basemaps for the ms3. They HAVE NOT fully cracked the ecu... that is clear and that is why after 7 adjustments on chris ap logs he still made what would have only expected from a stock ecu car with stock boost...287whp. that article was very good in that it made clear that flash tunes are only as good as the ecu is cracked..... and as far as what Christian claims? hois claims are EXACTLY the same now as they were in may on v100. three more versions, 6 more months and the story is the same... and we still dont have power. maybe someday we will. i liked that article alot.

Bullshit and you know it... Send me a standback... Ill prove you wrong

[dadasracecar]

I don't know how you can state that Cobb has completely reverse engineered the ecu. The 103 maps have shown whp losses compared to the stock ecu and there have been so many revisions that would indicate that the results are unanticipated and have to be further modified. If the ecu was completely reverse engineered each change would be informed and bring about completely predictable results. This clearly is not the case.

Back on topic, a flash will always outperform a piggyback provided the ecu is cracked and understood.

[Bravnik]

Originally Posted by dadasracecar I don't know how you can state that Cobb has completely reverse engineered the ecu. The 103 maps have shown whp losses compared to the stock ecu and there have been so many revisions that would indicate that the results are unanticipated and have to be further modified. If the ecu was completely reverse engineered each change would be informed and bring about completely predictable results. This clearly is not the case. Back on topic, a flash will always outperform a piggyback provided the ecu is cracked and understood.

Sorry man, but in my Dyno Day (You know an unbiased dyno day) I put down more power than any of the other MS3's present (10ish). The only one within 20WHP of me was a fully bolted MS3 running 18PSI. At the time I didn't even have my TBE installed.....so...yah.

[chrisyng]

Here is another interesting article written by Eric Hsu .. Eric is currently partnered up with XS Engineering and chief engineer at Apexi.. he was also in charge of parts development for Cosworth.. This man knows his stuff...

His take on interceptors:

Beyond The Dyno Piggyback ECUs are Bad for Your Health

Aside from the chances that whoever doing the tuning may not do a good job, I have yet to find any negatives when it comes to Flash programming.. It's good news to hear that Cobb WILL be releasing tuning software for the AP.. at that point, I can not see any advantage to using the standback over the AP