[bikepoet]

It's awesome to have vendors that step up to the plate with clarity and honesty. +1 Cobb.

There should be a penalty for starting threads like this without having the information to support the claim.

[bue car]

y it give us something to read..keept me entertained today lol

[Bownse]

Originally Posted by 405HP_Z06

Very well stated and I couldn't agree more. Stop the bashing and 'show us the money'. I'm not convinced this rumored 2MB is worth all the trouble unless someone can validate it exists and effectively integrate it into a tuning product that's reliable and simple.

+1

I'm not convinced the 2Mb of space exists to be worthwhile/worthless. Without the OP stepping forward and showing cobb the actual data, it's simply conjecture and F.U.D.

[NSFW]

I'm convinced that it doesn't exist and the OP doesn't know what he's talking about.

XML is a compact data format for logging? Seriously?

And you can do this with OpenEcu?

[silver arrow]

Gary, Trey, or a COBB employee,

I had my car tuned with openecu and know for a fact that Subaru can't detect the reflash once flashed to stock. They hooked it up to a computer and read the ECU in Japan and it came back a virgin ECU.

I have been thinking of switching to AP due to my tuner telling me that you guys think you have found the reason the 08+STIs have been blowing up, are writing definitions for it, and will be putting out new OTS maps with the fix. Is there any truth to this?

[atanarus]

I still have my trust in COBB and will continue to -LOVE- my AP.

[bluedemon_II]

Its clear that the op doesn't have any substantial prof of his findings. Is there any other point to this?

[Hinoki]

Originally Posted by bluedemon_II

Its clear that the op doesn't have any substantial prof of his findings. Is there any other point to this?

And I find it utterly fascinating that Cobb has gone silent in the email exchange regarding the positioning of their writing to the ECU. It's a simple question:
Do they or do they not store their Cobb AP lock somewhere in the first 10 bits of memory?

I also find it fascinating that folks here are the way they are. Here I thought you were better than NASIOC. Proves me wrong.

And you know what? Y'all can believe or not. I frankly don't care. I'll take care of the folks near me. The rest of you? Fend for yourselves.

Have fun in your thread, 'coz it ain't mine anymore to be certain.

[Mack]

Originally Posted by Hinoki

And I find it utterly fascinating that Cobb has gone silent in the email exchange regarding the positioning of their writing to the ECU. It's a simple question:
Do they or do they not store their Cobb AP lock somewhere in the first 10 bits of memory?

I also find it fascinating that folks here are the way they are. Here I thought you were better than NASIOC. Proves me wrong.

And you know what? Y'all can believe or not. I frankly don't care. I'll take care of the folks near me. The rest of you? Fend for yourselves.

Have fun in your thread, 'coz it ain't mine anymore to be certain.

You are mad that we don't trust some random person we don't know at his word? Do you blame us?

Show us some undeniable proof and we'll be with you. All you need to do is give us a step-by-step on how you found this.

Until then, the majority of the evidence points to this as a fake.

[Bownse]

Originally Posted by Hinoki

And I find it utterly fascinating that Cobb has gone silent in the email exchange regarding the positioning of their writing to the ECU. It's a simple question:
Do they or do they not store their Cobb AP lock somewhere in the first 10 bits of memory?

I also find it fascinating that folks here are the way they are. Here I thought you were better than NASIOC. Proves me wrong.

And you know what? Y'all can believe or not. I frankly don't care. I'll take care of the folks near me. The rest of you? Fend for yourselves.

Have fun in your thread, 'coz it ain't mine anymore to be certain.

"like NASIOC"?

how? in that we ask for more than unsubstantiated F)ear U)certainty and D)oubt (F.U.D.)?

Cobb reps and others in this thread have asked for something more substantive. You went silent until the posts where you state that you're taking your ball and going home (#51 and #138).

Step up and provide the data to either Cobb or someone with some tuning credibility that is widely known (if you insist it be a 3rd party other than Cobb).

Update: I did see your post (#116) when reviewing back through the thread. My subscription to the thread never notified me of it. My take is, if you're planning on marketing something then starting this thread was poor form. Slamming a competitor is ethically questionable. Providing a working alternative and explaining YOUR products benefits would be the way to take the high ground. Making claims without an alternative tested and ready to use seems only intended to stir up FUD. Your choice of topic wording makes is even worse especially in conjunction with your other posts about how people should avoid buying Cobb until pushed enough to admit that you'd like to market a competitive product if you can verify your current suspicions, build a prototype, test it, get backing, bring it to market, and become established enough to provide (any) customer service (including warranty, replacement, RMA and technical support).