Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Friday March 29, 2024
Home Forums Images WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC General > Proven Power Bragging

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.







* As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases. 
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads. 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-08-2010, 11:26 PM   #26
fastwrx25
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 126441
Join Date: Sep 2006
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: TPE
Vehicle:
03 bugeye

Default

I'm convinced too. If I ever go hybrid it'll be this cnc, slight ported heads, sti shortblock and sti cams.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
fastwrx25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Old 07-08-2010, 11:49 PM   #27
maxpowr
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 159243
Join Date: Sep 2007
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: medford nj 08055
Vehicle:
5/01 bugeye
Hakt Ecu is back!

Default

you gonna use avcs?^^^if your gonna use 2.0 heads you won't want sti cams without avcs. i decided against avcs with my bugeye due to having to change ecu and wire harness...you can get great cams for a 2.0 head reguardless. using sti cams without avcs will leave your timing retarded.

correct me if i'm wrong gentlemen.
maxpowr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 01:30 AM   #28
Concillian
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 4414
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Dublin, CA
Vehicle:
2002 WRX Sedan
Midnight Black

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by maxpowr View Post
you gonna use avcs?^^^if your gonna use 2.0 heads you won't want sti cams without avcs. i decided against avcs with my bugeye due to having to change ecu and wire harness...you can get great cams for a 2.0 head reguardless. using sti cams without avcs will leave your timing retarded.

correct me if i'm wrong gentlemen.
Stock STi AVCS cams, if used without AVCS, ends up at the same angle as stock WRX non-AVCS cams. AVCS adds power where advance helps... low RPM and low boost. It's too bad it's expensive to implement, because it's a very good thing for a daily driver.

Perhaps Ed can overlay an appropriate vf48 STi chart on the CNC / non-CNC chart so we can see where the AVCS benefits, I think it's primarily in the pretty low end.
Concillian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 02:33 AM   #29
Beetspeed
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 166264
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands, Europe
Vehicle:
1974 VW 2.2ltr 7670
402 WHP @ 30psi

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crashtke View Post
How much of it do you attribute to the difference in quench? Do you have any without cnc OR thicker head gaskets?
That would be my thought exactly as thats whats helping VE and imho, the full physical reason this mod is more knock resistant and the resulting more possible ignition advance ultimately gives the better torque.
Beetspeed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 08:09 AM   #30
maxpowr
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 159243
Join Date: Sep 2007
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: medford nj 08055
Vehicle:
5/01 bugeye
Hakt Ecu is back!

Default

i heard, but it is hearsay but if you use a avcs cam in a non avcs motor the best timing advance you can achieve is -4 degrees? or maybe it was you start out -4 degrees.

if running a plugged sti avcs cam in a 2.0 head is identical to running a wrx cam i wonder why so many people told me it was like starting behind the gun.

why run a plugged cam if its identical to a wrx cam?
maxpowr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 10:18 AM   #31
kellygnsd
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 32669
Join Date: Feb 2003
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Woodland Hills
Vehicle:
2007 2.34LR, EFR7670
LINK G4+ hybrid STi

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Equilibrium Tuning View Post
Try one on 91 and you'll see what I'm talking about

-- Ed
And with big turbo builds come big cams most of the time which lower your dynamic CR a good bit too. My past hybrid had 2.0L C.C. shape but was still pretty happy on 91. My C.C.s were also ceramic coated also.
kellygnsd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 12:21 PM   #32
Rick Hunter
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 825
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Kanada
Vehicle:
2002 wrx

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Equilibrium Tuning View Post
Both cars are running 18psi peak. The CNC head car is hitting about 12* at peak torque and about 25* by redline. The thicker head gasket car is running 8-9* at peak torque and about 20* by redline.

Thanks
-- Ed
What is the compression ratio on each engine? What is the AFR? I'm assuming this is on 91 octane, right? Even then, I find the timing on the thicker head gasket car lower than usual for similarly modded cars - were you knock limited? EJ257s with small turbos typically can run more timing than ej205s, your timing numbers are even lower than most ej205 tunes, even on 91 octane. Just trying to understand.
Rick Hunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 02:07 PM   #33
garageGT
Former Vendor
 
Member#: 80524
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: San Diego
Default

I was about to ask the CRs on the engines. You should post cylinder compression figures.

1st off, the mentality behind the cylinder head modification is correct, it will be a better setup than using a thicker headgasket. Thats no brainer. There is also the option to get a set of CP pistons that are designed for the hybrid setups. They have been around for a while now, there is just a bit of a wait time as they are special order pistons. Maybe you should have included that setup in the test.

There is too many variables on your test. Your assumptions are not ignorable. You should have done this on the same motor. Even if you pick 2 stock WRXs from the same lot, there are going to be differences.

Sorry but, this test is not done professionally, you did not eliminate variables.

COMPARING TWO DIFFERENT MOTORS IS USELESS.

please take this as a contructive feedback for your upcoming tests. good luck.
garageGT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 02:11 PM   #34
Badler
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 133597
Join Date: Nov 2006
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Orange
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by garageGT View Post
I was about to ask the CRs on the engines. You should post cylinder compression figures.

1st off, the mentality behind the cylinder head modification is correct, it will be a better setup than using a thicker headgasket. Thats no brainer. There is also the option to get a set of CP pistons that are designed for the hybrid setups. They have been around for a while now, there is just a bit of a wait time as they are special order pistons. Maybe you should have included that setup in the test.

There is too many variables on your test. Your assumptions are not ignorable. You should have done this on the same motor. Even if you pick 2 stock WRXs from the same lot, there are going to be differences.

Sorry but, this test is not done professionally, you did not eliminate variables.

COMPARING TWO DIFFERENT MOTORS IS USELESS.

please take this as a contructive feedback for your upcoming tests. good luck.
Dear god.


Please go away. Pretty please.
Badler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 02:53 PM   #35
subenerd
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 72630
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: CA
Default

lol, where is the pic of the dude with the giant bag of popcorn??
subenerd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 02:56 PM   #36
samo22
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 119693
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: CA
Vehicle:
1995 L w/ ej205
Aspen White

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by garageGT View Post
I was about to ask the CRs on the engines. You should post cylinder compression figures.

1st off, the mentality behind the cylinder head modification is correct, it will be a better setup than using a thicker headgasket. Thats no brainer. There is also the option to get a set of CP pistons that are designed for the hybrid setups. They have been around for a while now, there is just a bit of a wait time as they are special order pistons. Maybe you should have included that setup in the test.

There is too many variables on your test. Your assumptions are not ignorable. You should have done this on the same motor. Even if you pick 2 stock WRXs from the same lot, there are going to be differences.

Sorry but, this test is not done professionally, you did not eliminate variables.

COMPARING TWO DIFFERENT MOTORS IS USELESS.

please take this as a contructive feedback for your upcoming tests. good luck.
Well, at least the test subjects were tuned properly and everything looks legit
samo22 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 03:39 PM   #37
Phatron
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 36033
Join Date: Apr 2003
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Tuning Lab
Vehicle:
CEO PhatBottiTuning
2006 STi GTX3582 + Meth

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by garageGT View Post
Sorry but, this test is not done professionally, you did not eliminate variables.

COMPARING TWO DIFFERENT MOTORS IS USELESS.

please take this as a contructive feedback for your upcoming tests. good luck.
Cenk,

This was not a test. Someone asked Ed in his for sale thread for this machining service if he had plots of a thicker head gasket vs the CNC. Ed simply posted the plot in that thread.....and then started this thread because the data is interesting.

Ed did not set out to do a test.....he simply looked through setups he had tuned and put the plots on the same graph. i dont mean to speak for ed and he will correct me if im wrong, but the conversation is in the other thread.

the thread is here if you care to read it

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=2011458

You're coming in here like a whiny butthurt baby because EVERYONE (not just ed) is telling you your testing is pretty useless......so you come in here just to put Ed down. You should get off nasioc because you're not garnering yourself any business being on here. Take the time you'd be on here and figure out why every setup on your dyno spools like a gt40.
Phatron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 07:43 PM   #38
maxpowr
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 159243
Join Date: Sep 2007
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: medford nj 08055
Vehicle:
5/01 bugeye
Hakt Ecu is back!

Default

i'm gonna get my v5 207 head chambers done, use the cosworth .78 gasket and e85...

what can we estimate my compression ratio to be and how to you go about figuring it?

please excuse my ignorance if its been mentioned in this thread...
maxpowr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-09-2010, 10:46 PM   #39
eqlized_aero
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 88699
Join Date: Jun 2005
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: West Michigan
Vehicle:
2015 TS EFR7163 818S
V9 Spec C Type RA 92x

Default

Ed - do you have a similarly modified vf43 STI you can overlay with these other results?
eqlized_aero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2010, 12:35 PM   #40
Rick Hunter
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 825
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Kanada
Vehicle:
2002 wrx

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Hunter View Post
What is the compression ratio on each engine? What is the AFR? I'm assuming this is on 91 octane, right? Even then, I find the timing on the thicker head gasket car lower than usual for similarly modded cars - were you knock limited? EJ257s with small turbos typically can run more timing than ej205s, your timing numbers are even lower than most ej205 tunes, even on 91 octane. Just trying to understand.
Bump - am interested to know.
Rick Hunter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2010, 06:07 PM   #41
MRF582
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 48219
Join Date: Nov 2003
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Vehicle:
. Always drive
the race line .

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by crashtke View Post
How much of it do you attribute to the difference in quench? Do you have any without cnc OR thicker head gaskets?
Quote:
Originally Posted by crashtke View Post
Odd, we have tuned them without issue on larger turbo builds. Given they were low timing with more flow, but they did not have any issues on 93 pump gas.
All I see here is an engine with tighter quench height makes more power than an engine with horrid quench height. Eureka!

What about this 'proof' proves that the modified combustion chamber is helping and the gains aren't due to a much better quench height? Sorry, that was a rhetorical question...
MRF582 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2010, 07:33 PM   #42
Phatron
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 36033
Join Date: Apr 2003
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Tuning Lab
Vehicle:
CEO PhatBottiTuning
2006 STi GTX3582 + Meth

Default

is there a better way to lower the quench height and keep the compression ratio stock?

i mean the tighter quench with single gasket doesnt work so well with the increased compression ratio.....

so isnt it ultimately the CC maching that allows the tighter quench with the single head gasket to work?
Phatron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2010, 10:12 PM   #43
MRF582
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 48219
Join Date: Nov 2003
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Vehicle:
. Always drive
the race line .

Default

If the compression ratio is too high for your fuel (91 octane) and you want to lower it while maintaining stock quench height, just get a custom set of pistons that do just that. I theorize it will net the results you want.

same quench + higher compression = worse on lower octane fuel (stock hybrid)
same compression + worse quench = worse on lower octane fuel (hybrid with thicker headgasket)
same compression + same quench = win? on lower octane fuel (custom pistons...)

The problem I have with the OP is that he is neglecting to acknowledge the fact that he's changing more than one variable while claiming that 'his' variable change is what helped. That is simply not backed up. If people can't see this logic... then it's just about right for NASIOC.

crashtke and Phil from Element Tuning have said that stock headgaskets + stock heads are just fine. Sure, they're talking about 93 octane and the OP is saying that on 91 octane things get worse. Well, no duh! Higher compression + lower octane generally nets a lower peak power output...

Is this crystal clear for only me? Say it ain't so.
MRF582 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2010, 10:28 PM   #44
Equilibrium Tuning
Former Vendor
 
Member#: 26933
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Fairfield, CA
Vehicle:
2006 STI
CGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beetspeed View Post
That would be my thought exactly as thats whats helping VE and imho, the full physical reason this mod is more knock resistant and the resulting more possible ignition advance ultimately gives the better torque.
You're correct that the added knock resistance and the resulting ignition advance is what's giving the extra torque and power. But how would decreasing the quench height make the engine more knock resistant?

I personally believe its more knock resistant because of the decreased compression ratio and the smoother edge of the combustion chamber.

-- Ed
Equilibrium Tuning is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2010, 10:44 PM   #45
Equilibrium Tuning
Former Vendor
 
Member#: 26933
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Fairfield, CA
Vehicle:
2006 STI
CGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Hunter View Post
What is the compression ratio on each engine? What is the AFR? I'm assuming this is on 91 octane, right? Even then, I find the timing on the thicker head gasket car lower than usual for similarly modded cars - were you knock limited? EJ257s with small turbos typically can run more timing than ej205s, your timing numbers are even lower than most ej205 tunes, even on 91 octane. Just trying to understand.
Its been a while since I calculated the compression ratio with the 1.5mm head gaskets, so I'd have to go through it again. Off the top of my head, I think it ended up being around 8.6:1. With the CNC heads, the CR is 8.2-8.3:1 depending on how much the heads/block were decked. Both cars are on California 91 Octane.

The timing on the thicker head gasket car was knock/consistency limited. I could actually run quite a bit more advance through the mid range for one or two pulls, but once you started getting the car hot, it wouldn't hold the timing at all. I ended up pulling out a lot of timing out in the mid range until it was consistent and knock free under heavy use. Consequently, I ended up leaning it out in the mid range as well to make up some of the torque and smooth it out with the decreased advance. The knock threshold wasn't nearly as sensitive to a/f as timing in the mid range, so I ended up running it at around 11.5-11.2 until about 4000RPM and tapering down to 10.7-10.8 by redline. With this strategy, we ended up with about the same torque levels as we did running richer and more advance, but the tune was much more consistent and stable under heavy use.

The a/f on the CNC head car was 10.6-10.7 through the powerband.

Thanks
-- Ed

Last edited by Equilibrium Tuning; 07-12-2010 at 10:50 PM.
Equilibrium Tuning is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2010, 10:48 PM   #46
Equilibrium Tuning
Former Vendor
 
Member#: 26933
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Fairfield, CA
Vehicle:
2006 STI
CGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phatron View Post
Cenk,

This was not a test. Someone asked Ed in his for sale thread for this machining service if he had plots of a thicker head gasket vs the CNC. Ed simply posted the plot in that thread.....and then started this thread because the data is interesting.

Ed did not set out to do a test.....he simply looked through setups he had tuned and put the plots on the same graph. i dont mean to speak for ed and he will correct me if im wrong, but the conversation is in the other thread.

the thread is here if you care to read it

http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/show....php?t=2011458

You're coming in here like a whiny butthurt baby because EVERYONE (not just ed) is telling you your testing is pretty useless......so you come in here just to put Ed down. You should get off nasioc because you're not garnering yourself any business being on here. Take the time you'd be on here and figure out why every setup on your dyno spools like a gt40.
This just about covers my response to Cenk's post. Thanks Ron

-- Ed
Equilibrium Tuning is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-2010, 11:01 PM   #47
Equilibrium Tuning
Former Vendor
 
Member#: 26933
Join Date: Oct 2002
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Fairfield, CA
Vehicle:
2006 STI
CGM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MRF582 View Post
If the compression ratio is too high for your fuel (91 octane) and you want to lower it while maintaining stock quench height, just get a custom set of pistons that do just that. I theorize it will net the results you want.

same quench + higher compression = worse on lower octane fuel (stock hybrid)
same compression + worse quench = worse on lower octane fuel (hybrid with thicker headgasket)
same compression + same quench = win? on lower octane fuel (custom pistons...)

The problem I have with the OP is that he is neglecting to acknowledge the fact that he's changing more than one variable while claiming that 'his' variable change is what helped. That is simply not backed up. If people can't see this logic... then it's just about right for NASIOC.

crashtke and Phil from Element Tuning have said that stock headgaskets + stock heads are just fine. Sure, they're talking about 93 octane and the OP is saying that on 91 octane things get worse. Well, no duh! Higher compression + lower octane generally nets a lower peak power output...

Is this crystal clear for only me? Say it ain't so.
Easy there buddy . I'm not trying to convince anyone or "prove" anything with this data as its not a completely controlled test. I was simply asked for some data and I provided what I could.

There's no reason to theorize on this as I have built and tuned cars with custom pistons as well to bring the CR down and the results were still not as good. If a set of custom pistons solved the issue, I sure as hell would not have gone through the trouble of making this service available. We're not a machine shop, so we don't make much money on this actual service when its said and done. I offer this up to the community because it is the best option I have found after exhausting all other available options.

For what its worth, here is an 04 WRX hybrid with custom pistons that brought the CR down to about 8.3:1. This car is running a VF34 and similar supporting mods to the previous two:



This particular car tuned out a bit better than a thicker head gasket car, but still suffered from the same lack of consistency when it came to ignition advance especially in the mid range. You could get away with some decent advance for one or two glory pulls, but under real use, it would knock and retard timing. This car ended up at 8* in the mid range up to 23* by redline and was running about 10.6:1. Granted these are all different cars, but the trend is quite clear.

Now try to keep an open mind and be a little more respectful of people who do actual R&D rather than just theorizing. It may come as a big surprise to you, but there are people as smart or even smarter than you out there who have already thought of the points you're bring up .

Thanks
-- Ed

Last edited by Equilibrium Tuning; 07-12-2010 at 11:11 PM.
Equilibrium Tuning is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2010, 12:15 PM   #48
MRF582
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 48219
Join Date: Nov 2003
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Vehicle:
. Always drive
the race line .

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Equilibrium Tuning View Post
For what its worth, here is an 04 WRX hybrid with custom pistons that brought the CR down to about 8.3:1. This car is running a VF34 and similar supporting mods to the previous two:

http://eqtuning.com/images/dynos/larryp/91%20Tuned.png

This particular car tuned out a bit better than a thicker head gasket car, but still suffered from the same lack of consistency when it came to ignition advance especially in the mid range. You could get away with some decent advance for one or two glory pulls, but under real use, it would knock and retard timing. This car ended up at 8* in the mid range up to 23* by redline and was running about 10.6:1. Granted these are all different cars, but the trend is quite clear.
And did these 'custom' pistons royally screw up the quench/squish?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Equilibrium Tuning View Post
...so we don't make much money on this actual service when its said and done. I offer this up to the community because it is the best option I have found after exhausting all other available options....
This made me laugh. I guess there some out there who will actually believe that you are doing this primarily to 'help the community'. 'We aren't doing this for the money'.

Last edited by MRF582; 07-13-2010 at 12:23 PM.
MRF582 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2010, 01:00 PM   #49
Phatron
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 36033
Join Date: Apr 2003
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Tuning Lab
Vehicle:
CEO PhatBottiTuning
2006 STi GTX3582 + Meth

Default

i dont get why you are so against this....or how your logic doesnt see that the CC machining is the reason for the better quench height. Doesnt modus ponens apply here?

So even if the power isnt coming directly and solely from the CC machining.......its coming from using the CC machining to be able to use the proper head gasket and CR.

im just lost as to what your problem with this is?

Does Ed need to put a * at the bottom of the first post

* similar quench height may be achieved by using custom pistons

Do we also need to put * at the bottom of every dyno plot?

* similar power could have been made with a gt30, gt52, dom3, hta green, etc etc

Last edited by Phatron; 07-13-2010 at 01:14 PM.
Phatron is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-2010, 01:04 PM   #50
CKxx
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 33458
Join Date: Feb 2003
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: PA
Vehicle:
Your BOV sounds lame
93 RX7+09 Forester

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MRF582 View Post
This made me laugh. I guess there some out there who will actually believe that you are doing this primarily to 'help the community'. 'We aren't doing this for the money'.
Again, you are the turd in this thread's punchbowl.

Of course he is in the business to making money, but he only charges $400 for the CC machining. That is quite reasonable seeing as he doesn't own the CNC machine and had to make the program for it, or pay someone else to do so.

I had my heads done by hand and that was $300. I would have readily paid $400 for the consistency of a CNC'd job.
CKxx 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
thicker head gasket on stock motor? WRX_FTW Factory 2.5L Turbo Powertrain (EJ Series Factory 2.5L Turbo) 2 05-24-2010 02:42 PM
Hybrid motor - to machine combustion chambers or not? frayz Built Motor Discussion 9 10-20-2009 06:24 PM
Any luck using OEM thicker head gaskets?? kalescustom Built Motor Discussion 0 05-19-2009 12:43 PM
2.5 Hybrid - Sanding Required at Combustion Chamber? mokujin22 Built Motor Discussion 4 12-30-2006 08:15 AM
thicker head gasket for a 2.5RS? wop Factory 2.0L Turbo Powertrain (EJ Series Factory 2.0L Turbo) 2 05-25-2001 03:35 PM

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2024 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2019, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.

As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission
Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.