[COBB Tuning]

Originally Posted by 1LUMI335

So on a hot day, the COBB tune sometimes cant handle the heat and going down a map would be best? Arent piggies able to auto-tune themselves now to compensate for this?

I did not say it cannot handle the heat; just that you'll always enjoy a greater safety margin by using the more conservative mapping. Sorry if that seemed vague or confusing.

Regards,
Lance

[COBB Tuning]

Originally Posted by turkish335

good question - I was also somewhat puzzled as to why S1 is not recommended on a full bolt on car, since larger IC and catless DP's would add to the safety margin (vs. stock car) rather than reduce it. Perhaps it has something to do with the O2 sensor (and A/F) behavior under catless conditions?

Changing out major components such as a shift to catless downpipes will very likely mean a change in boost response. Without appropriate tuning, this will usually create undesirable side effects...boost spikes/dips, oscillations, overboosting, etc.

Regards,
Lance

[enrita]

Originally Posted by COBB Tuning

Changing out major components such as a shift to catless downpipes will very likely mean a change in boost response. Without appropriate tuning, this will usually create undesirable side effects...boost spikes/dips, oscillations, overboosting, etc.

Regards,
Lance

yep i have experienced this myself when running one of the first GIAC stage 1 beta on my fully modded car and as well Stage 2 giac on upped turbos. car was overboosting and cutting power constantly.

[Smitty1]

I have to say I'm really digging Cobb's approach to tuning.

I like their measured approach.

A summer map seems to be in order here, for the stage 1 cobb. I would like one that it is dialed back 20% to 25% just for those 101 or 103 days.

[BQTuning]

Originally Posted by Smitty1

I have to say I'm really digging Cobb's approach to tuning.

I like their measured approach.

A summer map seems to be in order here, for the stage 1 cobb. I would like one that it is dialed back 20% to 25% just for those 101 or 103 days.

Same here. I like their openess, and willingness to work with people. Not saying that other tuners dont have the same relationship with their customers, its just Cobb has more established logical, balance, and most important to me is uniform in what they do.

[Jeff@TopGearSolutions]

TEmp compensation tables ftw..... dont know if they exist for cobb.

[Clap135]

Originally Posted by JPSlick

TEmp compensation tables ftw..... dont know if they exist for cobb.

they do, just like the stock ecu. Excpet they work backwards from what you might expect, cause they are used to get a load, not to save the car lol

[Jeff@TopGearSolutions]

Originally Posted by Clap135

they do, just like the stock ecu. Excpet they work backwards from what you might expect, cause they are used to get a load, not to save the car lol

ahhh true

[Joshboody]

Originally Posted by Clap135

they do, just like the stock ecu. Excpet they work backwards from what you might expect, cause they are used to get a load, not to save the car lol

My understanding is that there is NO temp compensation. temp is included into the load formula... ie.
1. low temp, lower boost needed for x load
2. high temp, higher boost needed of x load

#2 scares me because the timing is based on this load value and temp is not accounted for. So no reaction to cylinder temp, pressure until knock is experienced.

this explains what i have noticed with datalogging.

[Joshboody]

my opinion is that the N54 needs some outside logic to manupulate the load values and change timing, thus i like the v5 approach. I would like to experience a flash for part throttle response. The v5, my only experience with piggies, doesn't seem to be as linear as stock. Not sure if this makes sense, but kinda steps in power... could just be in my head.

For a flash to work well, in all conditions, you may need to add to the logic... is this possible?

[Jeff@TopGearSolutions]

Originally Posted by Joshboody

My understanding is that there is NO temp compensation. temp is included into the load formula... ie.
1. low temp, lower boost needed for x load
2. high temp, higher boost needed of x load

#2 scares me because the timing is based on this load value and temp is not accounted for. So no reaction to cylinder temp, pressure until knock is experienced.

this explains what i have noticed with datalogging.

Yea thats why im not a fan of load targets.

It keeps consistency for power output in theory....

Any real tuner would want a tune that brings out the most power given the external conditions.

[Joshboody]

Originally Posted by maxnix

Why do you not think IAT is not an input monitored by the DME?

it's monitored of course but for calculating load only... this my understanding from the recent threads.

[Clap135]

I got a question. Based on your understand of this ECU, is it possible to implement Flat foot shifting and launch control for MT cars?

[dzenno]

Originally Posted by Clap135

I got a question. Based on your understand of this ECU, is it possible to implement Flat foot shifting and launch control for MT cars?

Didn't know what flat foot shifting was so looked it up and for anyone that doesn't know here's a description of what COBB did on another platform...must say I'd love to have this on my 6MT...i'm dreading bouncing off redline when on meth as its caused a meth backfire cracking the intake manifold on at least one car I know but then again the guy was running waaay too much meth:

http://www.accessecu.com/support/LaunchControl.pdf

[Clap135]

Originally Posted by dzenno

Didn't know what flat foot shifting was so looked it up and for anyone that doesn't know here's a description of what COBB did on another platform...must say I'd love to have this on my 6MT...i'm dreading bouncing off redline when on meth as its caused a meth backfire cracking the intake manifold on at least one car I know but then again the guy was running waaay too much meth:

http://www.accessecu.com/support/LaunchControl.pdf

flat foot shifting, will pretty must destroy automatic cars in a drag race
The actually shifting effort is amazing compared to you trying to flat foot shift on a stock ecu. It just slides into gear and the rpms never hit the rev limiter due to the ignition retard that takes place. However this isnt the best thing for turbos or cats.

[dzenno]

I have no cats so that's fine in my case....why is it bad for turbos?

[Clap135]

what flat foot shifting does, is pretty much retards ignition. When you drastically retard ignition you generate more heat and raise EGT to the point where heat/fire is keeping the turbo spooled.

Don't know if you ever saw a 2 step car....they all pretty much pop/backfire/shoot flames, FFS is pretty much the same concept. Maintaing/generating boost, without actual load present.

[themyst]

FFS would make 6mts destroy 6ats all day long.

[Clap135]

Originally Posted by themyst

FFS would make 6mts destroy 6ats all day long.

And thats the way it should be

[biz77]

Originally Posted by Smitty1

I have to say I'm really digging Cobb's approach to tuning.

I like their measured approach.

A summer map seems to be in order here, for the stage 1 cobb. I would like one that it is dialed back 20% to 25% just for those 101 or 103 days.

The thing is you shouldn't need a "Summer MAP." The factory ECU is more than capable of compensating for these conditions and anything Cobb has done to the ECU should not effect the ECUs ability to adapt to changes in atmospheric changes ie temp, humidity and elevation.

[dzenno]

Originally Posted by Clap135

And thats the way it should be

lol

[dzenno]

Originally Posted by Nor_Cal_335i

One little correction.

MBT does NOT stand for "Minimum ignition timing for Best Torque".

It stands for "Maximum Brake Torque". Knock limit aside, it is the spark timing that gives maximum torque at a given speed and flow rate.

The phrase "Minimum ignition timing" shoudlnt be associated with MBT at ALL, because its the MAXIMUM timing you should run because running more timing then MBT causes unacceptable cylinder pressures that lead to broken engines.

good point! thanks for clarification, makes complete sense