Cobb AP vs IE Powerlink

[snow_bound26]

Weighing the differences between using an AP with an EQT stage 1 tune or a Powerlink w/stage 1. For a MK7 R w/manual trans.

In all my years with Subarus I only had an AP on my first 05 and it was a V2. I have no experience with the V3 as I quickly switched to Open Source tuning on my Subies. I know these engine and ECUs are a lot more complicated than the 16bit ECUs I'm use to. If the AP is capable of doing most diagnostics and maintenance coding that something like VCDS software does, than that will 100% answer this dilemma. If not, then is there any advantage to the AP over the Powerlink? To answer the main question most will ask, no I will not be modifying much. I plan to stay stage 1 and very simple stage 1 safe bolt-ons. When the turbo fails I will be keeping with an IS38 though I may look into the EMD version w/ball bearing CHRA with slightly larger wheels. This will be for efficiency and not more power. I don't like pushing turbos to their limit and do my best to keep IATs down. Is iPhone integration on the Powerlink an advantage for someone like me? Does IE or EQT provide a better OTS map? Or are they about the same?

 

[aaronc7]

There's free and/or open source options for these cars as well, if you're interested in that route.

 

[snow_bound26]

There's free and/or open source options for these cars as well, if you're interested in that route.

I had considered this, but I'd like to keep things more simple this time. Open Source was more of a necessity for the JDM engines/ECUs I was using.

 

[Diggs24]

Then just get the AP and eqt stage 1 and you’re all set.

 

[GTI_Owner]

I found the AP and IE dongle similar in terms of ease of use. The IE dongle I used was through a laptop that pulled the tune from their server, which is more limited than the AP if you plan to change tunes more frequently. I think the data logging with the AP is better. I didn't do much diagnostics with either. I use the Ross-Tech VCDS, which I find much more capable than either AP or IE.

I'm using the Open Source now and believe it is superior to the AP and IE products. VCDS is still my go-to for diagnostics.

 

[snow_bound26]

I found the AP and IE dongle similar in terms of ease of use. The IE dongle I used was through a laptop that pulled the tune from their server, which is more limited than the AP if you plan to change tunes more frequently. I think the data logging with the AP is better. I didn't do much diagnostics with either. I use the Ross-Tech VCDS, which I find much more capable than either AP or IE.

I'm using the Open Source now and believe it is superior to the AP and IE products. VCDS is still my go-to for diagnostics.

Thanks for the info. I don't see myself doing much coding stuff. I just want to easily check/clear codes, reset oil service, and reset the EPB when I have to replace pads. If VCDS is still the better option for those things, then I'll go that route. These fancy ECUs give me a head ache.

As for Open Source, I don't think I'll be going that far on this platform. I'll be perfectly content with stage 1 power. I don't need to swap maps as I only have 93oct in my area. I had toyed with the idea of a flex fuel kit, but the closest place to me that sells E85 is over 2hrs away. From what I've read and the replies here, it seems that the AP is the better of the two so I'll most likely go that route once I get my suspension sorted.

 

[mike-y]

The off-the-shelf stage 1 tunes are all pretty similar from what I understand, so if you aren't planning on doing any custom stuff, just get whichever one is cheaper/on sale.

 

[GTI_Owner]

Thanks for the info. I don't see myself doing much coding stuff. I just want to easily check/clear codes, reset oil service, and reset the EPB when I have to replace pads. If VCDS is still the better option for those things, then I'll go that route. These fancy ECUs give me a head ache.

As for Open Source, I don't think I'll be going that far on this platform. I'll be perfectly content with stage 1 power. I don't need to swap maps as I only have 93oct in my area. I had toyed with the idea of a flex fuel kit, but the closest place to me that sells E85 is over 2hrs away. From what I've read and the replies here, it seems that the AP is the better of the two so I'll most likely go that route once I get my suspension sorted.

The Open Source platform doesn't require you to tune yourself; that's just an option if you want to. There are OTS type files available for it as well. The flashing interface is about $125 and the SimosTools application is free.

Whether going with Cobb or Open Source, I recommend the VCDS cable for diagnostics.

 

[snow_bound26]

The Open Source platform doesn't require you to tune yourself; that's just an option if you want to. There are OTS type files available for it as well. The flashing interface is about $125 and the SimosTools application is free.

Whether going with Cobb or Open Source, I recommend the VCDS cable for diagnostics.

I never said Open Source would require me to tune myself. That's not my reason for not wanting to go that route. I've been tuning (with professional tuners) via Open Source for over a decade. I understand how it opens the door for certain aspects of tuning, but companies like Cobb have also become better in that time frame as well. I don't want to have to pull out a laptop every time I want to see what's going on with something. Cobb and IE both offer simpler data logging and viewing codes. If I need to pull out a lap top when I change brake pads or make a suspension change, fine, is what it is. But if I'm on a drive and get a CEL, systems like Cobb mean I can pull into a parking lot and see the code rather than waiting until I get home, get the laptop and then run a diagnostic. This is why I don't want to Open Source. If things change I decide to go down the path of a customer turbo setup, then I'd consider it again. But I'd rather put that money into a real project car like a Daza swapped 944, a GC WRX, or go back to my Silvia roots. While the R is fun, it doesn't spark that same desire for me.

 

[Diggs24]

I never said Open Source would require me to tune myself. That's not my reason for not wanting to go that route. I've been tuning (with professional tuners) via Open Source for over a decade. I understand how it opens the door for certain aspects of tuning, but companies like Cobb have also become better in that time frame as well. I don't want to have to pull out a laptop every time I want to see what's going on with something. Cobb and IE both offer simpler data logging and viewing codes. If I need to pull out a lap top when I change brake pads or make a suspension change, fine, is what it is. But if I'm on a drive and get a CEL, systems like Cobb mean I can pull into a parking lot and see the code rather than waiting until I get home, get the laptop and then run a diagnostic. This is why I don't want to Open Source. If things change I decide to go down the path of a customer turbo setup, then I'd consider it again. But I'd rather put that money into a real project car like a Daza swapped 944, a GC WRX, or go back to my Silvia roots. While the R is fun, it doesn't spark that same desire for me.

Nothing you said applies to this platform. Simostools is 100% superior to Cobb in every way. You can read and clear codes right from your phone or tablet (while driving even!). Log without even taking your eyes off the road using the steering wheel or even autolog on any parameter the ECU is logging (i.e. autolog any time pedal is 100%). You can view logs right from your tablet in graph format. With ECU edit you can make a quick change to your file and flash it right there in Taco bell parking lot in 45seconds. You can't do any of that shit with Cobb or IE. Inferior platforms.

 

[EpicTech]

I really need to figure out a mounting solution for my tablet so I can view data at a glance, instead of reaching down and picking the dam thing up.

-Sorry random lol.

 

[aaronc7]

I really need to figure out a mounting solution for my tablet so I can view data at a glance, instead of reaching down and picking the dam thing up.

-Sorry random lol.

You may be better off just getting a $50-$100 cheap android phone (Tracfone Motorola something) for much easier and better mounting options.

 

[EpicTech]

You may be better off just getting a $50-$100 cheap android phone (Tracfone Motorola something) for much easier and better mounting options.

Poosibly but my tablet is not much bigger than the large iphone. The first couple mounts I got dont want to stay on the windshield

 

[Ezekiel81923]

Have not used the IE Powerlink. It seems you would be beholden to IE's tunes though, which I don't like.

If you like how Powerlink operates, SimosTools is similar in that it is bluetooth to your phone but is cheaper (if you already have an Android device, it's free) and has waaay more features. You can monitor more, adjust more, it's easier to log, logs are viewable in the app, it's just better.

I was an AP user for 10+ years, I wouldn't get another one given the options available now.

 

[snow_bound26]

Nothing you said applies to this platform. Simostools is 100% superior to Cobb in every way. You can read and clear codes right from your phone or tablet (while driving even!). Log without even taking your eyes off the road using the steering wheel or even autolog on any parameter the ECU is logging (i.e. autolog any time pedal is 100%). You can view logs right from your tablet in graph format. With ECU edit you can make a quick change to your file and flash it right there in Taco bell parking lot in 45seconds. You can't do any of that shit with Cobb or IE. Inferior platforms.

Apologies, I had thought it was windows compatible as well not just android. But it's a moot point either way since I'm an iPhone user and would still need to purchase a device to keep in the car to use it. At this point I'm just going to look at the cost differences between each (including tune) and make my decision based upon who will be providing the tune rather than which software option