Buying an Outback with over 100k miles? would you do it?- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 33 of 33
  1. #1
    person
    Reputation: G-VegasMTBiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    684

    New question here. Buying an Outback with over 100k miles? would you do it?

    Let me start off by first saying that I'm a college student, I don't have a lot of money to throw around. That said, I am in need of a new car. In the past I've spent about 1-2k on a Sh!t box and dealt with the repairs. However this time I am really looking for a reliable car that I won't have to put a ton of money into to keep running. Through my research I've come to a Subaru Outback Wagon as the best car for me. Its large enough to carry a lot, has AWD, which would be very helpful up here in New England, it gets pretty good mileage (listed at mid 20's, which I figured I could coax up to about 28-29 with an air intake and high flow exhaust), plus as far as I know the roof bars are interchangeable with Yakima Roof rack accessories (correct me if I'm wrong). This brings me to my main question. I only be able to spend about $5000, maybe $5500. For that price what I'm finding are outbacks with around 110000-150000 miles. Would it be worth buying one with that many miles or would I have to spend a lot on maintenance?

    FYI: I also plan on getting a standard if that helps.

    -Thanks, Dave
    My epiglottis is full of bees!

    Slapheadmofo
    EPhatch

  2. #2
    Skier by trade
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    132
    If it has a good service pedigree, not an issue. You will be looking at a late 90's model. If it is a 2.5L, head gaskets are the issue, make sure it has been changed. Get a compression check and axel boots are good.

    I would prefer to buy such a car from the original owner, meet them at their house, if the house is nice and well kept, chances are the car is too.
    Click. Point. Chute.

  3. #3
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    31,660
    Quote Originally Posted by G-VegasMTBiker
    which I figured I could coax up to about 28-29 with an air intake and high flow exhaust),
    No, if you open the intake and exaust you are going to suck more air into the cylinders, the car will compensate by increasing the amount of fuel going to the cylinders. The reason that you get a little more power is because you're putting more fuel and oxygen into the cylinders, it's not going to save you fuel at all, it's going to give you more ability to use MORE fuel.

    I have a subie, but the above doesn't really have anything to do with it, it's just that you'll get better gas milege operating on the least amount of power that will get your car going, increasing the power available will cause more fuel to be rammed down the cylinders when you acellerate and at almost all other times, you might not actually burn that much more during cruise, but cruising around at a constant speed isn't what kills fuel milege, it's acellerations and changes of speed.

    Outbacks are nice, I'm approaching 50K with the WRX wagon. My parents had the ll beam outback with the 3.0 6 cylinder. That was a very nice engine.

    I think the longevity of my cars (cross my fingers) has a lot to do with the climate it operates in. I live in arizona and it's very, very, very, very dry. It seems to help a lot.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  4. #4
    person
    Reputation: G-VegasMTBiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    684
    [QUOTE=Jayem]No, if you open the intake and exaust you are going to suck more air into the cylinders, the car will compensate by increasing the amount of fuel going to the cylinders. The reason that you get a little more power is because you're putting more fuel and oxygen into the cylinders, it's not going to save you fuel at all, it's going to give you more ability to use MORE fuel. QUOTE]

    I'm inclined to believe you, but is all the hype about boosted fuel economy through using a High Flow air intake a scam then?
    My epiglottis is full of bees!

    Slapheadmofo
    EPhatch

  5. #5
    Muskoka
    Reputation: BlackCanoeDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Posts
    3,433
    Subie reliability is at least as good as the best out there, and better than most. The AWD is the best on the market. Here in central Ontario they are very popular cars, and you do see a lot of older ones that are in surprisingly good shape ( no rust) considering all the road salt used up here in winter. Yes, Yakima racks fit Subie factory rails just fine, and I have the Lowriders on my WRX wagon. Be sure to get the Fairing as well, or the wind noise from the bars will drive you nuts.

  6. #6
    We want... a shrubbery!
    Reputation: ickyickyptngzutboing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    550
    You gain the better fuel economy from the increased power -- the engine has more available power and therefore doesn't downshift as much as an engine without an intake. Yes, you get more power, and you can use more gas, but at the same time that extra power let's you hold that high gear longer...

    I have a true Cold Air Intake on my truck, and it has improved my fuel economy. However, at the same time, I think it's more the driver that affects the fuel economy than the vehicle itself. Avoid balls to the wall accelerations and sporadic braking, and you've already improved your fuel economy greatly.
    waaahoooooooooooooooooo

    Calvin : Ahhh, another bowl of Chocolate Frosted Sugar Bombs! The second bowl is always the best! The pleasure of my first bowl is diminished by the anticipation of future bowls and by the end of my third bowl, I usually feel sick.
    Hobbes : Maybe you shouldn't use chocolate milk.
    Calvin : I tried Cola, but the bubbles went up my nose.

  7. #7
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    31,660
    Quote Originally Posted by ickyickyptngzutboing
    You gain the better fuel economy from the increased power -- the engine has more available power and therefore doesn't downshift as much as an engine without an intake. Yes, you get more power, and you can use more gas, but at the same time that extra power let's you hold that high gear longer...

    I have a true Cold Air Intake on my truck, and it has improved my fuel economy. However, at the same time, I think it's more the driver that affects the fuel economy than the vehicle itself. Avoid balls to the wall accelerations and sporadic braking, and you've already improved your fuel economy greatly.
    That's BS. Cold air decreases milege due to the increased amount of fuel and air that goes into the cylinders. When your car acellerates it will use that extra power to get to speed a little faster, that right there decreases the efficiency, although if you're getting more "power", who's to say that it's not efficiently making "more" power? The downside though is that milege should be worse.

    This is the exact same reason that milege is worse in the winter, and better in summer. A given amount of fuel and oxygen will produce the same results, but the incomming and outgoing temperatures vary quite a bit and will affect the actual results (diff between the intake and exaust temp determins efficiency). Cold air is more dense and will require more fuel to be stochiometric, and while it may produce more power due to this increased density, the efficiency will end up being worse due to the constant accellerations the car makes. If you could FORCE the car's computer to use less than the available amount of power then you'd increase your efficiency. In other words, you're car may make 80% power on a real real hot day. If you could force the computer to make the engine produce 80% power on a real COLD day you'd boost your efficiency. Because you can't control this, you end up buring more fuel on that cold day because you're using more horsepower and in the end, it's all about how much fuel and O2 go into the cylinders.


    Maybe the above is a little harsh, but you're not getting better milege due to your intake, there's another factor involved. The auto engineers are not dumb and if there was a quick and easy fix to boost milege and power at the same time, don't you think they'd jump on it so they could advertise?

    I have the before mentioned products on my subie already, and I can tell you that milege is no better on the highway, but worse in the city, this adds up to worse overall. Not a huge amount by itself, but it's there.


    Yes, you can do a LOT by using smart driving habits.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  8. #8
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    31,660
    Quote Originally Posted by G-VegasMTBiker

    I'm inclined to believe you, but is all the hype about boosted fuel economy through using a High Flow air intake a scam then?
    And oh yeah, a LOT of stuff about the high flow intakes is false and a scam. You don't get any benefit really if you put one on and don't open the exaust more, you can't open one end and leave the other restricted and expect a real change. A lot of the "improvements" are just the placebo effect and can be accounted for variance from day to day due to modern engine management systems (when the car is dynoed). Lots of "cold air" systems really aren't, some can suck water when it rains or when roads are wet, and so on.

    More air and fuel going into the engine will give you more power, but it's not quite as simple as bolting on a K&N product usually.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  9. #9
    person
    Reputation: G-VegasMTBiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    684
    Thanks for the feedback so far, if anyone else has more to add about Subaru's, please feel free.

    -Dave
    My epiglottis is full of bees!

    Slapheadmofo
    EPhatch

  10. #10
    person
    Reputation: G-VegasMTBiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    684
    I just dropped a line to the people at K&N. What they said backs up what was stated earlier about the driver having the greatest role in fuel Economy. "customers with more aggressive driving habits typically see mileage decrease, while customers with more conservative driving habits often see mileage improve slightly."
    My epiglottis is full of bees!

    Slapheadmofo
    EPhatch

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    6
    here is a link with some subaru info a friend sent me since I'm on the hunt too.
    http://boston.craigslist.org/gbs/car/370666292.html

  12. #12
    Harrumph
    Reputation: G-reg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,597
    The Suby's are good for well over 100K, it's barely broken in. Another poster mentioned the head gaskets on some 2.5's, I'll add that is for "phase II" engines in suby's from 1999-2001. Phase II engines after 2001 have the problem. The problem was covered under a special warranty up to 100K/8Yrs. As to the intake/exhaust, if properly designed they remove restriction on their respective sides of the engine (itself simply an air pump). You will see millage gains if you don't drive differently than you did without the modifications (again assuming they are properly designed). It will be hard to keep your foot out of it though, Suby's with a louder exhaust sound really good for a 4 cylinder.
    Slowly slipping to retrogrouchyness

  13. #13
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BlueTrain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    321
    go with an used legacy wagon with the bulletproof 2.2l motor. for 5000, youll get a better ride than if you try to fit an outback in your budget. the 2.2l is way more reliable as well.

  14. #14
    person
    Reputation: G-VegasMTBiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    684
    Bluetrain, after reading a few more reviews, I've come to that conclusion. I now am looking more at the Legacy Sedan, or Impreza outback wagon, because they both have the 2.2L. However some friends of mine may be selling their Civic, and although its not the most ideal car its almost too good of a deal to pass up.
    -Dave
    My epiglottis is full of bees!

    Slapheadmofo
    EPhatch

  15. #15
    Harrumph
    Reputation: G-reg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    1,597
    I had a 92 Legacy that I bought with 127K on the clock, and drove it like it was stolen for three years. I traded it in with 255K, and it still ran well. Those 2.2's are hard to kill, I tried. Early Legacy Outbacks had the 2.2, only for the first few model years.
    Slowly slipping to retrogrouchyness

  16. #16
    ballbuster
    Reputation: pimpbot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    12,717

    Yeah, pretty much.

    [quote=G-VegasMTBiker]
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem
    No, if you open the intake and exaust you are going to suck more air into the cylinders, the car will compensate by increasing the amount of fuel going to the cylinders. The reason that you get a little more power is because you're putting more fuel and oxygen into the cylinders, it's not going to save you fuel at all, it's going to give you more ability to use MORE fuel. QUOTE]

    I'm inclined to believe you, but is all the hype about boosted fuel economy through using a High Flow air intake a scam then?
    I suppose if it was a stick, you could upshift earlier for more effective 'short shifting' but the difference will be minimal if anything. Maybe the colder air charge helps fuel economy, but again that is probably minimal.... and not smog legal.

    On my old '79 Scirocco, I did notice a small bump in gas mileage when I put a free flow exhaust on it. I guess it may been due to reduced backpressure in the exhaust... or it could have been my imagination.

  17. #17
    Nat
    Nat is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Nat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    13,637
    Quote Originally Posted by G-VegasMTBiker
    I'm inclined to believe you, but is all the hype about boosted fuel economy through using a High Flow air intake a scam then?
    From what I've read, adding a cold air intake primarily lets you hear the turbo and bypass valve "whooooOOOOOOSH...pshhhhhhhhhhhhhht" more than anything. Watching some youtube videos, I must admit it sounds kinda cool, like the car is alive and breathing heavily.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miVBd...elated&search=
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwVmi...elated&search=
    Last edited by Nat; 07-13-2007 at 10:19 PM.

  18. #18
    Nat
    Nat is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Nat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    13,637
    I traded in a '97 Legacy Outback that just popped 100k miles for $3800. I would've been happy selling it privately for $3000 actually. The exterior was in fair shape but it was highly reliable and mechanically sound. You could find something like that in your budget. It'd make a great college/bike/winter vehicle. I just got bored with the lethargic handling and performance.

  19. #19
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,050
    Quote Originally Posted by G-VegasMTBiker
    Bluetrain, after reading a few more reviews, I've come to that conclusion. I now am looking more at the Legacy Sedan, or Impreza outback wagon, because they both have the 2.2L. However some friends of mine may be selling their Civic, and although its not the most ideal car its almost too good of a deal to pass up.
    -Dave
    If I were looking for reliable, and cheap to maintain, I would get the Civic.

    I own a '05 Outback 2.5XT (2.5L turbo ... *not* good on gas mileage, but lots of power), and have been very happy with it. Unless I have major issues with it in the next couple years, I will probably buy another.

    Up until the Subaru, we've had Honda's almost exclusively ('83 Accord, '93 Civic, '01 CR-V, '02 S2000, and '06 Odyssey) ... though I did stray a bit with a '00 Xterra. Civic's (and Honda's in general) are extremely reliable and extremely easy to work on if things go wrong. While a Civic isn't AWD, that's two less diffs and two less axles to worry about.

    The Civic will likely also maintain its value as long as you own it (I sold my '93 Civic after 10 years for more than 50% of its new price!), though that may be entirely geographic related (Subies probably hold their value better in Colorado than California, and vice versa).

    . . .

    As for worse mileage in the winter, at least the reason for that in California (and many other states), is the oxygenation of the fuel, rather than the density of the air. As another person commented, it's the person driving that has the biggest influence (it is true that you'll get more power on a cold day given the same fuel/air mix, but that just means you'll get the same power for less throttle input).

  20. #20
    mtbr member
    Reputation: California L33's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    699
    Quote Originally Posted by G-VegasMTBiker
    I just dropped a line to the people at K&N. What they said backs up what was stated earlier about the driver having the greatest role in fuel Economy. "customers with more aggressive driving habits typically see mileage decrease, while customers with more conservative driving habits often see mileage improve slightly."
    Anything which increases and engine's efficiency can help or hinder mileage, as K&N says, but I would also doubt that a K&N filter and new exhaust will effect mileage more than a percentage point or two. The nice thing about K&N filters is they can be washed and reused.

    I think it's highly unlikely you'll get 29MPG no matter what you do. Keep in mind that EPA "estimated" mileage is almost always high to start with, and that engines get less efficient as they start to wear.
    To the troll mobile, away...

  21. #21
    Nat
    Nat is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Nat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    13,637
    Quote Originally Posted by G-VegasMTBiker
    Bluetrain, after reading a few more reviews, I've come to that conclusion. I now am looking more at the Legacy Sedan, or Impreza outback wagon, because they both have the 2.2L. However some friends of mine may be selling their Civic, and although its not the most ideal car its almost too good of a deal to pass up.
    -Dave
    If you want good mileage then that Civic would be a good choice. We have a '99 Civic LX that's closing in on 100K miles that has been absolutely reliable and still gets 35 mpg. We haven't had to do anything more than regular maintenance.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rockymtnrider's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    291

    Don't forget other Subarus

    I own a 95 legacy that I bought in 2000 for 7000. I got the car with 42000 miles on it. I now have 278000 on it. I think that the outback cost more then other subarus. If you get a legacy or impressa with out the outback you will save money. You can always buy used outback rims and get the car a little higher.
    Try to get the car with the lowest millage you can. Don't worry about auto or manual no big gas savings with the manual. If you get one with over 75000 miles on it make sure you can see some service records. You may have to get the timing belt changed and that is a little costly.

    I'm thinking about a new car and I love my AWD, so I might start looking at the new Tribeca. I need something that can seat the family. I wish Subaru made mini vans.

  23. #23
    ballbuster
    Reputation: pimpbot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    12,717

    Depends on the manufacturer

    Quote Originally Posted by California L33
    Keep in mind that EPA "estimated" mileage is almost always high to start with, and that engines get less efficient as they start to wear.
    My VW GTi gets 2 MPG better than the EPA estimate, and I don't drive like an old man.

    http://www.edmunds.com/used/1996/vol...813/specs.html

  24. #24
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    31,660
    Quote Originally Posted by Nat
    From what I've read, adding a cold air intake primarily lets you hear the turbo and bypass valve "whooooOOOOOOSH...pshhhhhhhhhhhhhht" more than anything. Watching some youtube videos, I must admit it sounds kinda cool, like the car is alive and breathing heavily.
    It is cool, but what you're talking about is the turbo-silencer, which is what comes on the intake system on the stock WRX. By opening it up and using a much more direct intake and filter, you're obviously going to get some more power. It has NOTHING to do with "cold" air, that's something else that sucks air from down lower where there's lower pressure and colder air, in fact you have to put a heat-shield in when you do the SPT intake on the WRX because the interior of the engine is so damn HOT. If you want to increase your milege, suck in that HOT air and you'll get better milege (and worse power of course).

    Opening up the intake will inevitably allow you to hear the turbo more, but it's getting rid of a buch of crap that required the airflow to bend and curve all over the place to make it to the turbo, that somewhat higher volume and more direct flow is why you mod the intake, the turbo sound is just a cool benefit, unelss it annoys you

    The problem with the real "cold air intake" systems is that they can often suck up water from the road when it's wet, which is REAL BAD. Most bolt-on intake systems are not necessarily "cold air intake" systems.

    The amount of hype with "intake systems" in general is pretty unbelievable though, the "gains" in performance are made out to be much bigger than they really are, and in some cases there is NO measurable gain (the exhaust can only "exhaust" so fast). As a general rule though, anything that increases power will decrease milege, because it gives you the ability to acell faster and in general go faster. If you usually go 0-60 in 20 seconds to save fuel, a mod that increases power will allow it faster with the same inputs. If you're using cruise control, the engine is going to go back to speed when it varys (hills, etc) as fast as it can, and use more gas. There are exceptions to this, but also tradeoffs. A turbo engine runs hot, the computer sprays more fuel in there than necessary to keep the temp down (runs rich usually). If you run leaner you'd get better milege, but the heat of your engine would also go up a lot. In other words, it goes back to the carnot engine, the temp of the incomming air vs the outgoing air determines efficiency, and the bigger that diff is, the hotter the engine is running, which after a point is very bad of course.
    Last edited by Jayem; 07-14-2007 at 06:55 PM.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  25. #25
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    31,660
    Quote Originally Posted by anotherbrian
    As another person commented, it's the person driving that has the biggest influence (it is true that you'll get more power on a cold day given the same fuel/air mix, but that just means you'll get the same power for less throttle input).
    That's the problem though, it's bordering on impossible to really drive like that, remember that if you have cruise control the car will use more gas hands down, the speed will vary, it will try to return to speed with as much power as the engine can give. It will suck down more gas. The second factor is the human factor. Are you really going to go 0-60 (or whatever) slower to save gas? Are you really metering that throttle input when you are releasing the clutch and starting up? It's not going to give you much more power, and the milege increase (if present) would be very small, so are you really using the throttle in every situation enough to actually get that better milege? I don't think it's impossible, but I think it's completely unlrealistic.

    That "less throttle" input is true, it's just that it's so small that you can't really meter it.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  26. #26
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    31,660
    Quote Originally Posted by California L33
    Anything which increases and engine's efficiency can help or hinder mileage, as K&N says, but I would also doubt that a K&N filter and new exhaust will effect mileage more than a percentage point or two. The nice thing about K&N filters is they can be washed and reused.

    I think it's highly unlikely you'll get 29MPG no matter what you do. Keep in mind that EPA "estimated" mileage is almost always high to start with, and that engines get less efficient as they start to wear.
    I got 29 on the highway in my WRX from central AZ to San Diego, and 27 on the way back. At 80mph most of the time.

    It's amazing how much WORSE the milege is with a turbo in the city though when you're constantly acellerating, I can make the gas go REAL fast. The highway milege is NOT representative of what you'll get in the city at all. Don't get a turbo for better milege

    I definitely wouldn't put anything on the top (I use a hitch), my milege is bad enough as it is. I also find myself passing people way too often
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  27. #27
    Nat
    Nat is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Nat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    13,637
    Jayem (and others),

    What's your opinion on the Cobb Access Port? It seems almost too easy to reflash the ECU with this device. I read about how great people think it is but no one mentions any downsides. I would pay the $600 for it if there were no chance of me trading performance gains for some other problem, but I'm always leery when someone claims to have all benefits without any drawbacks.

    So far all I have non-stock is the SPT cat-back (which is a Subaru product of course, so it's almost a stock item). I don't plan on modding the car, but that Cobb AP sounds nice.

  28. #28
    mtbr member
    Reputation: nachomc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    6,787
    Since you've already determined that the 2.2 is the way to go for you (which is what I was coming in to recommend - the 2.5 motor has headgasket issues), I would recommend you get a Legacy L wagon. The L has the 2.2, is generally far cheaper than the outback and the 2.2. is rock solid.
    :wq

  29. #29
    Elitest thrill junkie
    Reputation: Jayem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    31,660
    Quote Originally Posted by Nat
    Jayem (and others),

    What's your opinion on the Cobb Access Port? It seems almost too easy to reflash the ECU with this device. I read about how great people think it is but no one mentions any downsides. I would pay the $600 for it if there were no chance of me trading performance gains for some other problem, but I'm always leery when someone claims to have all benefits without any drawbacks.

    So far all I have non-stock is the SPT cat-back (which is a Subaru product of course, so it's almost a stock item). I don't plan on modding the car, but that Cobb AP sounds nice.
    Reflashing a chip can help significantly, again you'll have more ability to use more fuel, as it can alter the amount of fuel sent to the cylinders, alter other parameters. On the other hand, I have heard bad things (not about cobb specifically), I had a student who had some pretty bad problems with mods, and I'm sure amongst those was a reflash. I don't know much particulars about it, but I know this, the more mods you make the more chance you have of everything not "working together" well. Lots of mods require other mods to work, and it becomes and endless problem. Can't run more boost because mixture too lean, so bigger fuel injectors but then fuel pump is too weak, then have to do bigger intercooler to deal with excess heat of turbo, then get bigger turbo to not overwork turbo, then up and downpipes are restricting everything, and so on. I don't know where it all ends and I'm honestly NOT going to go to extremes like this. I just want a fast car, and I pretty much have it. Personally, unless I win the lottery and get crazy (and then I'd buy another car anyway), I'm just planning on opening up the exaust more on mine, putting in an electronic boost controller, and bigger intercooler. I don't want to do anything more than that really, and there are ways that I could maximize those mods by making other mods, but then you get going down a road that never ends.

    So I can't say if the Cobb is a good idea (have heard mostly good stuff about Cobb flashes), but you gotta draw the line somewhere too.
    "It's only when you stand over it, you know, when you physically stand over the bike, that then you say 'hey, I don't have much stand over height', you know"-T. Ellsworth

    You're turning black metallic.

  30. #30
    Nat
    Nat is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Nat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    13,637
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem
    Reflashing a chip can help significantly, again you'll have more ability to use more fuel, as it can alter the amount of fuel sent to the cylinders, alter other parameters. On the other hand, I have heard bad things (not about cobb specifically), I had a student who had some pretty bad problems with mods, and I'm sure amongst those was a reflash. I don't know much particulars about it, but I know this, the more mods you make the more chance you have of everything not "working together" well. Lots of mods require other mods to work, and it becomes and endless problem. Can't run more boost because mixture too lean, so bigger fuel injectors but then fuel pump is too weak, then have to do bigger intercooler to deal with excess heat of turbo, then get bigger turbo to not overwork turbo, then up and downpipes are restricting everything, and so on. I don't know where it all ends and I'm honestly NOT going to go to extremes like this. I just want a fast car, and I pretty much have it. Personally, unless I win the lottery and get crazy (and then I'd buy another car anyway), I'm just planning on opening up the exaust more on mine, putting in an electronic boost controller, and bigger intercooler. I don't want to do anything more than that really, and there are ways that I could maximize those mods by making other mods, but then you get going down a road that never ends.

    So I can't say if the Cobb is a good idea (have heard mostly good stuff about Cobb flashes), but you gotta draw the line somewhere too.
    I hear ya'. On the Subaru boards it seems as if everybody has heavily modded their car, yet they all say, "No way I'd buy someone else's modded car; too likely to be messed up!"

    I'm not about to let my car get all ghetto'ed out that way. Mine's adequately fast for my tastes right now, so I'm not sure why I'm even tempted by the Cobb AP. Seems like easy money, but I know that nothing's free.

  31. #31
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    1,050
    Quote Originally Posted by Nat
    Jayem (and others),

    What's your opinion on the Cobb Access Port? It seems almost too easy to reflash the ECU with this device. I read about how great people think it is but no one mentions any downsides. I would pay the $600 for it if there were no chance of me trading performance gains for some other problem, but I'm always leery when someone claims to have all benefits without any drawbacks.

    So far all I have non-stock is the SPT cat-back (which is a Subaru product of course, so it's almost a stock item). I don't plan on modding the car, but that Cobb AP sounds nice.
    From all I've read (primarily on legacygt.com), the Cobb AP is as good as it sounds. Of course, more power = less fuel economy, but that goes without saying. The only apparent downside is risking your drivetrain warranty (if you still have one), and the increased wear and tear on the motor due to the increase stresses from the additional power. The current Legacy/Outbacks (2.5L turbos) appear to get their power (and its pretty huge, ~20% increase in torque without any other mods) by spooling up the turbo at lower RPMs.

    I'm in California, and the maps used for our 91 octane gas doesn't give nearly the same gains as the rest of the countries 92, but I still plan on getting an AP once my warranty is over (and with the AP's ability to switch between maps, having access to the 92 map when I'm near the local Unocal that sells race gas might be fun). I also plan to replace the up and downpipes and de-cat as necessary (er, for trackdays, ya).

  32. #32
    Nat
    Nat is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Nat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    13,637
    Quote Originally Posted by anotherbrian
    From all I've read (primarily on legacygt.com), the Cobb AP is as good as it sounds. Of course, more power = less fuel economy, but that goes without saying. The only apparent downside is risking your drivetrain warranty (if you still have one), and the increased wear and tear on the motor due to the increase stresses from the additional power. The current Legacy/Outbacks (2.5L turbos) appear to get their power (and its pretty huge, ~20% increase in torque without any other mods) by spooling up the turbo at lower RPMs.

    I'm in California, and the maps used for our 91 octane gas doesn't give nearly the same gains as the rest of the countries 92, but I still plan on getting an AP once my warranty is over (and with the AP's ability to switch between maps, having access to the 92 map when I'm near the local Unocal that sells race gas might be fun). I also plan to replace the up and downpipes and de-cat as necessary (er, for trackdays, ya).
    Fuel economy isn't big on my needs list with this car. As long as I stay 20mpg and above, I'm happy. I just bought this car June 1st so all warranties are intact. I definitely want to keep them that way.

  33. #33
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayem
    And oh yeah, a LOT of stuff about the high flow intakes is false and a scam. You don't get any benefit really if you put one on and don't open the exaust more, you can't open one end and leave the other restricted and expect a real change. A lot of the "improvements" are just the placebo effect and can be accounted for variance from day to day due to modern engine management systems (when the car is dynoed). Lots of "cold air" systems really aren't, some can suck water when it rains or when roads are wet, and so on.

    More air and fuel going into the engine will give you more power, but it's not quite as simple as bolting on a K&N product usually.
    Bingo, right on the money.

    CAIs are a sham, they really are. People buy into this stuff and it's TERRIBLE. Just like guys who think a K&N filter will give 5hp and 2 more MPG...not to mention don't understand how terrible the filtration is and the oil fouling up the MAF.

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2019 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.