Subaru Impreza Outback Sport & TS

cbmorton · November 2003

Pretty sure the RS of that vintage didn't have a rear folding seat, but I have a '99 or '00 Impreza brochure at home that I can check later.

First time driving my OBS on snow today. Not much fell but it drifted to cover the road in a few spots. No one was around so I tried out the AWD in the loose snow by using way more throttle than I normally would, from a standing start as well as when already moving. No problem at all. The rear end moved out a little bit when I accelerated hard from a stop but that was it. Very secure on the slushy roads today.

Nice to have the heated seats on a cold morning, and the defroster squiggle under the rear wiper works great. No more having to knock ice out of the wiper blade, although you still have to do it for the fronts. Great winter car.

bluesubie · November 2003

Stop showing off with your OBS and it's All Weather Package (not available in the U.S.)! ;-)

-Dennis

cbmorton · November 2003

Think of it this way: you US drivers are tough and don't need wimp gadgets like heated seats and heated mirrors. Up here we're soft and need more coddling. Speaking of coddling, the heated seats' high setting is surprisingly toasty. Good for my lower back. Ahhhh...

ateixeira · November 2003

OK, I'm officially jealous.

-juice

damish003 · November 2003

Actually had to scrape ice off my new OBS this morning. Nasty weather in Erie, just nasty. Didn't know that the wipers raise and stay up when time to scrape. I didn't have that on my Jeep. It's a small thing, but I likey! If I could only have Brents all-weather package...(grumble, grumble)

-Dan-

subarusaleshou · November 2003

I'm in Houston and I'd like the all weather package even down here. Seems like economy of scale and consistency in build would mean very little cost increase to put it in every single one that comes off the line. I'd have paid a little more for the added content and believe it would sell itself as a safety factor.

ateixeira · November 2003

It amazes me how many variations of models Subaru has for such a tiny manufacturer. I don't know how they can manage without economies of scale.

-juice

cbmorton · November 2003

Sure would be interesting to be a fly on the wall during Subaru product planning meetings. Some of the equipment differences between Canadian & US models seem pretty random.

ateixeira · November 2003

We lobby for that privilege all the time. They already get suggestions from this board and share it with those folks. I hope to meet them, eventually. :-)

-juice

paisan · November 2003

Loved the winter wiper mode on my XT6 and SVX

-mike

cbmorton · November 2003

It seems as though the major decisions, such as models, engines, colours, etc. are made on a both US+Canada basis, but after that the Subaru planners in each country can independently make small changes regarding standard equipment and options. Sometimes this results in oddities. I know Forester XT shoppers in the US were pretty peeved about not being able to get a five-speed XT with sunroof, although we can. I think Subarus are marketed better south of the border, but some of the equipment decisions are head-scratchers.

ateixeira · November 2003

WRXs also get heated seats, that was a biggie. I still think wagons don't get a moonroof or the AWP.

-juice

lotboy · November 2003

NEED HELP BOYS---Hey guys,looks like it is time now to replace my current car.I am trying to stick to a Subaru product.
Found a 1999 Impreza TS to look at with 108,000km,2.2litre engine,5spd,black,maitenance records and original owner from a Subaru dealer priced at $12,990 Canadian.
What do you think,would this be a good solid reliable car?Is the 2.2litre engine much different or more reliable than the boxer engine?Is it SOHC of DOHC?Rear brakes are drum correct?
Just need some info and tips gentleman(ladies too of course)!
Cheers!!!

DD

damish003 · November 2003

Lotboy,

So what happened to the Probe? The beast die on you or something?

I have no idea if the price for the 1999 TS is good as figuring exchange rate differences gives me a headache. That said, if it were me, I wouldn't go for one that old. Lots of improvements have been made to the Impreza line that are important to me, such as full disc brakes, better engine, etc. Of course, YMMV. Since you wanted to wait till spring, I'm assuming you have no choice now. If you're just itching for a different car, I'd still wait till spring. Hey, you asked, right? Good luck.

-Dan-

nippononly · November 2003

you have an XT6 AND an SVX? That is cool. :-)

lotboy - all the engines are boxers, including the former 2.2. Yes, the rear brakes are drums.

ateixeira · November 2003

The 2.2l is ROCK SOLID, perhaps Subaru's most reliable engine ever. It doesn't tend to have the gasket/seal issues that some 2.5l engines do. I think it made about 137hp back then, SOHC I think? paisan?

My only concern would be the clutch. Try it out on a cold, damp day, see if it chatters. Even then, a new ACT clutch is $400 or less.

-juice

lotboy · November 2003

My Probe is getting worn out.My mechanic said I should rid of it.My A/C compressor went on me last weekend and broke my belt.Plus he works on Subaru's too.I kind of thought I could spend a little less,on a good used car with some km on it and get a few years out of it.It fits more in my financial situation right now as well.
Just have to cross my fingers I guess and use my good judgement.
Buying cars is not easy sometimes is it guys?

DD

nippononly · November 2003

in my ol' Subie was 137 hp, that much I know for sure. That was the '97 - did they change it by '99? I have a fuzzy memory that it went from DOHC to SOHC, or something like that?

ateixeira · November 2003

The '98 2.5l was a DOHC, that went in the 2.5RS. Then in '99 they moved to a SOHC design and called it the Phase II.

The 2.2l, I'm not sure.

-juice

cbmorton · November 2003

The 2.2 was upped to 142 hp from 137 for the 1999 model year. Don't remember how that was done, however.

paisan · November 2003

I had 2 XT6s (1 '88 AWD 4EAT, 1 '91 AWD 5MT) and now have a '92 SVX. I also have a '96 Impreza L AWD 4EAT, and shortly will be buying a '94 Legacy Turbo Sedan 5MT from a fellow edmund's user!

The '96 Impreza's 2.2L SOHC engine has 156K miles on it, and I've had it for about the last 1500 miles. Of those last 1500 miles, it has been tracked for all of them. That little 2.2L with 155K miles doesn't burn any oil even doing 1hr sessions on track at nearly redline the whole time! My dad's '97 Legacy L has 95 K miles and the 2.2L motor is still going strong.

-mike

lotboy · December 2003

Well I did it,on Nov.28/03 I went and bought a 2004 TS,manual and silver with tinted windows.
I just love this car I tell you.I have 1500km on it now and it is almost broken in.The finance rate was good so I went for it,a little earlier than I wanted but the Probe would have costed me a fair amount till spring to keep up until when I originally planned to buy new.Plus I got deferred payments for 3 months interest covered by Subaru and $500.00 of accesories for free.This was a 3 day incentive here in Ontario Canada.
I am happy and can't wait to go outside and look at my car!!!
Have a good weekend gentleman and thankyou very much for your ongoing advice and comments.I have learned tons since I signed up on this site in September 2003.
Cheers...

DD

PS-damish003,did you get my email I sent you last week?

nippononly · December 2003

subarusaleshou · December 2003

I'm in an '04 OBS and love it. I've got about 2200 miles which is about 3500 kilometers I guess. It's a GREAT car.

lotboy · December 2003

...why thankyou guys,I love this car,,,it drives so good,,,,nice clear guages to read at night time too.Can't wait to get more snow,suppose to get 2 inches overnight!

DD

PS-Hope your cars are doing well!

cbmorton · December 2003

Well, we got that snow. I was bombing down unploughed country roads this afternoon and the car felt very secure. Also took a few minutes to practice catching the car's rear end when it breaks loose, which is fairly easy to do when going around a corner in the snow. Fun when you get the hang of it.

I'm at about 2800 km on my 2004. On the fuel economy front my last two tanks have been 22 mpg (US) which I consider decent considering my frequent short trips, and that the car's still pretty new, all using winter gas.

ateixeira · December 2003

Let me add my congrats...

-juice

damish003 · December 2003

Good for you, pal. I really hope you continue to enjoy the car, as I just love them. I was away last week and came home to 500+ emails. Quite likely I deleted it as just about everything was spam. Sorry about that...feel free to resend if you can and make sure the header is from you.

On a sad note, my 04 OBS was rear-ended about a week and a half ago. 11k in damage, with parts and labor combined. Look under "Members II" if interested in the details. I should get it back mid-January.

The strength of the car is fantastic. They figure I got rear-ended at 40+ mhp, by a big Dodge Ram pick-up. I walked away just fine, no whiplash or anything. The active headrest does its job, no doubt.

I hope everyone feels confident in the safety of their Impreza's, as they really do the job.

-Dan-

nippononly · December 2003

scary! Glad to hear you are in one piece!

tuckerdog1 · December 2003

Hello All,
Just bought a used 02 OBS two weeks ago. Really like the car so far. Has a couple problems, but I knew they were there when I bought it & expect them to be corrected under warranty soon. But to my question. having just bought the car, I was looking on E-Bay to see if there might be any aftermarket goodies I might want to buy for it. There seems to be an awful lot of replacement headlight bulbs ( listed as xenon ) that claim to really improve the vision at night. A couple things here. I live in an area with no street lights & a lot of trees. So it's very dark. The stock lights are pretty good, but compared with our other car ( 02 Mazda millenia S ), they are lacking. But I do think the Subaru guys know what they're doing & gave the car the correct lights for the design. Buttttt has anybody installed these aftermarket xenon bulbs? If so, how well did they work? I'm also suspicious because I think that xenon option on cars that it can be ordered with is over $1,000. These replacement bulbs are about $10.

Thanks
Fred

outback_97 · December 2003

Fred:

There are a lot of opinions on this subject... here's mine:

IMO: Avoid any blue tinted bulbs, and in general anything that claims, "HID look" or "Xenon look".

I have used Sylvania Xtravisions in my OB. They did seem to be better than the stock ones, not a huge difference, but maybe 10-20% better. Very similar color temperature to OEM, but brighter. However, they lasted only 10 months or so. Yes, I installed correctly, didn't touch the bulb, etc.

So, carry a spare if you go aftermarket.

utahsteve

hypov · December 2003

Fred-
I stay away from those. They are likely to be the "Xenon" wannabe as utahsteve had described.
They only look brighter when you're looking at the headlights. Their illumination... worse than OEM.

Your $ would be better spent, in your case would be, investing in a set of auxilary lights. Would cost more than the $10 bulbs, but it does help in very dark places and a good insurance for spare bulb on the fly should the headlights go out in the middle of driving.

-Dave

tuckerdog1 · December 2003

Utahsteve, Dave,

Thanks for the advice. My gut feeling was to steer clear. I'll do that for sure now.

Fred

cbmorton · December 2003

There are some good aftermarket bulbs that are designed to actually put more light on the road at the stock wattage, instead of having a trendy colour with less light. Unfortunately, the pickings are rather slim in the 9007 size of the 2002-03 Impreza. The Philips HiVisibility (aka Philips Premium) is a +30% bulb that does come as a 9007. Cost is around $30/pair.

I'm using Philips' +50% VisionPlus in my 2004 low beams. The light colour is slightly whiter than stock, and they put out noticeably more light.

ateixeira · December 2003

I had Hella H4+30 bulbs. They are marketed as "Xenons", and probably did create a slightly whiter light.

But...the catch? They lasted about a year, no longer than that. I had 2 pairs, in my Miata and in my Forester, not one of the 4 bulbs lasted longer than 14 months. And at $28 or so per pair, delivered, it didn't seem worth it. Stock bulbs usually last 5 years or longer.

So, just budget for that, or maybe get 2 pairs, one a spare set. Or even just carry the stock bulbs in the glove box if the new ones, which burn hotter, fail early.

I've heard more positive reviews of the Phillips bulbs mentioned above, but soured on the idea of having to swap them out every year, not knowing where I'd be when they blew out.

-juice

cbmorton · December 2003

This is true, they don't last as long. Good illumination is important to me so I'm willing to bear the cost of replacing the bulbs more often, although I hope for more than a year's use considering I only put on 12k km annually. The only other downside is how much fun it is (whee!) to replace the low beam bulbs on a 2004.

outback_97 · December 2003

cbmorton: Where do you purchase the Phillips bulbs? I have had no luck finding them at major chains here. I'd be willing to try them in my Outback.

A while back I bought some Sylvania Silverstars, I just had to try them out. Here's two links that show them vs. OEM:

http://users.sisna.com/ignatius/subaru/mods/bulbs.jpg
http://users.sisna.com/ignatius/subaru/mods/compare.jpg

They do have a very subtle blue tint that couldn't really be seen in the package, so I got suckered in by the marketing. I wish I would've stuck with the Xtravisions at half the price and better performance IMO.

The problem: The whiter light is a *little* brighter, at least it looks like it is because it's more like daylight, but causes more glare in heavy snow. Haven't tried them in rain but I've heard the problem is the same. A yellower light tends to be better in inclement weather, IMO.

utahsteve

cbmorton · December 2003

Steve: the Philips VisionPlus bulbs aren't widely available over here, although they're very popular in Europe. I got mine from a UK-based company that sells them online, but since then I came across a US site, www.suvlights.com, that offers them as well as the Osram Silverstar, the other highly-rated +50% bulb.

There's been a lot of debate about the Sylvania Silverstars (different than the Osrams) on other Subaru boards I follow. A lot of people who use the Silverstars like them, but the main selling point seems to be the colour, and they're advertised by Sylvania as having 'the look of HID'. Ultimately the blue tint reduces the light output so I know they're not for me.

The VisionPlus bulbs have a blue-tinted end to whiten the light slightly, I assume, but most of the bulb is clear so they're still almost identical to the stock colour. I read a lot of positive comments about them before I got them, and I've found they give me a bright, even beam pattern.

hunter001 · December 2003

Recently, I read that Honda's chief engineer who developed the 3.0L SOHC V6 engine for the Accord that officially generates 240HP and 212Lbs/ft of torque with regular fuel, admitted that the engine can generate at least 10-15 HP and 10-15 lbs/ft of additional HP/torque, with premium fuel. The reason was the high compression ratio of the engine at 10:1, which is essentially a compression ratio typically requiring premium fuel. The 2.4L 4-cylinder Accord engine however, does not have any such benefit, due to its 9.7:1 compression ratio, which is something that is truly designed for running with regular fuel. Thus putting premium into the 4-cylinder, would not add to any power benefits.

I wonder if the same principle could be extrapolated to the Subaru 2.5L engine. It too has a high compression ratio of 10:1 and the official power output of 165HP/166lbs/ft of Torque, is measured with regular fuel (for marketing reasons ??). Companies rate such high compression engines as able to run with regular fuel, mainly by using sophisticated knock sensors and retarding the timing (to prevent knocking), thus holding back the true output of the engine. If this is true, then the 2.5L engine may really be capable of generating more with premium. If so, then the 2.5L engine could theoretically generate 175+HP and 180lbs/ft of torque, if filled with premium fuel, with absolutely no other changes ! Just a thought.

Later...AH

subarusaleshou · December 2003

Octane does not generate power. Octane prevents detonation and pinging. A friend who is an engineer for Texaco and deals in just this stuff told me lots of tech details that are beyond me. The bottom line is that if your car doesn't detonate or ping there is ZERO advantage to using a higher grade fuel. It can actually be a detriment to the performance of your car.

Also, the difference from 9.7:1 and 10:1 isn't low to high compression. If you went from say 8.5:1 to 10:1 then you'd have a significant compression increase. Use the lowest grade that doesn't detonate or ping that is still at least the grade recommended by the manufacturer.

Keep the other money in your pocket. Or figure out the difference, say 15 gallons at 20 cents is $3. Put three dollars in a cookie jar. Every fill up put the difference in the jar. Once a year go out and eat steak and spend a night in a nice hotel with your significant other.

micweb · December 2003

The NY Times had an article stating that the engine controls on some modern engines are adaptive and will "learn" what fuel you are using (by the onset of ping") and reprogram themselves to give appropriate performance.

The gain from using premium with such adaptive engines was only a few horsepower.

My 2001 VW knocked on regular, ran fine on midgrade (manual called for premium even though it was normally aspirated). My V6 Mustang knocked on regular, runs fine on midgrade. My 2.3 PZEV Focus halls monkey butt on just plain regular. I haven't tried upgrading the fuel, it's too costly.

It takes a tank or two to learn, so don't judge the change on one tank of gas.

subarusaleshou · December 2003

applies to the engine management retarding the settings from the factory settings in case of ping or detonation. It doesn't "crank up" if you are using premium in a regular fuel required engine. It "cuts back" to accomodate less than ideal fuel. At least that's how the engineer explained it to me. Again, according to a ph-d engineer, using fuel grades higher than the recommended grade "only increases the value of my stock in the company. It doesn't improve performance on the vehicle." Now, that may be wrong but he told me flat out it only puts more money in the gas companies pocket and indirectly in his. YMMV

micweb · December 2003

But publicly (EPA postings etc.) my Golf claimed to run on regular, in the actual manual they asked for premium. Go figure.

In think the rated horsepower was based on regular. At least they haven't been sued yet for overstating horsepower, like Ford, Mazda, and Hyundai (anyone else?).

subarusaleshou · December 2003

is just the follow through to my taking the word of the engineer I know at Texaco. If that isn't correct he certainly made it sound good. Made a believer out of me.

As an aside, I was driving a Lincoln Mk VII at the time. It would knock under heavy throttle. I couldn't run anything but premium even though it was supposed to run on regular. He told me to fill it with Texaco premium and put a silver bottle of STP in. He said run a total of 5 tanks of Texaco premium through it and then switch to Texaco regular. I did that and for the remainder of the time I owned it I never had a problem again while running Texaco regular. It was a few cents higher than other stations regular but much less than the premium I'd been buying.

Texaco and Chevron, at that time which was 1993-4, both put the amount of cleaner and other additives in all their grades that were mandated for premium. That made the lower grades run cleaner. That's what kept me running ok on the Texaco regular.

Maybe all coincidence but it worked then and I believe he told me the truth on it all. Since then I don't go any higher than the manufacturer calls for and I'll run a silver bottle of STP through if I need to.

YMMV

ateixeira · December 2003

It's interesting because I have a Miata with manually set timing. Stock setting is 10 degrees before top dead center.

Experts swear up and down that advancing the timing to 14 degrees before (4 degrees earlier) increase HP by 3-5 or so. The risk? It might start to ping. But dyno charts prove the timing advance gives you more torque.

I did just that. With the same 87 octane, I don't get pining, so I still gained the same HP anyone else would, even if they used 93 octane and I didn't. So premium fuel did not result in HP, timing advance did.

Some go as far as 18 degrees before top dead center. The interesting thing here is that you MUST use premium fuel at that timing, but at that point you get diminishing returns, i.e. no noticeable increase in power beyond 14 degrees.

OK, follow me for just a minute here.

Now let's apply this to Subaru's ECU. A fresh ECU with no memory will run rich and start the timing probably conservatively. They don't want it to ping off the bat.

Timing is advanced until the knock sensor says "that's enough" and the ECU learns how far to advance the timing. Note that this is ever-changing, due to altitude and conditions. My Miata does ping under a strong load, but only a little.

So the Subie can potentially make more and more power if conditions are right, even with 87 octane. I guess it depends on when pinging would begin to occur.

But...Subaru tunes the ECU of the 2.5l to run on 87 octane, so I doubt it would benefit from any more than that. In other words, it's probably not pinging at the ideal setting for spark timing with regular fuel.

The H6 is tuned for premium, the ECU and cams (and who knows what else) can take better advantage of even more timing advance, so it makes more power with 93 octane. Supposedly 212hp with 93 octane, 208hp with 87 octane.

-juice

hunter001 · December 2003

The "admission" by the Honda Chief engineer was not a myth ! So it might mean that the Honda 3.0L V6 engine output, when measured with premium filled in, was around 250-255 HP, since it is an engine that is truly designed with premium in mind. But when 87 Octane fuel is added, the engine management system (EMS), retards timing to account for the lower octane and thus is able to generate "only" 240HP, which is what Honda publicises. Quite a few people would refuse to buy a family car, if the more expensive premium is required, due to which car manufacturers get around it by putting in sophisticated knock sensors that would prevent knock by retarding timing (at the expense of engine power), thus allowing them to "recommend" regular fuel for the engine. With premium, the engine is free to advance timing to take advantage of the higher octane fuel, even though it is not publicised. Of course putting premium into an engine with a low compression ratio, is wasting money since the engine cannot take advantage of it. Some people foolishly put premium into such engines to enrich gas companies, with no benefit to the engine whatsoever.

In fact quite a few companies freely advertise that their cars "can run" with regular fuel with a slight degradation in performance and power, over the recommended Premium. What this means is that with the lower octane fuel, the EMS retards timing below the knock threshold, allowing the car to run with regular fuel but at a power level below the advertised one. This generally happens with premium priced vehicles like Luxury branded nameplates like Acura, Lexus, Infiniti, BMW, Mercedes etc.

Interestingly, the 2.4L DOHC i-VTEC 4-cylinder engine in the Honda Accord generates 161 HP (with regular fuel) while the similar 2.4L DOHC i-VTEC 4-cylinder engine in the Acura TSX (European Honda Accord) generates 200HP with "mandatory" Premium fuel. Of course the compression ratio of the TSX engine is higher at 10.5 while the Accord version is lower at 9.7.

I was just speculating whether the Subaru engines also gain from a higher octane fuel, specifically due to their relatively higher compression ratio. A compression ratio of 10.0:1 for the 2.5L Subaru engine is fairly high, and is definitely something that can take advantage of premium fuel, even though you do find engines nowadays with 10.5 and 11.0 compression ratios.

Later...AH

ateixeira · December 2003

I'm sure that TSX has hot cams, besides that higher compression ratio, that is. I bet it would make 190hp even with 87 octane.

In fact I know so - Honda also has a variant of this engine tuned to run on regular fuel that makes exactly 190hp! CR-V owners are asking for this engine to make it into that car.

-juice

micweb · December 2003

Message 2492, great post Hunter!

tuckerdog1 · January 2004

Does anybody know the front vs rear power split on the awd for an '02 OBS with the auto trans? This would be with no outside influence causing loss of traction or weight transfer etc. Just motoring straight down the highway on a dry road. The Subaru website is pretty clear that with the manual trans it's 50/50. But it's vague about the auto. I've read two different sets of numbers elsewhere of 60/40 and 90/10 ( the 2nd set seems a little too weighted to the front, but I'm no engineer ).

Thanks,
Tuckerdog

ateixeira · January 2004

Publications say 90/10, but some Subaru engineers Patti put us in touch with said 80/20. I'll take their word over some marketing brochure, but that's just me.

-juice

Subaru Impreza Outback Sport & TS

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles

Subaru Impreza Outback Sport &amp; TS

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles

Subaru Impreza Outback Sport & TS