Just thought I'd share the news. It made 175 wheel hp on our Dyno Dynamics Dyno, or about 10-15 more whp than the regular WRX. Peak hp was generated by approx 5000, which is really early. IIRC, peak torque as around 180ft-lbs as well. Needless to say, the claimed power rating is understated. Assuming that SOA is honest with the WRX rating, the Forester Turbo is making at least 240bhp.

Cheers,
shiv

I knew it! Those things do LOW 14's and sometimes high 13 from the factory so they've got to be underrated. Thanks for the info, Shiv.

-STiLL

Wow, very interesting, thanks for the info.

That's certainly more in line with what it feels like and the 1/4 mile times.

So when is Stage 1 going to be ready, Shiv? ;)

- Steve

You have a way of making my day. Do you have any plans to tweaking the XT ? (Please, Hint, Hint) :) Richard

Dang, i would've hate to pull up to one of those when my twin turbo Z "Was" stock.
Brent

shiv

i'm assuming that the XT you tested was a 5 spd and running 91 RON?

keep us posted as to when you get your hands on the ECUTEK liscense for the XT!!!

thanks

duckboy

Yes, it was a 5sp manual. And yep, it was on 91 octane. I did hear a couple of small pings when driving the car afterwards. Very minor and seldom heard-- nothing like the stock STi.

We are working on upgrades for the car, btw.

Cheers,
shiv

Subaru needs to find a way to put this motor with AVCS into the model year 05 WRX. I know all about the minor debate, "well, a WRC car has a 2.0 liter engine, so the USDM WRX and STi should have one", yada, yada, yada, but I don't care about all that for a street driven vehicle. I want a wide and tall torque curve.

Thanks, Shiv, for sharing test results with us.

--
0==WW==0
"…axles of evil…" - george w. bush

Yeah, i would be all for the torque and more power potenial of the 2.5 block too. I mean a 2.0 is great for a 2500 pound front wheel drive sentra but not a 3200+ awd car.
Brent

So would the low trap speed only be due to aerodynamics of a brick? :confused:

Originally posted by duckboy
running 91 RON?

I doubt it was RON anything. (R+M)/2

Interesting numbers. I wonder why they are trapping so very low though.

shiv

are you going to be offering the same Stg sub-zero, 0 & 1 kit for the XT??? don't want anything too loud.

do you think significant gains could be had w/ just a cat back?

duckboy

I can't wait to see what the legecy B4 is going to be like when it comes over here, if it can pull off low 14's stock I will be sold :)

If the legacy only does low 14's then i give up on subaru! The legacy is their current flag ship of shorts here in the states. At least main stream anyway, to the enthusiast it's the sti.
Subaru is looking to change their image from conservative granola mobiles to something like a nissan image.
Nissan's flagship is the maxima. Their entry level car is the sentra. So this would mean legacy vs. impreza. You can't tell me they are going to want the two in the same class of buyer. Just doesn't make sense.
So with that in mind i have higher expectations for the legacy.
Brent

Originally posted by KanosWRX
I can't wait to see what the legecy B4 is going to be like when it comes over here, if it can pull off low 14's stock I will be sold :)
you guys are very wishful... what makes you think the B4 will be coming... the only word is that there will be a turbo legacy... bet it has the same 2.5l Turbo engine as the rest of the bunch... add in the extra weight, and 14s will be close...

the new legacy platform's are approx. 200 lbs lighter than the current legacy platforms, but, equally stiff if not stiffer. so, all that extra engine power added to the legacy models will not go un-noticed. should be an interesting line when it finally arrives.

i personally think the B4's coming. if suby continues its aggressive marketing, we'll in for an interesting ride :) funny, they're making honda & toyota look like a bunch of conservative granny mobile mfgs. :) go go go...

duckboy

Makes me even more optimistic about the turbo Legacy. Just have to worry about the suspension and transmission now :p And I hope I don't have to buy tires to replace RE92 right off the bat ... :lol: Damn it, SOA, make your announcement already!

Yeah RE92's and larger/wider wheels to clear bigger and better brakes. How come we americans that pay more for our wrx's get only a 6.5 inch wide wheel when everyone else gets a 7 inch wide one that will clear the 4 pots? :mad:
I hope subaru monitors these forums and reads up on this stuff. Coz if they don't then the turbo legacy will be a failure.
Brent

Originally posted by serious
If the legacy only does low 14's then i give up on subaru! The legacy is their current flag ship of shorts here in the states. At least main stream anyway, to the enthusiast it's the sti.
Subaru is looking to change their image from conservative granola mobiles to something like a nissan image.
Nissan's flagship is the maxima. Their entry level car is the sentra. So this would mean legacy vs. impreza. You can't tell me they are going to want the two in the same class of buyer. Just doesn't make sense.
So with that in mind i have higher expectations for the legacy.
Brent

So does that mean that you want the Legacy to be slower than that? What about the Forester XT?

you guys are very wishful... what makes you think the B4 will be coming... the only word is that there will be a turbo legacy... bet it has the same 2.5l Turbo engine as the rest of the bunch... add in the extra weight, and 14s will be close...
B4 is just a designation for all Legacy sedans as opposed to the Touring Wagon. You must mean that we believe that a GT will be coming. What reason do you have to not believe this? All information has been that there will be 250 horses for the US, and it will be a GT. It will be the same 2.5L engine in the way that the Forester XT has the same engine as the STi. As for weight, it will be lighter than an STi but a bit heavier than a WRX. Depending on gearing, this new Legacy has the potential of matching the Forester numbers but surely with a higher 1/4 mile trap speed. Who knew the Forester would be as fast as it turned out to be?

For more debate on this, why not head up to the News Forum to the Legacy threads where the threads meander and hijack themselves and end up answering what is currently known or not on them. In the meantime, how about we get back to the Forester?

Originally posted by serious
Yeah RE92's and larger/wider wheels to clear bigger and better brakes. How come we americans that pay more for our wrx's get only a 6.5 inch wide wheel when everyone else gets a 7 inch wide one that will clear the 4 pots? :mad:

Aside from Japan getting great deals, Europe, Australia, NZ, and latin America all cost more than the US. I didn't realize that the US wheels don't clear the 4 pots though

Forget about the Legacy for now. This thread is about the Forester! I'm excited to see what this car can do with a WRX intercooler and an XEDE!

I'm sure this question has been asked 10,000 times in the past, but I've not been on NASIOC as much lately: What turbo does the Forester have? Is it the same 13b as in the WRX?

Originally posted by PPower
So would the low trap speed only be due to aerodynamics of a brick? :confused:

:lol: :lol:

Originally posted by Noize
I'm sure this question has been asked 10,000 times in the past, but I've not been on NASIOC as much lately: What turbo does the Forester have? Is it the same 13b as in the WRX?
isn't a 13b the RX7 engine? :confused:

it has the 2.5l turbo engine... same block as the STi me thinks... but more displacement = :D

Originally posted by DanzBorin

isn't a 13b the RX7 engine? :confused:

it has the 2.5l turbo engine... same block as the STi me thinks... but more displacement = :D

Which TURBO, dude; not what motor! I'm wondering if it has the Mitsu 13b turbo the WRX has?

Originally posted by Noize
Which TURBO, dude; not what motor! I'm wondering if it has the Mitsu 13b turbo the WRX has?
dude, sorry...

we refer to it as the TD04, and yes, I think they have the same turbo...

Originally posted by DanzBorin
it has the 2.5l turbo engine... same block as the STi me thinks... but more displacement = :D

:lol: The same block as the STi but more displacement? So is the Forester XT a 2.7L or something? Both are 2.5L/2457cc/150 cubic inches. For being around for so long, you have some odd comments.:alien:

Originally posted by Noize


Which TURBO, dude; not what motor! I'm wondering if it has the Mitsu 13b turbo the WRX has?

The WRX has a TD04-13G.

Originally posted by PPower
:lol: The same block as the STi but more displacement? So is the Forester XT a 2.7L or something? Both are 2.5L/2457cc/150 cubic inches. For being around for so long, you have some odd comments.:alien:
:rolleyes:... I said more displacement = :D not that the XT has more displacement than the STi...

read there fella...

I meant that it had more than the WRX engine, which I thought Noize was asking... so, my answer had I read right (seems to be a lot of this going on...) would have been correct... at least I'm not slinging mud...;)

Originally posted by DanzBorin

dude, sorry...

we refer to it as the TD04, and yes, I think they have the same turbo...

"We" being me too. :) I had a WRX for a year and a half until a little over a month ago. The TD04 is the housing, but its a 13g (TD0413G) turbo. Sorry I put 13b, I was thinking of the larger TD0414b that was the OEM 1G DSM turbo. Now I understand why I confused you. Thanks for letting me know it is the same turbo! A friend of mine recently got a Forester XT, and I was looking for more information about it. You answered my main question, I appreciate it.



Originally posted by TypeC


The WRX has a TD04-13G.

Please see my correction above.

Shiv,

Since only the intake, turbo, IC, and ECU are really different (on the XT engine versus the STi), obviously, there will be people (like me) that would like to have a "STi Upgrade" for the XT.

Of course, the XT has got the WRX tranny, so I'd have to be careful... or, I could get an auto. But then the ECU code would be different since I am unaware of any US STi automatics.

SO! What I am looking for is a vendor that will have a custom ECU code that will combine the programming of the STi (for the fuel, timing control, etc.) but still be able to handle the auto of the XT.

Well?

Mark.:)

Originally posted by serious
If the legacy only does low 14's then i give up on subaru! The legacy is their current flag ship of shorts here in the states. At least main stream anyway, to the enthusiast it's the sti.
Subaru is looking to change their image from conservative granola mobiles to something like a nissan image.
Nissan's flagship is the maxima. Their entry level car is the sentra. So this would mean legacy vs. impreza. You can't tell me they are going to want the two in the same class of buyer. Just doesn't make sense.
So with that in mind i have higher expectations for the legacy.
Brent

Here,Here!! right on Brother(sorry about that I am listening to Aretha Franklin) I would like to see a 2.5 six cylinder in the new Legacy,bimmer does it.But Subaru says this is to big,they want to stick with the 4 because they can get it lower and farther back,better center of gravity.Also I new that puppy was uderstated when Car and driver got less than 6 on 0 to 60!!
Matt,It makes a nice winter ride so the sti can Hybernate for winter!!:p

Originally posted by PPower


:lol: The same block as the STi but more displacement? So is the Forester XT a 2.7L or something? Both are 2.5L/2457cc/150 cubic inches. For being around for so long, you have some odd comments.:alien:

DID you ever try Panama Red!!:D

Originally posted by Vishnu Performance
Just thought I'd share the news. It made 175 wheel hp on our Dyno Dynamics Dyno, or about 10-15 more whp than the regular WRX. Peak hp was generated by approx 5000, which is really early. IIRC, peak torque as around 180ft-lbs as well. Needless to say, the claimed power rating is understated. Assuming that SOA is honest with the WRX rating, the Forester Turbo is making at least 240bhp.

Cheers,
shiv

I KNEW IT, I KNEW IT, I KNEW IT!!!

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=385335&highlight=forester

13.8 quarter miles, 210/235 and 3200lbs was just way too suspicious to be believable.

I'm usually a very humble person. However.........

To all of you who were SO SURE that the flatter torque curve alone could translate into a car that much faster than a WRX, pour some ketchup on your hats, or a crow, or whatever you'd like to eat. Heh.

Shiv,
Can you please post a dyno plot of your stock XT over a stock WRX plot to compare? I'm sure all of us would like to see the difference.

Thanks!

Matt

it has the 2.5l turbo engine... same block as the STi me thinks... but more displacement =


You mean like an overbored storked sti ej207??? no
The ej257 is a different motor.... Its called the ej255 in the xt but its the same thing.

I am unaware of any US STi automatics.

There are no impreza STI autos anywhere.

Originally posted by totoherbs
You mean like an overbored storked sti ej207??? no
The ej257 is a different motor.... Its called the ej255 in the xt but its the same thing.
never said word 1 about an overbored ej207...:confused:

the more displacement comment refered to a 2.5l block has more displacement than a 2.0l block... plan and simple...

Not to sound like a goonie but i have two subaru automatics that say STI on them. Supposedly they came out of jdm turbo legacys. The stamp look authentic, but then again who knows!
brent

Just got the Forester today. It needs some help! Need suspension, exhaust, intake, bov, ecu upgrade, you know, everything! Have any ideas of where to start? Want to see more than 175 at the wheels though I am quite stoked about that right now! Thanks for the info!

From what I am told the turbos are the same. The engine is a EJ25 and I think the STI is an EJ257. So the blocks or something are a little different. That is all I know so far. I will be taking the car to turbo xs this afternoon for the possiblity of being a project car for them. This will include possible ic upgrade, turbo back, ecu tuning, bov, God knows what else. I will keep you guys posted in the Forester section! Hopefully the bov will be on there today. Still want to know about the Sub 0 kit myself? Come on Vishnu! We need this. I am sure this will help our engine just as it does the WRX!

Dude... Not to say anything negative about Dan at Godspeed, but I just got my STI tuned by Shiv at Vishnu this weekend and I would personally wait for his Forester kit.

It's the same as the WRX, not the STI.

Mark.

Sorry for not being clear. I meant that the WRX and the XT are the same.

Originally posted by DRNWAGN
From what I am told the turbos are the same. The engine is a EJ25 and I think the STI is an EJ257. So the blocks or something are a little different. That is all I know so far. I will be taking the car to turbo xs this afternoon for the possiblity of being a project car for them. This will include possible ic upgrade, turbo back, ecu tuning, bov, God knows what else. I will keep you guys posted in the Forester section! Hopefully the bov will be on there today. Still want to know about the Sub 0 kit myself? Come on Vishnu! We need this. I am sure this will help our engine just as it does the WRX!


The forester has a ej255, not the ej251 that is in the RS, same as the ej257 that is in the sti... except for maybe the cams.

http://subaru.com.au/downloads/929305.pdf

Same cams and fuel injectors as STi. Different intake manifold.

Mark.

totherbs

That technical data brochure is awesome! :eek: :eek:

It looks like since the block is your basic STi block, an STi UP/TB should be easy...the tranny will be a different issue altogether. If only suby offered the dbl syncro 1st/3rd and trpl syncro 2nd 6-sp from the STi stock, that'd be sweet:banana: :banana: . It only makes sense that the 2.5 with the 2.0 turbo would make mo' power than the 2.0 (no replacement for displacement :lol: :lol: ).

Edmunds mentioned that the STi block was reinforced and lightened compared to how the WRX block was made, so they could make mo' power. I would imagine all the reinforcing is still there for the F-XT, if it's the same block. Has anyone done/thought about an STi 6-sp into F-XT transplant yet?

Dr DRum

According to my mechanic buddy at Subaru, the MAJOR differences between the STI and the F-XT engines are this:

STI
Larger Turbo
Larger Wastegate
Larger IC
Forged pistons
6-mt
Brembos
DCCD

F-XT
Smaller Turbo
Smaller Wastegate
Tiny IC
5-mt or 4eat

For the price, family car-ness and sleeper looks, I'm gettin' the F-XT and upgrading.

Originally posted by ericb49
According to my mechanic buddy at Subaru, the MAJOR differences between the STI and the F-XT engines are this:

STI
Larger Turbo
Larger Wastegate
Larger IC
Forged pistons
6-mt
Brembos
DCCD

F-XT
Smaller Turbo
Smaller Wastegate
Tiny IC
5-mt or 4eat

For the price, family car-ness and sleeper looks, I'm gettin' the F-XT and upgrading.

Well stop listening to him because there are more differences than that. For one, the STi has cast pistons (stronger cast ones), and forged rods and pistons. These are internally gated wategates, so since they share different turbos, the WG size is irrelevent.

The STi internals and the F-XT internals are indeed the same.

Mark.

P.S. I second that whole "different wastegate" reply.

For one, the STi has cast pistons (stronger cast ones), and forged rods and pistons.


I think the pistons in the XT and the STI are the same, they look the same at least, as for the sti rods being forged... they dont look it.

http://www.i-speed.us/images/sti_engine/sti-rod_small.jpg

The top rod is a 2.5 n/a. The center is a 2.5T STI. And the bottom is the rod that we use in our monster motors.


The STI rod has bolts through the cap instead of studs with nuts, and the cap has two pins that align it with the rod. The n/a or the 2.0T WRX dose not.
http://www.i-speed.us/news/sti_parts.shtml



The STi internals and the F-XT internals are indeed the same.

The rods have different part numbers and MAY be different parts....

some good tec info here regarding the motor:

http://subaru.com.au/downloads/929305.pdf

Peaty, did you catch the front sway bar diameter of 21 mm ? Is this another upgrade for us FXT's to do? :) :) Richard

Originally posted by totoherbs



The forester has a ej255, not the ej251 that is in the RS, same as the ej257 that is in the sti... except for maybe the cams.

http://subaru.com.au/downloads/929305.pdf


some good tec info here regarding the motor:


:p

Originally posted by Vishnu Performance
Just thought I'd share the news. It made 175 wheel hp on our Dyno Dynamics Dyno, or about 10-15 more whp than the regular WRX. Peak hp was generated by approx 5000, which is really early. IIRC, peak torque as around 180ft-lbs as well. Needless to say, the claimed power rating is understated. Assuming that SOA is honest with the WRX rating, the Forester Turbo is making at least 240bhp.

Cheers,
shiv

Great News! (considering I pick up my XT 5MT in 3-4weeks when it comes in :D)

Keep us updated on the performance goodies you'll be making.
Though my XT has to be my daily, I'd like a few mild tweaks to it.
:devil:

I assume the XT's ECU is set for 91 octane, can you reflash it to run on 93 (as we have that in NYS) for a few more HP?

Thanks Vishnu!

*eagerly awaiting an XT kit*
:banana:

Originally posted by Ghostrider600


Though my XT has to be my daily, I'd like a few mild tweaks to it.
:devil:

Hey, I thought you weren't one to consider doing mods because of the warranty. :confused:

Originally posted by PPower


Hey, I thought you weren't one to consider doing mods because of the warranty. :confused:

Yeah, I wasn't, but I can after the warranty is out as I tend to keep my cars for YEARS (as evidenced by my current 1995 & 1988) :D

Besides, if I modded it now "The Committee" would kill me as she gets final approval/Veto to approve everything. It's half hers anyway, and she will drive it. And she'd *NEVER* let me void the warranty while we're paying it off. :(




But, wasn't it you and a few others who've said I *might* be able to get away with a cat-back and some other *teeny tiny* mods like a reflash or other *little* things?

Ugh. Being on these forums has corrupted me.

I said I'd *never* buy a wagon--I'm getting an XT
I said I'd *never* mod the car...now I'm *thinking* about doing it....but ONLY thinking about it...for now...:devil:

Actually, next summer I'd really just like to get some 17s and lower-profile tires to curb some body roll--that won't void the warranty, right? Or would it? :confused:

use WRX or STi springs and struts. This will put the forester at WRX or STi ridehieght (well + a little for the taller tires).

Originally posted by Ghostrider600
But, wasn't it you and a few others who've said I *might* be able to get away with a cat-back and some other *teeny tiny* mods like a reflash or other *little* things?

:devil: Do it early and tell the committee that the car is just getting more power as it is being broken in.

Originally posted by PPower

:devil: Do it early and tell the committee that the car is just getting more power as it is being broken in.

LOL, I may try that! ;)

What is the rideheight difference from?
I know the XT is lower than regular Foresters, but it has it's own set up that isn't WRX or NA Forester?

Taller springs and possibly longer stroke struts.

From what I understand the XT is the same ridehieght as the normal forester.

This is really off-topic for the post, but I had read that just putting RS springs on the Forester struts causes a 5" drop. Could be 3.5", though... I think the same guy put 5Zigen springs on his, that might've been the 5" drop.

Originally posted by Ghostrider600


I know the XT is lower than regular Foresters, but it has it's own set up that isn't WRX or NA Forester?

NA forester has 7.5" Minimum Road Clearance and the XT has 7.7"

From here:

http://www.cars101.com/subaru/forester/forester2004.html

That's odd. Subaru's own glossy brochure says 7.5" for the XT. Who's gonna argue over .2 inches anyway? :-)

Jack

Maybe they had more air in the XT tires :)

Not to be mean, but we've gotten this really off topic. Throw up a post in suspension or Forester forum. This should probably stay more organized than our hijack after hijack new Legacy threads. ;)

wonder what Shiv has gotten done on the XT upgrades...any update Shiv? :banana:

bump

Originally posted by inSaNE iRIsH
wonder what Shiv has gotten done on the XT upgrades...any update Shiv? :banana:

Anything yet?

Inquiring minds want to know....

You guys will be interested to see this. Trey Cobb has found similar results of the engine being more powerful than its rating. Guessed to be around 235-240hp crank. check it out (http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=436629)

I particularly liked the 260-265 ft lb. of torque. :banana: Richard

A 10% increase would be 231hp/258tq. Let's say it's 235/265. If the upcoming Legacy engine is built more for hp to where it is 250hp/250tq, that is 15hp more and 15tq less than the XT. Seems odd that it would be evenly matched, but maybe there is an explanation. It will sure be interesting to see the differences between the engines.

updately dooley?

Originally posted by PPower So would the low trap speed only be due to aerodynamics of a brick? :confused:

[PONTIFICATION]Originally pontificated by JDMSubaru

Yes, that and it's mass. We can see how evil air drag can become at higher speeds.

Look at Ferrari designs. Lighter weight, which also means lower mass. And then there's the aerodynamic body. High speeds can't be achieved with a blocky body (too much resistance).There are designs we can't quite practically fit into cars that only jets can. Look at the USAF's jets, they have round noses. You won't see any object hitting Mach 1 with a square shaped front end and sides. At least not in this atmosphere.

Back on topic of the Forester. I think it's a great utility vehicle/height wagon (whichever you feel more comfortable calling it), but it's hardly going to edge out even a base model WRX.

Let's look at other areas besides speed: braking, in no way better or accomplished in fewer feet than a WRX--suspension and handling (this is certainly a lost cause), the car's body has a higher center of gravity/blocky shape, high profile tires, it translated to a miserable low .70 g skidpad rating.

We get consistently conflicting quarter miles times on the Forester. Being generous, the car is guaranteed a low 14 sec. And likewise is the base WRX. Remember now though, it is only similar in straight line acceleration with the WRX because it has a bigger motor. But let us not forget, the Forester is not siginificantly heavier than the WRX and it also has an extra 0.5L too accomadate this inadequacy. So I wouldn't call this car better in speed when it is not fairly comparative being that it has a bigger engine. It only matches the power of a smaller engined 2.0L WRX, it does not clobber it (especially when it should, considering that it already has a major advantage).

If you need a utility vehicle or a family car but don't want to compromise the ability to go fast, buy a Forester, it's a great car, but if you are buying it with the intent to best an Impreza, you had best forget it.

[/B][PONTIFICATION]

Thats one bad ass soccer mom mobile :lol:

but if you are buying it with the intent to best an Impreza, you had best forget it.

I don't know with a few mods it's not so bad. Steve pulled a 13.98 with a stock XT, only mod was a silencer removal:

http://home.kc.rr.com/sulatycki/steve/forester13921.jpg

and in the auto-x with some coil overs and good tires he's beating quite a few guys, look in SM:

http://www.crownautocross.org/results/20031102-crown-8-results.htm

http://www.crownautocross.org/results/20031012-crown-7-results.htm

Originally posted by Peaty
I don't know with a few mods it's not so bad. Steve pulled a 13.98 with a stock XT, only mod was a silencer removal:

http://home.kc.rr.com/sulatycki/steve/forester13921.jpg

and in the auto-x with some coil overs and good tires he's beating quite a few guys, look in SM:

http://www.crownautocross.org/results/20031102-crown-8-results.htm

http://www.crownautocross.org/results/20031012-crown-7-results.htm

I don't want to argue with you too much because you are a nice guy, but trying to out-do any variant of WRX with a Forester XT is quite frankly, a pretentious and losing proposition.

No doubt it is an awesome car. I am trying to talk my mom out of buying a slow, unreliable, and expensive Volvo XC90 and getting an XT instead but she is hard to reason with. If it were my choice and I truly had a need for a utility vehicle, like outdoors hobbies or a family, I would buy one in a heartbeat.

I don't want to argue with you too much because you are a nice guy, but trying to out-do any variant of WRX with a Forester XT is quite frankly, a pretentious and losing proposition.

I would submit that your statement above was "pretentious"

I was just saying it was not bad. People have been doing well at the Auto-X and track with the XT. As far as being a brick I agree, but a CD of 0.35 isn't all that bad considering it's so tall. The WRX is .33

test drove a forester XT yesterday to get my winter survival kit. Pretty nice! It's very smooth witht he flatter torque and doesn't have so much turbo lag nor the kick in the pants like the WRX. I didn't want to push the tester too hard or do any clutch drops so I guess I didn't put it through it's paces, so it didn't feel that fast.

BUT, then I got back into my honda and felt like I wasn't moving at all! :lol: oh wait... my honda is slow... that's not funny... :(

Things I noticed... I felt very high up... and even passed another older forester and felt like I was quite a big higher than him too. Cargo room is pretty good, but that shifter was crazy! I swear the shifter was over a foot long and I had to move my arm forever to switch from first to second gear. When I got back in my car with the shortened shifter, I switched to second and thought I wasn't in gear b/c it was such a short movement!

but yeah, i if i wanted a small suv/sport wagon (which I don't right now), I might go with the forester.

Now now Peaty, he's not pretentious, just uninformed... :)

Well, let's see, the statement went something like:

but if you are buying it with the intent to best an Impreza, you had best forget it.

Ok, here is a link to the last local autox results, summarized for Subarus. All were WRXs or STis, except for my tall/slow Forester:

http://home.kc.rr.com/sulatycki/steve/subaru-results.htm

So, the Forester kill list in this one autox alone, includes: 4 STis, 2 WRX sedans, and 1 WRX wagon.

You can continue to pontificate ad nauseum and disregard the facts. This is an easy thing to do when you have no first-hand experience with the subject matter being discussed.

To this, I can only offer the little saying: "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink." :alien:

- Steve

Originally posted by zzyzx
So, the Forester kill list in this one autox alone, includes: 4 STis, 2 WRX sedans, and 1 WRX wagon.

Shhhhhh! Guys! GUYS! Please be quiet! I'd prefer everyone go on thinking the XT is a slow mom-mobile. Just let them believe what they want! You're ruining my sleeper! :-)

Jack Z

. Cargo room is pretty good, but that shifter was crazy! I swear the shifter was over a foot long and I had to move my arm forever to switch from first to second gear. When I got back in my car with the shortened shifter, I switched to second and thought I wasn't in gear b/c it was such a short movement!

I agree, when I first test drove a Forester coming out of my RS w/ a KB SS I was shocked how long the throw was. The Forester shifter lever is about 2" longer than the stock WRX/RS shifter. One of the first things I did was contact KB and asked him if he would make a shifter for the Forester XT. Which he did and I'm happy to say it improves the shifting feel a lot. The other weekend I drove Steve's (zzyzx) F-XT at the Auto-X and forgot how long the throws are. Good thing I only had to shift once :lol:

Originally posted by zzyzx
Now now Peaty, he's not pretentious, just uninformed... :)

Well, let's see, the statement went something like:



Ok, here is a link to the last local autox results, summarized for Subarus. All were WRXs or STis, except for my tall/slow Forester:

http://home.kc.rr.com/sulatycki/steve/subaru-results.htm

So, the Forester kill list in this one autox alone, includes: 4 STis, 2 WRX sedans, and 1 WRX wagon.

You can continue to pontificate ad nauseum and disregard the facts. This is an easy thing to do when you have no first-hand experience with the subject matter being discussed.

To this, I can only offer the little saying: "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink." :alien:

- Steve

You are likewise buying into ad nauseum with believing these stats and scores... How can a 0.72 g Forester outhandle a 0.83 g WRX? Or a 0.90 g STi???

If what happened in these contests is really true then the WRX drivers are really comatose.

Sorry but these are actual numbers. I was at the Auto-X and saw it w/ my own eyes. Not to mention he even beat the time that's listed in a fun run w/ me in the XT at 42.8 something sec. I have the video to prove it.

Plus you aren't reading everything:

and in the auto-x with some coil overs and good tires

Although his 1/4 mile time below is a stock XT (- silencer) time.

I'd say he's pulling more than .72 to lift both wheels wouldn't you?

http://primofoto.com/galleries/Halloweenie-Autocross-Nov-2-2003/IMG_0502.jpg

that is such a coooool shot.

peaty, do you know what spring rates, sway bars and tires this silver XT is running?

thanks for the help.

duckboy

Standard Sway bars but the other info is here:

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=429723

I drove his XT with the Race tires on and it was ultra harsh. But I have to say when he put the stock tires back on I was surprised at the difference. Those OEM tires are very squishy and the ride was actually tolerable.

Another thing that makes that particular XT so good at the Auto-X is the fact that Steve is at the wheel. He is amoung the better drivers in the area.

This one is not Steve at the wheel but aspera. Still a nice shot:


http://www.subaruforester.com/forum/files/1_steve__auto-x_11-2-03.jpg

Even if you can make this car handle better, I just find it absurd that you'd buy it for this purpose(?).

Why not just get a WRX for several thousands less and already have a big advantage? Whatever you had to do to bring yourself up to par with the WRX's stock handling will cost thousands more as well. Why, why why, why?!?!

I'll say it over and over, the Forester is an excellent utility vehicle. But it is not designed for handling performance.

It's got something the WRX will never have, Stealth and the element of surprise :)

That and no turbo lag, variable valve timing, drive by wire, it's quicker, nicer interior, more room, lots of potential once they get a reflash too the list goes on :)

Also, it's not that much money for a suspension. Actually with better tires it's pretty good as is.

It's more like why not?:banana:

Two classic quotes capture the essence of the Forester XT:

"Those who are skilled in producing surprises will win."
-Carl von Clausewitz, 1832
Prussian Army Major-General


"The Nature of Surprise"
Sun Tzu, The Art of War

"In conflict, direct confrontation will lead to engagement and surprise will lead to victory.

Those who are skilled in producing surprises will win. Such tacticians are as versatile as the changes in heaven and earth.

And as inexhaustible as the flow of a great river or like the sun and moon, appearing and disappearing and the four seasons, one cycle after another.

They are like the five music notes; combinations that produce endless melodies, like the five colours: mixture that produces a variety of beautiful objects."


METAPHORICAL ANALYSIS: The Forester XT is a beautiful object, with inexhaustible torque that moves heaven and earth, its boxer engine produces endless melodies, and its chassis yields four season versatility, thanks to its Geolanders. Coincidentally, it also comes in five (paint) colours!

Originally posted by JDMSubaru
Even if you can make this car handle better, I just find it absurd that you'd buy it for this purpose(?).

Why not just get a WRX for several thousands less and already have a big advantage? Whatever you had to do to bring yourself up to par with the WRX's stock handling will cost thousands more as well. Why, why why, why?!?!

I'll say it over and over, the Forester is an excellent utility vehicle. But it is not designed for handling performance.

why? Handling may not be its intent, but those suspension pieces are easily replaced and commonly are among the enthusiasts. what if you're already planning on getting coilovers and swaybars, etc. if you buy an Impreza? Then it's no different than getting a Forester. Most people on here don't leave their cars stock, so a stock comparison isn't very good. The point is that since the suspension is interchangeable, you can do the same for the Forester as you can with any Impreza. Now if you are talking stock everything, forget the STi as well and go for the Evo. Your comments sound like some of the older Forester current owners that if you aren't off-roading the Forester, you aren't doing what it was intended for. :rolleyes: Think outside the box.

Originally posted by PPower
Think outside the box.

But the forester IS a box!

Originally posted by duckboy
peaty, do you know what spring rates, sway bars and tires this silver XT is running?


Coilovers:

Koni 8611s double adjustables w/ Ground Control strut housings

Spring rates:

500F / 600R Eibach ERS

Swaybars:

Front - none, Rear - stock.

With stock tires and the shocks set on full soft it's actually quite streetable.


But the forester IS a box!


:lol: I won't argue with you there. However, what other shape is more ideal for chassis rigidity? :)


Shhhhhh! Guys! GUYS! Please be quiet!


:lol: That's how I feel. We need a few unsuspecting WRX owners left to mortify when the opportunity presents itself. ;)


But it is not designed for handling performance.


You don't "get it". That's OK, others will and are explaining the concepts. I'm beginning to think, though, that you don't realize the Forester is the same platform as the WRX? :huh:

- Steve

Originally posted by zzyzx
You don't "get it". That's OK, others will and are explaining the concepts. I'm beginning to think, though, that you don't realize the Forester is the same platform as the WRX? :huh:

- Steve

What does having the same platform give you? :confused: That's about as irrelevant as the fact that your car has the same AWD system.

It's the body that creates the "body roll" (something that is plentiful and quite pronounced in your car :lol: ) and not the frame/platform. I've never heard of a car with "platform roll" or "frame roll."

Car And Driver couldn't have said it better, "The Forester is a rollypoley [sic] in the twisties."

So now, how does having a WRX platform close the gap between your car and mine? You know, you've got 0.10 g of deficit from my car's stock skidpad --and it's going to take over a grand to make it up. :disco:

Originally posted by JDMSubaru
It's the body that creates the "body roll" (something that is plentiful and quite pronounced in your car :lol: ) and not the frame/platform. I've never heard of a car with "platform roll" or "frame roll."

I really, really hope you are not serious.

The body rolls over on the suspension. The body does not roll over on itself. The suspension is bolted to the body, and the body keels over on top of that suspension. If that suspension was stiffer, it will not keel over.

The entire Subaru lineup of the WRX, Legacy, Outback, Baja, and Forester is based on the same platform. What really defines the differences in handling between the cars is the suspension tune and wheelbase. Legacy end of the pond is the long wheelbase Subaru's, the Forester/WRX end is short wheelbase.

The body shares the same platform as the WRX - except that it is *wider*. Earlier on in the GC8 era, the Forester was well known here in JDM-land for having *more* potential than the WRX in the mountain twisties. It had a slightly wider track and could get *more* rubber under the fenders than the WRX. And every WRX suspension piece bolted up. The new Forester and the new WRX are now roughly *equal*, because the WRX finally got wider fenders as standard.

You have to ask which is cheaper - bolting on some suspension and putting on some real rubber, or switching from a 2.0-litre to a 2.5-litre turbo. Some people will opt for the Forester for this very reason - till the Legacy Turbo comes out.

Cheers,

Paul Hansen
www.apexjapan.com

Paul, it's always good to read your post.

Originally posted by shirokuma
You have to ask which is cheaper - bolting on some suspension and putting on some real rubber, or switching from a 2.0-litre to a 2.5-litre turbo.

Not to mention the tranny, which in the Forester has much more favorable gear ratios for performance-oriented driving.

Thanks for standing in as an instructor in newb school, Paul. ;) :)

- Steve

JDMSubaru,

Body roll, that was some funny stuff. Thanks for the primer.

As had been said before. The Forrester is basically an a taller Impreza wagon. The same suspension components can be bolted up.

For the most part the differences between the WRX wagon and the Fxt are as follows:

-different tranny, from what I hear it is stronger in the Fxt and has better gear ratios.

-different shocks and springs

-different engine and intercooler.

-same platform wrapped in a different body, this gives the Fxt a wider track.

-same brakes

-the curb weight of the Fxt is 45lbs. more

-the cd of the Fxt is slightly more

If you put the WRX springs on the Fxt and both cars are running the same rubber the handling will be so close that it would be lost in the noise.

The way I see it is that springs, dampers and tires are easy to replace. I would buy an STI wagon in a heartbeat, since I can't this Fxt is the next best thing.

Cheers

The manual trannys are the same (WRX wagon and FXT) except the final output ratio.

Mark.

Originally posted by jmaiken

-the curb weight of the Fxt is 45lbs. more


How interesting, I could have sworn that I have looked this up before and the FXT weighed less. I just doubled checked on autos.yahoo.com and you are right. Hmmm....
--Mark

Originally posted by maphill
The manual trannys are the same (WRX wagon and FXT) except the final output ratio.

Mark.

In the Forester XT technical supplement (from Subaru) it states

"The compact five speed AWD transmission is the same unit as used in the model year 2003 Forester but with improvements in the following areas:

-Reduced levels of Noise Vibration and Harshness (NVH) and gear durability due to increased gear width for improved meshing and gear noise

-Improved clutch performance through the use of new clutch disc with improved facing material. A wide-angle damper (WAD_ mechanism is also used to reduce gear vibration noise under high load and slow speed conditions.

-Fuel consumption has been improved through low friction driven bearings and the use of a lower viscosity oil."

My assumption is that the 03 Forester had the sane tranny as the WRX. I might be wrong though.

-the cd of the Fxt is slightly more

The F-XT has a CD of .35 and the WRX .33

Maybe they'll let us race a wrx and fxt at the Beechmont (cincy) open house tonight. :cool:

Originally posted by Peaty
The F-XT has a CD of .35 and the WRX .33

That is complete BS. Go towards the end of most editions of their magazine. They have 2 tan-colored pages that list all the cars they've reviewed and it states the acceleration times, price, and roadhandling.

SO now I am looking at the great magazine of comparisons they put on sale 2 months ago. I am reading this off of the "ROAD TEST DIGEST" pages in back.

Subaru Forester 2.5 XT = 0.75 g

Subaru Impreza WRX = 0.82 g

You completely don't know what you're talking about. Would you shut up about comparing the stock suspension Forester. I haven't ready anything from anybody here saying that a stock Forester (suspension-wise) can hang with a WRX. It's time for you to pull your head out and at least make a legitimate argument if you want to poop on this thread. And why quote aerodynamic cd's? That has nothing to do with lateral g's. :alien:

Oh man oh man.......

A "G" is the force of gravity, when applied to cars it means how much constant (or close to it) lateral accelaration will the car hold before it starts sliding, spinning or rolling over. The higher the g measurement the better.

There is a much more important measurement (IMHO) of handling. That is the slalom. This is a better test as it will measure the transient handling characteristics of a car.

A "CD" is a measure of drag (wind resistance) CD = Coefficient of Drag. The higher the cd number the worse the drag is.

Magazine racing is a little difficult to do. The numbers that I put the most stock in are the slalom (keep in mind different pubications might use a different gate spacing) and the trap speed at the end of the quarter mile.

Related link: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/156458142X/qid=1068762065/sr=1-3/ref=sr_1_3/103-6862137-3895837?v=glance&s=books

I think this thread explains how we ended up here. It is a short read with only 5 replies.
http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=450132

Cheers.

:huh: You are confused, I'm talking Coefficient of Drag "CD" the aerodynamics, not skidpad. Sheesh, take a chill pill.

Look here to see where I got my Forester CD info. :

http://subaru.com.au/downloads/929304.pdf

Page 7

You seem as perplexed as the guy in the WRX that couldn't shake me the other day :p (just poking fun, please take it as a joke, but he did have a funny look on his face)

Originally posted by SuperRuWRX
Peaty, did you catch the front sway bar diameter of 21 mm ? Is this another upgrade for us FXT's to do? :) :) Richard

Was reading back through and thought I replied to this :o I'm pretty sure we have the 21mm in the front also. I want something larger in the rear. Porter said the WRX 20mm fit no problems but I was thinking more like 22mm. Not sure if 20 is a big enough change over the 17 that is there.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

This thread gets better and better everytime I it. Talk about cheap fun. ;)

Regarding the Forester CD, ironic and sad to think that the car I really race - my GC8 - has a worse drag CD. :rolleyes: :furious:

- Steve

Peaty I've measured mine and it's 20 MM. BTW, last weekend Porter mentioned a larger front bar is something we may want to take advantage of.

I have an STI 20 mm rear bar and bushings on order from Lisa. I've been waiting two weeks now, it's coming from Japan. I guess they didn't anticipate us wanting them for the XT's.

This is the same combo I ran on the 02 WRX wagon 20 /20. Are you listening JDNSubaru. On both cars a tire upgrade was done before 500 miles. The XT is better.

How is the restrictor mod coming. I'll look for an update on your original post

Richard

Originally posted by PPower
You completely don't know what you're talking about. Would you shut up about comparing the stock suspension Forester. I haven't ready anything from anybody here saying that a stock Forester (suspension-wise) can hang with a WRX. It's time for you to pull your head out and at least make a legitimate argument if you want to poop on this thread. And why quote aerodynamic cd's? That has nothing to do with lateral g's. :alien:

You stupid aardvark, 0.75 g is the Forester's lateral grip not coefficient of drag. How stupid are you? :huh:

Originally posted by jmaiken
Magazine racing is a little difficult to do.


I didn't know measurement of lateral grip was considered a type of race. :confused:

As far as the magazine is concerned, the measurements for both cars came from the same source.

I like Cheeze

I didn't mean racing in the literal sense. What I was trying to say is that you should take those numbers with a grain of salt.

It sounded as though you did not understand the difference between cd and g. Your previous post made that abundantly clear.

All we were trying to do was to clarify the difference for you. By looking at your most recent post it is apparent that we have met our goal and you now understand.

I did a search of the other theards that you have been involved in and you seem to frequently rub people the wrong way. I would suggest that you will be taken more seriously and will enjoy the community much more if you adopt a more friendly tone.

Just my .02

Let's just put this issue astern and move the thread back on topic.

Cheers:disco:

Originally posted by JDMSubaru
You stupid aardvark, 0.75 g is the Forester's lateral grip not coefficient of drag. How stupid are you? :huh:

If this is all that you are countering, I will take this as waving the white flag. As for you, silly ostrich, you will notice that you quoted Peaty commenting that the FXT drag is .35 compared to Impreza .33. This has nothing to do with the stock Forester lateral grip of 0.75 BEFORE COILOVERS OR PERFORMANCE TIRES. I have to wonder about your reading comprehension skills as that could be the basis for much of your confusion. I hope all is clear now. ;) (in case you can't tell, this is in jest)

http://bullpup.lib.unca.edu/library/images/ostrich.gif

Originally posted by PPower
If this is all that you are countering, I will take this as waving the white flag. As for you, silly ostrich, you will notice that you quoted Peaty commenting that the FXT drag is .35 compared to Impreza .33. This has nothing to do with the stock Forester lateral grip of 0.75 BEFORE COILOVERS OR PERFORMANCE TIRES. I have to wonder about your reading comprehension skills as that could be the basis for much of your confusion. I hope all is clear now. ;) (in case you can't tell, this is in jest)

http://bullpup.lib.unca.edu/library/images/ostrich.gif

Take it as you will.

The word aardvark was to take the place of another word. I hope you can tell what I meant to say. If not, the word you are looking for contains only 3 letters.

OF COURSE MODS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. I meant to say that you have to put those items on a stock Forester XT -\(and then some more) to even come close to matcheng tha base model WRX's stock roadhandling/lateral grip.

JDMsubaru, im sorry, but you are quite ignorant, despite peoples attempts to teach you, and it makes me sad :( . Just go enjoy your USDM wrx and dont argue with people like peaty

JDMSubaru: The only thing you've demonstrated is your immaturity and utter lack of knowledge about Subarus. Go back to (mis)reading your magazines. Sorry for the interruption.

Originally posted by liigod
JDMsubaru, im sorry, but you are quite ignorant, despite peoples attempts to teach you, and it makes me sad :( . Just go enjoy your USDM wrx and dont argue with people like peaty Don't bullish me. You aren't sorry; otherwise, you wouldn't have said what you did.

You are following all the fallacy you hear on here like a sheep in a flock...now who is the ignorant one?

I argue with whomever I want.

Originally posted by JDMSubaru
I meant to say that you have to put those items on a stock Forester XT -\(and then some more) to even come close to matcheng tha base model WRX's stock roadhandling/lateral grip.

Incorrect. All it would take to surpass the stock WRX roadhandling and lateral grip in a Forester XT is sticky rubber. It may lean over like crazy, but it would still grip better than the WRX. And an experienced driver would be able to make use of the rubber in the slalom as well. It would not be pretty, but it is doable, I've done it myself before. It's actually kind of fun.

That is the no.1 problem with trying to argue magazine numbers. Sticky rubber, stock, skews performance numbers quite easily. Lateral grip is more a measurement of the stickyness of the stock rubber than it is suspension. There are many fines cars with amazing handling that have mediocre magazine numbers for lateral grip.

Cheers,

Paul Hansen
www.apexjapan.com

Sticky rubber, stock, skews performance numbers quite easily. Lateral grip is more a measurement of the stickyness of the stock rubber than it is suspension

If I'm not mistaken the same goes for stopping distance / braking performance. Replacing he stock tires on the XT, and most Subaru's I've found is amoung the single most effective "mods". Just about every review of the XT I've read will say something about the poor grip of the tires.

Originally posted by JDMSubaru
Take it as you will.

The word aardvark was to take the place of another word. I hope you can tell what I meant to say. If not, the word you are looking for contains only 3 letters.

OF COURSE MODS HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. I meant to say that you have to put those items on a stock Forester XT -\(and then some more) to even come close to matcheng tha base model WRX's stock roadhandling/lateral grip.

Little boy, do you think I am so ignorant that I don't know what you were saying. Again, nobody has written that the XT can handle as well as any iteration of the WRX with both models completely stock. Even though you meant to write the obvious, you didn't. You say that the suspension mods still wouldn't make the FXT comparable to a BASE WRX? You aren't paying attention. The question at hand should be if both WRX and F-XT are given the full suspension treatment, are they on par with each other in the end? They should be extremely close, and wagons have better weight distribution than the sedans countered by a higher CoG. End result would make them quite competitive. I'd lay a few grand on the line betting that Paul could beat you or me around a track in stock XT vs. WRX given RE92's on both. Or do they make helmets big enough for your head?

exactly man... TIRES!
that's all you need to see to account for the lateral G difference. Skid pad #'s are kinda worthless anyhow, it is not the deciding factor for which car handles better.

Geolander < RE92 (as sad as that may be)

And don't act like a stock wrx is a "great" handling vehicle either :rolleyes: with TIRES and a rear sway it's pretty good...


:banana: good stuff though, good stuff

-Chad

Originally posted by PPower
Little boy, do you think I am so ignorant that I don't know what you were saying. Again, nobody has written that the XT can handle as well as any iteration of the WRX with both models completely stock. Even though you meant to write the obvious, you didn't. You say that the suspension mods still wouldn't make the FXT comparable to a BASE WRX? You aren't paying attention. The question at hand should be if both WRX and F-XT are given the full suspension treatment, are they on par with each other in the end? They should be extremely close, and wagons have better weight distribution than the sedans countered by a higher CoG. End result would make them quite competitive. I'd lay a few grand on the line betting that Paul could beat you or me around a track in stock XT vs. WRX given RE92's on both. Or do they make helmets big enough for your head?

The better weight distribution that comes from a wagon is nothing more than mere added weight. So in effect you are being the devil's advocate; balancing the car at the expense of added heft and slowness. Then again does a taller rear end really balance the car better? :confused:

Yes, a base WRX will easily take the XT. So your Geolanders grip better than my RE92's? :lol: Maybe on dirt and rocks.

What you and all these other zombies are brainwashed into believing is that some sort of utility vehicle is going to outhandle a rally car/performance car. You have a fast utility vehicle; I give you that much, but no more.

Your stock to stock disadvantage and gap is so great that it would be quite a big feat for tires alone to make up the difference. You'd definitely need to lower that "rolly poley's" (exactly what C&D calls your car :lol: ) center of gravity through springs to come close. The high rear end will still cause a lot of lean even with the lowering.

JDM,

You crack me up.

Time for me to stop feeding the troll.

Best of luck. Be safe out there.

Cheers.

:banana:

Agreed, I think a little seat time thrashing an an XT would change his mind. :devil:
Richard

So your Geolanders grip better than my RE92's? Maybe on dirt and rocks.

Geolander < RE92 (as sad as that may be)

Not only do you misread CD VS Lateral G you don't know that the "<" symbol mean less than or in this case not as good as.

Originally posted by SuperRuWRX
Agreed, I think a little seat time thrashing an an XT would change his mind. :devil:
Richard

It's sooo true! I think you would be so surprised by the XT if you ever have the oportunity to drive one.
--Mark

Have you had a chance yet to drive the FXT?

Richard

Well we all saw this coming. The FXT was bound to get some WRX owner's undies in a bunch. It is too bad that we can't all just appreciate our cars for what they are. Some of us actually joined this site because we are SUBARU enthusiasts - not just some fool that jumped on the WRX bandwagon (JDM). I have owned both a WRX with suspension/tire/wheel/power mods AND now own the FXT. The FXT is a phenomenal vehicle with limitless potential (as is the WRX). Let's just leave it at that.

P.S. JDM don't forget to pick your jaw up off the ground the next time some "Roley-Poley" wagon passes you in the twisites....... :devil:

Originally posted by Adhesiv
Well we all saw this coming. The FXT was bound to get some WRX owner's undies in a bunch. It is too bad that we can't all just appreciate our cars for what they are. Some of us actually joined this site because we are SUBARU enthusiasts - not just some fool that jumped on the WRX bandwagon (JDM). I have owned both a WRX with suspension/tire/wheel/power mods AND now own the FXT. The FXT is a phenomenal vehicle with limitless potential (as is the WRX). Let's just leave it at that.

P.S. JDM don't forget to pick your jaw up off the ground the next time some "Roley-Poley" wagon passes you in the twisites....... :devil:

...and a couple people forgot they bought a utility vehicle for the wrong purposes.

Originally posted by SuperRuWRX
Have you had a chance yet to drive the FXT?

Richard

I plan on it once I get a day off. My folks are interested in some sort of utility vehicle and hopefully I can get them to buy the XT instead of an XC90 :rolleyes:

Originally posted by Peaty
Not only do you misread CD VS Lateral G you don't know that the "<" symbol mean less than or in this case not as good as.

Uh, actually I already read that post. Who in the right mind wouldn't already know such common sense bs without reading that? Of course a truck tire doesn't grip better than a care tire, even if they are both OEM. :rolleyes:

And yes I read the word, "rolly-poley" correctly in CD's article on the XT. Keep believing your car grips better than 0.75 in stock condition if that makes you feel good. :disco:

Originally posted by JDMSubaru
Uh, actually I already read that post. Who in the right mind wouldn't already know such common sense bs without reading that? Of course a truck tire doesn't grip better than a care tire, even if they are both OEM. :rolleyes:

And yes I read the word, "rolly-poley" correctly in CD's article on the XT. Keep believing your car grips better than 0.75 in stock condition if that makes you feel good. :disco:

Here your complete stupidity shows again. By CD, Peaty was talking about Coefficient of Drag vs. Lateral G. You just can't get anything through that thick lemming skull of yours. Calling it a light SUV is a bit of a joke really since it is really just a slightly different shaped Impreza on a taller suspension and Geolanders. Why do you insist on talking about the F-XT handling performance stock. Nobody is saying that it is great w/ stock tires and preferably some coilovers to compare to an Impreza w/ coilovers. Keep believing what you will....
if that makes you feel good. :disco:

Stop feeding the troll. He's never going to listen to the dozen people telling him he's not got it right. That includes one of the best informed people on Subarus around.

Scott

I hear by pledge to stop feeding the troll.
Richard :devil: :devil: :devil: :devil:
Instead I suggest we feed him to "The Beast".
http://idisk.mac.com/emily12/Public/TheBeast2.JPG

Originally posted by PPower
Here your complete stupidity shows again. By CD, Peaty was talking about Coefficient of Drag vs. Lateral G. You just can't get anything through that thick lemming skull of yours. Calling it a light SUV is a bit of a joke really since it is really just a slightly different shaped Impreza on a taller suspension and Geolanders. Why do you insist on talking about the F-XT handling performance stock. Nobody is saying that it is great w/ stock tires and preferably some coilovers to compare to an Impreza w/ coilovers. Keep believing what you will....

Your stupidity is reflected in believing C of D or "CoD" is called plain CD. CD is short for a popular magazine dip shiest. :mad: --Don't mislabel it or fall for its mislabeling.

You demonstrate utmost ignorance by following all these other Forester mongers that this is actually some world class handling car.

With tires, and springs, it still won't close the gap with your apparent rolly poley handicap. And no, neither you nor your groupies will beat me in drag either. You have an extra half liter of engine and still won't. I'm not sure if you have the same stock boost, you may have another advantage with that again if it does. Either way your rolly poley will be smitten if it ever runs me at the track. :D

Originally posted by JDMSubaru
And no, neither you nor your groupies will beat me in drag either. You have an extra half liter of engine and still won't. I'm not sure if you have the same stock boost, you may have another advantage with that again if it does.

So your saying that when you were stock you had a better time than the 13.9 time slip posted that the F-XT did? Not saying it's impossible, just wondering.
No, the F-XT runs at 11.4 psi so stock for stock you have more boost.
--Mark

JDM, just FYI....

The abbreviation for coeffcient of drag IS Cd. If you don't believe me take a look at a Cd formula from NASA.
http://www.lerc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/dragco.html

Out of curiosity (and I ask sincerly) Do you speak English as a second language? Your sentence patterns are unique, sometimes I feel like I am reading a fortune cookie.:D

Originally posted by jmaiken
Your sentence patterns are unique, sometimes I feel like I am reading a fortune cookie.:D

jmaiken - Classic! I almost bust my gut when I read this. This is great stuff! :lol: :lol:

- Steve

Originally posted by zzyzx
jmaiken - Classic! I almost bust my gut when I read this. This is great stuff! :lol: :lol:

- Steve

zzyzx - You are a homo! I almost gouged my eyes out once I found this out. Repent repent! :furious: :furious:

I suggest that everyone take it down a notch or this thread will be closed.

Originally posted by jmaiken
Out of curiosity (and I ask sincerly) Do you speak English as a second language?

I believe I asked the same thing and had no response. I thought the same thing as it would explain some reading comprehension problems here. :confused:

PPower, that is exactly what I am thinking.

JDMSubaru:
I guess I don't understand your anger?? Why the flaming?

Seriously. I suggest you drive the XT for yourself. Don't get me wrong. I love the WRX, and if I did not need the extra room for the kid, and kiddy supplies, that's what I would be driving. I am seriously crunching the numbers to see what it would take to trade in my tuck for a WRX. Awesome Ride...

On the same token, I love my XT. Numbers aside (temporarily), it's a blast to drive. It is a whole different ride, pull, and so fourth as the WRX (And yes, I have driven a WRX on several occasions). Two different cars, for two different purposes. So why are we trying to compare them? You can gain a lot by reading magazines.... but nothing compares to trying it out for yourself. Personally I don't mind if CD calls my car a "rolly-poley". In fact....it's a compliment. It's a flippen fast "rolly-poley"! :)

I will be changing my wheels after some other needs have been met. I have put in a short shifter and bushings. (Other "tweaks too!" (thanks for your help and support Pety)). There....two complaints about the car by magazines taken care of. So name one car that has come out, that someone at some magazine, or even a "spirited" driver has 0 complaints about? I don't think your going to find many.

My suggestion would be to stop flaming, be proud of what you have, and other Subaru owners have, and go for drive man!

Originally posted by kcohen
My suggestion would be to stop flaming, be proud of what you have, and other Subaru owners have, and go for drive man!

My suggestion would be to keep your maw *#@$^!%^ opinion to yourself.

As far as taking criticism as a compliment, if a magazine were to later call the XT ugly, would you embrace that and consider it a compliment too? :confused:

Why would I compare them? Well it's not really my choice. These out of touch with reality owners are trying to crown this utility vehicle as some sort of performance car. It is fast for a utility vehicle, yes, but its handling capability (it's almost dishonest to call it a capability) is a non-existent and those that think they can elicit such a trait are kidding themselves. If I put good tires on a Tahoe Z71 and lowered it, would I all of the sudden be a good handler. I mean, that and the XT have roughly the same skidpad...so by that formula I'd have a 'good handler' or a 'comparable' handler to a WRX (puns intended).

I'll try out the XT tomorrow on the way to pick up some coolant from the parts dept. and speak more on it on a subsequent post.

As far as taking criticism as a compliment, if a magazine were to later call the XT ugly, would you embrace that and consider it a compliment too?

Absolutly.... As has been said before.... Who buys a Subaru for it's looks? :lol: You can call my car whatever you want! It still gets me where I need to go quickly, safely, reliably, and with a huge smile on my face evey time.

Originally posted by JDMSubaru
These out of touch with reality owners are trying to crown this utility vehicle as some sort of performance car. It is fast for a utility vehicle, yes, but its handling capability (it's almost dishonest to call it a capability) is a non-existent and those that think they can elicit such a trait are kidding themselves....
[snip]


As far as being fast, there is no question it is a quick car and is possibly quicker than a stock WRX (the time slips are leaning in the FXT direction).
I guess why many people are getting heated up about your comments is that you seem to describe the Forester XT as the worst handling car known to man. I personally have driven my stock (as far as suspension and handling goes) Forester XT in two different AutoX events. Purely for fun and to know my car and its capabilities better. After doing this, my two greatest complaints are tires and body roll (which I am fixing with a sway bar soon). Unfortunately, I have never driven a WRX so I can’t comment on how its handling capabilities are and compare them. I can say however that the FXT is not the worst handling car under the sun. My point is, I don’t think I am kidding myself about the handling. I know its weaknesses and I think it is something that can be fixed. I also know that the car is a joy to drive, and that wouldn’t be possible if it had really bad handling.

Originally posted by JDMSubaru
I'll try out the XT tomorrow on the way to pick up some coolant from the parts dept. and speak more on it on a subsequent post. [/B]

I'm glad to hear that you have taken the suggestion of many and are finally going to test drive an XT. Just remember as in all situations of controversy, keep an open mind.

--Mark

Originally posted by JDMSubaru
Your stupidity is reflected in believing C of D or "CoD" is called plain CD. CD is short for a popular magazine dip shiest. :mad: --Don't mislabel it or fall for its mislabeling.

You demonstrate utmost ignorance by following all these other Forester mongers that this is actually some world class handling car.

With tires, and springs, it still won't close the gap with your apparent rolly poley handicap. And no, neither you nor your groupies will beat me in drag either. You have an extra half liter of engine and still won't. I'm not sure if you have the same stock boost, you may have another advantage with that again if it does. Either way your rolly poley will be smitten if it ever runs me at the track. :D

JDM. you are showing typical ricer mentality with your "rolly polly" magazine racing. READ cd.= Car n driver:lol: :o Please let the people who actually have a clue continue contributing to the thread.
Thanks;)

JDM..... forgot to mention.... Hope you have a great drive. Good luck and have fun! Thats what it's about.

As a side note.... I'm sure this is has been posted before, so sorry if this is repeating. Here is a link for times ect. side by side. XT and a 02 WRX. You can pick what car you want to see side by side as well if you want to see other years.
http://www.car-videos.com/performance/view.asp?ID1=277&ID2=269

Originally posted by JDMSubaru
I'll try out the XT tomorrow on the way to pick up some coolant from the parts dept. and speak more on it on a subsequent post.


Given your in-depth level of expertise, I'm sure your well written and carefully thought out review of the XT you drive will be much appreciated and revered by the community at large. Your unique insights are most appreciated.


;) :lol:

- Steve

I have a XT question for the group of current XT owners, and hope I can dodge the flamers.

I have a XT 5-speed now with 1400 mi. Love it. It is replacing a 93 GMC Typhoon. It does feel like a low 14 sec 1/4 and pulls good in 4th & 5th.

My question is that when accelerating with partial throttle and shifting at 3500-4500, the motor rpm does not drop off when the petal(sp) is let off when shifting to next gear. It tends to stay, for a sec at the rpm when the patel is lifted. Anyone else getting this ?? Any Solutions ??

My daugther's WRX does not have this runn-on...

Help....
Larry Wright
Carson Valley, Nevada

I've noticed the same thing. People may blame the heavy flywheel, but my 2.5 RS does not respond to the throttle like the FXT does.

My best guess at this point is that it's the electronic throttle and how it's programmed. It may be best to start a new thread and see if the STi owners experience the same behavior.

BTW, your WRX does not have an electronic throttle.

- Steve

Since the FXT has an electronic throttle (and the WRX does not), it could be part of the engine managment. I'll an FXT owner comment for sure, though.

Mark.

First thought would be that it is because of the electronic throttle. I have also seen kinda of the same thing you have described.
--Mark

IIRC it has something to do w/emmissiions.

Originally posted by micropro_wright


My question is that when accelerating with partial throttle and shifting at 3500-4500, the motor rpm does not drop off when the petal(sp) is let off when shifting to next gear. It tends to stay, for a sec at the rpm when the patel is lifted. Anyone else getting this ?? Any Solutions ??

My daugther's WRX does not have this runn-on...



Are you sure?? mine does, infact a lot of people have reported that same thing. Nothing you can do about it, its just the way the motor is, I think I rember one of the cobb guys talking about it...

Does the XT have the OEM de-catted uppipe like the STi, or is it catted like the WRX. Just wondering, my fiancee and I are getting her a XT before our wedding in Feb, I'm just wondering whether I will have to buy aftermarket, or gut the stock piece as us WRX owners have too

I searched and couldn't find reference to Forester Uppipes.

Thanks,

Andy

totoherbs
-------------
yeah, Leah's 02 wrx wagon drives like "it should" I started another thread on this also...seems to have been a problem for a while, but it is not said to be a problem with ALL subies, which makes me feel like it is an adjustment fixable problem

seems like it is not restricked to 2.5 turbo's

Does the XT have the OEM de-catted uppipe like the STi, or is it catted like the WRX

There is a cat before the turbo.

Originally posted by DonkeyPunch
Does the XT have the OEM de-catted uppipe like the STi, or is it catted like the WRX. Just wondering, my fiancee and I are getting her a XT before our wedding in Feb, I'm just wondering whether I will have to buy aftermarket, or gut the stock piece as us WRX owners have too

I searched and couldn't find reference to Forester Uppipes.

Thanks,

Andy

I got my XT yesterday. I was told by someone at Irvine Subaru that the XT does not have a pre-cat. He said that it is exactly like the STi in that regard.

So, Peaty, where do you get your info?

Subaru Service manual

Was that someone a Car Salesman perhaps? :p

http://www.scoobymods.com/forums/attachment.php?s=&postid=9548

http://www.scoobymods.com/forums/attachment.php?s=&postid=9549

Originally posted by Peaty
Was that someone a Car Salesman perhaps? :p



:lol: true, so true.

Originally posted by Bilkid
I got my XT yesterday. I was told by someone at Irvine Subaru that the XT does not have a pre-cat. He said that it is exactly like the STi in that regard.

So, Peaty, where do you get your info?

Pre-Production cars did not have a Pre-cat.Production cars do.

Originally posted by hondaslayer
Pre-Production cars did not have a Pre-cat.Production cars do.

Damn ringer cars......:devil:

Micro your probably just hitting the clutch right before you let off the gas. Try letting all the way off the gas and then hit the clutch and shift, I bet the rpms drop normally. What you described has been described by many sti, forrester and even wrx owners and is normal.

JDM you seem to be forgetting or just denying that the forrester is just a jacked up impreza, once you swap out the suspension and tires it becomes just an oddly shapped impreza, and wont roll any more, or handle noticably worse then a similarly prepped wrx wagon which has been proven to be able to keep up with wrx sedans.

Oh and you either avoid the truth like the plauge or your reading comprehension skills just plain suck.

Oh and the legacy outback wagon is more of a utility vehicle then the forrester is. Just because a car is marketed as somthing does not make it a SUV.

the block in the forester and the block in the sti are identical

http://subaru.com.au/explore/liberty/exterior.asp?item=23235

I have a quick question what is it the difference between the turbo XT motor and Subaru’s rarest vehicle the Baja turbo? thanks

Im 90% sure there is nothing different.

i own a forester xt manual and it owns wrx's mod for mod. sorry jdm dreamer boy, your wrx would get spanked by my wagon every time. in the twisties as well. you must not know the fxt has the same chassis/suspension as the wrx...just different springs and struts, but those are long gone.

Originally posted by kx200
I have a quick question what is it the difference between the turbo XT motor and Subaru’s rarest vehicle the Baja turbo? thanks
baja turbo has a single over head cam motor.

Originally posted by 4cylpwr
baja turbo has a single over head cam motor.

Realy? Are you sure?

DOHC 16-valve horizontally opposed high-output turbo-charged and intercooled 4-cylinder with die-cast aluminum-alloy block and aluminum-alloy cylinder heads
http://www.subaru.com/shop/specifications/top.jsp?MODELNAME=BAJA&TRIMLEVEL=TURBO

I found out it is does have the duel overhead cams with variable valve timing also it has fly by wire throttle. It looks like about the only difference is the way smaller hood scoop.

JDM Subaru,

You have been spending too much time in your Scion.

Stop it or you shall go blind!

Just thought I'd share the news. It made 175 wheel hp on our Dyno Dynamics Dyno, or about 10-15 more whp than the regular WRX. Peak hp was generated by approx 5000, which is really early. IIRC, peak torque as around 180ft-lbs as well. Needless to say, the claimed power rating is understated. Assuming that SOA is honest with the WRX rating, the Forester Turbo is making at least 240bhp.

Cheers,
shiv


Where do you get your 240 hp estimate from?
That would mean the FXT would have a 27% driveline loss.
From what I've seen most AWD cars lose about 21-25% don't they?

The other 2.5 Turbo Subaru's have the same rated hp and torque figures and even the non turbo 2.5 has about the same hp and tq figures. So keeping with that consistency the FXT would be rated about 235 hp.
25% drivetrain loss on it would yield a 176 awhp point. A 21% drivetrain loss would yield 185 awhp.
Also, from my understanding because of the FXT's much more aggressive gearing, this usually gives them a bit higher dyno readings than what would accurate.
With the FXT's aggressive gearing, I would think a lower drivetrain loss percentage would be more accurate.
So I would think a true crank hp rating of the FXT would be in the 230-235 hp range, not "at least 240 hp" as you stated.


What kind of drivetrain losses did you guys see for the WRX?

WRX's get about 165-170 on Shiv's dyno.
STi's get about 218. (Mine was dyno'ed at 219.6 whp a few weeks back)

Regards

Nick

http://www.vishnutuning.com/dynos_dont_lie.htm

http://www.vishnutuning.com/dyno_myth.htm

Thanks.

So with the STI and WRX driveline loss is about 27% on his dyno.
So with the aggressive gearing of the FXT (which usually posts higher numbers than what it accurate) it would be safe to say a drivetrain loss of about 26% would be more accurate on his dyno.
235 hp minus 26% would yield about 174 awhp. He got 175. So, like Cobb tunings results based on their dynos of other AWD cars, the FXT truly has about 235 hp.

Again, that would perfectly fall in line with the other 2.5 liter Turbo cars from Subaru having the same hp and tq ratings.
STI 300/300
FXT 235/235
LGT 250/250

Other than maybe the fear of the FXT taking sales away from the WRX wagon, I wonder why they wouldn't just give it the 235 hp rating. It clearly has about that and clearly more than the 210 hp they advertise.
I'm figure they'll change it as soon as they bump the hp in the standard WRX.