bjwirth

I'll state again for the record, that I'm NOT an engineer at subaru. But my limited knowledge of determining specs goes something like this. Usually there is some statistic used to measure failure rates. they most likely have data which correlate differences in sizes of tire circumference to center differential failures. But this data is never a "hard line." it's not like "well at 0.25", the CD is ok. at 0.26", the CD is toast." it's probably a bell curve. at 0.25" no failures out of 100 tests; at 0.5" 10 failures; at 0.75" 50 failures..... so why isn't it a straight cut off? probably because driving conditions vary. I suspect even if you had 100,000 cars that drove the EXACT same way, you would still see variation- why, because some cars were built on monday and some were build while the QC guy went to take a d*mp. So you take all these factors together. Now from what I know about engineers, they get hardly get the last say. there's always lawyers and bean counters who get the last say. can you imagine this conversation: Lawyer: so at 0.5" there's a 0.1% chance of failure? Engineer: yes Bean counter: so that will cost us $XXXX in warentee claims E: yes, but the cars all have new matching tires so there's really no chance of that L: so at what level would there be NO claims E: well according to our data 0.35 had no occurances BC: let's make it 0.25- if a claim comes in and the difference is greater, we can deny that claim L: OOOHHHH good thinking!! that's why you make the big bucks!! OK the above was TOTALLY fictional. I just read too much Dilbert.

I think there are 2 issues... 1 is that the writer of the note thinks the avalanche is better than the baja. but the other is that he actually took the time to write a note. I know I've seen cars that I don't like and maybe made a comment (to MYSELF). But when I see someone getting out of a H2, I don't run over with a note saying "how do you like your dressed up chevy tahoe?" as far as this guy holding the avalanche to such high standards- well I don't think there's anything we can do for the poor guy.

CAPTAIN'S LOG: Stardate 2005 I'm trying to convince my coleagues on the USMB that I, with little to no knowledge in the field of automotive engineering, know more than the engineers at Subaru. So far, for whatever reason, it's not working. I guess I'm just naturally a risk taker (or just cheap). To each their own. If I do get transmission problems, I'll report back here with my tail between my legs. But for now, everything SEEMS to be running fine. So to all those that are considering changing only 1 unrepairable tire, do so at your own risk. I'll just say I did it, and 10,000 miles later, no problems. I don't know what the magic number is for the tire circumference difference. I suspect the higher the difference, the greater the probability of problems. I tried to minimize the risk by trying to match the circumference with a used tire (of the same specifications).

I can believe that tires of different SIZES (ie 185/70 vs 185/75) will cause damage. But I think the original poster was getting at (or at least there are others who wonder) what will happen if one replaces only one tire with the correct size. My suggestion was for people to go out and actually measure their tire diameter. I'm willing to bet very few people have all 4 tires within 1/4" of each other. Now if you're in a situation where most of the tires are worn when you get a flat, you'll probably replace all 4. and if you're in a posiotion where the 4 tires are practically new, then you're probably safe just replacing the 1 tire. But what if you have about 2/3 your tread remaining.... what do you do- bite the bullet are replace all 4 or just take your chances and replace only 1. I'm saying if 1/2" difference is OK, then getting 1 new tire is probably ok. But how can I prove this? I don't think I can. but if people start measuring their tires and say, "oh, looks like some of my tires are not so close and i've been driving like this for a while with no problems." Maybe, just maybe, the 1/4" spec is too tight. I think there are people on this board who are religious about proper tire pressure and rotating tires every 5000 miles. But the mass public (including myself) is not. Try measuring your parent's car or a friend you know who is not diligent.

Hey, I was just curious how the check valve makes it a brake bleed a one man job. do you plan to put the valve on the bleed screw, then pump the brakes yourself and then when you let go of the brakes, air wont suck back into the caliper? I don't know what kind of back pressure would be generated from letting go of the brake pedal, but I got to think a cheap aquarium check valve wont hold the pressure before air gets sucked back in. Here's a one man procedure that isn't perfect, but easy. I don't know how often one should bleed their brakes- I guess it just depends on conditions. but I just suck out the resevoir and put the cap back on and compress each caliper- each time sucking more fluid out the resevoir. with the cap on, it genereates a little pressure in the line and air will rise to the top. then I fill it back up and step on the brakes, each time watching the resevoir. I know, I only replace SOME of the fluid. But I got the air and diffusion will take care of any moisture until next time. If you really want, I can show you the calculations where you don't really give up that much compared to bleeding the entire system.

My understanding of ceramic brake pads (and someone PLEASE correct me if I'm wrong) is they are more geared towards racing applications and not appropriate for normal street use. I was told they need to "heat up" to get optimum stopping power. So on a race track, where normal pads would get too hot and fade, a ceramic pad will work great. But on the street, you're not braking enough to heat up the ceramic pad and may risk LOSING stopping ability. And from my understanding of ceramics in general (not ceramic brake pads), ceramic material are very "hard" and I would think they would be harsher on a rotor than other types of pads. I have no proof or direct knowledge of this in braking applications- I'm just thinking back to my old ceramics material class.

1 story doesn't make this a fact, but I've been driving with 1 mismatched tire for about 10,000 miles with no apparent problems. Originally I tried to find a used tire with the same circumference as the other 3 tires. Of course when I had it mounted and filled with air, it was over a half inch bigger. Also the other 3 tires weren't so close either (2 tires within 0.1", the other 0.3"). If damage is supposed to occur within 100 miles, then I think this is a myth. but that's not to say I'm not tearing up my center differential as I drive now. (I doubt it though) I just think this 1/4" spec is REALLY tight and we really have a little wiggle room. I'd challenge other folks to go out and find an empty lot and mark your tires and drive until one tire make 40 rotations. if any of the other tires are not aligned within 45 degrees of your reference tire, then you are exceeding the 1/4" spec. (I'm assuming 82" tire diameter- making 1/4" a 0.3% difference. After 40 rotations, difference is 12% or approx 43 degrees. who can really measure that precisely, but if it looks close, than it's ok, but if it's obvious like 72 degrees (angle between 2 lug nuts), then you KNOW you're exceeding the 1/4" spec). EDIT: I have a 00 Forester auto w/ 86000 miles.

when we bought our forester (used), the dealer replaced the pads with semi-metallics and they squealed. I asked about it and they said "give it some time." after 3000 miles or so, we were having an oil change somewhere and asked them to check the brakes b/c they were still squealing. the mechanic said they were fine- he said a lot of semi-metallic pads squeal. he said that OEM pads were better b/c they didn't make as much noise. I can't remember but i think it took us 5000-10000 miles before the squeal went away. it's kinda like when a headache goes away.... at some point you realize it's gone.

If the head gasket is the primary reason for getting the warrenty, then you better read the warrenty carefully. Some warrenties wont cover head gaskets because they are considered "wear items." otherwise it's a personal choice whether to get a warrenty. we got one on our last subaru- we paid $1100 and got $300 worth of benefits. We didn't get one on our 00 forester we bought used as a result.

Well, I just called 3 tire places, including a Discount Tire, and they all said the same thing- that the road hazzard warrenty applies only to the damaged tire. So for whatever reason, your store replaced the other 3 tires and I would consider yourself lucky.

is this hazzard warrentee (for AWD) good only for Discount Tire or is this a common practice among other tire retailers? After getting an unrepairable flat last year, I would consider getting somthing like this on my next set of tires.

If you're going to do this with a CD player and you present this as a "deal breaker" after the sale, I wouldn't be surprised if the dealer turned around and went with option 1. Unlike a cruise control install, it's easy for the dealer to go to walmart, pick up a $50 cd player and install it in your OB and then you're left with a crappy cd player and more importantly, a crappy installation. I'm not there and I don't know the situation, but if it were me, I would try to knock off a couple of hundred (or whatever you think is appropriate) BEFORE the sale to prevent this.

a few nights ago, I noticed that my headlights would flash (off/on once quickly- not the highbeam) when I would turn on my turn signal (2000 forester). It doesn't do it all the time and of course when we got home, we tried to reproduce the problem in our garage, but no flickering. THen the other night, my hand was simply resting on the turn stalk (just applied gentle pressure, but not enough to activate the turn signal) and I noticed the headlights flickered again. So I'm guessing that there's some electrical gremlin, a bad contact, a bad ground perhaps? But where do I look or what do I check? the stalk? the headlight? some relay somewhere else?

I agree. I've had tires based on recomendations from Tirerack, and have disagreed with some of the opinions. Did I get "dud" tires or is everyone else wrong? The original poster asked for quiet tires. I don't know which Michelin was recomended to you, but I suspect you cant go wrong with them (except for $$$). On one of my cars, I got the GY comfortred- just because I wanted a "comfy and quiet" tire and was willing to sacrifice some traction/performance. I'm guessing being in STL, snow isn't a big deal and the AWD will take care of any traction needs fairly well. Also the forester isn't a sports car, so performance isn't a big deal. And if you're like 99% of 'suv' drivers, the only offroading you'll do is a gravel road. So I guess you got to decide how much you want to spend, treadlife, and noise. IMHO, I wouldn't get a hi mileage tire since I always seem to get at least 1 flat tire every couple of years which is unrepairable- so I would be throwing away 3 perfectly good tires. So that just leaves price since we know you want a quiet tire. So that just leaves Michelin vs some other all-season touring tire. wow, I just made a lot of assumptions, and we know that making assumptions just makes an a$$ out of me i guess. I guess a shorter way of saying this is, think about what 1 or 2 attributes are important to you and just about any tire that fits those criteria will probably suit you just fine.

I don't have a heavy foot, used seafoam, new plugs, filters, etc, use name brand gas (no EtOH) and I WISH I got your 22-24 for city mileage. I'm lucky to get that for ALL highway. I've heard the stories about winter gas and I've talked to a friend that works in a refinery and he tells me that it doesn't make a significant difference in mileage (not 5-10 mpg, maybe 1 mpg). I guess this will go down as one of those mysteries.

If you search the archives, you'll find the common responses of "change O2 sensor, take it easy on the gas pedal, don't use A/C...." I'm also getting below expected gas mileage as are many others who have also followed the advice that's usually written. It seems based on some of the responses I've read from this board only (and I could be way off here) that there are 2 populations of subaru owners, those that get mileage in the low 20's and those that get mileage in the upper 20's for easy highway driving. While things like O2 sensors, plugs, lead feet, etc are problems that affect mileage, I gotta think there's somethinge else that's being overlooked. I did follow all the advice that was written and I went from 17 mpg to 22 mpg for highway mileage. fwiw, I do have an auto forester. maybe it's the transmission?? maybe I should start a poll, who has an auto and gets better than 25 mpg and who has a manual and gets worse than 25 mpg.

I don't have any numbers to back this up but I would think that an amp (especially one for a sub) would draw more current than the 12V cigarette adapter could handle. It's been a long time since I messed with amps and aftermarket stereos, but I remember tapping power directly from the battery for my amp.

I never drove a leg GT 5spd, but have driven the auto and I gotta say I thought the auto was slow and 0-60 times around 9-10 sec seem reasonable according to my butt dyno. The leg GT has a lot going for it, but drag racer is not one of them. It definately felt slower than a bmw 323 auto which has a 0-60 time of around 8 sec. Again I am talking autos- but I find it hard to beleive that the difference between transmissions would be more than 1 second. The 2005 legacy gt's.... well now I can definately feel a 7 sec 0-60. Now back to the original post... I looked at the mustang and thought it would be cool for cheap thrills. you'd be hard pressed to find that much HP/$ with that much style (style is subjective). I would not buy one b/c because it doesn't fit my needs right now. maybe when the kids grow up and I'm facing my mid life crisis, that will be another issue. But I would like to hope I would be shopping at the porsche dealer instead of the ford dealer

I would probably pass as well. a couple of years ago we got a 2000 forester s w/60k for 10.5g. w/ 80k on the odometer now, i would figure it's gotta be worth around 8g today. I would think a 98 with about 100k would go for 5g's. A 99 might go for $1000 more w/ the same mileage. Last year my friend bought a 99 forester L w/ 65k for $7500. If $5000 is your price point, and you want a 99, you might have to get one with more miles. a 99 forester w/106k just went for $5400 on ebay a couple of days ago. good luck!

Aside from making the car look cool or serving as some marketing tool, can someone tell me what the purpose of fog lights is? THis morning it was foggy, so I turned on my fog lights. I saw no improvement in my visibility. a few years ago, in my other car, I turned on the fog lights one night when it was foggy, and again I couldn't see any better. I know fog lights cast a low wide beam, but what does that accomplish? If something suddenly shows up 2 feet in front of my car while I'm going 20 mph, it's too late for me to react. I honestly want to know so that I can drive better in fog if I ever have to again. thanks.

Ok this whole business about nitrogen is a little puzzling. First off, air already has about 79% N2, the bulk of the rest is O2. So does getting rid of the extra 20% of O2 keep air pressure constant throughout the changes in temperature?? Thermodynamics is not my specialty, but I would think for the range of temperature we're talking about, O2 and N2 have negligible differences in terms of "gas law" or the relationship between temperature, pressure and volume. (in other words take 2 balloons, one filled with O2 and the other N2, heat them to the same temp, and youll have the same volume- or you can do the same with a fixed volume and measure pressure) Ok, but what about water vapor? I can see how the presence of water will greatly affect pressure, especially if it goes through a phase change. (can someone tell me how hot a tire gets, i have no idea). but are you going to tell me that a) the N2 used to fill a tire is "dry" and assuming it is, that water NEVER diffuses into the tire?? ok, last theory i heard- lets ASSUME tires have a significantly higher diffusivity rate for O2 than N2. then theoretically a tire could lose 20% of its pressure. so you fill it up with more air, but now the mixture is 96/4 N2/O2 and then the tire loses 4% of its pressure, and eventually the presure is 99/1 and on and on. so really you could fill your tire with air, then "top it off" 3 times and you have essentially a N2 atmosphere, right? then it "never" leaks again?? I don't buy the higher diffusivity of O2- I don't have constants or data that shows one way or another- but the molecules are not that different in size. So let's assume that O2 has only a SLIGHTLY higher diffusivity than N2. then instead checking tire pressure every 3 months, you're doing it every 4 months. Now let's assume that they have the same diffusivity.... I've heard of people who use N2 to fill tires and I'm not saying they're wrong for doing so, I just don't know why they do it.

Hey thanks for this info! Originally I was all set to go into Midas today and raise H3LL, but after a night of sleep and reading some posts, I think I'll just move on. Here comes the dumb questions: If I get a new filter from subaru and want to install it myself, I'm assuming I'll have to drain the transmission first?? If I drain the fluid, do I have to magically fill it through that tiny awkwardly located tranny dipstick? also if the filter is too small for an oil wrench, how do you tighten it? by hand? thanks, Brian

in the wide shot, you can see the oil running everywhere. in the close up you can kinda make out the dented area. the red spot you see is a drop of fluid about to drip.

Ok, I took my 00 forester (auto) to midas to get an oil change a couple of months ago. I don't normally drive the car, but I did this weekend and smelled burning oil when I came to a stop. I've also been noticing some oil on the garage floor. So I wipe some of the oil and notice its red. I looked under the car tonight and it appears the fluid is leaking from what i think is the transmission filter (located approximately beneath the driver's seat). when I looked closer at the filter, I noticed it was slightly crushed- like it was unscrewed (or screwed) with a big wrench or something. I'll post a pic as soon as my camera charges up. Could this have been a possible scenario: the mechanic unscrews the filter, notices a red fluid pouring out, and says "aw $!$&@, wrong filter" and screws it back in. but because he mangles it off, the filter is now comprimised in some way in function and/or fit. so A) does this scenario make sense? or am I just trying to find someone to blame and I should look deeper? so in someway, if this is true, perhaps this is my fault for trying to save a few bucks. But even so, is there anything I can do?? I suppose I could go to my Subaru dealer and have them replace the filter (which would involve a transmission flush i suppose).

My 00 Forester has an alarm. When the car is NOT ARMED, the door ajar light on the dash is lit up. Once I arm the alarm, the door ajar light goes out once the interior dome light fades off. go figure. I don't know why it's wired this way or if this is even a factory alarm (bought car used). but, once I start the car, the door ajar light works as it should. If you have the same dopey alarm I do, you may want to check this out.