ECUtek vs Cobb AP

Well, since we are electrocuting frankensteins baby here..... There is only one tuning platform for the GTR, and that's COBB. These guys have won the race, conquered the world, installed puppet regimes on every continent, and declared legal holidays!
I wouldn't look at alternatives for any reason, I want a company that is going to continue updating and adding new features...not so they can charge me more money, but because they care about the customer and the product being the best it can be.

'nuff said!

http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/150503-free-ecu...gtr-tuning.html
its not far off from the cobb. everyone who has an ecutek tune says good things and the tuners aswell.
i agree that cobb has a little more features atm and its been tested with 1000whp gt-r's and alot more gtr's been tuned with cobb... but ecutek have added alot of features already to compete and are adding more soon, like LC4 etc....
http://www.gtr.co.uk/forum/154868-2011-gea...09-10-cars.html
ecutek is advancing pretty good and they know the main competitor is cobb and i think they are doing a good job doing there best to compete. i can only say they are up to par but only to a certain point due to the feedback from ecutek customer tunes, which have not gone that high in horespower as much as the cobb guys. litchfield are doing tests with LC4 and 700hp project soon, so that will be good R&D to hear about. if i were to do a build to 1000whp i know i would choose cobb over the ecutek, just cause it hasnt been done yet on that platform, and i wouldnt be willing to pay loads of cash and time to smooth out all the glitchs if there were any.

but i dont think there is any reason to say ecutek is not a good ecu tune unless you have proof of it, which i would like to see (because i havent heard any issues thus far).

cost is also a factor when choosing these systems, i dont recall how much ecutek is charging for the system and a custom tune, but cobb has been very good cost.

There seems to be a lot of close mindedness just because the cob is so entrenched in the community. I must admit that I prefer the cobb open platform policy but that doesn't make it superior.

Ecutek have many people who only do development sitting at computers and cars all day long every working day. That's why they had the 2012 mapping working in March and working well.

Rather than just state that the cobb is simply ahead, I think it would be fairer to actually compare them side by side. I think you'll find the ecutek does everything the cobb can do, with the exception that it does it on a laptop and the user interface is in a different league (read nicer).

The open platform does make the idea of cobb a nicer one, but just because the ecutek is based on an older business model of develop and sell, doesn't make it inferior.

I like the iea of being to use my laptop rather than an ipod size interface, I also like the idea of using a system that has been developed to be used on tends to hundreds of thousands of cars, rather than a few thousdand. Thar's why the ecutek user interface is so much better.

As for running 9 second cars - they have had very capable speed density mapping working for ages (I believe longer than cobb - but am not on the inside so can't confirm). They also have seemless transfer between maf and speed density so I'm not sure why anyone would think they don't have the capability to do 9 second cars.

For all this talk, forgetting the companies and the products, I don't get why people can't keep an open mind to the fact that more is always more than one way to skin a cat, and, preish the thought, that someone else's way might be better!

thistle said:

Adam, does Ecutek presently give users a device with which they can flash ECM and TCM, datalog, read/remove fault codes, measure performance and resell/transfer to another GTR and receive updates in the field to firmware or tuning? Do they presently sell software to end users so they can tune themselves? Does the laptop software allow the vehicle to be tuned whilst the engine is running? Have you used AccessTuner Pro to do realtime tuning to comment on the user interface and workflow to support what you say? All the tuning is done with laptops of course, the end user has the option of doing things with the Accessport such as I mentioned at the start of this post. I'm not sure I'm at liberty to say how many Accessports have been sold but you are underestimating it by orders of magnitude when you look at the size of the non-GTR markets they've been selling in and for how long.

Click to expand...

Answer to a lot of those questions is no, as you well know, but equally the answer to plenty of them is also yes in the very near future.

The interface software I refer to is based on the output maps that I have seen Ben post compared with those I have seen Iain Litchfield post. It is of course purely subjective but put them side by side and anyone can see the difference.

The cable they are about to release allows an item to be sold on, and also the license too. The cob b is all well and good, but it still comes down to paying for hardware that most of us don't need. If you can't sell the hardware then all you can sell is the software or license in this case - they are both business when it comes down to it.

John, putting you own allegiances aside, as a highly intellgient person, can you honestly say you know enough about both products to make a fair assessment/comparison?

I faced the dilemma of choosing between them and only went one way over the other because I trust Iain Litchfield's advice when it comes to GTRs over any other option in the UK.

If you were down south and in the tuing business, it might have gone another way, but it wasn't really an option.

I don't think the idea of there being only one "camp" is beneficial to the advancement of the industry. From my subaru and evo tuning days, there wasn't only one option. There was always a preferred ECU of the time. That's still the case. I'm pretty sure once someone like Pectel or Motec comes out with a replacement ecu for the GTR it will be far better suited to the applications most on here are interested in, but as you always said to me, there are huge benefits to tinkering with the standard ecu which are not to be sneezed at.

I've not met anyone dissatisfied with what ecutek provides them, I can't say the same of Cobb. That's not to say that the Cobb issues weren't sorted, but by the nature of the open development, problems are solved publicly.

With ecutek being a closed set up, the product advances are tested by ecutek before it is released. While that suits some people, it cannot suit others but that doesn't make it an inferior product.

You say look what the cobb can do that the ecutek can't and point out the features where they are playing catchup. I don't see you giving them credit for beating you to cracking and commercially tuning the 2012 car months before cobb did. The same can be said for running the 2012 gearbox and launch software on the earlier cars.

The fact remains that ecutek is a viable alternative that should not just be dismissed because it is a relative unknown in US tuning circles.

I am not trying to say x is better than y. I can't because I've only run one and my reasons for choosing it are based on confidence in Iain, rather than in ecutek. My respect for Iain tells me he chose it for a reason. I am also equally sure I'd have a great time tinkering with the Cobb and firmly believe it to be an excellent product. All I am trying to achieve by writing a post like this is to help others to realise there's more to mapping the stock ecu than Cobb.

Ecutek did start tuning the 2012 before we did. I think Iain mentioned 2012 gearbox software working on an earlier car on a forum 48 hours before I did. The rest they appear to be on catch up, and have made a good effort in recent months to do so having done very little with their GTR market share since the first post in this thread.

You do realise that the user tuning/cable feature from Ecutek was mentioned last year when we RELEASED ours. Where is it today in August 2011? Our realtime was RELEASED to lots of tuners recently having been tested by me for a whole year.

I can't believe you're seriously comparing the appearance of GUI on one system as an advantage when it can't even tune with the engine running which if you've ever tuned an OEM vs aftermarket ECU then you would realise this is the main disadvantage of OEM systems. I actually like the Cobb GUI, but I didn't write it.

Of course there are other options, and of course I'm biased. Having previous tuned with Ecutek software on the Subarus I decided to go open source on the Evo and then Cobb on the GTR because I thought I could get more done and it proved to be the case on both platforms. You will see that until recently the degree of custom code in open source and Cobb has been far more extensive than Ecutek as speed density and realtime mapping have long been features in the open source and Cobb worlds, but not on Ecutek.

The market share, results and features do the talking and the choice to most is obvious that I hardly need to say all this... I'm sure a competitor can offer some "me too" factor. You're right, I don't know enough about Ecutek's capabilities, it seems no one does. The features are rarely demonstrated first, rarely seen doing results, and only the odd suggestion out the blue on forums that they were doing it for ages all along. But then how can other people that haven't tuned using our software claim that Ecutek are our equal on the GTR when it doesn't even tune realtime? How can you and MindlessOath form your opinions about them being our equal? Do you think I'm going to give up opinion that we are world beating on the GTR on that evidence? Do Ecutek tune realtime on any of their platforms? I've never seen it documented. Cobb have been doing it for about 8 years I think.

John,

As I've said on several occasions, I'm not trying to claim that ecutek is better. I'm saying you don't know that it isn't because you are predisposed to be biased against it.

I am just saying that there are other options out there besides the cobb.

I am sure the ecutek is better in some respects, I know that it is in worse in others, and live mapping might be one of them. I don't know because I just wanted to turn up, have my car mapped and drive away. I left it in the hands of a professional and went with what he told me/could supply/had experience of.

I'd be very surprised if Ecutek don't have live mapping working. I have to say if it were my company, and was based on a closed platform marketing model that has professional mappers tuning customer's cars, I'd prefer to keep my developments secret. Otherwise you'll be forever telling your competition how to close the gap on you.

I appreciate that you might see these features as things you'd want to shout about, but since the majority of ecutek customers want a turnkey solution, why bother shouting, why not just keep the tactical advantage to yourself and produce an excellent product? All of these customers don't care how you produce the map, only that you do it well.

thistle said:

I decided to go open source on the Evo and then Cobb on the GTR because I thought I could get more done and it proved to be the case on both platforms. You will see that until recently the degree of custom code in open source and Cobb has been far more extensive than Ecutek as speed density and realtime mapping have long been features in the open source and Cobb worlds, but not on Ecutek.

Click to expand...

Sorry, a bit off-topic but this "open source" caught my attention. What do you mean by that? If the cobb is open source, I would love to take a look at the code

I think the majority of our users on here really appreciate the technical involvement and interest we offer then as an OPTION when they become a Cobb customer, including the ability to tune their own car (a lot like the idea but don't actually do it, but want to know they can), because that is what they clearly told us they wanted when asked. Others want turnkey and they are well catered for with a user friendly device which has a low technical barrier to entry that is no problem to almost any GTR user and very well supported.

To keep our enthusiasts in the dark is IMHO to disrespect them. And beyond that, actually interacting with your customers at this level proves that you actually respect them and care for their opinions and interests. Some of our features have developed from listening to our customers.

From what I see in what has been going on in Cobb in terms of the customer focus, support, development, as well as the incredible results against very strong headwinds, I'd say they're are bang on the mark even though my own personal involvement is reducing due to lack of time but also that the reverse engineering heavy lifting has been done.

Adam, I've known you for years so I think I can say this: That you wanted to turn up and have a turnkey map is just nonsense. The phone calls to me when you were buying your GTR and the forum posts show you take a huge technical interest in what you're choosing, your job as a patent attorney seemingly specialising in patents in the automotive industry, or at least taking a huge interest in them shows you are not a turnkey man and want all the nitty gritty. I respect your choice, but it is very unlikely with the time involved in supporting you that Iain would make any profit I wasn't even selling anything to you but it takes me hours to respond to all your communications as you well know!

By all means state there is another option, but don't expect me to back down from my claim that we are the best. I always try to be the best at anything I do and will robustly defend anything I turn my hand to and care about. I choose who I do business with and develop for carefully and have immensely sound reasons through experience to do so. You wouldn't expect any less.

Thistle, I feel confident in speaking for 98% of the readers on this forum by saying IT IS NOT NECESSARY for you to defend Cobb. Never get into a pissing match with an attorney as they will sacrafice their mothers on pagan altars to keep it going!
Now, go figure out how to put LC4 on our cars, wouldja?

COBB