A New Forester for Ratbag's SWMBO

Well, Folks

It's done. SWMBO approved, and so did I. They put the acid on us, as have a "sale" on ending today, and had two other enquiries. Refused a holding deposit ... So I had to grovel and gawk today. All straight underneath. Doubt that it has ever even been off the bitumen. Some parts at the rear still looked "new" - i.e. original sub-frame paint with no layer of dirt ...

Car has not been detailed; so good to see it "raw".

Take delivery next Thursday.

This is it, here.

Got a reasonable deal on the Camry, $2,500, specially when one adds back the cost of imminent repairs of the order of $1,500~2,000 ...
The dealership had already reduced their asking price by around $2,000. So not a bad deal for a 3 y.o. car with 65K Kms on it, that had a delivery price around the $44K+ mark.

The dealer didn't realise that the Forester had about $2,200 worth of additional extras until they looked at the original order in the book wallet, BUT I had :iconwink: . The deal had been struck by then. "Too late", she cried.

No cargo barrier, but has had a Milford professionally fitted previously - mounting points are still there ...

There is no key for the Thule racks, so they will either retrieve the keys, or re-barrel them .

Drives well, with no sign of any kind of uneven wear on the Geolandar G95s, which are around 1/2~2/3 worn. Look to be OEM tyres, spare is new, and an alloy ...

Plenty of jump in the donk, even though duck-features managed to lock it in 1st to start with ...

Talked them up a grand on the Camry trade in; and also pointed out that by saying their car has "full log book records" by necessary implication meant that the normal servicing had been done, and that the 60K Kms service hadn't been ... They wanted to argue the toss about that, but agreed to do a basic service with both oil & air filter in the price. I mentioned that I didn't think that anyone would legally interpret "full log book records" to apply to a blank log book with no record of servise therein ...

MUCH running back and forth to the manager for approval of the various negotiations ... LOL. I had told the salesman at the beginning that I was a PITA ... :lol: :ebiggrin:

Will post some phone camera photos a bit later.

Need to exchange the brand new Bosch battery in the Camry for the fairly new but unknown age Century battery in Roo2. Exactly the same size/rating.

All up, the change over price was about $3K less than I expected it might end up being, with the car being both younger and with fewer Kms on it than I expected. Has the "Sports Auto" rather than the later transmission as well.

SWMBO is currently ringing around the party line telling all her friends, so obviously approved of ...

:ebiggrin: :biggrin:

 

[thunder039]

i do my suzuki and my brumby every 5000ks and the forester every 10,000 and use fully synthetic oils (in the forester and zook only)
BUT in saying that the zook and the brumby have to work harder then the forester thats why i do it every 5k and i dont pay for servicing just the oil and filters.

i agree that 12,500 is reasonable but the issue is most people dont service there car when the service sticker says too anyway, usually there well over by the time they come in

 

[Ratbag]

Gidday Thunder

I know where you're coming from, mate.

We had to have the top and bottom dropped off the Camry when SWMBO's Dad gave it to us. Ross put cleaning rods through all the oil galleries, then flushed it a couple of times. Dad hadn't serviced it for years (hadn't reached the mileage ... :iconwink: ), and it never did long drives at the end of his driving career. All the oil ways were sludged up, and the oil was emulsified, so like Clag!

Modern engines also have tolerances/clearances that Rolls Royce could only dream about in my youth, so are far more susceptible to coking up and damage due to blocked arteries and oil galleries, clagged up bearings, valve guides, etc.

I used to do an oil change with my hot Morris 1100 every 1,500 miles. Also clean the plugs (Champion N3 - very cold; standard was N9Y), set the tappets, tune the carbies (twin 1 1/4" SU), and adjust the ignition timing. The plugs were so cold that they would carbon up in even moderate traffic. The coldness was to prevent detonation - "pinging", LOL - static ignition timing was about 10-12° BTDC. Standard was 6° BTDC, IIRC. As for "pinging", more like the engine would start running on 3 cylinders, then 2, then stall ... Clean the plugs by the roadside ... The things we do when we are young :rotfl:!

Geez it went like the clappers for an 1100 cc pushrod motor in a very heavy body though (16 cwt = 815 kgs) - heavy for a small car of its time. From a standing start, it would hold with a standard 1800 cc MGB up to my top speed, which was 105 mph at 7,000 rpm ...

My cousin's Pontiac GTO 400 (440 cu.in. donk) was just a tad faster :iconwink: :biggrin: :lol:.

So was my other cousin's hot rod Datsun 2000 sports; and my mate's Prince Skyline GT (Mercedes designed DOHC 2L(?) six, with three 45DCOE Weber carbies choked down to 38 mm - this one here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nissan_Skyline#S54 IIRC.

Anyway, no way could one just leave spark plugs unattended for 100,000 kms as I did with Roo1 in those days!! We were always tuning/servicing our cars. Equally, the engines were as rough as guts, with (such loose) tolerances that they would make a modern engine designer squirm ...

I never broke a timing chain in any of my cars, but I did break the crankshaft in my Morris 1100. Spent a long week in Coffs Harbour during the first Apollo Moon landing while the parts came up from Sydney ...

 

[Ratbag]

Bought a Milford cargo barrier for the SH

Gidday Folks

Bought a Milford cargo barrier off FleaBay for the SH last night.
Picked it up a couple of hours ago.

$90 with an "ice pick" for breaking the rear window from the inside.
Good luck! The rear quarter window is polycarbonate!!

RonnyRoo already had the Milford mounting points installed, so no great hassle to fit it, just awkward.

SWMBO is not convinced about it ... .

However, I did buy it primarily for her safety if she's in a prang. Don't want anything in the back flying around the cabin, after all ... .

 

[NachaLuva]

So you already have the mounting points & hardware?. If you do will be easy to fit. I can even give you a hand if you want :iconwink:

 

[Ratbag]

Gidday NL

So you already have the mounting points & hardware?. If you do will be easy to fit. I can even give you a hand if you want :iconwink:

I fitted it yesterday. Thanks for the offer, mate.
Why is it that the "professional" fitters didn't bother to fit the front/upper mount points? After all, the bits came in the can! I might need to fabricate some "arms" to reach back to the standard Milford mounting points for it. Really depends on whether it is tolerated by SWMBO, or not. She doesn't like it ... I have already pointed out that it is for her safety, even if sometimes a bit inconvenient.

I will need help fitting the one in my SG. It doesn't have the body mounting points at all (but does have the standard link/mounting straps attached to the barrier itself), so will have to use the existing tie down points at the bottom, and the child safety seat anchorages at the rear of the cargo bay, as you and others have done.

In spite of the dire warnings from Milford, I cannot see this barrier being in any danger of moving, specially since I tie the rear seats down with the seatbelts when I am travelling. If the rear seats + 3x seat belts can each restrain a 100 kg+ human in a crash, I cannot see how they could fail to restrain even a cargo barrier that isn't bolted down at all!!

Anyway, in the process of re-tensioning the SH's wheel nuts this morning, I discovered that there were three 3-4 metre webbing tie-down straps hiding under the spare wheel in SWMBO's car. Those I have got a use for ... :iconwink: :biggrin:.

 

[NachaLuva]

Really depends on whether it is tolerated by SWMBO, or not. She doesn't like it ... I have already pointed out that it is for her safety, even if sometimes a bit inconvenient.

It does take some getting used to. Esp while reversing, the barrier makes it hard to focus on the back window to judge distance behind, but hopefully she'll get used to it

 

[Scooby2]

... many moons ago I did have one in Scooby. My kids were mortified. They reckoned I'd fenced them in.....

 

[mr turbo]

Bought a Milford cargo barrier off FleaBay for the SH last night....

....However, I did buy it primarily for her safety if she's in a prang. Don't want anything in the back flying around the cabin, after all ... .

I have already pointed out that it is for her safety, even if sometimes a bit inconvenient.

And apart from saving stuff flying around, they can (kind of) act as a roll bar, due to their strength aswell :iconwink:

It does take some getting used to. Esp while reversing, the barrier makes it hard to focus on the back window to judge distance behind, but hopefully she'll get used to it

I did notice that when I first had mine installed, but you'll get used to it in no time.
I actually don't even notice mines there now :ebiggrin:

Regards
Mr Turbo

 

[Ratbag]

Gidday NL, S2 and Mr T

It does take some getting used to. Esp while reversing, the barrier makes it hard to focus on the back window to judge distance behind, but hopefully she'll get used to it

I did tell her that she would hate it for a week or two.

... many moons ago I did have one in Scooby. My kids were mortified. They reckoned I'd fenced them in.....

Well, you had, hadn't you? :lol: :rotfl: .

And apart from saving stuff flying around, they can (kind of) act as a roll bar, due to their strength aswell :iconwink:

I hadn't thought of that. It would be bloody hard to crush it vertically!
Even if it just slowed down roof distortion for a few seconds, it would make a significant difference to the strength of the roof for that important time.

I did notice that when I first had mine installed, but you'll get used to it in no time.
I actually don't even notice mines there now :ebiggrin:

Regards
Mr Turbo

She carries a fair bit of heavy stuff in her car routinely. Keeping it out of the passenger compartment is important - just a bit! Neither of us has been in any kind of crash for a very long time, but that doesn't mean that it can't happen to us!!

I need to get mine fitted soon too.

 

[Ratbag]

^ Well, she has got used to it, and as Mr T suggested, it only took a couple of weeks. I've got used to having mine there too. That took a couple of weeks ...

Just filled RR up today, as it's been doing short trips to the station mostly these days, as my SWMBO is doing a Uni course in Melbourne. 57.4L/446.5 Kms.

That's 12.86L/100 Kms. Even worse than Roo2 does for the same sort of short trip use.

Now the question.

Is there any way to adjust the fuel gauge in the SH?

The flaming thing was filled to the second or third click, and couldn't have had any more shoved into the tank if I tried. The fuel gauge is reading slightly over the 5/6ths mark. When it shows empty, it's still got about 200 kms in the tank!

And whose bloody silly idea was it to divide the fuel gauge into 6ths, anyway?? The one in Roo2 is the normal quarters. When it gets to empty, I have (roughly) 1/5th (a bit under 12L) left in the tank.

I think I am grumpier than usual today ... :rotfl:.

 

[guzzla]

And whose bloody silly idea was it to divide the fuel gauge into 6ths, anyway?? The one in Roo2 is the normal quarters. When it gets to empty, I have (roughly) 1/5th (a bit under 12L) left in the tank.

The SG certainly has a clear, easy to read fuel gauge. I have found that mine takes 15L at the 3/4 full mark, 28L at the 1/2 mark, 40L at the 1/4 full mark and 50L at the empty mark and finally ran out when the needle was over the E where it took 55L.

 

[Ratbag]

^ Our SG takes around 13L, 26L, 39L, 51L (needle exactly bisecting the Empty mark) at the marks. This appears to vary slightly, ±1L, on the bottom two marks. It's good to have an accurate fuel gauge ... .

Compared with my Impreza which had a fuel gauge that could only properly be described as "highly allegorical".
Then I fixed the tachometer just before I traded it in (by swapping out the old one for one in a spare instrument nacelle unit I had). After that, the fuel gauge worked perfectly ... . How weird is that?

 

[guzzla]

^ Our SG takes around 13L, 26L, 39L, 51L (needle exactly bisecting the Empty mark) at the marks. This appears to vary slightly, ±1L, on the bottom two marks. It's good to have an accurate fuel gauge ... .

Compared with my Impreza which had a fuel gauge that could only properly be described as "highly allegorical".
Then I fixed the tachometer just before I traded it in (by swapping out the old one for one in a spare instrument nacelle unit I had). After that, the fuel gauge worked perfectly ... . How weird is that?

Someone would find an explanation but I reckon some things just can't be explained. When I fill my Forester I always top up after the pump shut-off to the next whole litre. So it might only have to take just a fraction of a litre more, but won't take any more than a whole litre or it would overflow. In any case the fuel gauge needle always goes well past the full mark and in general driving on the open road it will do anywhere up to 90km before it sits squarely over the full mark. I reckon that there would be 7L of use above that top mark with another 8L then to the 3/4 mark.

One thing that I have observed is that on long open road trips (and it's had plenty of them across the Nullarbor, NT, FNQ etc) as the gauge gets close to the bottom mark the fuel light will come on earlier than it otherwise would, usually just before it gets to the bottom mark, yet when I fill it, it might only take 48 to 49L. Yet when running around town it really does have to get right down on that empty mark before the light comes on and then it will take 50 to 51L. Hills and corners don't seem to affect how the light comes on however (unlike that crazy light / gauge in our Camry which would be on and off with a wavering gauge depending whether it was going uphill to the left - low - or downhill to the right - high). My Forester's gauge does move slightly higher on steep hills (like coming up the Toowoomba Range) and slightly lower when going down. Overall though I've never had a car with a better fuel gauge though (although I do like the Golf's gauge with a 270 degree sweep with 16 segments including a red section at the bottom taking up 2 of those segments. Why it can sit on full for up to 300km and then take 33L at the 1/2 mark for a nominally 50L tank which apparently some have got as much as 57L into is beyond me). I've never had a car yet that takes half its specified amount at the half mark.

 

[Ratbag]

This year, SWMBO has mostly been driving to the station and getting the train to Uni. The short trips are taking their toll on the fuel economy. Her last tank turned in 13.44L/100 kms ... .

AND her fuel gauge is as inaccurate as hell. Not as bad as the fuel light on the Camry, but not anywhere near as good as the one in our SG.

 

[guzzla]

Around town or city running with short trip, cold starts destroys fuel consumption. My XT once recorded a 16.9L/100km during one winter week of driving around Toowoomba - it's normally around 12.5 for that sort of driving.

The other extreme that it does is a fairly regular 157km trip I do to visit my parents at Kippa-Ring (Redcliffe). It involves a drop in altitude from 690m to around 10m (according to my sat nav) with just over half the trip on 100km/h and the other a various mixture of peak hour Brisbane traffic to very easy 60-80 4th/5th gear outer suburban arterial cruising. I'm so consistent that I can guarantee that the careful fill will be between 10.2-10.4L. That's 6.6L/100km from a turbo Forester. The return trip usually takes 14.5L for around 9.2L/100km with the altitude change the only difference.

Strangely the difference isn't as great in our Golf. Its down run usually uses 6.5L for 4.1L/100km and the return uses just on 8L for 5L/100km.

Sorry - this looks like someone with a severe case of OCD - but as I tell SWMBO if that's OCD then I don't care, I enjoy it. There has to be some challenge in a repetitive weekly drive.

 

[Ratbag]

^ Yeah, I'm quite sanguine about it.

Getting 1.5 tonnes under way over short trips is going to use fuel. Simple laws of physics. It's also an auto, which does even worse at this kind of driving than a manual tranny will, with the same driver.

The SG and SH even out on the highway at around 7.5L/100 kms (2 adults) and 8.5L/100 kms (4 adults) over much the same round trip to Ballarat and back.

And we can buy a helluva lot of fuel for the cost of your turbo repair ... . Sorry, that was mean of me ... :lol:.

Nah, I am happy with this for the kind of car these are, and the level of functionality, safety and comfort they offer. Even doing cross town trips in either of them, the fuel economy improves dramatically. The SG usually reaches operating temperature in about 0.5 km. The SH doesn't have a temperature gauge in it ... ... Bloody "Accountant Pack"!!

 

[guzzla]

And we can buy a helluva lot of fuel for the cost of your turbo repair ... . Sorry, that was mean of me ... :lol:. QUOTE]

Yeah, I've heard that from a few skeptics before but at 263,000km there is no sign of needing one and there are plenty of non-turbo EJ-25's that have needed the almost obligatory replacement head gaskets long before that. The turbo model doesn't suffer from that problem. Actually by the 06 model you might even find you have got one that mightn't ever need it.

Used replacement turbos for the EJ-255 are pretty cheap anyway. So many low mileage ones have been taken off modified WRX's and are going for a song. It was more expensive to replace the seized air conditioning compressor near 200,000km on mine than a turbo. I never expected that. I hope Subaru have modified the design.

 

[guzzla]

The SG usually reaches operating temperature in about 0.5 km. The SH doesn't have a temperature gauge in it ... ... Bloody "Accountant Pack"!!

I've noticed the same thing. I've never had a car that seems to get up to operating temperature so quickly - well, according to the gauge anyway. 0.5km would have to be right. At least it still has a gauge even if it never moves once up to operating temperature. I'm certain the temp would have to vary when under hard loads/40C+ summers yet that needle just sits there in the same spot. My Camry and the new Golf are the same. I think the engineers are now giving us a dumbed down version. Maybe the SH version (doesn't it have a light that changes or something similar? Old age is fogging the memory - I haven't been in one for 3 years) is their way of completely removing it like BMW have with the engine oil dip stick.

 

[Ratbag]

^ As to the temperature gauge, mine is the same in Roo2. So was the Impreza's. It also got up to temperature very quickly - blowing warm air out of the dash vents in about 0.5 km, and the temperature gauge reaching normal operating temperature very quickly.

What I cannot get my head around is why run the cooling system at such high pressures? If the cooling system is adequate to the task, and the Subaru ones seem to be perfectly adequate, why not run them at 4-7 psi instead of 15 psi? The higher pressure quadruples the stress on every element of the system, including the head gaskets ...

My old Austin Kimberley's cooling system was barely adequate, but I ran a 4 psi cap on it, and it almost never went over 180°F (about 82°C), even on hot days (36-40°C), and didn't boil on one occasion when it got to 47°C ambient. The oil pressure was running at around 7 psi at around 140 km/h (normal was 40 psi ... ), and I thanked the Gods that I knew it had a high capacity oil pump, and that this probably wouldn't hurt the engine. It didn't. It was the day of the Ash Wednesday bushfires in the Adelaide Hills.

 

[Ratbag]

SWMBO drove RonnyRoo to Canberra and back for a seminar/workshop recently.

Two other adults, plus clothes and booze for a week on board (i.e. approaching legal GVM).

1,432 kms, used 130.22L = 9.09L/100 kms, or 31.6 mpg (UK), 25.87 mpg (US).

Not too bad at all, IMHO.