Welcome to Ultimate Subaru Message Board, my lurker friend!
|Welcome to Ultimate Subaru Message Board, an unparalleled Subaru community full of the greatest Subaru gurus and modders on the planet! We offer technical information and discussion about all things Subaru, the best and most popular all wheel drive vehicles ever created.
We offer all this information for free to everyone, even lurkers like you! All we ask in return is that you sign up and give back some of what you get out - without our awesome registered users none of this would be possible! Plus, you get way more great stuff as a member! Lurk to lose, participate to WIN*!
* The joy of participation and being generally awesome constitutes winning
** Not an actual guarantee, but seriously, you probably won't regret it!
Serving the Subaru Community since May 18th, 1998!
Help with 2000 outback limited
Posted 21 June 2004 - 12:33 AM
Posted 21 June 2004 - 11:42 AM
Posted 21 June 2004 - 10:25 PM
Your car shares the same phase II 2.5 L engine that is in my forester. If you can run 87 without compromising performance or, more importantly, without causing predetonation (pinging or knocking), its the best thing for your car. How your car performs will depend greatly on environmental factors such as temperature and altitude. 87 is more volatile than the higher octanes, which is why it may cause predetonation in older engines or certain engine designs such as the first 2.5 L Subaru engines (pre-Phase I). However, if you can run 87 without any adverse effects, it is the best way to go. Using a higher octane than necessary only increases carbon deposits in your engine and risks contamination of expensive emissions components. Generally, low elevations and high temperatures increase the likelihood of predetonation so if you hear pinging during during the summer months, bump up to 89 (or higher, if absolutely necessary). Congratulations and good luck.
Posted 28 June 2004 - 10:30 AM
performance went up quite a bit. the engine had a really good solid feel to it, especially in the high rpm ranges (for the first time i didn't hesitate to get her close to red line). in addition, susan also had a lot of pep and could accelerate like a bat outta hell when i needed her to
now, for the bad part. fuel economy did drop as expected, but i'm not sure how much of it is due to the gas and how much is due to me playing with the new power . i also noticed that i felt uncomfortable letting the rpms drop below 2500 (with 89 i get uncomfortable when they approach 2000).
if i could afford it, i'd use 91 a lot more. but, alas, college student, so i'll be running a tank of 91 once a month or every 2 months.
one other note about this: i live in boulder creek, california, so the elevation i was driving at ranged from <10ft to ~500ft.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users