I asked Ian about the changes in the MAPerformance thread he monitors, lets see what we get as a response.

Yeah but all aftermarket tunes will fix this, not just the OTS ones.

True, but is it worth $250 for a custom tune on a stock car on top of the AP price?

COBB maps work for I'd say 80% of the cars, the V5 beta MAPerformance map has also given me no trouble, something changed in V7 though.

If the throttle mapping is the only thing I wanted to fix, I'd just run the Cobb 91 map.

For $300, you can get a healthy 15-20% bump from a good e-tuner on a completely stock car. I'd throw in EGR, TGV, and boost controller if you don't mind wrenching.

I bought the AP from MAP so the MAP OTS is essentially free. Def going to dynotune in the future. I gotta figure out the TGV and EGR codes b/c Ca smog is a PITA.

I completely agree, turns out my MY2017+ has alot of 1 use clamps and diagnostic connections when compared to the MY2015-2016, right now I'm just spotting the differences and planning out engine mods.

I 100% agree that a custom map is the way to go, but the MAPerformance OTS was a great in between for most people.

I was on the V5 beta, the V7 looks to have changed quite a bit.

Can you elaborate where do you see this on the log ? Or how it specifically relates to AF learning and AF correction values. I trying to learn about FTCL tuning and I have seen custom etune logs with similar AF correction values (-10 near redline) as his log but the learning was at 0 or close it.

The target AFR on their 93 tunes was always on the lean side. 11.7 IIRC on the prior revisions. This one seems to be targeting 11.4.

Here is another log if you would like to take a quick look:

https://datazap.me/u/e90/map-v70?log...1-2-3-10-13-27

It is hard to explain. It is these little things here and there that make this tune very enjoyable. It is certainly nowhere near as strong as my custom tune but it is smoother, the throttle input is perfect IMO, the way the revs climb and drop, specially in 2nd and 3rd gears (where I spend most of my time), is also perfect. It sounds different too in a better way, hard to explain really. The car just feels happy and not over stressed if that makes any sense. It does register knock a bit more, but that is to be expected for an OTS tune but on the other hand who knows how much the sensors are desensitized with etunes...So the actual difference may not be as big as the AP screen would make you believe. I also think that there is a little more room left on the table in terms of power, which maybe easier on the clutch in the long run.

Full time closed loop is just keeping the fuel trims active so its able to keep it more in check for weather changes, atmosphere, etc... look at your AF correction and you will see what I mean. Each tuner has their own strategy, but what I found that made the most driveability/power was richer fuel, more timing. Low timing + leaner = a lot of heat. And a lot of heat leads to knock. But really your car is running leaner than that target actually. If you had an aftermarket wideband on it or a tail pipe wideband from a dyno, you would see it would be lean up top where the corrections are high. On the ones I've done, when in O/L mode, they follow target perfect. And the O2 sensor reads about 10% rich. Switch to full time closed loop and the sensor follows target perfect, but it's removing 10% up top because the sensor is telling it too because it's scaled wrong

FTCL makes sure you are always hitting target AFR at WOT (unless your O2 sensor is fouled) and it also allows for a little better gas mileage as well. Other benefits as well but those I am most familiar with.

It 100% is. Ask anyone tuned by JR, PhatBotti, Clark, Bren-the difference is night and day. If an OTS map is at any point better than your E tune than your E tuner sucks hardcore balls.

Thanks guys, for taking the time to check my log from yesterday. I did another three pulls today with Cobb 91. Same tank of gas, same roads, pretty much identical conditions. I think it did a lot better. Almost no FKL except for one pull at -1.41 but it seemed to "unlearn" back to 0 itself during the pull. The other pulls had no knock whatsoever.

https://datazap.me/u/sjxie1990/cobb-...&zoom=577-1231

Although the Cobb OTS did show some FKL at -1.41 when just cruising but I dont think i should worry about that. Also, this isn't because Cobb desensitizes the Knock Sensors right? I there was such a huge difference in WOT knocking so I'm really hoping it's a legit reduction.

Also just curious, the AF CORR 1 % flattens to 0 at about 3448rpm, is this the transition form Closed to Open loop? The COMM FUEL AFR also as a large deviation at the same spot.

Cobb OTS def feels less powerful but ill stick with it until protune.

If I'm understanding correctly, past a certain RPM on closed loop, an extra 10% fuel is removed due to an inherent limitation of the O2 sensor (hence the -10% AFR Correction). That will cause the engine to run lean but the ECU to believe it's stoic. O2 sensor scaling will prevent it from running lean. Does it do that by eliminating the AFR correction?

There is no night and day difference between open loop and closed loop if it's tuned properly.... It's the same... Closed loop is adjusting the fuel injection all the time to keep it on target. The reason why it is removing 10% is because of the O2 scaling. It's off from the factory... Notice on the Cobb map that the AFR reading from the O2 sensor is richer than target... The car is actually running target, but since it's in OL on the Cobb map, it's not going to correct it when the O2 is reading different than target. You can verify this by an actual wideband, which is what I did. It's also needed to get the correct scaling for the O2 sensor. I simply scaled the O2 to what the dyno was reading and it works perfect

This, this x100

Guys, just to clarify you are saying that the O2 scaling is off, not the MAF scaling?

More and more I've been wishing I had a dyno in my garage to play around with all day...

O2 is off by 5-10% rich at wot. You can recalibrate on a dyno.

Thanks. So the only way to get this perfect is pretty much a dyno tune ? Reason I am asking is because I have seen few different Etune FTCL logs from different cars by reputable tuners that show this -8 to -10 correction up top. Also, pardon for asking noob questions but doesn't the COBB OTS primarily utilize the MAF sensor for AFR ? So wouldn't be in fact running rich in WOT open loop if that is what is coming up on logs ?

I would say reputable tuners understand the o2 scaling problems and adjust fueling and fueling targets to compensate.

No, it won't run rich. The O2 will read rich while the car is on target. That's how you know the maf is scaled properly. The O2 isn't even an actual wideband. People just call it that because it's able to correct fuel and it's after the turbo

When looking at fueling you're better off looking at the AFR on the dyno chart.


My car targets mid 10 to 11, reads high 10 to low 11 on factory sensor, runs dead on the dyno sniffer.

Lots of FTCL etunes probably running pretty rich. even my scaling when i was making maps was probably rich, this is why I left them on the leaner side of target if you look at my logs. not hurting anything, just leaving a little power on the table.

OK, thanks again. So essentially the log I posted is a bit leaner than the 11.4 up top that it is showing. Correct ?

https://datazap.me/u/e90/map-v70?log...1-2-3-10-13-27

Factory cats or no? This is specific to a "stage 1" calibration

I am talking about the times when I was running factory cats when I was fighting with the maf scaling

That being said I still think looking at the dyno afr plot is the way to go as those are (hopefully) calibrated regularly

I can confirm that also. Mine was around 5.7% rich most of the range.

bumped