Perscitus

Fredrick, a bit off topic... STI 6MT bolts right up to FA20DIT WRX... check out the limited run ADM out of the box racecars. 8 bolts vs 6 but its PnP.

Nah, I wish Fred. No $$$. It's Golferdude unleashing his 3.6R Did I mention I can't wait for post-install impressions?

Looky looky... another beast coming along! https://www.facebook.com/pages/Auto-Master-AMR-ltd/133703916681281?fref=nf

http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/HEADERS-to-fit-Subaru-Legacy-Liberty-Outback-MY04-MY09-EZ30-6cylinder-engine-/181787116249

Yes yeeessssss

I have one, well its a resonator but 14" long, 3" ID. Its been there before the headers went in. Didnt help to remove the rasp once catless, metal cats solved the problem. Perhaps instead of a resonator, I shouldve put a glasspack or baffled muffler in there.. too late and too much $$$ spent now Sure thing. Check with heiche to make sure your ECU ID is compatible, I believe it is and yes, happy to help set it up. Its an invaluable tool with polling rates and precision much higher than OBDII. I use it as much, if not more real time vs for logging. Shows so much great Subaru SSMII and SSMIII protocol data.

http://legacygt.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5159199&postcount=660 BtSsm just keep getting better and better! Fredrick you NEED this. Some changes requested by yours truly.... and implemented by heiche the BtSsm mastermind genius.

Hahaha, best option is if any/all interested 3.6Rs owners email, call, chat message AutoMaster so theyll just make a handful or two. Some milled steel, some stainless steel

I asked for this a few times...

Agreed Fred. I pitched the idea, but that wasn't enough.

I agree ecksleven. You're spot on. I only brought out the Brake/Crank/Flywheel vs Wheel comparison to illustrate that exact point, but also to show that depending on what transmission, gearing, final drive, amount/type of diffs, etc. are mated to a given engine will have a fairly drastic effect on its @ the wheels output (everything else, such as day/time/dyno/config) being equal. The delta between wheel results before vs. wheel results after is really all that matters to see if the mechanical or electronic changes or both created a net positive effect on engine output.

All gone Alex. The exhaust sounds great, the 200-cell cats give it a nice aggressive metallic tone to the same catback deep bass note I had before.

I know dude. I've discussed this with AMR and they'd need the car in the shop to fabricate a Y for it. They'd use the same basic components, but the design would need to be slightly different from 3.6R to 3.6R. Few reasons behind this, I'll outline a bit (what I know) below. Yes, this would be ideal, I know. With the revisions we've done at AMR we learned a few things that could make creating a PnP design tricky. 1. The header runner flanges are angled a bit different depending on if the header spacers are used or not to clear the FSB 2. Stock cats will start to fail (its just a question of time) with the headers installed. Exhaust flow and EGTs (especially without a tune) are too high for them to take and they start to collapse, substrate separates from the housing walls. Symptoms: initially some bogging down, sluggish performance, eventually overheating front substrate surface, back-pressure spikes, random mis-fires, random knock. 3. The solution to 2 is either to go a. catless or b. replace OEM cats with larger ID metal core (higher temp tolerating) units. Catless is easier and cheaper, nets a slight performance gain, but calls for a retune (to realize it and to run safe), but results in a RASP >5K RPM that doesn't sound good at all. Catless: Exhaust fume smell is minimal (potentially thanks to the tune). Using baffled resonators in place of the cats causes pinging within the y-pipe and doesn't eliminate the rasp, using perforated straight through resonators doesn't eliminate the rasp either but eliminates the pinging. Catted: Using 100 cell race/metal cats only partially eliminates the rasp. Only 200 and 200+ cell cats eliminate (or rather muffle) the rasp enough to make it livable, streetable. 4. With the y-pipe design figured out (2.5" ID piping throughout, 2x 2.5" 200-cell metal cats), the location and way it mates to the catback is also different from car to car. All depends on what exhaust we're running (stock 3.6R CBE, modified LGT CBEs in either 2.5" ID, 3" IDs, resonated, non-resonated, flanged or not). Depending on the CBE, the inlet can be offset by as much as an 1-1.5" making coming up with a PnP y-pipe tricky. I ran that idea by AMR, but because of above they didn't feel it would be viable for them. Give them a call and if enough of us contact them about the header/y-pipe or just y-pipes, maybe they'll jig something up.

Y-pipe revision 4 (and final) fabricated and installed today, including 2x 2.5" ID Vibrant SS spun-metal cats '7101', 2.5" piping front to back. Kudos to Al AutoMaster and Rob at AMR. No retune yet, not until we're ready with Bank 2 control. http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=1468_1470_1111&products_id=856

Clever Golferdude! I'm working with Tim @ Raptor on exactly that

This! Its a slippery slope with exponentially diminishing returns that will cost more $$$ than its worth, especially for a DD car. Luckily our engines and the FA20DIT can produce enough low and mid-range torque to make the 5EAT or HT-CVT perfectly acceptable for DD duty.

Should be relatively quick. I think you can direct Subaru Online Parts to a number of dealerships. Sometimes the ones in NJ or OH seem to have even lower prices. Coming back to the topic of BHP/BTQ vs WHP/WTQ - it doesn't really matter which one you quote or what a given dyno is reporting the car is putting down (or approximating what the @thecrank numbers should be) - the net gain is really all that matters. So say on Dyno 1 your car puts down 150whp stock and after the mechanical upgrades/tune, on the same dyno with similar/same conditions and settings it puts down 190-200whp. The net gain of 40-50whp is all that matters. On Dyno 2 your stock car might put down 200whp stock and everything else being equal should probably put down 240-250whp (same net gain) with the mechanical changes and tune. The net gain will have a approximately same effect on both whp/wtq and bhp/btq. So it doesn't really matter which one you quote, and ideally all that's really needed is the net gain or % gain (vs. stock). Next comes the power to weight ratio which is also key and of course our dreaded drivetrain loss (thx 5EAT, thx SAWD) which isn't fixed or even linear (increases with RPM and velocity) and robs us of at least 25 and more typically 30%! A similarly equipped 6MT 5th gen will usually 'suffer' only 19-21% combined drivetrain losses. Which means that in a back to back scenario, in order for a 5EAT or CVT equipped Subaru to put down the same whp/wtq #s as those from an equally equipped 6MT, the 5EAT/CVT car would need to produce ~13-14% more power at the crank... loosing more of it along the way to the wheels - resulting in a similar/equal whp/wtq output. Part of the reason why 5EAT equipped Legacy GTs (4th and 5th gen) and HT-CVT equipped Legacy DITs (5th gen), 2015+ WRXs/Levorgs typically put down far lower whp/wtq numbers vs equivalent 6MT cars.... meanwhile their output at the crank might actually be same or potentially higher (say at Stage 2 and beyond).

On a good day ~40-45hp and perhaps ~80ft-lbf wtq (catted!). The average torque between say 2K - 5.5K RPM: ~280ft-lbf wtq. At the 5.25K RPM intersection, she's making ~294-297bhp (206-209whp on DynoDynamics in Shoot44) and ~265ft-lbf wtq. On a bad day (high ambient >90F and intake temps >140F; poor fuel, FKC/FLKC pulled IAM), peak numbers are down quite a bit.

Correct. I think a few more full points (not the 0.1 points typically quoted on OTC octane 'boosters') over AKI91 or AKI93 is more than enough to smooth out both NA and FI Scoobies and make the ECU knock prevention strategies 'happy'. I will try to find a balance between 0 or close to 0 learned knock correction and low enough blend over 100% pump. I wouldn't be surprised if it was only a matter of 2-5 points.

Yup, spot on Fredrick. Your experience with racegas was my inspiration. I don't have dyno results yet but I can clearly see all timing added back in by cumulative Subaru ECU knock prevention strategies, higher min/max timing advance, etc.

Lol, in short - yes. She runs even smoother now. I've noticed a few things: a. smoother idle, cruise, any RPM transitions (the car is 5 years old and the best way I could describe how the engine ran now is what I remember from break-in with 7-999 miles on the ODO) b. cooler engine temps (my coolant temp was typically 10-15F higher under the same conditions during highway cruises with same/similar ambient temps) c. improved throttle response (just a tad more crisp) d. strong pull under any form of acceleration (especially once the ECU dialed out all the timing corrections back to the max settings AMR dialed in - this took about 1/5 to 1/4 tank of DD to take full effect). I've been doing a fair bit of research on Boostane, Torco, Ace's IV (can't wait to try this one BTW, already on its way to me) and it looks as though the effective octane ratings Boostane quotes for various blend ratios a. assume AKI93 base b. give RON effective octane Playing around with the AKI, RON, MON #s a bit, I would say that the '100' octane rating I should be getting with the ratio I used is likely equivalent to AKI96. If I'm wrong and its indeed AKI100, that would be a nice bonus. I will try to dial the dosage back a bit and say use 1/2 a bottle or 3/4 of a bottle to see if I still get no FKC/FLKC throughout the timing adjustment surface. I wouldn't be surprised if that's more than enough over AKI93 on our engines in NA form. ItalianLegacy would probably benefit from the 80-74:1 blend ratio (full quart, if not more per tankful).

Early teaser of my Boostane review. I have tons of logs to go through and will likely want/need to run one more tankful to get a good before/after comparison. A dyno run would be good to (I have the before just a few weeks ago; no after) but I'm not sure when I'll have the time and $$$ to drive back up to AMR for it. This should speak for itself though On the left are the BEFORE Learned Values from ECU RAM (AKI93/E10 Exxon/Mobil tankful, no additives) On the right are the AFTER Learned Values from ECU RAM (AKI93/E10 Exxon/Mobil tankful + 1 quart of BOOSTANE, effective RON of approx. 100, can't tell AKI) Same tune Same stretch of road Similar ambient conditions Each LV snapshot after 1/4 of tank used to allow ECU to learn.

No idea - but it seems to sound better on all Scoobies I've tried it on (including on the 2015 WRX).

Catless Y-pipe Update: Even with the bottle style resonators welded in-place of the cats, I'm getting rasp above 4.5-5K RPM. Its not bad but annoys me (my exhaust sounded PERFECT before the trouble with the cats began) so I've done more research online and talked to Vibrant in Canada and settled on these: http://vibrantperformance.com/catalog/product_info.php?cPath=1468_1470_1111&products_id=856 http://autoplicity.com/545763-vibrant-exhaust-fabrication-high-flow-catalytic-converters Vibrant tells me that unless I get lucky with adding more and more resonators and mufflers (and finding just the right config/combo) to eliminate or muffle out the rasp, the only sure way to get rid of it on an NA engine is to replace the cats. FI cars, especially those with turbos have the single best muffler/resonator upstream of the their downpipes - namely the turbo itself. I'll report back when I have these added in. Might be keeping the short bottle-style resonators where they are, unless we decide to take them out (for whatever reason).

Go with LOUDNESS ON and THROUGH MODE. You should notice a nice difference, even with stock speakers or Kickers/HKs.