Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Saturday April 19, 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 02-13-2009, 01:44 AM   #1
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 You Can't Make Power The Way You Think You Can

I had promised to write another post about some other things I learned during my header shootout. This will be a bit more speculative than you're used to seeing from me.

Issue 1: Stock Catalytic Converters


There are 4 pulls here. 2 pulls had the stock cats for an 05 RS, 2 runs had a track pipe. Can you tell the difference?

Summary: Track pipes and HFCs are a waste of money on the 05 RS and any other RS sharing the same part number unless you've done internal work to the engine. If you've done cams, PnP, pistons, etc, then you'll need to evaluate the cat issue for yourself. Look at Matt Monson's comments below in post #8 if you have done internal engine work.

Issue 2: Peak Airflow
Note: This section deals exclusively with the SOHC engines.


This is the comparison of UEL+stock cats to EL+(stock cats or track pipe). Notice how close the torque lines start to lay on each other above 5200RPM? Notice how The HP curve almost flatspots on top? That, my friends, is an engine running out of air.

It's even more clear if we look at airflow directly. Blue dots are EL, red dots are UEL. Ascending line is mass airflow (g/sec), mostly horizontal line is engine loading (g/rev):



Notice how the mass airflow lines get closer and closer as the revs rise? Notice how the engine loading lines drop on top of each other on the top end? The engine is starved for air and just can't get anymore air in.


This car now has every single bolt on available. Not a damned one of them made a meaningful difference to peak HP. All of them, however, make more torque, made it sooner, and made it over a broader range. What this means is that the external bolt ons can make it easier for air to get into the engine and make it easier to get exhaust out, and make it more efficient over a larger range, but they can't actually change the engine's basic hunger for air. To make the engine suck more peak air, you're going to have to crack the engine. Cams, PnP heads, valve jobs, high comp pistons, etc are the path forwards.

Summary: Bolt-ons can't make a meaningful increase in peak airflow because the major limitations are the stock cams and heads.


Now, there's absolutely nothing here that's going to shock anyone who's been trying to make power out of these, or any other NA, engines and has a grasp of the theory. However, I think a lot of people are going to be hearing about it for the first time.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.

Last edited by williaty; 02-13-2009 at 12:35 PM.
williaty is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 01:46 AM   #2
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

Reserved like a fine wine.
williaty is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 01:55 AM   #3
HamFist
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 2112
Join Date: Aug 2000
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Vehicle:
2000 Impreza 2.5RS
BRP

Default

I like your enthusiasm with the stuff you've been doing. You found some of the same stuff I did but in a different way. I built my final header as an EL header that came out equal in a really different way. That curve in the rear port messes with the bolt-on header's pipe length requirements. "Unequal" can mean a lot of things with a header.

The kind of results you had were the same as mine even if the numbers are different. You can move around the torque peak, make more torque, and make broader torque. But it just isn't a horsepower machine in stock form. It has big ports and valves and high compression. However, that stock cam is for torque. A wide torque curve in lower gears is what makes this car so much damn fun as an n/a build. This boxer motor design doesn't "spin" as much as "grunt".
HamFist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 04:34 AM   #4
PA-Outback2000
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 161832
Join Date: Oct 2007
Chapter/Region: Tri-State
Location: PA
Vehicle:
2000 Outback Limited
Black

Default

what does the 1st graph show? there is no Y-axis label on it.

i assume all bolt-ons means intake, header, cat, catback, and pulley, right?

i agree with you on your overall post, esp. the 2nd last paragraph. basically you made better use of what they engine had to offer without doing any internal work to the airflow patterns inside the heads.

i will, at some point, be doing custom cams and head work, which will gain a lot of power. i just need money!

what car do you have? 2005 impreza rs? if so, our engines are basically the same. with every dyno run i made, i gained a decent amount of WHP and WTRQ, both at top end and low end. do you have dyno graphs available to post? i would like to see your results.
PA-Outback2000 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 05:42 AM   #5
rougeben83
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 115154
Join Date: May 2006
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: NYC
Vehicle:
2003 Legacy L Turbo
silver

Default

Thanks Ty, that's some good substantive data. So straightpipe/HFC = more noise right? I'm going to have to argue that the louder the car is, the more power it's making!
rougeben83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 09:50 AM   #6
ibanez24_7
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 192322
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Springfield, VT
Vehicle:
2002 Impreza TS

Default

Nice post. I agree to a degree. Yes there will not be huge gains from these bolt ons but a gain is a gain. I for one dont care about the numbers and glad you used percentages to keep that whole dyno agruement out of the picture. These bolt ons really come into effect when as you stated do cams or head work. If you ever do any internal mods you wont see big gains with out first allowing the engine to breathe which these bolt ons do. I have all the exhaust bolt ons you can do, HFC, CAI, catback, UEL headers but no pullies yet. While hp probably didnt go up that much yes the torque did. My butt dyno can tell the difference between what it is now and stock. Gas milage improved, not greatly but I get 30-50 more miles per tank than stock. I would like to dyno some day just for shts and giggles before I build my SC'd engine so I can see the gains. Why SC and not turbo..Torque thats why.
ibanez24_7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 10:09 AM   #7
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 PA-Outback2000 View Post
what does the 1st graph show? there is no Y-axis label on it.
That's to keep people from obsessing over the numbers. It's just a standard dyno plot.

Quote:
i assume all bolt-ons means intake, header, cat, catback, and pulley, right?
Bolt-ons meaning anything outside the engine. So pretty much the stuff you listed.

Quote:
what car do you have? 2005 impreza rs? ... do you have dyno graphs available to post? i would like to see your results.
Yes, 05 RS. Don't have them available for posting because I never digitized them. Not worth it at this point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rougeben83 View Post
So straightpipe/HFC = more noise right
On an internally stock motor, yup, just more noise and stink. At some point, you could build the innards of the motor to the point that you would need to change/delete the cats, but it doesn't happen before you crack the motor.
williaty is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 10:19 AM   #8
Matt Monson
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 832
Join Date: Jan 2000
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Teh Ghetto Garage, CO
Vehicle:
99 2.5RS, '85 911
'73 914 and 2012 BRZ

Default

Issue #1:
My car made 4whp more with a track pipe than it did with a Cobb high flow cat on the car. This was an engine with Cobb Spicy cams, Cobb CAI, UR light and underdriven pulley, ACT LW flywheel and full Cobb exhaust. MY00 2.5RS on stock ECU.

I think the fallacy of composition that you are facing with your testing is that like math, building power has an order of operations. If you haven't set the engine itself up to breathe better then your results farther down the line won't be results at all. They will just be more of the same.
Matt Monson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 10:32 AM   #9
renyo
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 93577
Join Date: Aug 2005
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Orlando, unfortunately
Vehicle:
98 Impreza

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Monson View Post
Issue #1:
My car made 4whp more with a track pipe than it did with a Cobb high flow cat on the car. This was an engine with Cobb Spicy cams, Cobb CAI, UR light and underdriven pulley, ACT LW flywheel and full Cobb exhaust. MY00 2.5RS on stock ECU.

I think the fallacy of composition that you are facing with your testing is that like math, building power has an order of operations. If you haven't set the engine itself up to breathe better then your results farther down the line won't be results at all. They will just be more of the same.
I think he's implying both issues are without cracking the block (which includes cams).
renyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 10:41 AM   #10
Matt Monson
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 832
Join Date: Jan 2000
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Teh Ghetto Garage, CO
Vehicle:
99 2.5RS, '85 911
'73 914 and 2012 BRZ

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by renyo View Post
I think he's implying both issues are without cracking the block (which includes cams).
I choose not to assume anything. He stated:
"Summary: Track pipes and HFCs are a waste of money on the 05 RS and any other RS sharing the same part number. I think that means clear back to 99 or so"

I am just pointing out that the truth of that the statement is in fact conditional. I would fully agree with him that for a car with only bolt ons a track pipe doesn't do much if anything for you. However, when you take the next step, there are gains to be had.

I never went back to the dyno with a track pipe after I did the headwork, but it's quite possible that 4whp with cams could grow to 6 or 7 whp with headwork.

My main point is to not make vast sweeping statements without proper data to back them up. However, based on my previous interactions and conversations with Williaty, I suspect his response to my comments will be less defensive than your comments made on his behalf. And since he attempts to be fairly scientific with this stuff he will appreciate my addition of more data to the set.
Matt Monson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 11:10 AM   #11
Zac86
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 136919
Join Date: Jan 2007
Chapter/Region: W. Canada
Location: North Pole
Vehicle:
2005 Legacy GT Wagon
ABP

Default

I wonder if my 98 cats on my legacy are the same. Thank you williaty now I can put my stock cats back on because im tired of my car being so god damned loud.
Zac86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 11:49 AM   #12
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

Yup, I actually did mean without work on the internals when I made that cat statement, I'll edit that to make it explicit.
williaty is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 11:59 AM   #13
Patrick Olsen
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 120
Join Date: Jul 1999
Chapter/Region: AKIC
Location: Where the Navy sends me...
Vehicle:
1997 Legacy 2.5GT
QuickSilver Metallic

Default

As a counterpoint, I'll throw up my dyno comparison of a header/cat install. This was on my then-stock 2.5GT (N/A DOHC), same day dyno, going from the stock header/cat/mid-pipe to an MRT header/cat/mid-pipe. Not only did peak power jump ~14whp, it also shifted to the right ~400rpm. I don't have the Excel file here at work, but as I recall power was up +18whp at redline. Peak torque didn't go up nearly as much, but you can see it also shifted well to the right.



I've also posted in the past this comparison of a stock SOHC 2.5RS (I think it was a 2000) vs. my stock 2.5GT.



While I think it is generally accepted that the SOHC heads flow nearly as well as the DOHC heads, and the intake manifolds and headers on these two cars were essentially identical, clearly the SOHC is much more optimized for day-to-day driving midrange. Based on process of elimination, the difference in the torque curves on the two engines comes down to (1) ECU and (2) cams. It would appear to me that the SOHC cams/tuning are such a limitation that even when you free up the intake and exhaust you just can't get the engine to breathe more. That was definitely not the case with my DOHC, even with the stock cams.

Pat Olsen
Patrick Olsen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 12:06 PM   #14
renyo
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 93577
Join Date: Aug 2005
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Orlando, unfortunately
Vehicle:
98 Impreza

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Monson View Post
I choose not to assume anything. He stated:
"Summary: Track pipes and HFCs are a waste of money on the 05 RS and any other RS sharing the same part number. I think that means clear back to 99 or so"

I am just pointing out that the truth of that the statement is in fact conditional. I would fully agree with him that for a car with only bolt ons a track pipe doesn't do much if anything for you. However, when you take the next step, there are gains to be had.

I never went back to the dyno with a track pipe after I did the headwork, but it's quite possible that 4whp with cams could grow to 6 or 7 whp with headwork.

My main point is to not make vast sweeping statements without proper data to back them up. However, based on my previous interactions and conversations with Williaty, I suspect his response to my comments will be less defensive than your comments made on his behalf. And since he attempts to be fairly scientific with this stuff he will appreciate my addition of more data to the set.
I wasn't trying to be overly defensive, I'm sorry if it came across that way.

You're right, his summary for issue 1 was a blanket state with no regards to inner head or engine improvement.

Perhaps I'm mistakenly tying two unrelated points together, but I thought the overall theme of his post is that you have to do some kind of inter-engine work to have an increase in airflow. It appears that the limit of this airflow (as far as williaty's mods have taken him) is low enough so that the restriction due to the cat is negligible. I was only trying to saying with your cam work, perhaps you are flowing enough air to make the cat a restriction.

Last edited by renyo; 02-13-2009 at 12:14 PM. Reason: the comment in question has since been edited
renyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 12:35 PM   #15
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 Patrick Olsen View Post
As a counterpoint, I'll throw up my dyno comparison of a header/cat install. This was on my then-stock 2.5GT (N/A DOHC), same day dyno, going from the stock header/cat/mid-pipe to an MRT header/cat/mid-pipe. Not only did peak power jump ~14whp, it also shifted to the right ~400rpm. I don't have the Excel file here at work, but as I recall power was up +18whp at redline. Peak torque didn't go up nearly as much, but you can see it also shifted well to the right.

...

Based on process of elimination, the difference in the torque curves on the two engines comes down to (1) ECU and (2) cams. It would appear to me that the SOHC cams/tuning are such a limitation that even when you free up the intake and exhaust you just can't get the engine to breathe more.
I think that's probably a pretty valid conclusion to draw. I knew that the DOHC engines had a reputation for breathing better but then I had seen flowbench numbers showing the SOHC and DOHC heads basically right on top of each other. That pretty much leaves just the differences in cams to account for the differences in breathing.

I'll make the first post clearer than I'm talking about the SOHC engines.
williaty is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 12:40 PM   #16
Back Road Runner
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 60082
Join Date: Apr 2004
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Minnesota
Vehicle:
2004 Forester STI
Silver

Default

Williaty and Matt, you guys are a great help to the NA community!


The cat part isn't surprising. There are some flow bench testing data of various cats floating around Nasioc and Google. In stock form, the cats have little problem flowing 200-250cfm before becoming resistive to flow. With a 2.5L engine, you are only seeing about 300cfm at redline. Up to even 4k, you will never experience any restriction simply from the cats. Now if you have an engine that flows to 7k-8k, that's a whole other story, but one would really have to build the enigne for it to take good advantage of a higher flow cat.

I tend to feel the same way about piping in generally, kind of why there's little point to running 2.5" or larger pipe considering a 2" pipe can support 300cfm just find as long as you're not tossing sharp bends in or using crush bends and cutting down flow area.

Williaty, what have you done with the ECU? Any specific theory about the dip at 3k rpm? I'm just curious if these plots retain the stock ECU programming or have been optimized for the parts.

Also the 3k dip, I'm not sure why it's there. I say that because it was something specifically there for me too...until I installed my I-Speed RS flashed ECU. Then it was gone. It's sort of lead me to believe I-Speed figured out how to get rid of the dip there and make the engine run consistent through that range. In fact, my torque peak is basically where your dip occurs.


So the gist of this thread is focus on low end torque unless you're willing to crack open the engine.
Back Road Runner is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 03:40 PM   #17
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 Back Road Runner View Post
Williaty, what have you done with the ECU? Any specific theory about the dip at 3k rpm? I'm just curious if these plots retain the stock ECU programming or have been optimized for the parts.
Tuned specifically for this setup.

Quote:
Also the 3k dip, I'm not sure why it's there. I say that because it was something specifically there for me too...until I installed my I-Speed RS flashed ECU. Then it was gone. It's sort of lead me to believe I-Speed figured out how to get rid of the dip there and make the engine run consistent through that range. In fact, my torque peak is basically where your dip occurs.
I think it's real, at least for my car. When I put the intake on (all of them, CAI/SRI or hybrid), it just didn't get any better there. That area has about the same loading as stock while everywhere else got better.
williaty is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 03:47 PM   #18
Matt Monson
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 832
Join Date: Jan 2000
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: Teh Ghetto Garage, CO
Vehicle:
99 2.5RS, '85 911
'73 914 and 2012 BRZ

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by renyo View Post
Perhaps I'm mistakenly tying two unrelated points together, but I thought the overall theme of his post is that you have to do some kind of inter-engine work to have an increase in airflow. It appears that the limit of this airflow (as far as williaty's mods have taken him) is low enough so that the restriction due to the cat is negligible. I was only trying to saying with your cam work, perhaps you are flowing enough air to make the cat a restriction.
What you are referring to is called Brake Specific Fuel Consumption. A number of years ago Shiv wrote an article for SCC about it. He happened to use his '98 2.5RS as the example in his article. What he did, using math, was proove that without cracking open his engine the most he could do with bolt ons was get his car up to 185chp (from 165chp stock).

In essence, that is the same thing that Williaty is getting at here. It's a good exercise for getting the truth out there with respect to mods and shutting up the bench racers who claim silly stupid chp numbers because they just do basic addition for the published gains of any given item or pull out their Ipod road dyno and take that as fact.
Matt Monson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 04:36 PM   #19
Back Road Runner
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 60082
Join Date: Apr 2004
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Minnesota
Vehicle:
2004 Forester STI
Silver

Default

An additional note there is power band versus peak numbers. For example, we do whine that we can't make high peak power, but at the same time, we can vastly improve the power band, i.e. area under the curve. As much as we like taking about big numbers, we tend to forget that the area under the curve is generally more important. Example, my bro has an 18g turbo on his Forester XT. I have a plain ol' Forester. He makes gobs more peak power then be, but I actually beat him everywhere under 4k rpm. He's got me beat by a mile from 4k to 6.5k, and I beat him from idle to 4k. Which engine is better? Better question is which engine is better for which specific uses. Drag race, he wins. Rally-x, I win. It depends. We like to look at raw numbers, but we really to tend to forget about the broad functionality of it all. It's mighty nice making 90% peak torque from 2k to 5k rpm.
Back Road Runner is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 07:18 PM   #20
Smoke
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 172486
Join Date: Feb 2008
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Location: Cheney, WA
Vehicle:
95 V4 STi-RA swap
Stage 49.8

Default

I'm glad I stopped going catless.

All it was, was loud, for a couple of freed lousy horsepower.
Smoke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 07:27 PM   #21
Hedbergsuby07
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 160840
Join Date: Oct 2007
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: boston
Vehicle:
2007 impreza
urban gray scoooped

Default

williaty did you do these pulls with your hybrid intake just curious if that makes a difference or not.
Hedbergsuby07 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 07:29 PM   #22
renyo
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 93577
Join Date: Aug 2005
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Orlando, unfortunately
Vehicle:
98 Impreza

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Monson View Post
What you are referring to is called Brake Specific Fuel Consumption. A number of years ago Shiv wrote an article for SCC about it. He happened to use his '98 2.5RS as the example in his article. What he did, using math, was proove that without cracking open his engine the most he could do with bolt ons was get his car up to 185chp (from 165chp stock).

In essence, that is the same thing that Williaty is getting at here. It's a good exercise for getting the truth out there with respect to mods and shutting up the bench racers who claim silly stupid chp numbers because they just do basic addition for the published gains of any given item or pull out their Ipod road dyno and take that as fact.
Sure, if you wanna go and put it in technical terms..

In all seriousness, thanks for enlightening me. : )
renyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 07:50 PM   #23
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 Hedbergsuby07 View Post
williaty did you do these pulls with your hybrid intake just curious if that makes a difference or not.
With the hybrid, yes, but that wouldn't have made any difference.
williaty is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2009, 11:57 PM   #24
HamFist
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 2112
Join Date: Aug 2000
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Vehicle:
2000 Impreza 2.5RS
BRP

Default

The mistake is trying to make HP with the stock cam instead of torque. The restriction is the cam. Where that cam is a "restriction" it is also the reason I made a lot of low end torque and get 29mpg on E85. Peak power certainly isn't there. But, I can putt around town at 1500-2000rpm and even start in second gear with a lightweight flywheel. At least a trade-off or two is still there to have. This is so NOT a Honda that it isn't even funny .

You guys are right in trying to improve the area under the curve. That flat torque curve is why I can't hit the gas before mid corner. It's actually touchier than boost but easier to modulate with the throttle. Drive it a bit quick and "toss" it into a corner. Use the throttle and the AWD to get you out but the brakes and the wheel to set you up for the corner. Once you really get that flat torque curve just right, you can double clutch your way to a drift in the first few gears. All seasons are useless for me on the ice now if I get on it. Snow is okay, but glassy ice sucks without studs. It's tractionless like an n/a Honda through a burnout box--*RAPPP-P-P-P-P-P" .

You want to see a REAL cam? Pay for the damn things and get Mobeck cams.

HamFist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2009, 12:07 AM   #25
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

What year of car do you have? If it's an 05+, I have the solution to your throttle problems.
williaty is online now   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
Things you can't make in the toaster oven for $100, Alex CosmoTheCat Off-Topic 15 04-02-2008 07:11 AM
You can't make this stuff up 92XJET Off-Topic 12 08-12-2007 01:15 PM
You can't tell me the spam filters can't catch this. Jake1050 Off-Topic 9 01-31-2007 06:57 AM
You can't make irony like this up - US denounces Belarus election results Keshav Political Playground 39 06-05-2006 08:03 PM
Who knows, why you CAN'T use power steering fluid? TaiChih Mid Atlantic Impreza Club -- MAIC 11 02-04-2003 01:36 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:40 PM.


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.