Suddenly more responsive motor. XV 2014

Some interesting points from everybody ( and remembering we're all civil adults unlike other forums full of kids)

You'll not usually hear them ping, the knock control on 01+ ECU'S is very good at reducing audible pinging, but can still be too slow or not listening when it counts.

Get a $20 VAG-COM OBD cable, RomRaider on your laptop and read the ECU.

I do agree that fuels are temperamental on some engines and Ethanol is no use in a road car without proper tuning or flex sensor to allow closed loop operation to compensate for the added oxygen affecting the Lambada readings.

One thing I'll call you out on though RB is the "Constant tuning" on a 93 EJ18.
The only tech that ECU had was closed loop O2 feedback.
The knock control back then was completely "dumb".
I.e the knock sensor would detect a high level of knock for a sustained period, then default to " limp mode" (rich fuel mix and retarded timing)
Post 03 the tunes had strict emissions patterns to get around, the engineers in Japan did not have that to worry bout when designing the hardware, or the emissions for their domestic market.
They're given an emissions target to make sure the vehicle complies to under certain conditions (on a dyno) for the AU and EU markets. The 0's and 1's are jumbled up to make it work and pushed out the door.
So your tube ends up too lean for too long, too much timing to influence EGT's which makes the CATs work faster and too hot coolant temps.
None are good for longevity or engine output.

We dont modify or tune these things for no reason.
They are a dodecahedron that needs to be squashed through a triangular hole to keep the EPA happy.
Funny thing is, most custom tuned cars actually better the standard tunes for emissions.
 
Sorry, Rob, but there are a squillion things that the ECU attached to any ECU controlled engine manages, even on a 1993 EJ-18 engine.

Dual spark control and highly variable ignition timing, mixture control, emissions control systems (yes, even the '93 EJ-18 had these ... they replaced mechanical systems that had similar functions), etc, etc. Even controlled the power steering in pretty much the same way that it does in our SG and SH (Jaguar patent, IIRC - variable ratio, variable power assist hydraulic power steering).

The ECU had dual (tandem) systems. 'Limp mode' referred to a failure of the primary ECU system, causing the backup system to take over, with presets for all its functions, instead of being adaptive.

Nissan did not adopt this design for some years after Subaru had it. If your Nissan Patrol ECU failed in those days, you ended up in a ditch (happened to our next door neighbour - at least he didn't go over the cliff on the other side of the road!).

Perhaps not quite as simple as you have suggested ...
 
Ratbag said:
Just BTW, you consider Chip Torque at Nerang are not amateurs, yet the engineers at Fuji Heavy Industries are, by necessary implication ...

What a peculiar perspective ...

But whatever rocks your boat ... :poke: :cool:.
Click to expand...

Well whatever they are I do know that in an hour the tune that was loaded on to my car and then checked on a dyno made it a smoother, more responsive with better power delivery characteristics then the standard motor. And turbo Subaru owners all over the world have found the same thing when retuning with any nuber of aftermarket tuners. Just look on some of the forums like ozfoz or subaruforester.org and see the results. So yeah, on the 2.5 turbo Fuji heavy Industries didn't do as good a job as they should have or could have.

And non turbo engines - my impressions on the 253 engine in Foresters and Outback I drove was Subaru got the tuning right with good power spread and even smooth delivery. The figures and performance results of respected testers do show that the equivalent sized engines in a Mazda 6 or Honda Accord Euro did it better though. My brother's 2010 Accord Euro manual (the only manual of it left in Australia when he got it) cost $35000 and was less than the Forester XS has ever been. I think you said yours was over $40000 when new. It was around $37000 when I priced and drove a manual XS back in 2007 when I was shopping for my car.

And I wasn't talking about on road handling and ride - the Accord Euro would clean up our Foresters on both accounts - as should be expected. It's faster, more economical, quieter, better riding, better handling and better braking - and faster across any sealed surface. But that was not what this debate was about - you introduced that in what appears to me to be a belittling attempt at someone who doesn't agree with your personal assessments. Well, you're wrong mate.
 
All this still doesn't explain why my car will now corner in 3rd gear when it wouldn't before. Thank you gentlemen for returning my thread to a more civilized tone. It was getting a little hot that few a few posts.
Actually the best stock tuned modern motor I have driven is a Honda 1500 VTI in the 2004 Jazz. The only car that could go faster up Mt Stuart faster than I could drive it. It was like driving a properly tuned racing MOTORCYCLE motor. Total feedback and insane useable power for it's size. And sounded soooo sweet.

Again PLEASE is there a reference in this forum ( or elsewhere) that gives a list of engine names relative to car models and years. There are some interesting conversations going on and I can't follow as I don't know to which engine/vehicle /year combos.
I actually had the bit about more fuel use with alcohol but deleted it before post. To get the best from alcohol fuels you need to radically increase the compression ratio to increase the volumetric efficiency. That then uses less fuel per K.
 
Gidday Greg

If you search Wikipedia for "subaru engines" it will give you some idea.

[Edit]

List is here:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Subaru_engines

[End edit]

However, Subaru build 'LEGGO' cars, and what's standard in one market may not be in another. e.g. in the USA, the Forester was never cursed with the EJ-20 engine back in the old days. They also never got the dual range gearbox.

Some of the gear ratios in my 2006 gearbox are the same as some in my '93 Impreza ...

Just a couple of examples.
 
Last edited:
gregjet said:
All this still doesn't explain why my car will now corner in 3rd gear when it wouldn't before.
Click to expand...

If your car was a demonstrator, the engine could well have started to become carboned up.
Being endlessly driven around the block is not good for any engine, let alone a new one.
A bit of 'normal' driving, e.g. over a few hundred kilometres, may well have cleaned it up sufficiently to make a quite perceptible change in all aspects of performance.

Modern engines, particularly Japanese designed/built ones, have incredibly fine tolerances. They carbon up easily because of this IME.
 
Another possibility Ratbag. Good Point. Especially if it has ridiculous multi electrode plugs. Plasma density is pretty marginal at best of times. I think it had done pretty close to 200km in almost a year so reasonable possibility especially if drivers get in from carby cars and depress the accelerator when they are starting the car screwing up the TPS. I would have thought the drive back to Bundy from Bris would have burnt it clean though as the long 110kph sections at constant lean throttle should have had it spick and span but home. On thing I forgot to mention was that when I change the oil the oil that came out was REALLY viscous so maybe it had some very think run in oil ( maybe cause it was a demo?)
 
"Depressing throttle when starting screwing up TPS..."
Please explain.
holding the throttle open when cranking has the effect of allowing the engine to consume much more air than it would normally. It's a go-to test on a Subaru to diagnose starting issues.

Also, the long "cruise" drive won't clear them out, you're not producing the extra heat or airflow required to clear them.
From my years working in a new car dealership we would have a lot of cars idle badly when they rolled off the transporter,
under 20km on the clock and lots of stopping and starting shuffling them around the wharf/ yards, etc.

warm them up, then drive at alternating high RPM, then high load.
Sometimes the plugs even had to be pulled and changed as they wouldn't clear on a pre-delivery test-drive.

As for oils, unless your new ride has a scheduled 1000km oil change, modern engines don't typically use run-in oils, especially in non-prestige brands.

As alluded to above, lots of short tips clogs up the CAT's quickly and they just won't breathe.

Don't be kind, give it hell and it will reward you in the long run.
 
^ I don't know if this has changed over the intervening years/models, but all ours have had a 1,000 km scheduled oil change done.

Even for a low mileage demonstrator, I would recommend following the running in procedure I outlined in the link above. It has worked well for me with the new cars I have had over the years.

With a higher mileage s/h purchase, one can usually tell on test drive whether the car has been thrashed (loose as a goose, and thin blue smoke on hard acceleration ... ) or not run in properly (tight and relatively unresponsive in all circumstances), or about right (engine is free revving, but not overly so nor 'tight', and no thin blue smoke under hard acceleration).

Just some observations made from experience over msny cars and many years, FWIW.
 
All of the motorcycles and the last 3 cars I had use/d a TPS sensor zeroing on startup. That is, during ECU/'s boot up they run a voltage set across the TPS to establish the zero open point. My Husky with a Magnetti Marelli actually uses a idle to warm up , no touching the throttle to set fuel/air zero ponit as well. The Rodeo turbo diesel ( no idea what the main ECU was but I think it probably was a Bosch) actually accs sluggish unless you leave the throttle completely alone until after it starts for the same reason.

You are probably right about the long drive not being sufficient because of air flow. Could explain the performance jump if one plug was intermittent carbon shorting as well then finally cleared. I live 8km along the highway from the edge of town so the engine gets a good clearout before it has to do any idling in any "traffic". I wonder if the autostop doesn't increase the rate of fouling though.
Just thought of another problem that could have come from the var being a demo. With only a couple of hundred km on the clock and I suspect being a short drive demo for so long, it may have had the same fuel in the tank for a VERY long time.
I have done mid load acceleration run in for a long time except on the factory pre run in cars I have owned ( Toyota Prado, Nissan Pulsar SSS N14, Honda Jazz 1500 VTI) . I am not sure it is still necessary with the changes in bore and ring materials in modern cars, but I still do it anyway, until someone shows me proof that it isn't necessary.

The latest oil research I have been able to find still indicates that all automotive oils, even the best PAO's, have less than 50% of their lubricity after about 1200 to 1500km. The big difference then occurs as mineral oils drop off even faster after that than synths. I do a oil change/oil filter change at about 1000km on a new engine to remove the post manufacture and early mateing wear materials. They WILL be there, despite any comments on any owners manuals or factory, and WILL increase engine wear and reduce the service life of a motor. The only reservation I have is with motors with soft iron coated pistons as the metal fines may help polish the piston coatings early on. The free metal will still cause extra wear in other parts of the engine though, especially sliding surfaces like cams , followers, cam chains, valve shafts etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top