maca1983

iTrader: (3)

He's just being a clever **** unsuccessfully

BrownPantsRacing

iTrader: (6)

So info taken from someone else taken from the internet. Yep, gotta be 100% correct that Maca! Well done! Good research.

Tidgy

Man, talk about getting pissy lol

No it's not an official figure, it was quoted a number of years back, if you want I can get the post removed so it doesn't offend your nature.

maca1983

iTrader: (3)

don't worry about brown duds he gets his pants in a twist sometimes

BrownPantsRacing

iTrader: (6)

Not having a go at you Tidgy!

Was just a comment about more of Maca's sweeping unsubstantiated comments that's all.

LuckyWelshchap

Just under 2 weeks, 17 pages and almost 500 posts. *

Yep, tall oaks most certainly do grow from small acorns.
And just like them, this thread seems to branch out in all directions.

Certainly stirred up a good debate op

* Internet-based statistics with due acknowledgement to Scoobynet.com

maca1983

iTrader: (3)

maca1983

iTrader: (3)

Carnut

I know that this thread has gone of track a little and iam not going to help but........with regards to "safe" power, well its relatively, well that and engine builder's making educated guesses.

But in response to engine failures, could be worth a quick look, I think you will be surprised how many engine failures even the most reliable of engine's have. http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-new...ngine-failures I also think that 30% is quite simply a reckless figure, Subaru are no were to be seen at the bottom of the engine failure list.

Tidgy

Overall though Subaru don't sell that many 2.5 turbos though. US is their biggest market iirc and then sell mostly NA stuff

Carnut

It doesn't matter how many they sell, if they only sold a few hundred and most failed it would still give a high percentage, the stats ive quoted are a percentage of car's sold.

Tidgy

But its by manufacturer, so if they sell a million others per 100 2.5's 30 2.5 failures is less than 0.01%

LuckyWelshchap

You can put it back on track quite easily CJT.

How many 2.5 engine failures have been attributed to poor mapping?


Joking aside, there's a few good debates going on here, flavoured by the mandatory little squabble.

Anyway, my view:

Some non-mechanics (ie. not their profession) are quite happy to take their engines apart etc (I'm certainly not one of them) and they have no problems with the repairs etc.

Most (me included) take them to professionals, and sometimes the job is bodged for one reason or another. Quite a few examples in threads here, and the outcomes.
Get good service and you usually stick with them, generally no reason to change after all.

I wouldn't 'not go' somewhere because of one person's bad experience but I'd perhaps pay a bit more attention to what had been done.

Just as Fuel Injection replaced carbs, electronic ignition came along, turbo technology, EMS etc. etc. mapping is part of the evolution.
If you're happy learning new technologies and techniques, want to move with the times and are confident enough to keep your bills well down by maintaining your own car then you'd be a fool not to.
I suppose buying a laptop and downloading software is the modern 150-piece toolkit and Haynes Manual.

Finally, another aspect:
I remember someone asking an accountant how they justified their high fees, and the accountant replied "you're paying for my knowledge, not my time".
That seems particularly apt in this respect.

Carnut

I hear what you are saying but...

European Subaru sales figures.

All subaru's / impreza

06 55,000 / 12,000
07 46,000 / 14,000
08 50,000 / 12,000
09 45,000 / 11,000
10 46,000 / 10.000
11 38,000 / 8,000
12 42,000 / 3,000
13 38,000 / 2,000

Not quite 1,000,000 100

SN will also tell you that the legacy diesel's had many failures as well.

Clearly the 2.5 engine failures could hide to a certain degree behind the success of the other car's subaru make but not so much that they wouldn't make some impact on the overall figures.

And as LuckyWelshchap says, there has been some modified engines that have gone bang that alot of the oth car manufacturers don't have to worry about.

I have not owned all the 2.5 e er made so can't speak from personal experience but I find the info on SN reads somewhat differently to the official figures.

Blue by You

iTrader: (23)

I'm not having a dig here mate, but this is my whole point, you're unsure.
You say the v9 rods are good for 450bhp. Who has done the definitive, repeated, and destructive testing to ascertain that figure? Nobody that I know of so it's all anecdotal.
And incidentally, where is the bhp measurement derived from?
Torque.
I'm not saying they won't tolerate higher torque levels. My own v9 engine was running 440ft/lbs until I chickened out and bought a forged build, but the fact is you're in largely unknown territory at 400+ ft/lbs.

maca1983

iTrader: (3)

Good job im only at 340 ft/lbs then

The reason I am unsure is that my knowledge is minimal but the Subaru specialist who rebuilt my second hand block has vast experience of tuning/rebuilding engines and knows from past experiences how far to push an engine, his advice to myself was that I am running "safe power". He also gave me a 12 month warranty on the engine and everything I have done from running it in to mapping last Thursday was done from his advice so he must be pretty confident! because if anything goes wrong its down to him to fix

So I could say his testing to gain this knowledge has been served over x amount of years and probably taking engines that little bit too far.

Tidgy

um, where on erth did you get those figures from? cos they aint anywhere near lol

http://media.subaru.com/homepage.do;...C7D49A97C521CB

subaru us sales fiugures, jul 2013 35,994, jul 2014 45,714.

i cant believe they sold 2000 cars in the rest of the year so would have been well over 50k lol but i do agree, not a mill.

o in fact here you go, subaru US sold 424k cars in 2013,

http://www.autonews.com/article/2014...6-jump-in-2013

Carnut

I said EUROPEAN sales figures, I thought it might be more appropriate being that we are in Europe not to mention all the accusations on SN are based on uk members cars.

If you want to talk about the us then with out looking into I think their opinion on the 2.5 is some what more rosy than ours.

Tidgy

o right, that link is world wide figures though not europe, so not realy a valid point to the argument.

Carnut

What argument, there was a discussion on engines and engine failures and I just put some statistics up, make what you will of them.

p.s the study from the original link that I put up was from Warranty Direct uk.

not sure it's relevant at this point but apologies to the op .

Emmaroids

iTrader: (2)

another ive got a 2.5 so its fine blinkered owner...............
its a very unreliable weak engine in standard form, thats well documented and common knowledge in the subaru community.

Carnut

Pull your head from out of your ****, I don't have a clue what the reliability is like with the 2.5, just that I read one thing on SN and then another thing when I read the statistics, to be honest I don't know what to believe.

I know this though, you have got one hell of a gob on you so I won't be taking anything you say seriously.

its been nice, maybe we could chat again sometime.

Emmaroids

iTrader: (2)

calm down love xxx its a crap engine in standard form

Maz

iTrader: (34)

It's not just that the engine itself is inherently weak, the stringent emission laws mean the mapping from the factory is on the limit. It's the P1 all over again.

Emmaroids

iTrader: (2)

Carnut

Let's not forget the oil pick up.

Emmaroids

iTrader: (2)

or the headgasket and ringland failure issues and the problems with the air pump

Carnut

Now come on, let's not go over the top, it's only the secondary air pump.

Jayjay100

Wow was that back in the days wear if something worked on the Subaru use it . Lol. Been looking into this mapping things like most of you have. I no alot more now and if getting the softwear it's don't seem that hard to play with the ECU. It would just meen taking your time to no wear to set things . That's wear if you go to a pro mapper it shod be done at that 100% level 1st time . Or just take your time and do it your self . You will see its not that hard . (But I will say paying some of the price some of the mapper want is a rip off . But if they are doing you a deal I.e a esl & mapping at a what YOU think is a good price . Then go for that mapper.
But price just for mapping shod come down abit . We all like to add bits to your car if mapping was cheeper then you would not have to save up and by the intercooler/jets/ fuel pump / & so on all in one go just to then get it mapped . Anyway . Good reading some of the comments. & has made me look into something I did not no much about befor the link started.

fat-thomas

iTrader: (4)

did your 6 year old son write this??? please use a spell checker for those of us that went to school as i cant understand most of it.