Dyno tuned my car tonight. Meh.

There is no problem, just stating what I did, and that I was under the assumption that it would put out closer to stock rated numbers is all. That and the fact that a stock car (ST in this case) which is rated lower than mine from factory responds better to ots tunes and puts out better numbers than ours. I'm not complaining at all. just an observation and "general discussion"

 

This is a Freektuned GT3071 on 93, stock mannies. You won't get as far on 91 though.

 

Nice! Yeah, you don't really see that on TX 93, LOL.

 

I'd be very happy with those numbers.

 

Hmmm...maybe that's why Cobb's own help file refers to the OTS maps as "base maps" (see attachment)

Attachment source: https://cobbtuning.atlassian.net/wiki/display/PRS/MAZDASPEED+Tuning+Guide

It looks like Cobb recently redid their ATR manual, and actually I have to say I really like the new updated version so far. Far better than the old one.

I see a lot of misunderstanding about these OTS maps on the forums all the time. The OTS maps are not performance maps. They are designed to be a starting point for further tuning. I would argue, some of the tables aren't even a good starting point on most cars.

edit: And with regards to the OP, I always tell people, the OTS maps are a great way to make sure that your car doesn't gain anything from your mods. If you look at the differences between the OTS maps, as the maps add flow mods, Cobb decreases WGDC while keeping boost and ignition timing targets roughly the same, such that the Stage 3 map is really going to give you roughly the same loads and ignition timing as the Stage 1 maps...ie the same power.

 

I appreciate the info @VTMongoose