kimokalihi Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 HAHA! So did I, and I passed all the sections on the stupid WASL test in 4th, 7th, and 10th grade. For others who aren't from washington, it's just some lame test that you are required to pass in order to pass high school and it takes like 2 weeks of testing if I remember correctly. The thing that's stupid about it is that they spend WAY too much time trying to teach the students how to PASS the test instead of actually teaching them the sort of things that we need to know how to do to get a passing grade. ex - basic algebra skills would help a lot of students. Anyways, I use the same procedure to check my MPG as well and I don't get anywhere near that, which is why I found it hard to believe. Just making sure there wasn't some other factor feeding your MPG results. A lot of people will just say,"I have half a tank, therefore I must have used 8 gallons to travel 200 miles. Which means I got 25 mpg!" Which is by no means correct but lots of people do that. Isn't your second half supposed to go faster than your first half according to the gauge? Thought I heard that somewhere before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnuman Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 Isn't your second half supposed to go faster than your first half according to the gauge? Thought I heard that somewhere before. I find that the gas gets used fastest when I have an empty wallet. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msmithmmx Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 My 97 2.2 with 162K gets 23 MPG on average. The engine was just tuned. It is running on a 2.5 ECU though, wonder if this helps or hurts??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manarius Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 My 97 2.2 with 162K gets 23 MPG on average. The engine was just tuned. It is running on a 2.5 ECU though, wonder if this helps or hurts??? Probably hurts since the EJ25 is a very different engine than the EJ22 (at least when it comes to tuning and electronic sensors of the sort). Any particular reason you're running 2.5 ECU and not the 2.2? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnceggleston Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 My 97 2.2 with 162K gets 23 MPG on average. The engine was just tuned. It is running on a 2.5 ECU though, wonder if this helps or hurts??? this does present an interesting questions regarding ej22 into a ej25 outback. for those of you who have done this, what's your gas mileage?? i was searching for transmissions at car-parts.com recently, and i noticed the in 96 the outbackwas available in with a ej22 engine, no surprise there. but the thing that did surprise me was that the ej22 outback only came with manual trans. legacy wagons / ej22 had both a/t and m/t. huh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msmithmmx Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 The forum said not to switch the ECU out so I did not bother. I was just happen the car turned on but its been 12K miles now. Anyone think I should sitch it to a 2.2 ECU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranger83 Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 Sort of.....the route I traveled was East on 69 North on I 17 and North on US HWY 89 and then East again on 160 through the four corners and durango to pagosa springs, CO reason I asked is that if you're travelling West to East in Winter, you can get some insane mileage on the plains if the wind is strong. On a trip to Colorado from the East coast, we averaged nearly 25% better mileage W-E than E-W. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idosubaru Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 since the EJ25 is a very different engine than the EJ22 (at least when it comes to tuning and electronic sensors of the sort). i guess this is semantics and depends how you define "similar" but if you can pull one motor out and stick another in without any engine or electrical modifications at all...i wouldn't call the engines "very different". the 2.5 was designed from the 2.2 as the starting point and many things are interchangeable. on a similar note you can have the engine rebuilt with OEM Subaru over sized pistons. increasing combustion chamber size does not effect the ECU's ability to monitor incoming air and adjust fuel supply accordingly. read up on ECU's to understand that concept and that ECU's don't care what the engine is...is all about the ECU's ability to monitor air and control fuel. that's how megasquirt works...on any engine, use the same sensors and it's applicable to almost any engine. he states his mileage is 23 mpg. read up on all the gas mileage threads. i don't know your driving style, conditions, engine condition, etc but that's well in EJ range depending on all the possible variables. that's about what i get in my daily driving 1997 OBS with a 2.2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manarius Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 i guess this is semantics and depends how you define "similar" but if you can pull one motor out and stick another in without any engine or electrical modifications at all...i wouldn't call the engines "very different". the 2.5 was designed from the 2.2 as the starting point and many things are interchangeable. on a similar note you can have the engine rebuilt with OEM Subaru over sized pistons. increasing combustion chamber size does not effect the ECU's ability to monitor incoming air and adjust fuel supply accordingly. read up on ECU's to understand that concept and that ECU's don't care what the engine is...is all about the ECU's ability to monitor air and control fuel. that's how megasquirt works...on any engine, use the same sensors and it's applicable to almost any engine. he states his mileage is 23 mpg. read up on all the gas mileage threads. i don't know your driving style, conditions, engine condition, etc but that's well in EJ range depending on all the possible variables. that's about what i get in my daily driving 1997 OBS with a 2.2. You are right. However, I think there's a reason they have different ECU's. I recognize that that mpg isn't actually that bad, but perhaps it could be better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
msmithmmx Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 I am leaving well enough alone. Its working fine with the 2.5 ECU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
99lego Posted December 8, 2006 Author Share Posted December 8, 2006 reason I asked is that if you're travelling West to East in Winter, you can get some insane mileage on the plains if the wind is strong. On a trip to Colorado from the East coast, we averaged nearly 25% better mileage W-E than E-W. The driving was for the most part all in the mountains save the basin and range travel accross four corners. The wind wasnt really blowing on the way east like it was on our way back west though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiffy Posted December 9, 2006 Share Posted December 9, 2006 The wind wasnt really blowing on the way east like it was on our way back west though. possibly because it was going the same speed as you, so you didn't feel it... which could explain some of your great MPG... and I can attest first-hand that a higher octane will give you more mileage... I used to run premium in my '85 GL d/r 5spd because I got a few more MPG out of it... not a lot, just enough to cost about the same as regular when you average it, but at least I could make it a few more miles and not ping as much... I had a 2000 legacy GT that got around 22mpg, but I drove it hard and mostly in the city... --Spiffy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
99lego Posted December 9, 2006 Author Share Posted December 9, 2006 and I can attest first-hand that a higher octane will give you more mileage... I used to run premium in my '85 GL d/r 5spd because I got a few more MPG out of it... not a lot, just enough to cost about the same as regular when you average it, but at least I could make it a few more miles and not ping as much... --Spiffy my catless weberized 85 GL D/R consistently got 30 mpg with mixed driving while it had high test in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martinjmpr Posted December 11, 2006 Share Posted December 11, 2006 I'd be interested in the kind of MPG you got on the next tank after the 39mpg tank. Whenever I've had what appeared to be unusually high MPG the next tank was invariably below normal. What happens is that some gas pumps have different settings to shut off the flow of gas when the tank is full. Some will let you fill all the way up the filler neck others will quit when there is still room for a gallon or two of gas in the tank. So, say you drive 300 miles, fill the tank and it only takes 7.5 gallons and you say "woo hoo! I got 40 mpg!" In reality, though, you actually used 9.5 gallons with an average MPG of 31.5, it's just that the pump "kicked off" when there was still 2 gallon of space left in the tank. When you fill up again, all that MPG you "gained" from your last stop will be lost. That's why the only way you can truly know is to average. One tank at High MPG doesn't really mean anything. Having said that, I do believe it's possible to get better MPG in most cars, but driving at an average speed of 85 is not the way to do it. Most cars reach their MPG peak at 50-60 mph. If you really want to see phenomenal MPG in your car, then the next time you take a long highway trip, set the cruise control at 55. I've consistently gotten 29-31 mpg in an AWD 2.5 OBW with an auto tranny by doing this. It only works in the summer (due, I'm sure, to the fact that our winter-blend gas has higher ethanol content) but it does work. Of course, some people aren't happy unless they're going 80+ mph, but hey, if they've got "money to burn" then power to them! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
99lego Posted December 12, 2006 Author Share Posted December 12, 2006 I'd be interested in the kind of MPG you got on the next tank after the 39mpg tank. Whenever I've had what appeared to be unusually high MPG the next tank was invariably below normal. Just filled up with 11.59 gallons of 91 Octane Shell V Power at $2.49 a gallon. My trip clock said 305 miles (all city driving). So 305 / 11.59 = 26.315789 miles per gallon. I think that is pretty good for 'round town driving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnceggleston Posted December 12, 2006 Share Posted December 12, 2006 Just filled up with 11.59 gallons of 91 Octane Shell V Power at $2.49 a gallon. My trip clock said 305 miles (all city driving). So 305 / 11.59 = 26.315789 miles per gallon. I think that is pretty good for 'round town driving. 9.46 cents per mile. i think i'll go back and reead the first post so i can figure how you did it. kudos to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
99lego Posted December 13, 2006 Author Share Posted December 13, 2006 And that's still pointless... I'd like to know why you would think that running 91 oct is pointless....especially when i am getting mileage like this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idosubaru Posted December 13, 2006 Share Posted December 13, 2006 I'd like to know why you would think that running 91 oct is pointless....especially when i am getting mileage like this. check your owners manual. unless the engine has problems, there is nothing to gain by using higher than the recommended octane. i'm not weighing in either way, only stating that your owners manual should say. lots of gas/octane material out there to read to understand this. on older soobs you can you can get a higher horsepower by advancing the distributor and running higher octane gas. running 27 degree advance on an ER27 that comes stock at 20 degrees will gain about 7 horsepower if the dyno numbers are right in my head (you can verify this at xt6.net if you'd like). now.....whether that translates to better mpg, i don't know and whether the newer EJ series vehicles that don't let you do any advancing of the timing mechanically can take advantage of that i don't know either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
99lego Posted January 3, 2007 Author Share Posted January 3, 2007 check your owners manual. unless the engine has problems, there is nothing to gain by using higher than the recommended octane. i'm not weighing in either way, only stating that your owners manual should say. lots of gas/octane material out there to read to understand this. on older soobs you can you can get a higher horsepower by advancing the distributor and running higher octane gas. running 27 degree advance on an ER27 that comes stock at 20 degrees will gain about 7 horsepower if the dyno numbers are right in my head (you can verify this at xt6.net if you'd like). now.....whether that translates to better mpg, i don't know and whether the newer EJ series vehicles that don't let you do any advancing of the timing mechanically can take advantage of that i don't know either. well i did it again. 35 mpg from flagstaff to cortez going 90 mph flat whipping passes at 5k in 4th gear doing 80 mph uphill. all with premium fuel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 well i did it again. 35 mpg from flagstaff to cortez going 90 mph flat whipping passes at 5k in 4th gear doing 80 mph uphill. all with premium fuel. no one likes a braggert nipper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oshkosh Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 With 89oct I have been averaging 28.4 mpg with my 163k miles OBS. I dont know how this tank will turn out ,seems less .I filled up with 87oct maybe winter blend??? Time will tell as I am only a quarter threw the tank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nipper Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 On my xrss country trip, my best mileage on my 97 OBW was 30 mpg. That was after filling up with premium. The premium was cheaper then the regular. I was was averageing 24 at about 70-80 mph. nipper Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterD Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 I have only had my 91 legacy wagon for a few weeks now but so far I have seen the milage improve since I got the car. My latest trip I went 354.5 miles on 13.2 gallons of gas, so almost 27mpg. Mostly highway driving. Now i'm going to be keeping track of my mileage on an excel spreadsheet, hopfully to get a better average number. when i first got the car it had a half a tank of year old gas, we topped it off with a full tank and put some adatives in the tank it was able to get about 22mpg, i filled up again and mostly city driving and one drive over a few mountain passes stuck in rush-hour like traffic i was able to get about 24mpg. so over all im not too dissapointed. my vw scirocco was able get 35mpg on the highway and about 28-29ish in the city, but it weighs a thousand pounds less and dosn't turn all the awd crap, it also has a better power to weight ratio. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
95legwagon Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 (edited) Just filled up with 11.59 gallons of 91 Octane Shell V Power at $2.49 a gallon. My trip clock said 305 miles (all city driving). So 305 / 11.59 = 26.315789 miles per gallon. I think that is pretty good for 'round town driving. holy S*** batman! lmao 2.49 a gallon? i pay over a dollar more a gallon for 87.......it costs 3.65 a gallon and thats at the cheapo stations.... shell cost 3.74 for 87..... diesel is pretty much 4 dollars as well as kerosene. lucky! oh and my car doesnt like gas additives..... i BURN through gas with additives....like f.i. cleaner or gas antifreeze or octane booster lol Edited November 10, 2011 by 95legwagon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ever Victorious Posted November 10, 2011 Share Posted November 10, 2011 holy S*** batman! lmao 2.49 a gallon? i pay over a dollar more a gallon for 87.......it costs 3.65 a gallon and thats at the cheapo stations.... shell cost 3.74 for 87..... diesel is pretty much 4 dollars as well as kerosene. lucky! oh and my car doesnt like gas additives..... i BURN through gas with additives....like f.i. cleaner or gas antifreeze or octane booster lol Did you bother to read the date on the thread you were responding to? Because it was over 4 years old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now