A very big YES! The 91 octane tune is better than stock as far as power, the car doesn't fall on it's face between shifts like it used to and the car pulls like a beast to the NEW 7000 rpm limit. I'd say it is very much worth the money, IMHO.So are those that purchased this product for 500.00 or so, happy with the gains on the 91 oct map(s) ?
I live in Canada where 93 is not available
Also what I'm really having difficulty with, is risking the mfgs warranty by installing this product :scared:
My Cobb AP observations...
Finally got the Cobb AP installed this morning. I initially installed the 91 octane stage 1 map due to everyone saying it was better than the 93 map. Peak boost on the 91 map was 19.92 psi, but on average it is hitting 19.5-ish. The max boost run that produced that number was in 2nd gear.
![]()
I was seeing 17-18 psi in first gear, but the gear run out is so short it's hard for me to visually read the gauge. I can't really tell on the butt-dyno if the engine is making any more power but I plan on doing a dyno test in a few weeks with all three maps (stock, 91 and 93) just so I can document the output differences on paper. I also tried the 93 octane stage 1 map and concur with others findings that it's not nearly as "responsive" as the 91 map. I have a feeling Cobb is going to want to go back to the drawing board in regards to the 93 map. I still think the 91 octane stage 1 map could be tweaked for a smidge more for a 93 octane car. Boost seems to taper down a bit too much as rpm climbs. I think I remember reading that the 93 map doesn't have quite the taper down and runs 1-2 psi higher at upper rpm. It just appears as if the A/F ratio targets are set too rich on the 93 map and that could be an issue. The engine seems a bit muffled compared to the 91. I was kind of hoping to see peak psi around at least 20.5 psi. Mine seems to be displaying peak boost numbers with nothing erratic showing up like others have. I only drove the FiST about 12 miles since I installed the 91 map. Wondering if all the short/long term fuel trims and speed density learning are erased with the reflash (I would think they would be). Overall I like the AP and can't wait for the Racer Access to be released.
21 - 40 of 50 Posts
Ok, so here is the latest (bare with me). I scheduled an appointment with Cobb Tuning Plano to look into the map discrepancy and to get a baseline for my car. Cobb replaced my K&N panel filter with one of their own for the test and left it in there free of charge. Kudos to them for that! 
So, with that said... (takes a deep breath)... I am *VERY* disappointed with my "stock" numbers. According to their dyno my car only makes 182 hp and 227 pft torque at the flywheel (a whopping 15 hp less than Fords advertised rating). The torque is quite good though. Either the correction and input factors on the dyno is uber conservative (Mustang dynos notoriously net lower numbers than Dynojet dynos, that is just a fact), OR my car has an UNUSUALLLY high driveline loss (highly doubtful), OR my car is just a complete "DUD". I have never seen such a low "horsepower to the wheels" number on a Fiesta ST anywhere in the world (and I have seen over two dozen different dyno runs on 2-3 different types of dynos) for this application. The number spread between all those dyno runs is less than 5%. I think I will have to seek a second opinion (and dyno my car on a Dynojet 248E just to get a comparison). :biglaugh: Also, I was a bit disappointed that I was not provided with the best 91 map dyno run to compare with the 93 map dyno run (is it a state secret?). I can't compare the two tunes curve for curve to verify which one is truly "better". I was only provided with my best run (they did about 10 dyno runs total). But... I'm not going to complain since they did my baseline for free. :meh: My best Cobb tuned run, supposedly on the 93 map (I really don't know for sure) netted 172 hp & 247 pft torque to the wheels. The "tuned" wheel horsepower number is on the lowish side of a bone stock car and with an estimated driveline loss of 12%. That's approximately 192 hp & 276 pft torque @ the flywheel (good lord that's some beefy torque!!!). They did do some OAR adjustment running to get -1.00 on the timing advance learning. Anyways, that's where I am. :whistling:
So, with that said... (takes a deep breath)... I am *VERY* disappointed with my "stock" numbers. According to their dyno my car only makes 182 hp and 227 pft torque at the flywheel (a whopping 15 hp less than Fords advertised rating). The torque is quite good though. Either the correction and input factors on the dyno is uber conservative (Mustang dynos notoriously net lower numbers than Dynojet dynos, that is just a fact), OR my car has an UNUSUALLLY high driveline loss (highly doubtful), OR my car is just a complete "DUD". I have never seen such a low "horsepower to the wheels" number on a Fiesta ST anywhere in the world (and I have seen over two dozen different dyno runs on 2-3 different types of dynos) for this application. The number spread between all those dyno runs is less than 5%. I think I will have to seek a second opinion (and dyno my car on a Dynojet 248E just to get a comparison). :biglaugh: Also, I was a bit disappointed that I was not provided with the best 91 map dyno run to compare with the 93 map dyno run (is it a state secret?). I can't compare the two tunes curve for curve to verify which one is truly "better". I was only provided with my best run (they did about 10 dyno runs total). But... I'm not going to complain since they did my baseline for free. :meh: My best Cobb tuned run, supposedly on the 93 map (I really don't know for sure) netted 172 hp & 247 pft torque to the wheels. The "tuned" wheel horsepower number is on the lowish side of a bone stock car and with an estimated driveline loss of 12%. That's approximately 192 hp & 276 pft torque @ the flywheel (good lord that's some beefy torque!!!). They did do some OAR adjustment running to get -1.00 on the timing advance learning. Anyways, that's where I am. :whistling:
Thanks.
Actually, if you look at the graphs, there's a place under the curve where the torque difference is 49 pft. lol. That's a significant amount of difference and something you can feel behind the wheel. Torque steer has officially reared it's ugly but equally fun head. Drivability is much improved. Traction is a bit more limited (that's an understatement) despite running sticky 215 width Dunlop Direzza D2 tires on 7.5" wide wheels.
There's also the +29-30 extra horsepower up on top where the stock map falls on it's face, the Cobb tune pulls hard all the way to rev limit (which is now 7000 rpm instead of 6350. Peak numbers don't always tell the whole story. The engine pulls A whole LOT better up top now too. Just feels good everywhere... better throttle response, better mid range, better top end. What more could we ask for? 
21 - 40 of 50 Posts
