fishbone Posted November 24, 2013 Share Posted November 24, 2013 dgoodhue: I'm originally from Europe. I can tell you first hand the figure are comparable. I've driven imported cars that would shoot a rod if what you bolded out of context were true to the extent/context you believe. For all intents and purposes and practical reasons the figures do translate to what I've stated. The bolded part speaks to the number difference between RON and MON not final AKI rating. In my home country octane is found between 95 and 100, sometimes 101. I would have to know the MON rating to figure out AKI. You'll usually see 95, 98, 100. No question that Cali has shit 91. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoplightAssassin Posted November 24, 2013 Share Posted November 24, 2013 Ha. Track rat wrx owners won't be concerned as much by trying to find the shift paddles as they will by the fake torque vectoring by brake actuation. 370z owners are known to burn up pads in a single day of lapping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minuccims Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Why not pull a fuse like for ABS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StoplightAssassin Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 You can unplug the yaw sensor in the 370. I wouldn't recommend it though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David2013tundra Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Also......CVT praising guys is the same crowd saying that 2.0 sucks because it surely must be slower than 2.5 ....despite all the data saying otherwise. It will be much faster with it's wide power band and hopefully decent tunning potential. There is going to be a lot of random people buying those cvt wrx's just because price was right and specs say it's faster than Johny's GTI. People glide on the surface of specification not really caring about steering ratio's, gearing and differentials. That kind of crowd will jump on WRX CVT. I will definitely jump on a CVT WRX... just to see how it goes. If it's anything like the 2.0 Forester, then it's a keeper. If not, I can always sell it and go back to the manual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dgoodhue Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 dgoodhue: I've driven imported cars that would shoot a rod if what you bolded out of context were true to the extent/context you believe. I am going to need something a little more scientific than the shooting a rod out the side of the block test. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hmmrdwn Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Yeah, imho upgrades to performance and durability would override all others. Course that is me. I'd like basic amenities and more performance. Subaru is out to please everyday drivers (aesthetics) and keep costs down by using engine parts that meet the engine output. That is where the Sti comes in.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishbone Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 I am going to need something a little more scientific than the shooting a rod out the side of the block test. Gladly! If you can provide me with the MON and RON value of any given station overseas, we can figure out the equivalent AKI. LE: you know, I have actually been behind on something. In my homecountry it used to be 92, 95 and 98. Only in very recent past I see that it's migrated to 95 and above, as high as 101. I've asked a couple friend and confirmed it is as seen here. http://www.mergebrici.ro/cifra-octanica-a-benzinei Anything above 98 is not very prevalent, and the reason I haven't noticed the change is because as recent as this past summer the pumps I've been fueling up from had either 95 or 98 and that's been the norm around my homecity. Now, going back to the original point, if you assume the MON to be 8-10 points lower than the RON (note that there is no direct link between it and MON, as the wiki article also mentions) then yes, the final AKI can be higher than here. But please also note my original response was stating "roughly equivalent" to our grades, so you are right, they are not the same. RON of 98 assuming MON is 10 points lower is equivalent to 93 here. There's enough regional variation that we are both correct, so for the sake of the argument I agree that octane overseas can be a few points higher. Now, have you seen it where the AKI is as high as 4-5 points? B.t.w. here in Sweden we have the RON values 95 and 98 and sometimes 96. So that would be 90 and 93 AKI equivalent to US/Can, assuming a MON value of 10 points lower. Now that I've moved to Texas, I am pleased to see 93 everywhere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCHM1AN Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 Do you actually have a fuel tester? I wouldn't be surprised if you had access to one, living in Texas... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishbone Posted November 25, 2013 Share Posted November 25, 2013 I do, because I have an oil rig in my back yard. Everybody does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imprezsing04 Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 My fiancee would prefer the cvt over the manual so we shall see how the road tests go with the cvt. If so...we might be getting on at the end of 2014. Road trips and traffic around here might make the most sense for her I guess I can see SOME of the concept in the 2015... just wish there was more of it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perscitus Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 Overall, I agree with Fishbone! Good writeup. Without getting into the technical details (discussed sufficiently above), and having lived 15+ years across Europe and another 15+ years across the US (East and West coast) - my 'opinion' is that US fuels are equal to, if not better, blends than their EU counterparts. In that context the simplified cross-reference chart above makes good sense. Regardless of how accurate or not. I've even owned a USDM German (lol) car, brought to and re-flashed/tuned in Germany and Spain (40K miles in the EU post tune), and then returned to the US (another 40K miles) and can tell you that the car ran different and better on US fuel after returning. I was able to switch to a more aggressive ignition and timing map back in the US, which wouldn't work in the EU with 99+ Shell fuel. Besides, I hope you guys realize the most basic function of HIGHER octane numbers. In simplest terms, the higher the octane #, the harder it is to detonate a given fuel blend, the more that blend is resistant to knock. The LOWER the #, the easier it is for a given fuel to detonate! Including eventually self-detonation under increasingly lower compression (spark or no spark). In reality, a higher octane number (unless required* - more on that below) does little to nothing to engine performance and power/torque output. For an engine that can run on say 85 octane fuel, 90 octane will do nothing more, 100 octane will do nothing more. Going the other way however could be an issue, and that's where modern engine ECUs will compensate (to some extent, by cutting ignition and timing to prevent.... wait for it.... knock). The main reason we need higher octane # fuels is to allow engines that have: higher compression ratios, higher redlines, direct injection, etc. If an engine was designed to run on 'premium' fuel, its usually for one of those design spec, operating param reasons. So as a good rule of thumb, if your engine has a high compression ratio (nowadays say 11:1 and up) and calls for it - use higher octane # fuels - especially in the summer. In the winter, you can often go down one 'notch' (93/1->89 or 89>87) and use one grade 'lower' fuel for easier cold starts, etc. You might actually pickup some oomph as long as the ECU doesn't detect knock and pull too much timing. If you engine has a lower compression ratio (nowadays 10:1 and down) and calls for regular fuel, use that throughout the year. You'll gain nothing from special or premium fuels, with higher octane #s you don't need. In the summer, you can use one notch "higher" (say 89) to help prevent knock. The rest is usually buzz and marketing. Car gasoline used today is already so far down the distillation process, differences between different fuel blends are often just a source for chemical engineer reconciliation exercises. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ehsnils Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 Aside from the fact that cetane rating is for diesel engines and is the opposite of octane where you want it to ignite easily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perscitus Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 Aside from the fact that cetane rating is for diesel engines and is the opposite of octane where you want it to ignite easily.Precisely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCHM1AN Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 I do, because I have an oil rig in my back yard. Everybody does. Cot damn you must be rich. I was astounded when I went to Texas for the first time last year and saw an oil rig every 100'. I'm still considering a move to TX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishbone Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 Cot damn you must be rich. I was astounded when I went to Texas for the first time last year and saw an oil rig every 100'. I'm still considering a move to TX Yes, I am super rich, that's why I drive a Subaru Legacy GT. From 2005. Perscitus, thanks for validating my own personal experiences Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
laz Posted November 26, 2013 Share Posted November 26, 2013 You are baller when you don't really know where you live. House on the east coast, Houses on the west coast, Houses abroad. Then you can consider yourself rich. --- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ej25_TS Posted November 27, 2013 Share Posted November 27, 2013 I choped my wheels on her http://i173.photobucket.com/albums/w64/ej25_TS2/2015-Subaru-WRX-silverzucru.jpg Sent from my SGH-I337M using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCHM1AN Posted November 27, 2013 Share Posted November 27, 2013 So does the new wrx come without wheel gap? Or is that just a teaser to appeal to the stance crowd? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aac0036 Posted November 27, 2013 Author Share Posted November 27, 2013 Wheels are now 5x114, same as STi fitment as per Autoblog's interview at the show. Sent from a box in my pocket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCHM1AN Posted November 27, 2013 Share Posted November 27, 2013 Hopefully that'll drive down the price of the 5x100 BBS wheels Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueWhiteBoy Posted November 27, 2013 Share Posted November 27, 2013 The more I see the side pictures, it just seems like the front of the car doesn't match the back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spc2125 Posted November 27, 2013 Share Posted November 27, 2013 Legacy in the back... wrx concept in the front Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tDoug60 Posted November 28, 2013 Share Posted November 28, 2013 What do you thin the price will be Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gelacy Posted November 28, 2013 Share Posted November 28, 2013 What do you thin the price will be Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk 2 Just enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.