Tuning Review: Cobb vs Hondata (Extensive!)

[BV1]

It has been sometime coming... but I thought I take my time on this and make sure I covered all the bases, and tried all the features before I would post a thoural review between the two tuning options available for the Si.

I have personally made over 200 custom maps/revisions now for myself and others using the Cobb AP and approximately 50 maps/revisions using the Hondata FP. I have had the opportunity to work both directly on the Cobb AP Honda Beta team since its conception, with its developers and also with Doug from Hondata. This just means that I have 4 times the experience using the Cobb then the Hondata... but despite that, I still feel a review is warranted at this point.

There is an agreed hardware/software comparison list between the two devices already posted here:

Official FlashPro & AccessPORT Comparison



But I am sure what you REALLY want to know what the real deal is. All those numbers and comparison's don't mean as much as someone explaining to you which is solution has features better oriented for your goals and why. This review is to sum up without going too technical my overall experience with each tuning solution from a PERFORMANCE stand point. Not to discuss if the AP can log dyno runs or if the Hondata has 20x20 tables etc... so with no further adue, let me begin.

The below review is assuming "perfect" ideal tunes on both systems... as in you have invested the time to tune your car properly. I have had both tunes running in this condition (nearly as good as you can get them to). Also I am not commenting on the "base" maps, I will assume both units have a good selection of base maps for intake/header combinations.

Currently Cobbs ATR tunes HIGHLIGHTS include the ability to remove the P0420 code, the ability to log with a digital input from a WB02 in ATR, a cockpit display, unrestricted table access to 100's of tables and some very nice 3d graphic displays. At this point and time the Cobb AP only supports Air Flow Meter based tunes and these AFM tunes currently offer more features then Hondata's AFM tunes (This is because Hondata is spending more effort in their SD/MAP based tunes) as of the date of this review. These are tunes that require the use of the Mass Air Flow sensor to tell it how much fuel to inject.

The Cobb AP is a tool, much like a screw driver or a ratchet set. It allows the user to twist and turn nearly every portion of the stock ECU code. Think of it like using a set of tools to fine tune the way your engine is running. Changing the spark plugs, cleaning the air filter etc but keeping all the stock internals. This is the easiest way to explain it. Most of the code itself remains unchanged, but the reference sections of the code, particularly the tables are all laid out before you and are easily changable. My Cobb AP takes exactly 6 minutes and 10 seconds to flash a map, it is a first generation device, and I understand newer devices has less flash time. Cobb has not offered any upgrade program at this time, despite my asking over and over. Continuing...

With the Cobb AP using the Access Tuner Race software you can edit nearly anything and everything table wise. Not that all the tables are entirely explained... for example the "VTEC Window" table. However, all of your stock features will remain intact as for all intents and purposes because it is a modified "stock" map that is being run, like your Oil Flow Meter for example.

Using the Cobb AP and ATR you can get your car to run very close to ideal with the tools provided. It may take a bit longer to get there (explained later) but you can get there. However at this point, you are stuck using the AFM based technology. But lets assume you can get the car running perfectly with that AFM tune and that you are happy with it running that way disregarding Flash Time or Rev Hang issues, because this was the situation I was in. Overall I was happy with my tune, I had accepted certain issues as unable to fix (like MAF resonating aka reversion pulses) but thought I would give the Hondata unit a try just to review and investigate.

If the Cobb AP/ATR is like a screwdriver, when then the Hondata unit on the other hand, is like a mechanic. You talk to your mechanic and tell him what you want to do, and he goes about getting it done without bothering you with the finer details.

For a simple example... like setting your VTEC window and engage points. You may have to tweak around 6 tables editting the raw data with the Cobb ATR software while this may offer more control to some it may also offer more opportunities for error, but with the Hondata Flash Pro Manager you simply set the VTEC window as desired by entering the range for the window and the engagement RPM.

Hondata's current main highlights include: Live Tuning(!!!), Speed Density Tunes, Table manipulation based on graphic input (very handy, smooth the graphs like artwork instead of by numbers), No Rev Hang, Turbo support, Fuel/Tuning suggestion (AKA Lamba Overlay), online YouTube videos (see how its done vs read hows its done), and faster datalogging, in addition to those that the Cobb unit currently has (minus the display).

It took me sometime to learn the Hondata FPM software... when I was getting started, things are done very different then in the Cobb ATR. Think of it like trying use your mechanic like a screwdriver or a ratchet set... he or she won't like that very much as they already know what to do and how to do it. If you treat FPM the same was as ATR and try to boss it around, or look for specific tables to adjust your going to have a hard time. The good news is that you will soon realize that the "dirty work" has already been done for you. In my case I had to put a call into Hondata and they personally helped me with the software/learning issues I was having, more then once.

Once I realized this and changed my way of thinking, things started to make more sense. Let me explain. For a long time I have held firm to the belief the AFM/MAF based tunes were superior with regards AFR regulation and resolution, due to the science behind the technology. While the TECHNOLOGY when used properly CAN give greater resolution due to the nature of the AFM sensor itself... the way the AFM based regulation is employed by default (and with the AFM based tunes) does not take advantage of this and as a result is definetly INFERIOR to what Hondata has come up with in their Speed Density tunes. In other words the AFR regulation in the Hondata SD tunes is more stable then in AFM tunes.

Don't believe it just based on the words, take a look at what a fellow user has posted for an example:

FlashPro calibrations/datalogs

Originally Posted by soxfan

Thought I'd post my back-to-back datalogs comparing stock to a custom MAP tune. Besides flashpro, my only other mod is the Password JDM Powerchamber.

Stock idle:


MAP tune idle:


Stock cruising at 80mph in 6th gear:


MAP tune cruising at 80 mph in 6th gear:

EDIT: Added this graph just in case there was issue with the above being a PWJDM intake:


Full log: http://www.members.shaw.ca/smpotter/...R/datalog9.xls

Pay attention to the AFR (Red line in Soxfans Graph, Blue in my Injen Graph) I have long accepted that is neccessary for the CL feedback portion of the Air Fuel Ratio to result in the AFR swinging rich to lean. As this is what was neccessary for the old school narrow band oxygen sensors to be able to register a "rich" or a "lean" condition or AFR as they could not read "14.7" for example. The old Narrow Band sensors could only read RICH or LEAN.

Our Civic Si employs a wideband type factory Oxygen Sensor and yet still uses the same logic that makes the AFR swing from Rich (~13.9) to Lean (~15.0) at idle and cruise situations, as seen in the above post. I had previously accepted this as "normal" behavior. And it is for the most part, its just not IDEAL behavior.

However after been given the ability to try the Hondata MAP based speed density tunes it displayed evidence that these tunes were more "performance" oriented due to a more stable AFR. The AFR's were significantly more stable as posted above, and the resonance issues that AFM are so sensitive too... were gone.

You may notice resonance issues as a simply lack of performance at a certain RPM's and Load conditions... say low RPM WOT on some long tubed CAI intakes, or the inability to get proper cruising AFR using a certain brand SRI intake. While these AFM/MAF issues are no excuse for an improper intake design (not naming names)... the MAP based tunes can easily overcome them, as they have employed logic that will not allow the AFR to change that drasticly... that quickly... like in the MAF based tunes.

Think of it as a CL feedback system that has all the oscillation dialed out of it... there is no more RICH LEAN RICH LEAN... just the ideal AFR as it was tuned for.

The long and the short of it is this has resulted in NO hesitation when easing into or slamming into... the throttle. Prior to running SD based tunes I had come to accept that at certain RPM's and throttle positions the car was sluggish or would "blip" for half a second. Logs indicated for example +10 STFT at 1500 and 2500 RPM WOT on the Injen CAI... but the MAF Cal was perfect and only that RPM and Throttle condition caused this affect.

See here: Injen CAI Resonance

This is resonance... and that +10 STFT results in a "blip" or loss of power while the ECU determines it actually needs 10% more fuel at that RPM. In others words its REACTIVE not PROACTIVE... The SD tunes do not have this present, just instant throttle response. This is due to us programing into the Volumetric Efficiency table the results we have already learning REACTIVELY... so now that information can be applied PROACTIVELY... so that we don't have a BLIP or loss of power. IE The ECU already knows it is going to need 10% more fuel at WOT 2500 RPM so come that time, the ECU just adds the fuel (via the VE tables) before the STFT jumps and asks for the extra fuel.

Also I have been VERY impressed by my cars ability when it came to cold starting. I had been worried about Cold Start issues running the MAP based tunes as it was my opinion that MAF had better cold start regulation... HOWEVER I am happy to report I have not had even ONE issue.. even in the extreme -30 and -40 conditions up here. FYI -40C is = to -40F. The car starts just the same as factory. I actually watched one morning from the window (Compustar - Remote Start) and noticed I had forgot to plug the car in, and it was COLD out. I pressed the button and no issues at all, just fired right up.

It became apparent the Hondata MAP based tunes are indeed superior to the Stock and Cobb AFM based tunes. The stock logic is simply jumping from using the AFM at idle/cruise to using the MAP at WOT and is not taking advantage of both sensors simotaneously. This basically creates alot of performance issues and costs us in the long run. If you use the AFM/MAF based tunes, you must also tolerate the AFR jumping around, AND the resonance issues, AND the extra restriction of the AFM itself in the intake.

So when one combines the above information it quickly becomes clear that SD or MAP based tunes are indeed superior to MAF or AFM based tunes. Add to that information the freebies that come with Hondata FP... a 90 second flash time on the Hondata FP (vs my 6 mins 10 seconds), no Rev Hang (working as intended), Turbo Support, LIVE TUNING (Huge!), graphical table manipulation, faster datalogging, INJECTOR SUPPORT, and Lamba Overlay (fueling suggestions based on datalogs).

There is alot more going on here then I have posted above, but you get the jyst of my review and I can only say so much without getting too technical. There is alot more going on behind the scenes in the Hondata FP then in the Cobb ATR. Where as the Cobb unit for the most part changes the tables and their values... the Hondata unit changes the way the ECU is run entirely with alot of custom coding.

For example, Live Tuning is an amazing feature... but building it and making it work is no easy feat. Changing values on the fly in the micro controller RAM requires extensive ECU re-coding nevermind the programming for the software WE use to adjust it.

While I don't doubt the Cobb is working hard to bring us a quality solution, there is no denying that currently the Hondata FP is superior in terms of performance which is what this review is based on, and this makes sense considering their experience in the market. Running the FP it became clear to me that I could get the car running better (stable AFR's), faster, with less time spent datalogging and uploading. As I plan on installing cams this year, my tune will have to re-done and this means less time spent re-doing it.

I don't want anyone to take offense to this review, so I tried to keep the information based on my personal experience not generalization but now that I have a really got a shot at both units, even though I do miss the Cobb display, the performance gained from removing resonance and adding a stable AFR more then made up for it. As I have said in the past I am one to give credit where credit is due...

So in this case, I believe Hondata deserves some credit for a quality product.

Steve

[fre$h si]

nice write up steve
but fp does have valet mode

[bossman]

nice write up...but the way you make it seem,it's like there's no basemaps for the FP nor is there any type of security,it is password protected which is all the security you need.I have'nt yet caught everything wrong,this was just the first and most obvious that I found in a minute of reviewing.I had hopes of an unbiased review but this seems to be not quite there.

[BV1]

Originally Posted by fre$h si

nice write up steve
but fp does have valet mode

Originally Posted by bossman

nice write up...but the way you make it seem,it's like there's no basemaps for the FP nor is there any type of security,it is password protected which is all the security you need.I have'nt yet caught everything wrong,this was just the first and most obvious that I found in a minute of reviewing.I had hopes of an unbiased review but this seems to be not quite there.

I made no reference to Valet mode, or maps in the review. Please explain.

Steve

[bossman]

my bad,the top part that compares them side by side is'nt from you?If not who is it from?

[fre$h si]

i was referring to what the chart said under "pre installed maps on device"

[BV1]

I further explained my 200 revisions vs 50 revisions comment incase there was mis-interpretation.

Steve

[BV1]

Originally Posted by fre$h si

i was referring to what the chart said under "pre installed maps on device"

Thats not my baby, that chart originated due to the efforts of Silversweet09 I believe and has been agreed upon by both Cobb and Hondata, its posted in the link above the graph.

Steve

[bossman]

ok...IDK why Hondata would agree to the chart,but it's still informative in the most technical aspect,but there's more to each than what is on the chart.

[nycclaye]

fp can clear DTC's

[BV1]

If there is an issue with the chart, please post about it in that thread. If my review is missing information that you want to know about, please post it in this thread, and I will answer as best I can.

Steve

[bossman]

my bad....again.

[Silversweet09]

Originally Posted by bossman

ok...IDK why Hondata would agree to the chart,but it's still informative in the most technical aspect,but there's more to each than what is on the chart.

That chart was completed through a joint effort by Cobb & Hondata. They both approved of the values. There are a couple things that need to get updated since it was posted, however.

If you feel something is listed in error, please post in that thread so I can work with Doug & Gary on updating it.

Thanks!

[Silversweet09]

Steve - very nice write up btw!

[ruloSI]

Good job Steve!

[wicked image]

wow.. i was already set on the FP but this really makes me want it even more. just to see the way the engine runs stock the the rich lean rich lean.. its crazy. thanks for the review and could you post up a link for the hondata flashpro chart thread.. i am going to look for it but i am sure there will be like 60+ pages about FPs/ Cobbs. thanks

[Silversweet09]

It's in the sticky's in this section. Here:

Official FlashPro & AccessPORT Comparison

[mucter]

Steve, phenomenal job on posting up actual empirical info comparing the two types of logic here. It's good to see some of the things Doug has explained to me over the phone represented visually and with numbers to back it up.

Glad you're enjoying tuning with FPM, and good analogy between ATR and FPM.

[soxfan143]

Good writeup Steve.

[aki]

Just saw this thread, I liked your review.

Can you go into more specifically how an AFM-based tune could be better, but what exactly prevents that with our cars?