After a cobb tune...what happens to the M button?

[v1k0d3n]

So, I went against all my previous conventional wisdom (and typical advice), and I bought an engine modification before I changed suspension. Most of you probably know that I'll have the Ohlins installed in a couple/few weeks, but there was a [nameless] supplier that had the Cobb AP on sale for $800...so I thought "what the heck...I'll get it, I guess".

So, after the mapping change, does the M button pretty much go useless? That's typically the way it is in motorcycles (which I have better knowledge of; like the GSX-R 1000 fuel mapping). Does anyone how this installed? If so, what are your thoughts and what happens to the M button?

Thanks!

[ADVANT123]

Originally Posted by v1k0d3n

So, I went against all my previous conventional wisdom (and typical advice), and I bought an engine modification before I changed suspension. Most of you probably know that I'll have the Ohlins installed in a couple/few weeks, but there was a [nameless] supplier that had the Cobb AP on sale for $800...so I thought "what the heck...I'll get it, I guess".

So, after the mapping change, does the M button pretty much go useless? That's typically the way it is in motorcycles (which I have better knowledge of; like the GSX-R 1000 fuel mapping). Does anyone how this installed? If so, what are your thoughts and what happens to the M button?

Thanks!

The M button functions like stock when using the stock throttle maps. I heard some people lost functionality of the M button on the linear throttle maps. Not sure if this has been corrected or is something Cobb did intentionally.

[///M1]

I had the tune for a bit, so let me chime in.

There are a total of 6 maps under the AP:

1. Simulated stock
2. Valet
3a. 91 Octane Linear Throttle
3b. 91 Octane Aggressive Throttle
4a. 93 Octane Linear Throttle
4b. 93 Octane Aggressive Throttle

Linear throttle 'disables' the M button, meaning there is no difference if you depress it or not. Under Aggressive you still retain the functionality, so chances are v1k0d3n you are using a linear throttle maps hence why you are not seeing the M button difference.

I was told by the developers it is not as easy to incorporate the M mode in the Linear throttle modes, but Cobb is allegedly working on it and it will be available in subsequent versions. This after this is still a beta, has been since...Xmas of last yr.

[lcrain]

Originally Posted by ///M1

I had the tune for a bit, so let me chime in.

There are a total of 6 maps under the AP:

1. Simulated stock
2. Valet
3a. 91 Octane Linear Throttle
3b. 91 Octane Aggressive Throttle
4a. 93 Octane Linear Throttle
4b. 93 Octane Aggressive Throttle

Linear throttle 'disables' the M button, meaning there is no difference if you depress it or not. Under Aggressive you still retain the functionality, so chances are v1k0d3n you are using a linear throttle maps hence why you are not seeing the M button difference.

I was told by the developers it is not as easy to incorporate the M mode in the Linear throttle modes, but Cobb is allegedly working on it and it will be available in subsequent versions. This after this is still a beta, has been since...Xmas of last yr.

You say you had the tune...do you not have it installed anymore? If not, care to indulge why you chose to not run it anymore? Thanks

[Mnime]

Originally Posted by lcrain

You say you had the tune...do you not have it installed anymore? If not, care to indulge why you chose to not run it anymore? Thanks

+1 inquiring minds....

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by ///M1

I had the tune for a bit, so let me chime in.

There are a total of 6 maps under the AP:

1. Simulated stock
2. Valet
3a. 91 Octane Linear Throttle
3b. 91 Octane Aggressive Throttle
4a. 93 Octane Linear Throttle
4b. 93 Octane Aggressive Throttle

Linear throttle 'disables' the M button, meaning there is no difference if you depress it or not. Under Aggressive you still retain the functionality, so chances are v1k0d3n you are using a linear throttle maps hence why you are not seeing the M button difference.

I was told by the developers it is not as easy to incorporate the M mode in the Linear throttle modes, but Cobb is allegedly working on it and it will be available in subsequent versions. This after this is still a beta, has been since...Xmas of last yr.

I was at a car show a few weeks ago and spoke with some of the Austin Cobb guys. They have the M button figured it out. On some of their beginning tunes, they switched the M button on all the time (rendering the button on the wheel useless). They have now figured the programming out for this and now the M button works as it did originally from the factory.

As far as the reasoning why it was switched on...they simply thought people would want it on all the time ( many drivers push it every time they get in the car). When they realized it was something that some people still want to turn on and off... then they set about figuring out. It seemed like it was not easy and did take them a while..

[mikewills]

Can you pm me the name of this supplier. That's a good price.

[v1k0d3n]

i can for sure verify now that in the stage 1 - sport mode...M button still works. the advanced mode (which obviously yields more hp/tq) turns the M button off. i did notice that gas milage INCREASED in this mode under "normal" driving conditions, which didn't surprise me at all. my STi was the same way. when I used "intelligent" mode (which detuned the turbo), i always got WORSE gas milage. turbo's actually increase HP under normal driving conditions. I have to say...I am VERY pleased with this upgrade...and for the price, it was very hard to pass up!!

[///M1]

Originally Posted by lcrain

You say you had the tune...do you not have it installed anymore? If not, care to indulge why you chose to not run it anymore? Thanks

Yes, I had it for a while, and do not have it installed any longer. I was one of the early buyers and testers, and provided over the course of several months loads of formal, informal, quantitative, and qualitative feedback back to the company, including data logging and dyno run flat files. Ultimately chose to go another route as I was unhappy with the tune in its current version, and relative lack of progress on its further development as exhibited in the subsequent months. I have chosen another tuner with whom I am thrilled to bits, and will share my experience soon enough, with full results/comparos/data.

I personally was not happy with several aspects of their tune. I'll enumerate a few, but I do not want this to sound as a bashing of the company as i have great respect for them. They treated me right, were very responsive to my inquiries and feedback (in fact sent me a custom map at one occasion trying to alleviate some of the issues I was experiencing), and for the most part communicated swiftly, and ultimately offered a fair resolution (money back guarantee). So kudos to them, I still have utmost respect and certainly hope they continue to do work on improving their tune. Quickly, some of the things I disliked in the tune:

1. The overall character of the car changed adversely, it was no longer the magical M car that is was, but felt like a 'chipped' 135i (very unlinear with huge spikes of TQ - my dyno charts confirmed the same 'butt dyno' feel, and actually if you look at the graph posted on their website, you see the shape of the TQ curve - very non-linear down low with noticeable burst/spikes followed by drops of TQ - my actual TQ dyno curve literally looked like a seesaw - up down/up down, and of course that translated in what you actually felt).
2. Perhaps on the heels of the above as it relates to character of the car: Turbo lag was more noticeable/pronounced and definitely increased. Not only did I feel power came with a delay, it came very virulently and abruptly. Perhaps to the liking of many, but what was almost a NA aspirated feel of the car was gone, and you got the all or nothing sensation of a turbo car. To me, the biggest difference in the power delivery between the 1///M and 135i was the smoothness and linearity that the M engineers managed to achieve in all those hours of work on the 1M tune, running the aftermarket maps seemed to blow off the M magic dust.
3. Power gains were meager (10whp delta on the dyno and that under the 93 Octane maps, though in their defense they do claim 4% peak on their website, so if anything, it backs their assertions). Considering I gained as much from a silly mid pipe, I expected more from a tune on a FI car.
4. Boost was way too high for completely stock setup (19+ psi on the 93 Octane maps, confirmed with both a boost gauge physically reading actual levels, as well as the AP through the ECU, which of course is way too inefficient for stock turbos and an otherwise stock car, and also very aggressive for stock internals)

The Beta tune aside (and let's not forget it is a Beta), I have great respect for the company and found it easy to deal with their professional tuners. I still think the AP is like no other device out there (though I haven't tested Evolve's box), if they get the tune right, it will be the hands down winner. But a lot of wood needs to be chopped based on when I last experienced it.

Originally Posted by M3 Adjuster

I was at a car show a few weeks ago and spoke with some of the Austin Cobb guys. They have the M button figured it out. On some of their beginning tunes, they switched the M button on all the time (rendering the button on the wheel useless). They have now figured the programming out for this and now the M button works as it did originally from the factory.

As far as the reasoning why it was switched on...they simply thought people would want it on all the time ( many drivers push it every time they get in the car). When they realized it was something that some people still want to turn on and off... then they set about figuring out. It seemed like it was not easy and did take them a while..

My personal feeling is the guys were eager to release a product, and as such they released it early (perhaps targeting Christmas sales as that's when the release was). In their defense, they called it a Beta (which it most noticeable was), and perhaps still do. The issue became - they didn't have a shop car any longer, for months. So development didn't really progress.

Let's face it, I don't expect every tuner to come out with a 1///M tune given the limited numbers. But those that do, I would hold them to a certain standard. If my 1///M starts feeling like my tuned 135i (which it did), I will let it be known.

Originally Posted by v1k0d3n

i can for sure verify now that in the stage 1 - sport mode...M button still works. the advanced mode (which obviously yields more hp/tq) turns the M button off. i did notice that gas milage INCREASED in this mode under "normal" driving conditions, which didn't surprise me at all. my STi was the same way. when I used "intelligent" mode (which detuned the turbo), i always got WORSE gas milage. turbo's actually increase HP under normal driving conditions. I have to say...I am VERY pleased with this upgrade...and for the price, it was very hard to pass up!!

So the M button works on the Linear maps now (meaning you can toggle between on and off and there is a difference)? If so, that is good news. Certainly backs their words and commitment to get this done (I had identified this back in Dec and the tuners did admit it was not a trivial change to incorporate but will work on doing so).

I am glad you are happy, perhaps there has been a release of a new much improved version of the Beta? Have you done pre- and post- dynos, or at a minimum data logs? If so, what are the gains you are seeing (both peak but equally importantly curve shape) and at what boost levels?

[lcrain]

Originally Posted by ///M1

1. The overall character of the car changed adversely, it was no longer the magical M car that is was, but felt like a 'chipped' 135i (very unlinear with huge spikes of TQ - my dyno charts confirmed the same 'butt dyno' feel, and actually if you look at the graph posted on their website, you see the shape of the TQ curve - very non-linear down low with noticeable burst/spikes followed by drops of TQ - my actual TQ dyno curve literally looked like a seesaw - up down/up down, and of course that translated in what you actually felt).
2. Perhaps on the heels of the above as it relates to character of the car: Turbo lag was more noticeable/pronounced and definitely increased. Not only did I feel power came with a delay, it came very virulently and abruptly. Perhaps to the liking of many, but what was almost a NA aspirated feel of the car was gone, and you got the all or nothing sensation of a turbo car. To me, the biggest difference in the power delivery between the 1///M and 135i was the smoothness and linearity that the M engineers managed to achieve in all those hours of work on the 1M tune, running the aftermarket maps seemed to blow off the M magic dust.
3. Power gains were meager (10whp delta on the dyno and that under the 93 Octane maps, though in their defense they do claim 4% peak on their website, so if anything, it backs their assertions). Considering I gained as much from a silly mid pipe, I expected more from a tune on a FI car.
4. Boost was way too high for completely stock setup (19+ psi on the 93 Octane maps, confirmed with both a boost gauge physically reading actual levels, as well as the AP through the ECU, which of course is way too inefficient for stock turbos and an otherwise stock car, and also very aggressive for stock internals)

Thanks for your detailed response regarding the Cobb tune. I must say this disappoints me, but I am not all that surprised to be honest. I hope I am wrong as I say this but I think we are going to have to choose from either a linear/NA like power delivery with meager HP increase or a typical turbo like power delivery with typical N54 power delivery. When I spoke with Cobb they informed me that they had two maps, a linear and aggressive maps.

That said I will likely still try their product as I am local to their shop and it just seems like a good fit. I will probably go to their monthly meet to see if anyone with an N54 shows up. Though I anxiously await hearing about whatever tuner you chose to go with at this point.

[Texas F1]

My car has spent quite a bit of time recently at COBB headquarters for testing and tuning. The baseline (stock hardware) figures on their Mustang dynamometer were 294 whp and 381 wtq. We ended up with the stage2+ currently producing 367 whp and 450 wtq, so a significant improvement. This is with a FMIC, aFe intake, and exhaust work. I would describe the power as linear. In other words, I think the tune honors the characteristics of the factory tune, but just raises the bar (mainly from having a more efficient intercooler). I couldn't be happier with the tune so far. Just need to get the car out of the garage more for "testing" purposes.

I am driving up to Plano next week to visit Vorshlag and COBB for some suspension work. If you want to meet at COBB Plano (May 2), send me a PM.

[Das Ein]

Originally Posted by Texas F1

My car has spent quite a bit of time recently at COBB headquarters for testing and tuning. The baseline (stock hardware) figures on their Mustang dynamometer were 294 whp and 381 wtq. We ended up with the stage2+ currently producing 367 whp and 450 wtq, so a significant improvement. This is with a FMIC, aFe intake, and exhaust work. I would describe the power as linear. In other words, I think the tune honors the characteristics of the factory tune, but just raises the bar (mainly from having a more efficient intercooler). I couldn't be happier with the tune so far. Just need to get the car out of the garage more for "testing" purposes.

I am driving up to Plano next week to visit Vorshlag and COBB for some suspension work. If you want to meet at COBB Plano (May 2), send me a PM.

Sorry for off topic, but...

What FMIC, AFE intake (closed or open), and exhaust work do you have (type/brand). Thanks!

[Texas F1]

Originally Posted by Das Ein

Sorry for off topic, but...

What FMIC, AFE intake (closed or open), and exhaust work do you have (type/brand). Thanks!

The intercooler is the Helix Stepped Core design; aFe is the twin or Stage 2 intakes; cat back portion of exhaust is the Eisenmann race. The downpipes are a catted prototype that will be replaced with some production parts soon (sorry, don't recall the brand) and the mid-pipe is a COBB prototype. It has a collector near the front and then exits through a high-flow resonator to control the sound a bit. I was at the local BMW CCA drive last weekend and got several compliments on the sound of the exhaust. It does have a bit of drone right at 2K rpm or so.

[Texas F1]

I don't think I was clear about the intake type, but it is the open version.

[Das Ein]

Originally Posted by Texas F1

I don't think I was clear about the intake type, but it is the open version.

Awesome. Thanks for the reply.

I have the AFE stage 2 open/dual cone intake, ETS intercooler, AR catted downpipes, Berk mid-pipes, and Magnaflow axle-back exhaust...so it sound like we have very similar performance mods.

Do you know when the stage 2+ cobb AP tune will be ready for beta so we can download it? I have my cobb AP waiting to be installed. Just need the right maps.

[Texas F1]

Originally Posted by Das Ein

Awesome. Thanks for the reply.

I have the AFE stage 2 open/dual cone intake, ETS intercooler, AR catted downpipes, Berk mid-pipes, and Magnaflow axle-back exhaust...so it sound like we have very similar performance mods.

Do you know when the stage 2+ cobb AP tune will be ready for beta so we can download it? I have my cobb AP waiting to be installed. Just need the right maps.

Not sure if the stage 2+ map is officially released yet, but I'll bet it is very close; contact COBB directly if you don't find it on their site.

Yes, our set ups are very similar. I'd be interested in your results when you get the tune on your car.

[CarJunkie]

Great input here. I have considered a Maddad midpipe (approx 10hp) and was surprised by the price of the Cobb AP. Almost decided to do the Cobb instead. In the end, the only thing I really want is a little more pull to the top of the rpm range and a better sound. Sounds like Cobb wouldn't do either of those.

[v1k0d3n]

Originally Posted by ///M1

So the M button works on the Linear maps now (meaning you can toggle between on and off and there is a difference)? If so, that is good news. Certainly backs their words and commitment to get this done (I had identified this back in Dec and the tuners did admit it was not a trivial change to incorporate but will work on doing so).

I am glad you are happy, perhaps there has been a release of a new much improved version of the Beta? Have you done pre- and post- dynos, or at a minimum data logs? If so, what are the gains you are seeing (both peak but equally importantly curve shape) and at what boost levels?

They must have changed their maps completely, because I was surprised to see your notes. Very good writeup, and thank you! Now I have some things to look out for. I have to admit though...I've tried both of the "newer" maps? I only use " because I'm not sure if they're the same as what you tested or not. I thought the car felt GREAT with the latest maps. I ONLY like the linear maps though. I DO NOT like what they consider "stock" trottle maps. It's too jumpy. The linear maps seem to appropriately capture the 1M feel, and I have tried a lot of tunes before (I've had STi's since 2007, and even played with ECU tunes on my ITR since 2001). Having tried a lot of maps, on a lot of different cars, I know exactly what you're talking about. An improper map can definitely change a cars character of the car. I didn't really feel that was the case with the linear maps. Did they change something since you tested the beta maps perhaps?

[v1k0d3n]

Originally Posted by lcrain

Thanks for your detailed response regarding the Cobb tune. I must say this disappoints me, but I am not all that surprised to be honest. I hope I am wrong as I say this but I think we are going to have to choose from either a linear/NA like power delivery with meager HP increase or a typical turbo like power delivery with typical N54 power delivery. When I spoke with Cobb they informed me that they had two maps, a linear and aggressive maps.

That said I will likely still try their product as I am local to their shop and it just seems like a good fit. I will probably go to their monthly meet to see if anyone with an N54 shows up. Though I anxiously await hearing about whatever tuner you chose to go with at this point.

Don't be too disappointed, really. Read my last post.

[MrRoboto]

How much R&D goes into these tunes anyway?

[nicoz]

Hi,

Just looking at the dyno graphs... seems like something's wrong around 4,5k-5k rpm when comparing with the other dyno graphs on Cobb website... like the ones for the 135i for instance.

I'm no expert in that matter. Someone maybe can make it clear to us.

[nicoz]

http://www.cobbtuning.com/Dyno-Datab...if_height=1631