Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Friday April 24, 2015
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 07-27-2010, 12:17 PM   #51
PleiadesSTi
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 194132
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Indiana
Vehicle:
2009 WRX Sedan
SSM

Default

subscribed. I use 93 all the time in my 09 wrx( no 91 in my area). I use all brands of gasoline and I see no difference in performance, though I do like shell, BP, and Mobil gas a little better due to their additives.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
PleiadesSTi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2010, 12:22 PM   #52
ibanez24_7
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 192322
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Springfield, VT
Vehicle:
2002 Impreza TS

Default

Asking if sunoco gas is better than mobil is like asking if polar springs water is better than voss water. Sarcasm aside Ive always run 89 in all my vehicles. Here this should help:

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search

A US gas station pump offering five different AKI octane ratingsThe octane rating is a measure of the resistance of petrol and other fuels to autoignition in spark-ignition internal combustion engines.

The octane number of a fuel is measured in a test engine, and is defined by comparison with the mixture of 2,2,4-trimethylpentane (iso-octane) and heptane which would have the same anti-knocking capacity as the fuel under test: the percentage, by volume, of 2,2,4-trimethylpentane in that mixture is the octane number of the fuel. For example, petrol with the same knocking characteristics as a mixture of 90% iso-octane and 10% heptane would have an octane rating of 90.[1] This does not mean that the petrol contains just iso-octane and heptane in these proportions, but that it has the same detonation resistance properties. Because some fuels are more knock-resistant than iso-octane, the definition has been extended to allow for octane numbers higher than 100.

Octane rating does not relate to the energy content of the fuel (see heating value). It is only a measure of the fuel's tendency to burn in a controlled manner, rather than exploding in an uncontrolled manner. Where octane is raised by blending in ethanol, energy content per volume is reduced.

It is possible for a fuel to have a Research Octane Number (RON) greater than 100, because iso-octane is not the most knock-resistant substance available. Racing fuels, AvGas, liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), and alcohol fuels such as methanol or ethanol may have octane ratings of 110 or significantly higher — ethanol's RON is 129 (116 MON, 122 AKI). Typical "octane booster" gasoline additives include MTBE, ETBE, isooctane and toluene. Lead in the form of tetra-ethyl lead was once a common additive, but since the 1970s, its use in most of the industrialised world has been restricted, and its use is currently limited mostly to aviation gasoline.
ibanez24_7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2010, 12:36 PM   #53
nairbmik
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 220259
Join Date: Aug 2009
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: HoCo & College Park
Vehicle:
09 2.5i
SSM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PleiadesSTi View Post
subscribed. I use 93 all the time in my 09 wrx( no 91 in my area). I use all brands of gasoline and I see no difference in performance, though I do like shell, BP, and Mobil gas a little better due to their additives.
You must be lost, this is the NA forum. Not saying that to be an ass, but the 09 WRX requires 91, and the difference between 91 and 93 is obviously smaller than the difference between 87 and 93. The argument lies within the using 87 vs. using 93 in terms of supposed vastly improved gas mileage (42 mpg? really? ), reduced knocking, and better performance. So far, no one's shown definitive proof of ANYTHING, so until anyone proves me wrong, I'll go with what Subaru says is safe enough for my car and keep on pumping 87
nairbmik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2010, 01:12 PM   #54
lemons
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 186654
Join Date: Aug 2008
Chapter/Region: E. Canada
Location: Toronto
Vehicle:
2005 2.5 RS
Navy Blue

Default

My stock map logs recorded an IAM of 0.3xx (not sure of exact numbers) on 87 gas.

Does that mean my car was constantly knocking?
lemons is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2010, 01:16 PM   #55
archdude
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 205968
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: New York
Vehicle:
2009

Default

I've done some testing with 87 VS 93 octane in a 2009 Impreza with factory tune and there was absolutely no difference. The MPGs were exactly the same when tested in exactly the same places with exactly the same speeds. However I didn't reset the ECU which I guess could make a difference.

In terms of what brand, I've noticed BP/Sunoco gas making my car seem like it was a bit more torquey after a fill up but that was probably just me/placebo effect or some other kind of variable. I usually use whatever is convenient as long as it's a well known brand and not something like "Joe's Gas Station".

I don't think it really makes a difference. They all have pretty much the same ingredients and some level of detergents required by law.
archdude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2010, 06:16 PM   #56
GrundleJuice
NASIOC Supporter
 
Member#: 165749
Join Date: Dec 2007
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: ლಠ益ಠ&
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudgers73 View Post
Agreed. The recommended octane for our cars are what Subaru designs them to use. A 2.5i is tuned for using 87 octane fuel.
A 2.5i is tuned poorly for using 87 octane fuel. ****, it's tuned poorly for using 91 octane fuel on hot days.

Do you have experience tuning these cars? have you investagted how the timing advance system works and what different octane fuels will and will not allow it to do?


Quote:
Originally Posted by Imp-RS View Post
Yes, you're right of course, in a overbearing pedantic sort of way.

It's not a limitation of the gasoline, it is however a limitation of the tuning.
We can probably get an open tune map that would take better advantage of higher octane fuel.


Subaru doesn't recommend it on THIS tune. And thus that is what is 'best' for our car at this time.

I'm still obliged to think that running higher octane gas on our cars with our factory map won't do us any good, if not cause carbon build up. No one has directly evidenced how my mechanics suggestion was incorrect. Not that I take it as a fact, but right now I'm trusting the guy who works on subarus for a living for over 20 years, over you lot.
The factory tune (on 2.5i's and 05 RS's at the least) is very aggressive and does not use all the timing avalible in the advance table. It knocks more on lower octane, but even knocks on 91oct fuel. Does your subaru mechanic spend hours a week studying and experimenting with the ignition timing? I have and still do on occasion when new ideas come up. Many others, who would agree with me, have spent hundreds of hours or more tweaking these maps.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Back Road Runner View Post
The tune is designed to run on 87 octane. You put 87 octane in and it drives exactly as designed. You can put in whatever octane you want. If the ECU is tuned and is not very adaptive, it will not do anything useful with the higher octane. If you want to run 91 octane and actually see an advantage (a) the ECU needs to be designed to advance timing...a lot...stock or (b) retune the ECU to take advantage of the slower burn and resistance to knock. Not many cars are designed to tune excessively automatically because they don't expect you to run higher octane in the car. I'll give an example. I've run both I-Speed's SRS-10 and SRS-20 flashes. The SRS-20 tune runs just about double the timing of the SRS-10 flash making use of the change from 87 to 91 octane. The gain for this yields around 5 ft-lbs. One, do you think a completely stock ECU will advance timing that much if you just toss in higher octane on a bone stock engine? Two, how much gains do you really expect from the change?
The ECU has so much timing advance that is not used on 87oct fuel that it can, and does use on higher octane fuels. Tq gains are small, reliability gains are probably not so small.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Subyroo2.5 View Post
My manual says to use at 87 or HIGHER octane.

Our ECU's go through a process of learning where they can advance the timing, and where it has to pull the timing. Depending on conditions, it adjusts timing using course adjustments (the infamous IAM value which effects ALL RPM's), a somewhat middle of the road adjustment, and a fine adjustment. If atmospheric conditions change, and the knock sensor starts sending **** tons of knock signal to the ECU, it will change the IAM, which throws ALL of the other adjustments out the window, and it has to relearn them. It also constantly plays with the fine adjustment, slightly advancing the timing here and there to see if it will get knock, to keep the engine on the very edge of knock - for emissions and power.


____________________________ _______________

Exhibit A:



So my bottom line is: do what you want but it has been proven, even on a stock ECU that running a higher octane of fuel results in good things...
Yep, the factory tune and knock control system is purposely designed to keep the engine on the ragged edge of knock so it can extract the most tq, fuel efficiency and have the lowest emission output. all of which are achieved by running the most advanced timing possible on our engines. there is a timing advance value that when passed (advanced beyond) will start to hurt all the above benefits, but our engines cannot achieve this on pump gas in their current design state.


Higher octane fuel, in 05-08 RS/2.5i's and probably the newer and many older model N/A impreza's will allow more timing advance to be used because on 87oct fuel only slightly more than half of the available timing advance is being used. more timing advance will allow more tq to be made, allow the engine to be more fuel efficient and reduce harmful emission output. That is a fact. This is not true for every stock vehicle, but it is for some and the stated model Impreza's is one of those. End of discussion. really. No more need to muddy this up for someone who wants to actually know how it will effect their vehicle with opinions and statements based on "I think, I heard, I felt no benefit, etc etc."
GrundleJuice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2010, 07:51 PM   #57
vrusso
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 207074
Join Date: Mar 2009
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Sacramento California
Vehicle:
2015 STI
You know you're jealous

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The G.O.A.T. View Post
I am not recommending anything other then what ever you want to put in your car, but for me I get 42mpg with 91 octane, and 31ish with 87.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bluefoton View Post
My apologies, but I call a royal BS on that.. unless you drive downhill with the wind after refilling with 91 octane...
Canada Gal /= US Gal FYI

Last edited by vrusso; 07-27-2010 at 07:59 PM.
vrusso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2010, 09:35 PM   #58
ChronicHerb
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 187595
Join Date: Aug 2008
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: Fullerton, CA
Vehicle:
2008 2.5i Hatch
Spark Silver Metallic

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nairbmik View Post
The argument lies within the using 87 vs. using 93 in terms of supposed vastly improved gas mileage (42 mpg? really? ), reduced knocking, and better performance. So far, no one's shown definitive proof of ANYTHING, so until anyone proves me wrong, I'll go with what Subaru says is safe enough for my car and keep on pumping 87
Actually, the argument lies within which brand of gasoline to use based on addatives and such if you read the OP. This tangent is quite the clusterF#$%.
ChronicHerb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 01:07 AM   #59
The G.O.A.T.
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 149724
Join Date: May 2007
Chapter/Region: W. Canada
Location: Calgary Alberta, Canada
Vehicle:
1999 leggy gt 5speed
Blood red

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vrusso View Post
Canada Gal /= US Gal FYI
this I am pretty sure the 09's were rated at 37mpg and that has been over the last 15,000 kms. plus I can show you the accessport screen if you wish
The G.O.A.T. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 02:47 PM   #60
nairbmik
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 220259
Join Date: Aug 2009
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: HoCo & College Park
Vehicle:
09 2.5i
SSM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChronicHerb View Post
Actually, the argument lies within which brand of gasoline to use based on addatives and such if you read the OP. This tangent is quite the clusterF#$%.
Ah you're right, I guess we've all forgotten
nairbmik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-28-2010, 03:41 PM   #61
vrusso
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 207074
Join Date: Mar 2009
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Sacramento California
Vehicle:
2015 STI
You know you're jealous

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The G.O.A.T. View Post
this I am pretty sure the 09's were rated at 37mpg and that has been over the last 15,000 kms. plus I can show you the accessport screen if you wish

I believe you. I was simply stating that US Gal is not the same volume as a Canadian Gal therefore your 37mpg is different then 37mpg in the states. I was letting Bluefoton calling bs on you statement know that your numbers are fine.

Canda Gal = 4.55 Litres
US Gal = 3.78 Litres

AKA 37mpg Canada = approx 30mpg US

Last edited by vrusso; 07-28-2010 at 03:46 PM.
vrusso is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2010, 01:09 AM   #62
Subyroo2.5
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 168129
Join Date: Jan 2008
Chapter/Region: SCIC
Location: High Desert
Vehicle:
2013 WRX
WRBP

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RaceFaceXC View Post
A 2.5i is tuned poorly for using 87 octane fuel. ****, it's tuned poorly for using 91 octane fuel on hot days.

Higher octane fuel, in 05-08 RS/2.5i's and probably the newer and many older model N/A impreza's will allow more timing advance to be used because on 87oct fuel only slightly more than half of the available timing advance is being used. more timing advance will allow more tq to be made, allow the engine to be more fuel efficient and reduce harmful emission output. That is a fact. This is not true for every stock vehicle, but it is for some and the stated model Impreza's is one of those. End of discussion. really. No more need to muddy this up for someone who wants to actually know how it will effect their vehicle with opinions and statements based on "I think, I heard, I felt no benefit, etc etc."

Thank you.
Subyroo2.5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-29-2010, 03:49 AM   #63
formula91
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 102984
Join Date: Dec 2005
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Northbrook, IL
Vehicle:
2005 2.5RS 4EAT
Platinum Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Subyroo2.5 View Post
Thank you.
To confirm, I haven't logged hundreds of thousands of hours like Race or Williaty, but I have logged. I can confirm less knock with higher octane.

I do log gas mileage almost always. The method is not so scientific, but to do anything more would be a strenuous task. I always drive until the light comes on and get gas as soon as possible, and fill all the way up. Then use the standard miles divided by gallons put in.


That is to say, there seems to be a larger difference between 87 and 89 than 89 and 93. Not sure as to why, but the gas mileage increase seems to offset the higher price just a tiny bit more. That being said, I use 89 right now. There is no doubt that there is a difference between 89 and 93 though.
formula91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-10-2010, 04:46 AM   #64
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
Sooooo.... basically, every gas station is fine.
No, there's some very notable missing names there. BP/Ammaco, Sunoco America (which surprises the hell out of me), Citgo, etc


Quote:
Originally Posted by kero View Post
Interestingly enough, my 2.5i wagon on 87 knocks or pings alot. I changed over to 93 and it doesn't happen. When I am tight on money and go back to 87, the pings/knocks start again.
Yes, this is well documented. I've been writing about it for 2-3 years now, it's just finally clicking for a lot of people.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Olsen View Post
It also isn't doing anything to help the car. But it's only money, right? .
It absolutely is doing something to help the car. The 05+ cars knock continuously on 87 octane under certain conditions. The knock sensor detects the knock and pulls MASSIVE amounts of timing, but it's not enough to stop the knocking.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Olsen View Post
Yes, something is wrong with your car. When I read your comment the first time I missed that your car was a newer model. If it's actually knocking and pinging then the knock sensor isn't doing its job. Normally a dead knock sensor would pretty much put the ECU in limp mode, pulling a lot of timing to keep the engine "safe", so the fact that you're not getting a CEL and not seeing horrible performance indicates that something is definitely not right.
My reply to this is also part of my reply to BRR below. The way the adaptive strategy the ECU works is to detect the onset of knock. In other words, it has to actually advance the timing to the point of knock and then back off. Over time, it'll keep trying to creep the timing back up, detecting knock, and backing off. The car will not be knock free due to the ECU's adaptive behavior.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Back Road Runner View Post
The tune is designed to run on 87 octane. You put 87 octane in and it drives exactly as designed. You can put in whatever octane you want. If the ECU is tuned and is not very adaptive, it will not do anything useful with the higher octane. If you want to run 91 octane and actually see an advantage (a) the ECU needs to be designed to advance timing...a lot...stock or (b) retune the ECU to take advantage of the slower burn and resistance to knock. Not many cars are designed to tune excessively automatically because they don't expect you to run higher octane in the car. I'll give an example. I've run both I-Speed's SRS-10 and SRS-20 flashes. The SRS-20 tune runs just about double the timing of the SRS-10 flash making use of the change from 87 to 91 octane. The gain for this yields around 5 ft-lbs. One, do you think a completely stock ECU will advance timing that much if you just toss in higher octane on a bone stock engine? Two, how much gains do you really expect from the change?
The newer ECUs absolutely are capably of adding as much or more timing as the I-Speed reflashes. The ECU is capable of being knock-limited on all octanes up to at least 93 and the LITTLE bit of playing with 104 octane I've done suggests that there's a few isolated islands of knock left even with that. The I-Speed reflashes can't advance timing past where the stock ECU is willing to go or the engine would blow up.

This all, IMO, relates back to the fact that the EJ engines have a very un-optimized combustion chamber design and there's WAAAAAY too much piston-to-head clearance in stock form. Knock city.
williaty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-12-2010, 11:25 PM   #65
suex
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 243393
Join Date: Apr 2010
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: Foresdale
Vehicle:
o6 impreza rs
silver

Default

I use shell gas, it gets me about 650km's on the hiway per tank, I use bronze, I find the cheaper gas stations(gulf) I'm losing about 45km's per tank... IMO it's whatever you let the ecu get used to... Yeah, that's probably not it at all, but it works for me. I've tried using premium many times and i don't notice any difference, we used to have a mini Cooper that was built to run on premium, and it really makes a difference what gas you use...... Go with what the manufacturer recommends, or spend more money on something that you might not need...
suex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2010, 10:21 PM   #66
Rudgers73
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 141433
Join Date: Feb 2007
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Rochester, NY
Vehicle:
2006 Impreza 2.5i
Obsidian Black

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Subyroo2.5 View Post
Wow! You know so much.....tell us more.
eat it
Rudgers73 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2010, 04:36 AM   #67
vaccaroja
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 168845
Join Date: Jan 2008
Chapter/Region: NESIC
Location: North Easton, ma
Vehicle:
2005 Legacy GT LTD.
Blue

Default

I've noticed that n/a impreza's typically burn oil at high rate while using 93, I use 89 which is mid grade, no pinging and it's still better than 87.
vaccaroja is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2010, 05:09 AM   #68
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

Gasoline octane can have no impact on oil consumption.
williaty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2010, 12:17 PM   #69
Bluefoton
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 141373
Join Date: Feb 2007
Chapter/Region: E. Canada
Location: Quebec, QC
Vehicle:
2008 2.5i-hatch -
now with a HID retrofit

Default

RaceFaceXC/Williaty, what's the range of timing advances allowed by the ECU (03 N/A for me)? Not sure if a ScanGauge is accurate enough to make a credible statement, but i'm definitely curious to see how far it maxes out on timing with 87 vs 91 octane...
Bluefoton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2010, 12:51 PM   #70
RaineMan
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 256727
Join Date: Sep 2010
Chapter/Region: RMIC
Location: SL,UT
Vehicle:
2007 2.5I Wagon
Silver

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by williaty View Post
Gasoline octane can have no impact on oil consumption.
QFT

Simply put... there is knock with regular grade gasoline, and there have been many many logs to prove it. So don't be a cheap bastard... spend the extra few dollars at fill-up and get premium. Your car will run better and last longer.
RaineMan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2010, 03:55 PM   #71
PleiadesSTi
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 194132
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Indiana
Vehicle:
2009 WRX Sedan
SSM

Default

The kind that is combustible.
PleiadesSTi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-01-2010, 09:02 PM   #72
cmiovino
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 134005
Join Date: Dec 2006
Chapter/Region: MAIC
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Vehicle:
2004 WRX Premium
PSM

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vaccaroja View Post
I've noticed that n/a impreza's typically burn oil at high rate while using 93, I use 89 which is mid grade, no pinging and it's still better than 87.
Ditto. I think 89 is the best compromise. 93 is kinda expensive, but 89 is typically only 10 cents more than 87. Mine runs better with less pinging for sure. I don't care if it don't 'really' help... it sounds better and that makes me feel better. If it does actually help, then great! All the better
cmiovino is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2010, 12:36 AM   #73
formula91
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 102984
Join Date: Dec 2005
Chapter/Region: MWSOC
Location: Northbrook, IL
Vehicle:
2005 2.5RS 4EAT
Platinum Silver

Default

My local road ranger sells 89 as regular and 90 as mid-grade.

SCORE!
formula91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2011, 04:29 PM   #74
Blobeye04
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 268813
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Grove city
Vehicle:
2004 wrx sti
silver

Default

i use sunnoco 93......id rather be safe then sorry i want me engine to run its best...the gas mileage wont get any better and dont mind spending a little more... last week i spend $3.49 for 93 but im willing to pay it...if i dont have the money i just dont put as much in...lucky i dont drive too much mostly right around my house5 or 10 miles at the most
Blobeye04 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-04-2011, 05:21 PM   #75
colorfull
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 136688
Join Date: Jan 2007
Vehicle:
2005 Impreza RS
silver

Default

I agree with Williaty & RaceFace.

On my 2005 RS, the higher octane gas I pour in, the better the engine performs.
And this is not a "seat of the pants" statement, it is based on logging over the last 2 months: the engine pings A LOT LESS on 94 gas than on 87 (still pings a bit at high loads/low RPMs) and runs A LOT MORE timing advance.

My IAM went from 0.4 on 87 octane gas to 0.9 , even 1 lately.
The car therefore uses less gas and makes a little more power. Not sure about the power since I have no dyno sheet to prove it (the car really feels more lively), but the gas mileage has definitely improved, almost enough to make the higher gas price a non issue.

Williaty, thanks for suggesting a higher octane gas, it made a VERY tangible & positive difference on my 2005!!! Still need to put those regrinded cams in (they've been laying on the bench for the last month) and get the car tuned for a slightly cheaper gas (91 instead of 94).
colorfull 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
What is the best fuel injector cleaner to use for a WRX? Jasno999 Factory 2.0L Turbo Powertrain (EJ Series Factory 2.0L Turbo) 17 09-28-2002 09:35 AM
Best fuel additive? Mike Smith Service & Maintenance 14 03-25-2002 11:16 AM
Best fuel pump PE, or Supra TT? WRXThis Factory 2.0L Turbo Powertrain (EJ Series Factory 2.0L Turbo) 10 11-12-2001 04:12 PM
Which is the best Fuel Computer? Silverscooby27 Normally Aspirated Powertrain 8 09-29-2001 11:35 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2015 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2014, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.