View Single Post
Old 07-23-2003, 10:09 AM   #73
Porter
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 486
Join Date: Nov 1999
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Roanoke, VA
Vehicle:
2004 Forester XT
bug spattered

Default

No, I don't work for SoA. All I'm trying to point out is that for Subaru to change the ECM programming and get it approved by the EPA so rapidly is amazing. Changes that go through the EPA approval process are infamous for their delay times, often more than half a year in the process, and sometimes longer than that. Realize that if Subaru changed something in the engine management system and it later was shown to negatively affect emissions in any way, Subaru could (and would) be charged up to $10,000 per car in fines from the federal government. If something like that happened, there would probably be no more STi.

In the past I've been one of Subaru's biggest critics, over the years I have accused them of dropping the ball on all kinds of things, for example the old threads on the ABS problem in the WRX. But in this case, I think they've stepped up and done the right thing. It's nice to see forthright response like this from a company that doesn't have a perfect track record of responding to owner complaints. It makes me feel pretty good about owning one myself, and helps justify the efforts that I (and many of us who were around from before the Impreza-RS.com days) have made over the years to promote the ownership experience in the enthusiast community.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Porter is offline   Reply With Quote