Thanks for the comments, I have two more pics on me... I will get my car later and shoot more







This one is one of the compares the day I put the car on 91 and softronics vs one of the testing runs on COBB

P.S. The car that day (91oct soft) vs the baseline dyno with softronics with 93oct is only 10 whp difference (501HP vs 512HP)

 

The Softronics is a 91octane tune unless you got a custom 93 octane Softronic tune. It doesn't matter if you add 100 or 103 or 117 octane, it's still a 91 octane tune. The 10hp difference you see may just be margin of error in measurement. Correct me if I'm wrong but the label on the graph states it is a 91 octane Softronic tune. If you compare a 91 octane tune to a 93 octane tune you would expect about 25-30 hp/tq difference just from optimizations to the tune for the octane difference.

 

Im a bit confused as the dyno you posted says that the car has a Softronic flash in it and it was run on 91 and you ran the new flash on 93.. The car had been flashed a few years ago for the prior owner for 91 so I assume it still was in the car and not altered etc. Granted I have changed the files since then for more power yet that applies more to 93 octane. The Hp figure you gave of 513 is the same as you mentioned and posted prior as 513WHP and 522WTQ with the 91.


These threads mention 513 with 91:
https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...7-2-turbo.html


https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...numbers-2.html


I also posted in the 2nd thread listed above with the IPD plenum a dyno of a 997.2 run on 91 octane and on a mustang at 530WHP in which seemed unusual that you were even only getting the 513WHP on the Dyno with exhaust was odd. Our usual file for 93 would run up in the high 550s-560s as well so something seems off..... This of course depends on mods etc as some are beneficial while others may not be.


The above posted dyno that you now said is the 91 dyno doesn't match up either with the baseline one posted on 4/1/14 "Baseline dyno my 997.2 Turbo.




Best,
Scott

 

Scott,

You are a great tuner and obviously know your way around these cars. There is no denying cobbs has a nice platform. We are going to have to get you to change your tunes to the Cobb's format . The nice part about tuning with the Cobbs flash tool is the throttle body learn process after each flash no longer has to be done. Everything from tune to log is all in one package. No more durametric cable and program for data logging.

 

Softronics, just to make this clear this Thread is not to begin a tune war

My car have the 91 softronics tune and with 93gas only gain 10whp, I have sereval dyno passes with the softronics tune and the best one was what I post... The day of the COBB tune the first dyno pull was the one on the first post with the difference of the COBB tune (before and after on the same day and dyno)

the point here is that with COBB tune the car put 562whp regardless what tune have before... To make more sense of my point, my friends Turbo S the same day put 540whp eith only COBB tune and his baseline was 494whp with EVOMS tune, so is nothing against any other tune. Its just our facts

 

What Im stating is you had posted the car ran 513WHP and 522WHT with 91 octane and it was a 91 file. You now flashed the car as a 93 specific file and it increased to 562WHP and 560WHT. This would be a difference of 49WHP and 38WHT from the 91octane to 93 specific file.


When you said you added the 93 to the car and it gained 10WHP at 512WHP it was actually about at the other 2 91octane dyno runs that had been previously done as it was a 91 file. Basically it didn't gain anything with the 93 octane. Should it had it would have been around 523WHP.


What would be more comparative is a showing of two 93 specific files is my point.


Best,
Scott

 

Ok, got you... At the end all dynos always has variables and will never be 100% acuerate

 

+1 for Mitch and Cobb!

 

Yep, thats my point theres no substitute for custom tunning

 

While it may not appear as objective when a tuner chimes in and questions your data, I'll do so as a moderator as I have no dog in the hunt.

In your opening statement, you said:

When you say "the only difference is COBB", this suggests that you ran a 93 tune vs a 93 tune and the only difference was the tuner.

If you ran a 91 specific tune and are compared it against a 93 specific tune, then the difference is more than just the tuner, and you should state it.

If you don't know what type of tune your original file was, then you don't really know if the only difference is the tuner, and you should state it.

 

Yes, Agree 100% the error was posting that both runs have 93oct gas but one was with 91 oct specific Softronics tune. What will be the difference if my car have the "93 specific tune" on it? will never know


Just to add another fact, my friends Turbo S with EVOMS 93oct tune (no mods) put 494whp and with the 93oct COBB Custom tune put 540whp... if that is low or high compare to another 93 oct tune from EVOMS I don't know, but it was what it was.

This Turbo S also did a run with a stock tune (100% stock) and another with 93oct COBB Custom tune and BBi exhaust










The other 997.2 Turbo on the program was a complete stock one, put 448whp and after the COBB custom tune put 514whp... I believe is pretty good gain for a 100% stock car





And this is my car to complete the photo shoot

 

Were the tunes done on the same day and SAE corrected? I noticed many Porsche tuners post STD of uncorrected dyno #s. Impossible to compare without consistent testing and correction parameters. I've tuned many cars and can overlay a million different sheets to tell any "story" I would want to if that was my intention (it never was).

I've even changed the weight & hp @ 60mph on a Mustang dyno and it showed over a 40rwhp difference from a back to back run.

 

Yes same day all SAE Corrected, no tricks here believe me... COBB doesn't gave us anything, just a good relationship and professional tread

 

I totally agree and that is why I like doing all my testing with my Vbox. Same road, Same day with different mods. Pretty hard to fool the GPS. Something like this:

Runs were made at Dense Altitude of around 4100 ft. in temperatures around 77 degree F. Most magazines use the 1Ft. rollout. I did not which in theory we could deduct .3 seconds off the 0-60.

All test were done on sport mode, AC on, auto shift simply by flooring the car from standing start and did not use launch control except for the last test.

Stock with Fabspeed and BCM filter – 4.0 seconds
After Vivid Tune – 3.7 Seconds
After Cat Bypass – 3.6 Seconds
After R888 – 3.5 seconds
Launch Control - 3.2 Seconds with major traction issues (32 PSI front and 38 PSI rear).

 

that's also a good compare... I have vbox too, will do some runs on the weekend