Tag Archives: Subaru

Import Tuner Article – The Truth Behind The Subaru EJ-Series Engines

Subtitled, “Are they as weak as tuners claim?”

Subaru engines have always been known to be well engineered that are both powerful and torquey, but Subaru engineers left a lot to be desired when it came to the EJ205 (’02 to’05 USDM WRX), EJ255 (USDM WRX ’06 to present) and EJ257 (’04 to’07 USDM WRX STi) turbocharged models. This month, we get in-depth with three of the top Subaru tuners in the world, as they help dispel myths and speak their minds about the infamous EJ-series engine.

http://www.importtuner.com/tech/impp_1103_subaru_ej_series_engine_tech/viewall.html

Mod Notes – this is a great read.  It’s not too technical but technical enough to give you an appreciation of the Boxer engine layout.  I found the article posted at http://www.iwsti.com/forums/3816681-post405.html (titled, “defend against ringland failure”)…this is a Subaru owner must-read, IMO.

Nice WRX!

I saw the below on the Facebook “STi Photography” group:

 

It was a very good video composition. The car wasn’t bad, either.

Here’s another video (from the same FB group) of an STI playing in the snow. I’ve done something similar but never filmed 3rd person:

Porsche to Manufacture Horizontally-Opposed 4-cylinder Engines.

Apparently, Porsche is interested in producing some new engines:  flat-fours.  Per CAR magazine:

A 1.6-liter version will produce 210 horsepower, a 2.0-liter version will be good for 286 hp, and a 2.5-liter version will produce 360 hp.

As well:

The horizontally opposed engine layout will obviously cut CO2 and boost economy, yet keep a genetic link to the famous flat-six engines which have powered the 911 for decades. Don’t forget 2014’s Porsche 919 Hybrid Le Mans racecar also uses a four-cylinder engine, albeit a V4.

Subaru is the only other car manufacturer to build flat-four engines, which typically have a charismatic soundtrack as evidenced on the Impreza family over the years.

Digital Trends has further information:

With power outputs that high and displacements that low, expect all engines in this family to feature turbocharging and direct injection. Each engine will also feature the same horizontally-opposed boxer configuration as the company’s signature six-cylinder motors.

The 2.0- and 2.5-liter engines are expected to find their way into the Boxster, Cayman, and Cayenne, with other models likely to follow as Porsche grapples with stricter global emissions standards.

The 1.6-liter version is reportedly in limbo. It was apparently intended for a “baby Boxster” sports car that could have spawned Audi and Volkswagen siblings, but has now been shelved.

I’ve heard at least one Subaru enthusiast complain that Subaru should be trying to build a boxer engine that outputs 350-360 HP.  If you look across the car-maker spectrum, there are not that many 4-cylinder cars in production (mass produced) that are making power at that level.  In fact, there’s currently only one.  The CLA45 AMG.  And that car is $50K+.  The engine is also fortified to Hell and back, too (much of the money they want for the car is due to the fortification process of the engine).  Now, Porsche is attempting something similar.  Notice a trend?  It’s the luxury manufacturers that are designing H.O. 4-cylinder engines.  No one else is.  That’s a niche Mercedez and Porsche can afford to fill.  I highly doubt a Japanese manufacturer will do this (they haven’t yet).  Now, Mitsubishi was producing the FQ series of Evos, but I’m not sure those should be factored into this discussion, as that variant of Evos are expensive as hell, only available to the UK, and are very limited productions).  And you see where Mitsubishi is now (they’re in financial trouble and have been for years).

If a Subaru fan wants more power, there’s a vast aftermarket world available to him/her.  There’s no need to pine/whine about what Porsche and Mercedez are making…a Subaru rarely compares to cars such as those, although a recent comparison of an BMW 4-series, a CLA45 AMG, and a 2015 Subaru STI ended up with the STI being on top due to its handling characteristics.  I think Subaru knows what they’re doing.  There’s no need for them to be enticed into a HP war that escalates into a vehicle that’s not attainable to most average people.  Subaru is doing fine and has been for awhile.  Just my 2 cents.

Flow-matched Fuel Injectors

If you’ve ever done research into upgrading your fuel injectors, and are looking for a used set, you’ll occasionally see someone saying, “make sure they’re flow-matched”.

Were you ever curious as to what that means?

Look at this video:

In the above video, initially, the spray pattern is being observed, with the injector on the far right turned sideways to see the spray pattern at a different angle.  These are Subaru WRX injectors (so said the author).  The injectors are being run at different RPMs and are not yet clean.  At the end of the observation, the injectors were statically tested.  At the end of that test, 3 of the injectors were flowing 95-96cc while one was flowing 92cc.  3 are within flow specification while the other is not.  His plan is to apply a 20-minute ultrasonic soak to the set in the hopes that the injector with the lower flow will increase it’s flow (the soak would probably clean out any build-up/gunk in the injector).

The above video shows the results of an ultrasonic cleaning and a back-wash to remove any build-up within the injectors from the first video.  Notice that after the static flow test, the injector with the hangup now has a measurement of 96cc, matching at least 2 of the other injectors (the last one is still at 97cc but is probably within spec).

Yes, I saw that he quoted the measurement of the 2nd injector being 92cc in the first video and 93cc in the second video.  Probably a (small) gaff on his part.

I thought these two videos were pretty cool.  I’m a geek like that!

I found the videos while trying to find videos on how to perform an injector swap on GR/GV STIs.

Oh, and by the way, going big on injectors….requires a tune.  The stock ECU cant calibrate itself to adjust for larger injectors — source is here, under the “Questions” tab, and is the answer to Question #3.

Service (Shop) Manuals?

So, after the 2007 model-year of WRX/STI, Subaru stopped offering paper service manuals.  Instead, they offer them online (for a fee).  A 3-day subscription will give you access to the online database of manuals.  You can download the PDFs for later use.

http://techinfo.subaru.com/index.html

Some forums also have PDF copies of the service manuals.  IWSTI, for example, has them in their Donating Member section.  Also, a quick scour of the web (via Google) may get you some hits.

Air Oil Separators – Not All Created Equal

I’m thinking on adding an air oil separator (AOS) to my wishlist.  It’ll help keep the oil out of my IC and intake and keep the car from experiencing detonation by preventing any condensation from making it into the engine. There are arguments on if this item is even needed on a Subaru (or any blown) engine (see here). There’s quite a bit of AOS makers, too.  I’m going to link each one, but keep in mind that the links may break as the web designers move their products around their web pages:

  • Grimmspeed – this appears to quickly-installed product, but I’ve seen bad reviews of it; there are conditions that will cause blow-by, even with this AOS.
  • Moroso – this is a small dual can variant – $275; they have $350+ variants as well as variants that are $100 less.
  • Perrin – this is a nice unit; I like the fact that I could theoretically pull the drain hoses and see what the oil condition looks like after it has worked its way through the separation process.
  • Crawford – from their website: “Largest internal volume (.75 liters) on the market. This volume is imperative to the effective separation of the oil from the air.”
  • iAG – they’ve a LOT of science-like info on their site regarding this product, but I’m not sure that will be enough to sway me.

I may have missed a few, but those are the ones that jump out at me.  Plus, it seems like the aftermarket is flooded with tuner interpretations of the AOS concept. Note that almost all of them are in the $350-$375 range.  That’s a lot of cash, but apparently they aren’t all created equal. Grimmspeed’s doesn’t work all that well on engines that crank out 350-400 HP, but it’s cheaper than most of the others.  Apparently, they don’t take well to high G maneuvers and they also tend to be more of a street application (low HP and street with no hard street driving).  There have been reports of significant blow-by occurring with the Grimmspeed AOS.  I found a good NASIOC forum thread here that describes this issue and even has Grimmspeed feedback. Crawford’s and Perrin’s apparently work very well on high HP applications. The Moroso AOS appears to also be a good candidate and has many options.  They come in single and dual container configurations.  With the dual container option, you can opt for large or small containers.  The containers can be obtained with powder-coating too.  The thing I’m confused about with the Moroso is that they appear to be more of a catch-can solution.  They will not direct separated oil back into the oil supply.  They have to be periodically emptied and the from my understanding, the they don’t really separate the oil from condensation…the gunk is really something you don’t really want to reintroduce to your oil supply. There’s also the thought that with the general thought behind the AOS concept, you shouldn’t really be redirecting separated oil back into your engine’s supply.  The thing is, these aren’t considered cat cans.  Catch cans just catch any blow-by that occurs.  They have to be maintained…you don’t want them to be full and you have to throw out any gunk they catch.  With an AOS, there’s a separation mechanism and the idea is that once the oil is separated and de-condensed, it should be OK to put back into the oil supply, but I’ve yet to see vendors/makers provide evidence that the oil that is separated is clean and can be reintroduced to the engine’s oil supply.  So, I’m torn between buying an AOS and buying a catch can that I’ll have to maintain. I’m leaning toward the iAG (one of the most expensive) or the Moroso (because it looks good and because it’s cheaper…but it’s just a glorifed catch can…I really don’t think they are true AOSs).  iAG swears that they’ve stopped the issue of condensation, but they haven’t provided any hard evidence.  I’d hate to spend $380 on an AOS (any AOS) only to find that they’re putting gathered gunk back into the engine. Oh, and what’s the difference between an AOS and catch can?  The AOS separates the oil from any condensation and returns the oil back to the oil supply.  A catch can only catches it, it has to be periodically emptied, and there may be more than oil that’s captured.  And note that there are some $300 catch cans.  That’s a pretty ridiculous price for a catch can but apparently Mishimoto sells catch cans in that price range. Lastly, for those located in areas where there are strict emissions testing, an AOS might not be a good thing.  Remember, not only are there visual inspections that some states require (an AOS might not pass a visual), but there’s also the actual sniffing/testing…an AOS might cause a test failure.  I’m not 100% but I wanted to forewarn people, because the PCV is an emissions part.

========

UPDATE: Regarding the Moroso, I did a bit more research and found some clarification on the Moroso unit (regarding if it’s a catch can or actual AOS):

Q:  The title says it’s an Air Oil Separator, but the description sounds more like it’s an Oil Catch Can since it has to be drained. Which is it?

A:  Its a separator in terms of it breaks down the fumes much more efficiently compared to just a catch can.

If that’s the case, then the oil that it catches can be poured back into the oil supply (sounds like, at least).  I found the answer here, under Questions (it is the second question…the questions aren’t linkable).  And note that these do indeed require maintenace (ie, they have to be periodically drained/cleaned).  Some variants have drain petcocks, and others can be removed from the mount.

STI: Hatch vs. Sedan

OK, so even though the WRX and STI are no longer offered in hatch form, there’s still infighting going on in the Subaru world regarding what’s the better offering:  hatches or sedans.  Here’s my take on things.  Note that this isn’t meant to offend.  If you’ve thick skin, please understand that this is just an opposing opinion…the internet is full of such things.

Now, the key word that hatch owners throw out is practicality.  What is practicality without relating to a Merriam-Webster’s definition?  It relates to utility, usability, and “all-around” (as in jack-of-all-trades).  For those that want the true definition, you can see it here.

I’m going to throw out a few thoughts on practicality:

  • Practicality is only important if you care about it (ie, it is a subjective issue).
  • For a lot of people, practicality isn’t really a requirement.
  • Jacks-of-all-trade type of cars are best at nothing…practicality means compromising.
  • If I wanted true practicality, I wouldn’t be looking at a performance car.

There’s far more to a practical car than having space.  That’s why I got a sedan.  Before I got the STI, I had a quad cab truck…you can’t get any more practical than that, IMO.  I associate practicality with being frugal.  Again, the key words are utility, usability, and “all-around”.  I’ve said this before: I grew up one step from being dirt poor and I’ve always pinched my pennies, so I actually know what practicality is.  It means something different than what most Scoobie owners are thinking when using the word, for sure.  I was so bad with the practicality mindset that I’ve always had problems buying performance cars…if I bought them, they’d have to be low-priced in the extreme, because practicality surely has a money factor…most people don’t relate practicality with a $400 car note, for example.  I had to force myself out of that mindset when I bought the STI, otherwise I’d have never bought even the hatch version.  I never thought of getting a hatch for additional space.  I initially considered the hatch only because it looked better designed (the back end flows better with the rest of the car…that’s not so with the sedan, IMO).

If I’m looking for truly practical cars, I’m probably not going to be looking at a car with a mid-$30K price tag that gets 16-17 MPG in the city and requires a tire swap in snowy/icy/cold weather, $100 oil change services, and other expensive periodical maintenance (from my understanding, brake rotors are NOT cheap, for example) because it takes a lot more than extra space to be considered practical, IMO. Insurance prices for these cars surely isn’t anywhere near practical. None of what I mention hints at practicality.

These are just my opinions, though. I fully expect someone to be offended by this because that tends to be the nature of the interwebz and Scoobie hatch owners tend to be overly sensitive about such things.  I mean no insult by this, but if people are willing to put out their thoughts on why hatches are better, they should expect to receive an opposing opinion and be able to accept a different view of things.

What Forums Do I Frequent?

I’m not sure if you guys are curious as to what internet forums I frequent (in relation to Subarus), but I’m a member of the following forums:

IWSTI.com

NASIOC.com

ClubWRX.net

Flat4va.com

i-club.com (registered tonight)

Of the above, IWSTI is my favorite by far.  ClubWRX is the next favorite but I rarely post on that particular forum.

Regarding NASIOC, I mostly read there.  I’ve a post count of 2.  In my first post, I immediately had a run-in with Unabomber…he tried to be a dick to a poster regarding a him asking questions about a Setting Saver (Unabomber said they were non-existent) and I provided a link showing that they indeed existed.  Unabomber never responded.  This berating of new Subaru owners turned me off and I stopped using that forum as a resource.  I’ve only just started using it as a resource again.  There’s a gold mine of information there (there’s so much of it that it’s rather disorganized).  And they’re extremely rough on anyone that’s not deemed part of the popular crowd.

I’ll be reading up on i-club.com the next few weeks, just to see how it compares to the other forums I frequent.  It is not a quiet forum, so I might actually find good info there…I’ll let you know.

I usually go by either ‘unixfool’ or ‘NoVaSTI’ on those forums.

EDIT:  I forgot about Flat4va.com, so I added it.  Also, I registered on i-club.com and the site gets a fair amount of traffic, as it’s been around awhile, but on a day-to-day basis, it’s a bit quiet.  Also, most of the traffic appears to occur from California users. Does it matter?  It depends on what I’m looking for.  It’s obvious I can’t use that site to arrange local meets or ask if anyone has local parts, but for general information, it may suffice (it’s certainly no NASIOC or IWSTI, though).

Rally Sport Direct’s 2015 WRX & STI Review

I’m going to let this video speak for itself, but Rally Sport Direct (RSD) has both a 2015 WRX and a 2015 STI that they’ve recently reviewed.  The review is more off-the-cuff in nature (it is not a technical review by any means). They’re also a good vendor to purchase parts from, too.

Without further delays, here it is!