Subaru XT Turbo Forester

ateixeira

Bob: funny, squirrels for some reason keep chewing up my aluminum gutters! Maybe to sharpen their teeth? But I need that bad-tasting metal also.

-juice

dcm61

juice - You need a dog, not a cat dressed as a dog, to chase the squirrels away. ;-)

DaveM

ateixeira

It's pathetic, he's afraid of the squirrels!

Back to Subaru, what, do they baste the wires in au-jus before delivery, or is that part of the PDI process?

-juice

once_for_all

and the Baja Turbo has the 3.9 diffies. That and the weight, maybe your .5 second slower is on the conservative side.

John

dcm61

It's pathetic, he's afraid of the squirrels!

My cat loves to chase squirrels. She chases ground hogs too!

To keep this on topic, my cat needs a turbo so she can keep up with the squirrels.

DaveM

corkfish

Zero to Sixty and quarter miles are also heavily influenced by air temperature. Car and Driver conducted their testing in early spring. With the warmer weather, anyone noticing a decline in acceleration?

atlgaxt

Good point. I guess the bottom line is that little sucker is quick even with the AT. Whether 60 comes up in the low 6 or mid 6 second range, I don't think is all that noticeable to my rear end. And, as I have said before, while I can't dump the clutch, brake torquing it helps to jump off the line easily and consistently.

samiam_68

No noticeable degrade in acceleration. Very noticeable improvement in gas mileage - probably due to summer gas. I think I'm about to report the highest MPG ever - will fill 'er up on Wednesday.

ballistic

my cat needs a turbo so she can keep up with the squirrels.

Skip the turbo. All she needs is a ridiculous 4.44 final drive.

atlgaxt

Hi Jack - good to see your posts again. I guess tax season is over.

bobshere1

Ateixeira,

  Plant an Oak Tree. That'll give 'em stuff to chew!

  I'm pretty sure I remember that you, like me, have a Miata. Getting all that extra performance out of FXT Plus Sizing to 17" wheels, getting Falken tires, and putting in the 20mm STi rear sway bar, and, of course, feeling that ZOOM (which I've never had in any car I've owned)in FXT, I've been inspired to do a few things to my otherwise stock '94 Miata. I finally did the timing advance trick (I'd known about it for many years) -- WOW big difference. I took off intake resonator box and ziptied the filter to the Air Sensor (turning it towards the driver's fender (a bit more wow and lots more grunt sounds). I need tires so I decided to get some really nice ones instead of the middle of the road Perelli SuperTouring 4000 I've been using. The Miata is a weekend twisty car so the extra $100 or $150 these tires will cost, even though they wear faster, won't cost much per year as I don't put on more than 2-3k miles/yr. I'm getting Toyo Proxes TS-1 (190/60R14), hopefully delivered this afternoon! I'm going to get some swaybars for Miata too. I think I'll get racing beat (they told me not to get tubular in the front because it is too agressive -- the guy on the phone from Racing Beat agreed with me that I might only need the front bar, but I'm think about getting both....

   Anyway, to tie this into the FXT: I'm not going to put more money into the Miata than that. At least I don't think so I think you reach a certain level of performance that satisfies, unless you've got an obsession.

  I was reading a review of Lotus Elise. I just love the way they look! They're going to go for ~$40k . 0-60 in 4.9 seconds. 30-ish mpg "economy". 160 mph top speed. Weighing under 2,000 lbs, they're going to feel like a rocket ship (it's quite a bit smaller than a Miata!)and the handling is supposed to feel like a $200,000 elite racer.

   I got the Miata for my 50th birthday. My 60th isn't that far off. Hmmm....

   Well, I don't think I need to spend money for the 4.9 0-60. Forty Grand is quite a bit of cash for an extra second or so faster than my FXT. I think the Miata is such a fun car that I don't think the other performance attributes of the Elise are worth spending that $40k either.

    So there you go. I just met some people with a new Miata Turbo. Beautiful car. Guess what? FXT is faster -- even though the lighter smaller Miata has 170 HP !!!

   It's a nice morning. I might just go for a drive in those twisties. Really, I have a hard time deciding whether to take the Miata or the FXT !!!

         Cheers,

             Bob

PS: I was just "studying" air/speed looking at CAI's for the Miata. You gain 1 PERCENT HP for each 7 degrees you lower temperature. For 250 HP FXT that means 30* crisp Autumn morning vs. 90* sweltering Summer heat can itself (to say nothing of altitude and other factors) translate into 90-30 = 60 deg./7 = 9. Lets call it 10% instead of 9%. So that's 25 HP difference for FXT just based on the weather! Even though the numbers are "smaller" with the stock Miata, Jackson Racing claims their Forced CAI can yield ~10% gain in HP for a Miata!

njswamplands

never good to use the words Hi Jack together

ateixeira

Plenty of trees. I just think they basted my gutters with the same stuff Subaru uses for its wiring.

Yup, still have the '93 Miata, timing advanced manually to 14 degrees before TDC. You get any ping under load? I do only very occasionally.

She's got a new top, $800 for a Robbins with a glass window.

I'd trade both the Miata and my '98 Forester for a new XT, though!

-juice

ballistic

The Beaverton I'net sales manager who sold me the first XT 5-speed in Oregon last June at $100 over invoice says the '05 Legacies will arrive in about 2 weeks. He says the wife can have his first GT turbo at $250 over. Tempting.

driveaway

The Costco program is $200 over invoice for Foresters and extra packages or accessories at invoice price also. Combined with 1.9%, it is a pretty good deal. That at-invoice online deal sounded good, just make sure accessories and packages are not at MSRP or you could end up paying higher than the Costco deal. All Costcos have an auto program flyer near the exit.

p0926

Just be sure and give it a LONG test drive and make sure you can live with the gearing :-)

-Frank P.

nowakj66

Just drove them both tonight. The XT Auto is nice but WOAH! That 5 speed is a barrel of fun!

ballistic

make sure you can live with the gearing :-)

It would be mainly my wife's. She wouldn't know the difference between a 4.44 and a 2.91 final drive.

miamixt

and you never answered Miami's Octane Question. That's Ok, 91 is not available here anyway. I would take this Car home for a Weekend Low mileage extended Test Drive, or consider getting a Hybrid Car, it costs quite a bit more to run the XT then last Summer when we bought them, and Gas Mileage is Dismal. When Lance Armstrong says "With Power to spare, your Confidence Surges" he should also say your Results may Vary, not available at certain Speeds!

ballistic

p0926

It's costing everyone quite a bit more for gas this year than last ;-)

-Frank P

p0926

You're up bright and early today.

-Frank P

corkfish

It's great having a performance car you don't have to be embarrased to drive. It seems like any time I see a guy in a Corvette, Mustang etc. I can't help but think, "get a load of this guy". I can walk out and get in the XT without being self concious at all.

miamixt

Granted some Posts aren't worth responding to (post #4039 to your #4038) however when I lived in California Unocal 76/ Union Oil only offered 89 as Regular Unleaded (no 87), priced it with the other Major Companies 87, and that was the only Fuel used in the Turbo Colt. While the XT is no Colt, 76 Cent Gas Prices from 76 in 1986 have been on my mind lately!

ballistic

Frank: You're up bright and early today.

I'm always up before 4AM. My workday goes from 5A to 5P. <sigh>

Miami: My question, why am I currently using 93, and is there any benefit in using higher Grade Gas, my XT seems to love it, and it's only a few cents more!

In my opinion, purchasing costlier fuel with an octane rating any higher than that which is specified by the vehicle manufacturer is a complete waste of good money. 91 octane will produce all the power your XT is capable of delivering (unless you've modified it...higher boost, etc).

I go in the opposite direction. Subaru has indicated that an XT can operate safely on regular 87-octane fuel, albeit with some loss of performance. Therefore, I have settled on 89-octane mid-grade as the most cost-effective compromise between performance and operating cost. I will probably use 91-octane only during the hottest months of summer or if I take a trip through mountainous terrain.

bobshere1

Juice,

  No, I haven't heard any ping. I did the Miata timing to 14 degrees. I bought a timing light. That way I can play with it; but I heard the gain from moving it towards 18 is marginal and you will need premium, per discussions here, at that setting. I might try to bump it up a bit -- I don't tow with it If I get ping it will be in the summer heat.

  I bought the Miata in the Sierra's -- it was snowing that day. Had the top up. The top hasn't been up since then !!!! I took a look at it the other day, for the first time (curiosity, I thought it might have rotted out under the boot or the plastic window gained some permanent creasing (even though it was bedded in a towel), but it was fine -- looks brand new !!!

  All you guys worrying about a few hundred bucks on your FXT deals should get a CHASE SUBARU Card -- doesn't take long to get that money back. I get a $100 check for Suby stuff from them every few months now....

         Cheers,

               Bob

bsumpter

My fuel economy has gotten even better as the miles climb, with 21,000 on the odometer I'm up to 23 mpg on my usual commute (was 22 before) - starting seeing the improvement in the 15,000 range. I also switched to synthetic oil at that time (Mobil 1), don't know if that's part of it or not.

Highway only mileage still stays around 26 mpg, running 75 mph or so. I've had 6-8 tanks that hit 27 mpg (including 3 back to back on one trip for the people that think it must be getting underfilled & that number is an error). Pretty amazing given the performance of the XT...
No crappy "winter" fuel mix in my area to deal with is probably part of the difference compared to what some others see. One other thing that I've seen posted somehwhere is the fuel mixture curve varies a lot depending on rpm - there's a lean spot in the 3,000 rpm area, very rich below & above that. Maybe I'm staying in that rpm area more than some - in this case running at lower rpm's can hurt the fuel economy rather than help.

samiam_68

My MPG has gotten better - I've been averaging around 22-23 since the switch to summer gas in NJ with 9000 on the odo, driving about 70/30 hwy/city, with A/C on part of the time. I have yet to take a highway only trip.

bstumper - I agree, running at lower RPMs has nothing to do with fuel economy. Most economical cars have high-revving engines and short gearing.

p0926

Well I don't know if they've switched to a summer blend around here or what but my last couple of tanks have gone up by almost one mpg. I've got a little over 7k on the odo now so I tried an experiment with my last tank and used 89 mid-grade. There was no noticeable difference in performance and I got 24.7 mpg with mostly hwy miles (my 3rd best mpg ever).

-Frank P

ballistic

Copycat!

p0926

Jealous!

ballistic

First you disbelieve my claim that the XT engine can easily handle moderate loads and throttle at RPMs as low as 1,500 - then discover that it's perfectly happy there. Then you scoff at my use of 89-octane. Now you're doing it.

I suppose next you'll switch sides and re-elect the President... <ducking and running>

p0926

Huh? You've got the wrong guy. I've always advocated that the Forester has good torque down low and I've repeatedly pointed out that Subaru's own literature states that premium is "recommended", not required. I just wanted to establish a solid baseline of performance and mpg using premium before switching to a lower grade gas. Now with more than 7k on the odo (and the recent spike in gas prices) it just seemed like a good time to make the switch.

-Frank P

ezshift5

..on highway MPG....27 is head and shoulders above the EPA rating (which is 'detuned' some 20% from actual EPA tests to compensate for (?)...
Still saving my Naval Reserve bucks and looking at summer of '05....best, ez..

subearu

I figure I'll run on 91 octane, at least for the break-in mileage. There is 92 and 93 available here as well as 89. All appropriate for it too.

-Brian

bluesubie

I just took a trip and got two tanks at 25.
This was with a/c and NC Interstate speeds (70 mph posted).

-Dennis

p0926

You certainly don't need higher than 91 octane.

-Frank P

lark6

All these reports of mid-twenties MPG in highway and mixed driving is good news. That's not much worse than my current 22-23 city/27-28 highway in the '00 S - and all that power to boot!

Oh man, I'm getting antsy up here on the Fence...

Ed

ballistic

My 7,000-mile average has never yet climbed as high as 22.

p0926

Four words of caution - YMMV. For every owner getting mid 20s there's another who is having a hard time breaking 20. I'm not trying to discourage you, just don't want you to be unhappy in case your mpg is less than hoped for.

-Frank P

Edit: As demonstrated by the above post :-)

bsumpter

I've only had a handful of tanks *under* 22 mpg on mine, and one of those was the very first from the dealer. Other than that single tank at 19, everything else has been 21+. My driving does always include a significant amount of highway miles though, I'm sure it would be much lower in pure city driving.

I'm still convinced that the guys running around at very low rpm's in search of better fuel economy on the XT are the cause of their poorer mileage. Tuners have looked at the fuel/air ratio, it's very rich in the lower rpm range. I stay over 2,500 rpm pretty much all the time around town, and a highway speeds it's over 3,000. It seems to like it...

corkfish

Sorry, I don't buy these mid to high 20's mpg stories. If I'm getting 21 or 22 I'm lucky. I drive it to work a few times a week and all of a sudden the tank is empty. Kind of like a guy who tells me he's getting 12.5 second quarter miles in his stock Mustang. I say how do you know? and he says, "I used a stopwatch". Ok. I'm afraid I beleive the sticker on the car over urban ledgends.

samiam_68

Agree - lower RPM are very likely the result of poor mileage on the XT. The turbo kicks in all the time when the engine is overloaded at lower RPM and therefore the mixture is rich. The boost is very small, it may not even register on the boost gauge, but the mixture turns super rich to avoid detonation. Running in the optimal RPM range (2500 and above) will yield better mileage. This is from personal experience. A couple of thousand miles ago I started shifting at higher points and keeping the revs higher in general, and my MPG improved immediatley. Now, with summer gas, it jumped up another one mile per gallon.

My last 3 tankfulls were 22.8, 24.8, and 24.4 (summer gas). Before that, I used to get between 21-22 (higher RPMs). And before, I used to get 20-21 (low RPM shifting / driving). The first tank from the dealer was 19 - that was the lowest ever (probably not filled all the way from the dealership).

This is my second turbocharged car, and the MPG vs RPM theory seems to hold true for both. Keep the revs up! :-)

p0926

Did you mean that you've never averaged 22 mpg for a tank or were you referring to the lifetime cumulative average?

-Frank P.

lfdal

So..... should I not put the auto in D and leave it in 3 most of the time - my driving is seldom over 40 mph, frequently long spells at 30 where I can see the engine rev's at around 1500 or so.

Viewpoints welcome....

Thanks,

Larry

kens

Ed: I thought you were already on the fence!

Jack: Are you comfortably past the break-in period yet? If yes, it might be an interesting experiment to measure your gas milage driving at higher average RPMs.

Ken

bsumpter

It's funny that there's always somebody that calls you a liar if you say you're getting better fuel economy than they can manage

I don't doubt that some are seeing worse, just trying to point out a possible reason why. Those of us who are getting better mileage pretty much drive using the same technique - it's not too hard to see a trend there...

tidester

Of course there are those who DO exaggerate mileage claims - enough so to raise an occasional doubt or two about remarkable claims whether or not they are true. :-)

tidester, host

p0926

Tidester- No doubt the opposite also holds true - owners so unhappy with their mpg that they report it as being even worse than it is.

-Frank P

samiam_68

I was referring to a manual transmission. Automatics are totally different in that they are non-linear and allow the engine to multiply torque at low RPMs due to the slippage in the torque converter. Plus, they are governed by a lot of electronic wizardry. You can try driving in 3 instead of D around town - it may or may not help the gas mileage.
Manuals are a lot simpler - the RPM and speed are always linear. When you let up on the gas in a stick-shift car, the RPM's don't drop like they do in the automatic. Conversely, when you step on it, the RPMs don't jump but increase gradually.