Cobb and JB4 Dyno Results

[Terry@BMS]

Hey guys,

Spent a couple hrs on the dyno today collecting data. I have logs of every run and it will take some time to sort through everything. But I'll just post the dyno charts and a few quick notes for now and add some additional logs and analysis later.

The test car is our 2008 135i, 30k miles, 100% stock other than a dual cone intake and BMS oil catch can. Fuel is 91 octane with a can of NOS octane boost added to the full tank. Basically, 93 octane.

I have around 65 emails staring me down right now so some quick comments.

1) The JB4's low end approach of running less boost, less fuel, but more advance resulted in similar torque figures.
2) The JB4 map 1 is a little less aggressive up top than the Cobb "Aggressive" map and JB4 map 2 a little more aggressive up top.
3) I don't think a piggyback will be able to touch their air/fuel ratios below 5000rpm, but with less boost and more advance I don't think they need to either.
4) Just my personal opinion but I find the Cobb "linear" maps horrible to drive and the "normal" maps extremely too boost happy. Half throttle 12psi happy. I prefer the mapping we've setup in the JB4 which is around 8psi at half throttle. But, these things can always be adjusted.
5) Overall, I don't foresee JB4 owners trading in for the Cobb for improved drivability or power but the install process itself is easier which is very important to quite a few. I suspect Cobb will take over Vishnu's business on the top end of the market and then the question for many customers will be become whether the extra install time is worth the lower cost and additional features the JB4 offers.