Boosting 1990-2002 USDM Subarus: A Chronological Guide - Page 6 - Subaru Impreza GC8 & RS Forum & Community: RS25.com
 
Private Support i-Trader Ratings Become a Vendor Rules for VendorsModsUsers Contact
Subaru Impreza GC8 & RS Forum & Community: RS25.com
gc8 RSS GC8 Facebook Subaru GC8 Twitter Subaru YouTube Channel Subaru Sticker
 
Login below or Register Now
Register Mark Forums Read FAQ Advertise
Go Back   Subaru Impreza GC8 & RS Forum & Community: RS25.com > >
Boosting 1990-2002 USDM Subarus: A Chronological Guide
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-30-2011, 08:57 AM   #51
Xise
2.0L Turbo
 
Fav Mod: Dashboard Ninjas
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: R'Diland
Trader Rating: (4)
Posts: 1,373
Default

I am no trying to start any arguments, I was giving my personal experience of using high octane fuel on a car that is not designed to burn.

All I was trying to say was don't use higher than 87 unless you are forced induction...no point in getting poor fuel economy on more expensive gas and prematurely wearing out parts

Anyway, if you are determined to turbocharge an NA motor like an EJ251 or 253 Emanage is the key to keeping it alive, the high comp motors just like ImprezaRSC said, produce a lot of heat with boost pressure and can kill a motor faster anything! Plenty of people here have done it on here and reliably to. I believe most of them are on a PP6, hopefully some people that have done it will chime in with some advice.

with that said I was going to do this same thing until I did some research and ending up starting a swap project instead
Xise is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 03-31-2011, 07:36 AM   #52
TwoPhive
2.0L
 
Car: 2000 Impreza RST
Fav Mod: Boost
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Kansas City, KS
Trader Rating: (13)
Posts: 58
Default Intercooler

For those wanting to avoid the fitment hassles of the WRX TMIC, I'd recommend the Forester XT TMIC instead. MUCH easier to work with. Boosting to 14 psi on a TD04, and it seems to be doing ok. Although I could use a turbo radiator at this point..
TwoPhive is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2011, 05:56 PM   #53
Jagular 1785
2.0L Turbo
 
Fav Mod: Built engine
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Columbia, MO
Trader Rating: (9)
Posts: 1,840
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xise View Post
incorrect, the ECU is tuned for regular gas, put 91 in there for long enough and you will foul your cat. If you added a turbo kit to an RS you might be able to get away with 91 just because the extra pressure would allow that fuel to burn better...just think about it 87 octane is still rich on an RS, adding a turbo would lean it out some, so 91 or 93 would prob be alright if you were turbo. If you aren't running a factory ecu you can get it calibrated for 93 (if you have it in your area) and just ue that gas.

Just saying from experience thinking I was getting "the good gas" for my car, when in fact I was running super rich and getting partially burned fuel resedue inside the waffling of the cat until it smelled like boiled eggs when i would be at WOT....so now I am making my own cat pipe because they are $300 a pop...so get some form of emanage unless you want to lean out when you get a turbo and possibly cause detonation or use 91 or 93 and have probs with idle or it just runs like shit.
Premium doesn't clog your cat... if anything, on subaru's higher compression motors it will burn better and more efficiently due to higher knock resistance. If you reset your ecu and calibrates to the premium gas, I'd bet you'd see a bit of economy improvement, it did for me. It also allows for better performance, which again if you reset the ECU and learn it, there is added energy value to be used.

Only downside to premium is the added cost. Which I personally will have to do once I get my own homebrew kit running. Again, thanks OP for the great info!
__________________
Built > Bought
Jagular 1785 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2011, 09:47 AM   #54
ntrsssgti89
1.8L
 
Car: 01 aw 2.5rs sedan
Fav Mod: G13B 13.5:1 12k RL metro
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: New Hampshire
Trader Rating: (0)
Posts: 18
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xise View Post
I am no trying to start any arguments, I was giving my personal experience of using high octane fuel on a car that is not designed to burn.

All I was trying to say was don't use higher than 87 unless you are forced induction...no point in getting poor fuel economy on more expensive gas and prematurely wearing out parts

Anyway, if you are determined to turbocharge an NA motor like an EJ251 or 253 Emanage is the key to keeping it alive, the high comp motors just like ImprezaRSC said, produce a lot of heat with boost pressure and can kill a motor faster anything! Plenty of people here have done it on here and reliably to. I believe most of them are on a PP6, hopefully some people that have done it will chime in with some advice.

with that said I was going to do this same thing until I did some research and ending up starting a swap project instead
I notice a significant increase in fuel economy with 91-93 octane over base 87 and my engine seems to run a lot quieter and smoother, actually it has been that way with every car I have ever owned
ntrsssgti89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2011, 07:00 PM   #55
Xise
2.0L Turbo
 
Fav Mod: Dashboard Ninjas
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: R'Diland
Trader Rating: (4)
Posts: 1,373
Default

The motor itself runs awesome with 93, I will agree with that. Are you using the stock cat section and midpipe? because there are 3 separate cats...at least on my 04 RS there are. It did start to really burn my cats out pretty quickly though..I am guessing b/c of the extra heat from the higher octane.

When I took off my catback the last cat before the resonator smelled like fucking eggsalad and ass. I do have 140k on the clock now....so they are old but why would they just happen to crap out as soon as I changed fuels.

anyways..I bet it would be better if you just had no cat or a high folow unit
Xise is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-01-2011, 09:15 PM   #56
joejoe69
2.0L Turbo
 
Car: 2015 STI Crystal White Pearl
Fav Mod: Nameless Beer Coozy
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Hawaii
Trader Rating: (27)
Posts: 1,861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ImprezaRSC View Post
I saw under the hood of plenty of these older boosted combinations. The electronics were "Pong-like." Combinations were more like Legos. External controllers had dial-pots as opposed to software. The newer capabilities of reflashing still rely heavily on the older principles to tune the actual motor......
Must be me....



My Pong/Tron-like electronics and Lego setup pulled away from a 7cm2 FP Green'd '03 WRX wagon with Cobb AP software.
__________________
Love, Joe
joejoe69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2011, 04:00 PM   #57
ImprezaRSC
2.0L Turbo
 
Car: 2000 2.5RS BRP
Fav Mod: 8 SEMA awards.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Trader Rating: (2)
Posts: 1,173
Default

BEFORE the WRX was ever here, junior...

565s were the largest injector you could use on a stock ECU. Reflashing wasn't invented yet. We made turbo pipes to fit the U.S. crossmember for either Garret or IHI flanged turbos. Usable turbo crossmembers only existed in Turbo Legacies. BTW, nice work JoeJoe. Just enough overkill to be really cool. The ITC and AVCR are from my era. So, ya got me at "Gameboy" instead of "Pong" .

The AVCR was probably the most advanced piece of electronics back then aside from the factory ECU itself, for the pure fact that it was digital. The SDS secondary fuel controller had dial pots. Their ECU had a single distplay line that you scrolled through . A greddy boost controller? More dial pots. LCD readout screen? $2k later you could have a Greddy something-or-other that they don't even make anymore. Your average STI on the street is light years ahead of the 90s cars with just its own factory electronics. I would have loved the ability to reflash my computer with a handheld device 10 years ago. You still can't do that to a 00' 2.5RS without mailing it to someone.

It was easier to put some of these things in because you were introducing a whole new part. Modern ECUs get a little more fussy when you mess with their signals and "borrow/modify" stuff like MAF signals, injector pulsewidths, and cam/crank signals. Reflashing is a lot cleaner, even if it does have its own performance limits like injector size and a boost ceiling. Older cars didn't have that option until VERY recently. Yoshio-san and some company in Oregon did it back then and that was it.

9 years ago the game changed with the WRX. 7 years ago it started to get saturated in the marketplace. The turbo forester and turbo legacy models became established, widening the turbo Subaru market. 3-4 years ago it was at its worst. Noobs still blow these things up regularly, driving up the price of replacement parts along with the popularity . What is very satisfying at this point in time is seeing the DIY crowd have some experience under its belt and more resources than even 5 years ago.

Now, it's evolved into multiple strata of age groups and hobbyist levels. I'm over here in the "classic" camp enjoying telling these stories of being "retro." It's nicer over here because we know how to get along with the boxer hobbyists who like boats, planes, and other boxer equipped cars. The growing hobby market with these motors has a lot more freedom, IMO. There's a huge variety of setups that people are proud of because they built it themselves.

I have owned no other car longer than just this 1 2000 2.5RS with about 113k miles. It's had the same JC torque chip for 11 years. I did the supercharger stuff so long ago that even it is "retro". I'm just dusting myself off for the sequel .
__________________
http://youtube.com/hI3n_VzPMuY

Last edited by ImprezaRSC; 04-02-2011 at 04:03 PM..
ImprezaRSC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-02-2011, 10:23 PM   #58
joejoe69
2.0L Turbo
 
Car: 2015 STI Crystal White Pearl
Fav Mod: Nameless Beer Coozy
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Hawaii
Trader Rating: (27)
Posts: 1,861
Default

I'm helping a retired co-worker install an 97 EJ25D into a VW Vanagon. A bit off topic but since you mentioned "boxer equipped", I thought I'd throw it in the air since I am pretty much a "boxer equippped" hobbyist as well (graduated from an enthusiast, lol).

I just loved how everything in my car was simply 90's technology and it could still whoop the asses of cars today, nearly 20 years later.
__________________
Love, Joe
joejoe69 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2011, 08:24 PM   #59
OBS
2.2L
 
Fav Mod: Trunk Monkey
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Trader Rating: (0)
Posts: 191
Default

Any thoughts on universal turbos?
OBS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-01-2011, 09:00 PM   #60
WhiteScooby
2.2L Turbo
 
Fav Mod: Baja blast n my cupholder
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Mt. Baker
Trader Rating: (7)
Posts: 2,337
Default

id personally just go with a stock wrx or sti turbo cus you can get a used td04 for under 100 bucks anyways
WhiteScooby is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
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


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:44 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright © 2019 VerticalScope Inc.
Designed & Powered by Domain Architect