Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Friday December 26, 2014
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Home Registration is free! Visit the NASIOC Store NASIOC Rules Search Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Calendar Archive NASIOC Upgrade Garage Logout
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC Technical > Normally Aspirated Powertrain

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-05-2013, 04:43 PM   #1801
williaty
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 71092
Join Date: Sep 2004
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Delaware County, Ohio
Vehicle:
2005 2.5RS Wagon
Regal Blue Pearl

Default

Maybe. But you're spending $144 to get a black pipe and then throwing everything else out. It's also for the EJ20 NAs, which probably don't have the same number of breather ports as your 2009.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
williaty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2013, 05:14 PM   #1802
Turnyface
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 330036
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Saint Paul
Vehicle:
2004 WRX Wagon
Silver

Default

Turnyface is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2013, 06:16 PM   #1803
williaty
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 71092
Join Date: Sep 2004
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Delaware County, Ohio
Vehicle:
2005 2.5RS Wagon
Regal Blue Pearl

Default

Well, it's cheaper, at least, so it's not as much of a disappointment if you end up having to drill more holes in it to add breather nipples.
williaty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2013, 09:42 AM   #1804
gdoggmoney
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 158150
Join Date: Sep 2007
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: some place
Vehicle:
2007 Impreza 2.5i
Newport Blue pearl

Default

Missed the reply. It absolutely was not just the CL/OL transition setting. The first thing I did was change those. That woke the car up drastically. I left the pulsewidth based tables alone and worked solely with the counter values, and throttle percentage tables. There were impressive gains all by moving to the evil in fender CAI and retuning for that.

Waiting on my set of spare heads to be completed. 1mm OS valves exhaust & intake(valves were U shaped at the seat rest area), nice back cut, with the rest of the angles being done, some good port work and a set of Delta 1000 AVLS cams going in the car. That may actually change the physics some, or enough -- or it may not. Reversion(cause of the MAF spike) is dependent upon more than just the intake geometry/length.

Know what else helped stumbles and AFR resolution/swings? Upgrading the grounds and most importantly upgrading the single what looked like 10 gauge wire feeding + from the battery to the fusebox, and also reeding alternator + back to the battery.

I had to retune the car afterwards, the exhaust note changed to be deeper overall, and it required much more fuel likely due to proper ignition events. The idle also smoothed out and the motor has less of the tiny tiny misfires that wont trigger a CEL or slow crankspeed down enough to register a misfire -- but will upset the motors balance at idle and are visible. A retune, from simply upgrading a + feed to be a decent gauge. (fusebox underside had to be trimmed to fit the lug.)

Lightweight flywheel required a maf scaling as well.

It seems as you fix more of the factory given problems, this issue starts to be minimized. I think it is a combination of things that make it so very bad.
gdoggmoney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2013, 02:26 PM   #1805
williaty
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 71092
Join Date: Sep 2004
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Delaware County, Ohio
Vehicle:
2005 2.5RS Wagon
Regal Blue Pearl

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gdoggmoney View Post
There were impressive gains all by moving to the evil in fender CAI and retuning for that.
No, there weren't. I've had more than one car on the dyno testing that. There are gains, but they utterly fail to be "impressive" on the 05+ cars.

Quote:
Upgrading the grounds and most importantly upgrading the single what looked like 10 gauge wire feeding + from the battery to the fusebox, and also reeding alternator + back to the battery.
Again, I've tested this on multiple cars. On the cars with an existing wiring problem, it helps immensely because you're fixing a problem. On cars with no problem evident, it really doesn't change anything at all.

Quote:
Lightweight flywheel required a maf scaling as well.
This is tied for the stupidest thing I've ever heard on NASIOC. A LWFW CAN'T affect the MAF's function.
williaty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2013, 07:04 PM   #1806
gdoggmoney
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 158150
Join Date: Sep 2007
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: some place
Vehicle:
2007 Impreza 2.5i
Newport Blue pearl

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by williaty View Post
No, there weren't. I've had more than one car on the dyno testing that. There are gains, but they utterly fail to be "impressive" on the 05+ cars.
Really? So my MAF scaling logs lied and the brand new primary AFR sensor lied? And you mean to tell me, that just replacing 1 part of this:





Is going to give the largest percentage of gains? Take note of the WRX Scoop as well. On the 05+ cars, with the best flowing intake manifold, and what seems to be the best flowing SOHC heads yet with depressions(singh grooves! lol) factory between the intake/exhaust valves for overlap efficiency?

Quote:
Originally Posted by williaty View Post
Again, I've tested this on multiple cars. On the cars with an existing wiring problem, it helps immensely because you're fixing a problem. On cars with no problem evident, it really doesn't change anything at all.
Well I guess you could say they have a wiring problem stock then. Because without breaking out my Tektronix THS unit, you can see the voltage drop less through ECU logging, AND watch the ECU voltage drop dramatically less. You can actually see interior lights dim less, the idle drops less when the radiator fans and a/c compressor cycle on/off. Who would have thought?!?! IT IS MAGIC!!!! Basic calculations show that cable to be undersized, and it isn't exactly terribly apparent until you have high electrical loads -- or you have a car without the voltage drop to see how it performs. This is how companies save pennies a car on the assembly line, and it fixes a factory installed wiring problem.


Quote:
Originally Posted by williaty View Post
This is tied for the stupidest thing I've ever heard on NASIOC. A LWFW CAN'T affect the MAF's function.
Why did my MAF scaling logs in romraider change drastically, and why did after the retune, the "Lightweight flywheel drivability problems (TM)" dissappear? I'm talking across the board, a few % I drove it without a retune attempting to let it adapt, and it did not help.

LITERALLY 100% THE ONLY CHANGE. A lightweight flywheel and exedy clutch & pressure plate that weighs what the stock stuff did. No vacuum hoses were left undone, no gaskets were removed/reused, nothing was seated wrong that could pose an intake air leak after said clutch install. All changes were made individually, and all logging was done near the same temperate. 90% of my logging and scaling has been done at 70f, 50ft above sea level with about 70% humidity. That is how it has been here when I have had time to work.

I'm going to use the DBW thread you started where throttlehappy shredded you after you gave that kind gentleman sharing his knowledge similar treatment as a reference here, because of the parallels. Unless you discover it, say it or know it IT CAN"T BE BECAUSE YOU ARE TY WILLIAMS SUPREME RULER OF PHYSICS AND REALITY.

BTW throttle happy was right, you were wrong. Requested torque is more than a scalar, and the ECU flutter closes the throttle. His suggestion made the car even better and stopped the flutter closing of the throttle my vehicle was doing.

You are hilarious. Get over yourself.
gdoggmoney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2013, 07:42 PM   #1807
williaty
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 71092
Join Date: Sep 2004
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Delaware County, Ohio
Vehicle:
2005 2.5RS Wagon
Regal Blue Pearl

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gdoggmoney View Post
Really? So my MAF scaling logs lied and the brand new primary AFR sensor lied? And you mean to tell me, that just replacing 1 part of this:

...

Is going to give the largest percentage of gains? Take note of the WRX Scoop as well. On the 05+ cars, with the best flowing intake manifold, and what seems to be the best flowing SOHC heads yet with depressions(singh grooves! lol) factory between the intake/exhaust valves for overlap efficiency?
Yes, that's exactly what I mean and that's exactly what I've proved on the dyno. Repeatedly. The thing that the members of NASIOC have trouble accepting is that Subaru's engineers aren't a bunch of idiots. When there's room to "improve" something with modding, it's generally because of one of two reasons: either what we want makes the car worse for selling to the general public or what we want would raise the price of the car too much to sell it to the general public.

So, in the case of the intake, it's pretty damned close to as good as it gets straight from the factory. The biggest reason for this is that the intake has a large impact on the total volumetric efficiency of the motor. VE has a big impact on the resulting fuel economy. The fuel economy of the base model NA engines have a HUGE impact on Subaru's C.A.F.E. numbers since they sell so many of them. In order to be able to sell the STi, Subaru has to maximize the fuel efficiency of the NA engine so that the CAFE numbers come out OK. Every tenth of a mile a gallon they can scrape out on the NA engine allows them to sell another couple of STis (or Spec Bs, or whatever). In an NA engine, efficiency and power production are very nearly the same thing, or at least most of the things that improve efficiency (such as better intake flow) incidentally improve power.

All that's a long-winded way of saying that Subaru's design goals for the intake were pretty much the same as our goals for making more power. Very little of the intake is problematic because it was in Subaru's best interest to eliminate the restrictive parts. The net result of that is that there's very little power to gain from doing anything at all with the intake. The biggest gains I've ever seen were 8whp from one. Average is about 5whp. That doesn't qualify as "impressive".



Quote:
Well I guess you could say they have a wiring problem stock then.
I will agree that the factory wiring harness is borderline. However, not ALL the cars benefit from improvements to the grounding system. Some do. That's the thing about being borderline, some cars come in above the line, some cars below. It's false to say that they'll universally benefit.


Quote:
Why did my MAF scaling logs in romraider change drastically, and why did after the retune, the "Lightweight flywheel drivability problems (TM)" dissappear? I'm talking across the board, a few % I drove it without a retune attempting to let it adapt, and it did not help.
What "drivability problems"? I've installed LWFWs in close to 100 NA Subarus now. 5 of them are cars I either own or deal with one a weekly basis. I've never had a single one of any year have a drivability problem. The only issue I ever saw was that some of the much older cars incorrectly detect misfires and even that is very rare. Whatever you found, it had nothing to do with the flywheel.


Quote:
LITERALLY 100% THE ONLY CHANGE.
Not true. You separated the engine from the tranny in order to change the flywheel. That means you have a hell of a lot of opportunities to have either accidentally fixed a problem that existed beforehand or cause a problem during. That's where your findings come from.

Quote:
Unless you discover it, say it or know it IT CAN"T BE
You're right, unless I can reproduce your results experimentally, you're blowing it out your ass. When you make an exceptional claim, that is, when you claim your car behaves very differently to the norm, you must supply exceptional proof. Part of that proof will be documenting how others can obtain the same result. If others don't obtain the same result, what you're claiming is false.

Keep in mind, sometimes when I'm ragging on you guys it's because you're trying to take the experience you've had with just one car and say that's the way every single car that Subaru has ever sold is. Your sample size isn't large enough. Before I mentioned this CAI problem on NASIOC, I had already independently documented it on 5 different cars. Before I wrote the first post of this thread, I had tested it and the fix on 12 different cars spanning 3 production years, 2 cam revisions, and 3 intake revisions.

Flipping it around, I'm also willing to admit that any individual car might have some weird tolerance stacking, or even a mis-made part, that produces results contrary to what I've found in the general population. Hell, I found a car once that gained 25hp when I switched the intake! When I switched from a stock intake to a stock intake, that is. Of course, it was making about 30whp less than it should have before the intake swap. Turns out that the original intake had some casting flash in it that almost completely blocked the flow through the box. So I swapped it from the stock intake to a stock intake that wasn't mis-made. Variations exist, but there's usually reasons behind it other than "my car is magic". Before I'll stop telling you that you're wrong, you're going to have to provide an explanation of why your situation is unique that's consistent with known physics and engineering, show a test protocol with no flaws in the setup and procedure (so that I can reproduce your test and results), and then show the data from that testing. Until you do that, you're just talking out your ass.

Look at the history of this thread. Quite a few people have claimed their car didn't do this and therefore it wasn't a problem. So far, every single person has, when they finally did the test properly and posted their results turned out to have exactly the problem I've documented. So yeah, that makes me real damned skeptical when someone comes along that claims their car is a unicorn and behaves like no other car has been documented to do.
williaty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2013, 01:33 AM   #1808
Turnyface
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 330036
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Saint Paul
Vehicle:
2004 WRX Wagon
Silver

Default

On a lighter note, do ya'll think it's possible for a muffler shop to custom make a tube for me for the hybrid intake? I could then add holes and nipples as needed for the breather lines.
Turnyface is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2013, 01:34 AM   #1809
williaty
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 71092
Join Date: Sep 2004
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Delaware County, Ohio
Vehicle:
2005 2.5RS Wagon
Regal Blue Pearl

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Turnyface View Post
On a lighter note, do ya'll think it's possible for a muffler shop to custom make a tube for me for the hybrid intake? I could then add holes and nipples as needed for the breather lines.
A muffler shop that can work in stainless steel or aluminum should be able to do it no problem. The only X-factor is if they'll do it for cheap enough that you'll actually want it done.
williaty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2013, 11:37 PM   #1810
Area517
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 358098
Join Date: Jun 2013
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: MN / TN / KY
Vehicle:
2007 Impreza 2.5i
Newport Blue Pearl

Default

I know I've already looked at the pics and read this, but can the SRI be used to build this, correct? Or does it have to be a CAI because the SRI may be too short?

Just asking because I'd rather be a dumbass for a few minutes rather than being a dumbass forever.
Area517 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-09-2013, 12:56 AM   #1811
williaty
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 71092
Join Date: Sep 2004
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Delaware County, Ohio
Vehicle:
2005 2.5RS Wagon
Regal Blue Pearl

Default

The tubing from either a SRI or a CAI can be used... if it fits. Both are long enough, it's all about the bends being in the right spot.
williaty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2013, 03:28 AM   #1812
throttlehappy
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 313497
Join Date: Mar 2012
Chapter/Region: International
Location: Australia
Vehicle:
2012 S206
White

Default

FYI: The NA 2.5's have an engine load limiting value based on RPM, that once lifted will improve any NA engine that breathes better than stock

http://www.romraider.com/forum/viewt...hp?f=34&t=8990
throttlehappy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2013, 03:33 AM   #1813
williaty
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 71092
Join Date: Sep 2004
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Delaware County, Ohio
Vehicle:
2005 2.5RS Wagon
Regal Blue Pearl

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by throttlehappy View Post
FYI: The NA 2.5's have an engine load limiting value based on RPM, that once lifted will improve any NA engine that breathes better than stock

http://www.romraider.com/forum/viewt...hp?f=34&t=8990
How far above stock-reachable levels are the limits set in the factory ROM?

In the 05-07 ROMs, they're either not present (entirely possible given how often Denso changes execution logic) or set so high you can't hit them because those cars all see increased load right up into forced induction territory. I haven't done any big-power 08+ builds yet, just stock and stock+headers (no one seems as interested in playing with the 08+ cars as with the 05-07), so I haven't bumped into them there either.

Does Subaru leave any headroom at all or is it like some of the GM products have been where any increase in airflow at all is neutered by the ECU?
williaty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2013, 10:24 AM   #1814
throttlehappy
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 313497
Join Date: Mar 2012
Chapter/Region: International
Location: Australia
Vehicle:
2012 S206
White

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by williaty View Post
How far above stock-reachable levels are the limits set in the factory ROM?

In the 05-07 ROMs, they're either not present (entirely possible given how often Denso changes execution logic) or set so high you can't hit them because those cars all see increased load right up into forced induction territory. I haven't done any big-power 08+ builds yet, just stock and stock+headers (no one seems as interested in playing with the 08+ cars as with the 05-07), so I haven't bumped into them there either.

Does Subaru leave any headroom at all or is it like some of the GM products have been where any increase in airflow at all is neutered by the ECU?
They are present(just recently done a 05 Legacy and an 06 Forester NA) and set at 1.0g/rev until nearly 3000rpm where it lifts to 1.4g/rev which is about 0psi and basically follows the timing curve in stock timing A

Yes, you can 'log' higher but the injector pulse cuts off so if you got 1.25g/rev and was capped at 1 then log the injector pulsewidth

There is a few 08+ guys who are tuned, doing bomberlegacy's car at the moment with a Raptor Supercharger
throttlehappy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2013, 04:11 PM   #1815
williaty
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 71092
Join Date: Sep 2004
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Delaware County, Ohio
Vehicle:
2005 2.5RS Wagon
Regal Blue Pearl

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by throttlehappy View Post
They are present(just recently done a 05 Legacy and an 06 Forester NA) and set at 1.0g/rev until nearly 3000rpm where it lifts to 1.4g/rev which is about 0psi and basically follows the timing curve in stock timing A

Yes, you can 'log' higher but the injector pulse cuts off so if you got 1.25g/rev and was capped at 1 then log the injector pulsewidth
I've personally done cars (05-07) that exceed the limits you claim. Superchargers get it above 1.0g/rev before 3kRPM and DEFINITELY exceed 1.4g/rev on the top end. Load increased smoothly, injector pulsewidth tracked it right up. They have all been Imprezas, but I'm unaware of significant ROM logic differences in 05 and 06 in the NA cars between Imp/Leggy/Fozzy.

It would seem there's more going on here than a simple limit then.
williaty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2013, 11:39 PM   #1816
throttlehappy
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 313497
Join Date: Mar 2012
Chapter/Region: International
Location: Australia
Vehicle:
2012 S206
White

Default

http://www.romraider.com/forum/viewt...hp?f=25&t=9492

E2UE202L the value is definitely there
<table name="Engine Load Limit B Maximum (RPM)" address="c1c14">
<table name="Engine Speed" address="c1bc8" elements="19"/>
</table>
throttlehappy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 09:45 AM   #1817
gdoggmoney
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 158150
Join Date: Sep 2007
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: some place
Vehicle:
2007 Impreza 2.5i
Newport Blue pearl

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by throttlehappy View Post
http://www.romraider.com/forum/viewt...hp?f=25&t=9492

E2UE202L the value is definitely there
<table name="Engine Load Limit B Maximum (RPM)" address="c1c14">
<table name="Engine Speed" address="c1bc8" elements="19"/>
</table>


Oh hey there


Thanks. You are completely correct, and were 100% right regarding DBW and engine load limits, and I am loving the car again. What you've allowed has tied everything together and turned this thing into a smooth torque machine across the tach. I look forward to working with you further as well. This thing is turning into somewhat of a light beast for a N/A base model car. It is only going to get much much better too.


My MAF scaling? I have a minor resonance looking scatter plots at 1.2-1.3v no resonance at 1.7v after reversion porting the exhaust ports and header inlet ports. Something anyone with a dremel even could do.


The fuel trim +/- went from 15% in some spots varying by maf voltage to about 7-8% each way.

I have less bucking stuttering, and subaru "jouncing at low RPM" than at any point in the cars history.


Can't wait to get the nicely ported big valve heads on, and delta 1000's. Much attention has been paid to tiny lips for anti-reversion in the proper places. I went over on my throttle body, and manifold inlet, so later this week I need to correct that to get the proper lip and flow transition. Once the heads come, the intake manifold is getting the same anti-reversion treatment. Later on I may end up locking the AVLS, if I don't just adjust it to do what I want and have a set of custom cams ground.

Cheers Matt! If anyone wants to see what your car can really do, talk to Matt about a tune. Just don't come with a vacuum leak ridden clap trap, or something stock with the reversion problems and expect miracles. That said, the full CAI is TOTALLY streetable/drivable/tunable and you are not going to blow your car up, wash your bores out with fuel if you approach this right.
gdoggmoney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-27-2013, 10:07 AM   #1818
gdoggmoney
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 158150
Join Date: Sep 2007
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: some place
Vehicle:
2007 Impreza 2.5i
Newport Blue pearl

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by williaty View Post
Yes, that's exactly what I mean and that's exactly what I've proved on the dyno. Repeatedly. The thing that the members of NASIOC have trouble accepting is that Subaru's engineers aren't a bunch of idiots. When there's room to "improve" something with modding, it's generally because of one of two reasons: either what we want makes the car worse for selling to the general public or what we want would raise the price of the car too much to sell it to the general public.

So, in the case of the intake, it's pretty damned close to as good as it gets straight from the factory. The biggest reason for this is that the intake has a large impact on the total volumetric efficiency of the motor. VE has a big impact on the resulting fuel economy. The fuel economy of the base model NA engines have a HUGE impact on Subaru's C.A.F.E. numbers since they sell so many of them. In order to be able to sell the STi, Subaru has to maximize the fuel efficiency of the NA engine so that the CAFE numbers come out OK. Every tenth of a mile a gallon they can scrape out on the NA engine allows them to sell another couple of STis (or Spec Bs, or whatever). In an NA engine, efficiency and power production are very nearly the same thing, or at least most of the things that improve efficiency (such as better intake flow) incidentally improve power.

All that's a long-winded way of saying that Subaru's design goals for the intake were pretty much the same as our goals for making more power. Very little of the intake is problematic because it was in Subaru's best interest to eliminate the restrictive parts. The net result of that is that there's very little power to gain from doing anything at all with the intake. The biggest gains I've ever seen were 8whp from one. Average is about 5whp. That doesn't qualify as "impressive".




I will agree that the factory wiring harness is borderline. However, not ALL the cars benefit from improvements to the grounding system. Some do. That's the thing about being borderline, some cars come in above the line, some cars below. It's false to say that they'll universally benefit.



What "drivability problems"? I've installed LWFWs in close to 100 NA Subarus now. 5 of them are cars I either own or deal with one a weekly basis. I've never had a single one of any year have a drivability problem. The only issue I ever saw was that some of the much older cars incorrectly detect misfires and even that is very rare. Whatever you found, it had nothing to do with the flywheel.
I'm running a 10.5lb flywheel on an 07 drive by wire car. It's a bit lighter than average, along with weight off the crank nose. If the tune is not tight, your maf scaling is off, or your fuel filter is old, the car will be crap. Period.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Williaty
Not true. You separated the engine from the tranny in order to change the flywheel. That means you have a hell of a lot of opportunities to have either accidentally fixed a problem that existed beforehand or cause a problem during. That's where your findings come from.
Thanks captain I was there during the clutch. I slid the transmission back a few inches with the driveshaft out, and jacked the motor up a few inches to seperate. I torque everything in star patterns, only the intake tube was removed. All was set exactly as it was before. No intake leaks or exhaust leaks were fixed, everything was torqued when not torqued. Same newer exhaust manifold gaskets were used, etc. No rear main seal was replaced, could not have fixed an accidental vacuum leak.

There simply were no changes. I do things to the point where I make sure my hose clamps are angled proper and able to seal around the entire circumference. All the time.

I know you have a hard time thinking that other people can do work like you, or are capable of building and maintaining vehicles in a professional manner or solve problems and test solutions to issues you and others find, but no you are not the smartest person in the world. No, you are not the only person out there who understands reversion, EFI, logic and math. In fact, you sort of suck as you sit on your past work and screech in anger when solutions are found to some issue you reported years ago, or a better understanding of the ECU logic leads to work arounds to your pet problems.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Williaty
You're right, unless I can reproduce your results experimentally, you're blowing it out your ass. When you make an exceptional claim, that is, when you claim your car behaves very differently to the norm, you must supply exceptional proof. Part of that proof will be documenting how others can obtain the same result. If others don't obtain the same result, what you're claiming is false.
Right Nikola Williaty Tesla, because the scientific method of all variables being 100% the same applies here. Your and another members motor, with the exact same porting done to the throtle body, etc, the exact same taper to the throttle bore are all reproducible. There's my experiment, it's up to YOU to clone the variables and test. I've listed my mods, and I can go as far as to take diameters and anti-reversion porting measurements of my lips and everything. Even the diameter, length and steps of my modified stock header where the 4-1 merge is cleanly butt welded to a squared -> mandrel bent 3" tube that then is tapered to 2.5".

Get to work. All my mods are listed, and as I said I will give you exact dimensions of everything, including the new heads going on. Yes, I have those tools, yes I am capable of that and yes I have been doing this sort of thing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Williaty
Keep in mind, sometimes when I'm ragging on you guys it's because you're trying to take the experience you've had with just one car and say that's the way every single car that Subaru has ever sold is. Your sample size isn't large enough. Before I mentioned this CAI problem on NASIOC, I had already independently documented it on 5 different cars. Before I wrote the first post of this thread, I had tested it and the fix on 12 different cars spanning 3 production years, 2 cam revisions, and 3 intake revisions.
My car absolutely had it. And it became half as bad after a few mods, and now i get no maf spikes on my scatter plots at 1.7v. I have a few minor at 1.2-1.3v and the rest of the scatter plot is super tight.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Williaty
Flipping it around, I'm also willing to admit that any individual car might have some weird tolerance stacking, or even a mis-made part, that produces results contrary to what I've found in the general population. Hell, I found a car once that gained 25hp when I switched the intake! When I switched from a stock intake to a stock intake, that is. Of course, it was making about 30whp less than it should have before the intake swap. Turns out that the original intake had some casting flash in it that almost completely blocked the flow through the box. So I swapped it from the stock intake to a stock intake that wasn't mis-made. Variations exist, but there's usually reasons behind it other than "my car is magic". Before I'll stop telling you that you're wrong, you're going to have to provide an explanation of why your situation is unique that's consistent with known physics and engineering, show a test protocol with no flaws in the setup and procedure (so that I can reproduce your test and results), and then show the data from that testing. Until you do that, you're just talking out your ass.
Mods are listed, get to work logging Nikola Tesla.


REVERSION. You don't get it, I've said it but you are too wrapped up in your giant ego to listen. REVERSION CAUSES THE MAF SPIKE. ANTI REVERSION PORTING STOPS REVERSION WAVES. FLOW INCREASE AND EFFICIENCY INCREASES ALSO HELP.

STOP THE PRESSES! THIS HAS BEEN KNOWN SINCE THE 50's-60's!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Williaty
Look at the history of this thread. Quite a few people have claimed their car didn't do this and therefore it wasn't a problem. So far, every single person has, when they finally did the test properly and posted their results turned out to have exactly the problem I've documented. So yeah, that makes me real damned skeptical when someone comes along that claims their car is a unicorn and behaves like no other car has been documented to do.

All these people are guided by you, hand held by you, and I have not read of anyone doing any sort of actual proper port work to these motors, measuring things like the header inlet port diameter stock, how the slaggy welds and flange to pipe area can be smoothed safely to a good 1.6" eliminating a ton of reversion, while cracking the exhaust ports open as well, making the short turn radius on the dog leg port better as you open it, you know...... REAL WORK.

I've done this. Have you? You can sit here and stroke your throbbing ego phallus all day, when I have actual measurements and a shop vacuum full of probably 2-3lbs worth of aluminum dust, shavings and steel dust/shavings.

I can spit the measurements of the work i've done to this motor off the top of my head. Because I did it myself.

If not, the onus is on YOU to start doing real work and stop egojaculating all over people who do, while you say it can't be done.
gdoggmoney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2013, 06:41 PM   #1819
swanny094
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 296318
Join Date: Sep 2011
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Wisconsin
Vehicle:
06 2.5i Wagon
Obsidian Black Pearl

Default

I read the thread and all the old eBay links have expired and won't take me to the product. I'm not exactly what to search on eBay. It would much appreciated if someone could direct link me the piping needed for the hybrid intake on a 06 subaru impreza 2.5i. Thanks!
swanny094 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2013, 07:19 PM   #1820
Soul Shinobi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 130759
Join Date: Oct 2006
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Nashua, NH, USA
Vehicle:
2002 Forester S

Default

The cheap intakes change so often that to be honest it's going to be a crap shoot, just look for lots of piping.

Here's a search with a $50 price cap:

http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_trks..._udlo&_udhi=50

He's an example of a kit that doesn't look bad:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/02-06-SUBARU...fd2ce0&vxp=mtr

Just stay sway from these new flexible hose things that pop up too. Setting a price minimum on that search might help get rid of results for just filters.
Soul Shinobi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2013, 10:00 PM   #1821
swanny094
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 296318
Join Date: Sep 2011
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Wisconsin
Vehicle:
06 2.5i Wagon
Obsidian Black Pearl

Default

Thanks that helps alot! Do I need one that has "nipples" on it for the hoses? Or what do you recommend for the hybrid intake?
swanny094 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2013, 10:01 PM   #1822
Soul Shinobi
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 130759
Join Date: Oct 2006
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Nashua, NH, USA
Vehicle:
2002 Forester S

Default

You'll have to look on your car to see how many smaller hoses attach.
Soul Shinobi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2013, 10:20 PM   #1823
swanny094
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 296318
Join Date: Sep 2011
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Wisconsin
Vehicle:
06 2.5i Wagon
Obsidian Black Pearl

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soul Shinobi View Post
You'll have to look on your car to see how many smaller hoses attach.
I have 2 hoses connected to the torque box that would be
swanny094 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-30-2013, 11:27 PM   #1824
swanny094
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 296318
Join Date: Sep 2011
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Wisconsin
Vehicle:
06 2.5i Wagon
Obsidian Black Pearl

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soul Shinobi View Post
You'll have to look on your car to see how many smaller hoses attach.
I looked at most of the intakes on eBay and none of them have mounts to clamp the hoses onto. I'm just not sure what to do with the 2 hoses that are connected to the torque box once I remove it if the intake piping has no "nipples" to connect them too. Where do they go?
swanny094 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2013, 11:56 PM   #1825
FOGeologist
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 361500
Join Date: Jul 2013
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Frederick, Colorado
Vehicle:
2007 Impreza 2.5i
Black

Default

Wow, what an amazing, two-day read - and I caught every post, including all the posts where people didn't read anything but the post immediately above theirs (LOL).

I've got my eye on the oddly-named "Taco Taco I'Loveil" (LOL!! CHINESE LOLL!!) intake on eBetray. It seems like this thing may fit. I'm approximately 150 years old and not fond of chrome things underhood; I may Plasti-Dip it black. I guess I'll need a couple of those bump couplers, eh?

This is another choice.

I'll knock it out and report back here.
FOGeologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
CAIs, SRIs, and dynos Bluefoton General Community 10 04-09-2008 09:27 PM
problems with 04' sti into an 01' RS help! Imbaru25rs Subaru Conversions 7 02-18-2006 03:40 AM
Any problems with your STI and with SOA? bbbwrx STi Forum Archive 3 08-27-2003 05:32 PM
LOTS of Problems with SOA, Dealer, and MYSUBARU.com saleen90181 Newbies & FAQs 11 11-26-2002 02:37 PM
Anyone with CAI, Unichip and stock turbo? Dougeefresh Factory 2.0L Turbo Powertrain (EJ Series Factory 2.0L Turbo) 4 04-27-2002 01:13 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2014 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2014, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.