ScoobyNet EJ20/EJ22//EJ25 ** ON Standard Internals ** LEADERBOARD
05 April 2016, 01:24 PM
#393
Scooby Regular
Plan to put it on the dyno over next month at some point. That is all i have from andy forrest mapping it on the road. So not 100% accurate. But what dyno is lol ??
12 April 2016, 06:29 AM
#394
Seen people rock up to SRR bragging 400 based on something like that and gone home with a 350bhp readout very annoyed.
Personally I'd remove it from the list until you have it dyno'd - the delta dash (or similar) figure is estimated, otherwise you end up with a very widely distributed list which could be wildly inaccurate.
Everyone else on the list has figures from a dyno I believe?
Mr Forrest does good work it would be interesting to see how well his estimate matches the readout.
1.7 bar is also quite high for a standard engine, most only go to 1.5 or just above for safety, but again that may be an inaccurate reading.
Last edited by MrNoisy; 12 April 2016 at 06:30 AM.
12 April 2016, 06:37 AM
#395
Apologies mate I misread 2005 for 2.5 when I wrote that originally.
533 on a 2.0 though bloody hell haha.
How long are you realistically hoping that will last?
I saw my old car ran a 435/380 the other day at SRR on V Power even though as far as I'm aware the compression issue still hasn't been looked into, so shows these can take a pounding but 500+ must be really pushing it on standard internals - might be worth getting the valves uprated as I'm told that's what typically suffers on the widetrack cars.
533 on a 2.0 though bloody hell haha.
How long are you realistically hoping that will last?
I saw my old car ran a 435/380 the other day at SRR on V Power even though as far as I'm aware the compression issue still hasn't been looked into, so shows these can take a pounding but 500+ must be really pushing it on standard internals - might be worth getting the valves uprated as I'm told that's what typically suffers on the widetrack cars.
12 April 2016, 09:10 AM
#396
Scooby Regular
If it's just plugged in ECU software they typically overread in my experience.
Seen people rock up to SRR bragging 400 based on something like that and gone home with a 350bhp readout very annoyed.
Personally I'd remove it from the list until you have it dyno'd - the delta dash (or similar) figure is estimated, otherwise you end up with a very widely distributed list which could be wildly inaccurate.
Everyone else on the list has figures from a dyno I believe?
Mr Forrest does good work it would be interesting to see how well his estimate matches the readout.
1.7 bar is also quite high for a standard engine, most only go to 1.5 or just above for safety, but again that may be an inaccurate reading.
Seen people rock up to SRR bragging 400 based on something like that and gone home with a 350bhp readout very annoyed.
Personally I'd remove it from the list until you have it dyno'd - the delta dash (or similar) figure is estimated, otherwise you end up with a very widely distributed list which could be wildly inaccurate.
Everyone else on the list has figures from a dyno I believe?
Mr Forrest does good work it would be interesting to see how well his estimate matches the readout.
1.7 bar is also quite high for a standard engine, most only go to 1.5 or just above for safety, but again that may be an inaccurate reading.
Got hold of a JDM Spec C Map sensor to allow the boost above 1.5 bar,
Stock UK map sensors wont have any safety margin if running above 1.5bar using ECUtek,
Andy says he gave it more than 1.7 and it made little difference,
From previous experience, the yellow line on my graph which is my old setup quoted 355bhp/352ft/lbs, i went to Ecotune Glasgow and rolling road made 334bhp/332ft/lbs.
Using these differences as a worst case I should still be in 400+ club
Not that bad of a drop when you consider the state my spark plugs where in at the dyno run almost a year later, not only were the loose to the point it sounded like knock, they were knackered,
Hope to have it on the same rollers with this new setup to keep things scientific
29 April 2016, 12:56 PM
#398
Sold mine last November.
It's still going well despite a compression test that showed cylinder 3 to be slightly down (not really bad at all) - common issue with widetracks is valves; of the 3 well known engine builders I spoke to, 2 said the widetrack valves often need re seating and the rest of the engine will likely be fine.
It's still going well despite a compression test that showed cylinder 3 to be slightly down (not really bad at all) - common issue with widetracks is valves; of the 3 well known engine builders I spoke to, 2 said the widetrack valves often need re seating and the rest of the engine will likely be fine.
That's the first I've heard about valve issues. Is there a general consensus about at what point (bhp wise) they can start to be the weak link?
03 May 2016, 06:54 AM
#399
Got hold of a JDM Spec C Map sensor to allow the boost above 1.5 bar,
Stock UK map sensors wont have any safety margin if running above 1.5bar using ECUtek,
Andy says he gave it more than 1.7 and it made little difference,
From previous experience, the yellow line on my graph which is my old setup quoted 355bhp/352ft/lbs, i went to Ecotune Glasgow and rolling road made 334bhp/332ft/lbs.
Using these differences as a worst case I should still be in 400+ club
Not that bad of a drop when you consider the state my spark plugs where in at the dyno run almost a year later, not only were the loose to the point it sounded like knock, they were knackered,
Hope to have it on the same rollers with this new setup to keep things scientific
Stock UK map sensors wont have any safety margin if running above 1.5bar using ECUtek,
Andy says he gave it more than 1.7 and it made little difference,
From previous experience, the yellow line on my graph which is my old setup quoted 355bhp/352ft/lbs, i went to Ecotune Glasgow and rolling road made 334bhp/332ft/lbs.
Using these differences as a worst case I should still be in 400+ club
Not that bad of a drop when you consider the state my spark plugs where in at the dyno run almost a year later, not only were the loose to the point it sounded like knock, they were knackered,
Hope to have it on the same rollers with this new setup to keep things scientific
Regarding boost, JGM extracted 440/390 on v power out of mine at peak 1.65 bar tailing straight back off to 1.5 after the initial peak. That's why I felt 1.7 was a little high, but again it's probably the laptop over reading again.
Mine had a 3 bar map sensor in it for same reasons as yours.
03 May 2016, 07:01 AM
#400
*Especially* true for SIOC - Some of the most stupid advice I've ever seen found right there from people who barely understand how to drive in many cases let alone work on a vehicle and properly maintain it! The argument is always "but my car's fine because it hasn't blown up"...yeah great counter lads!
Anyway, back on topic it seems all the (reputable) engine builders are more than aware of it. Tim Farmer, Paul Finch and Alan Jeffrey - spoke to all of them, and whilst all said the widetrack engines are strong units, both Paul and Tim immediately suggested that would be the cause of the problem.
Another chap on here had a black widetrack that wouldn't crack 340 because his valves were knackered, so the answer is luck and maintenance tbh.
The valves tend to suffer on cylinder 3 which gets the hottest but apparently the widetrack design means they often have to be reseated. It's not a small amount of work - believe the guy who bought my car is doing the work.
Basically you can push but long term for a reliable (STi) engine 360+ you want forged would be my suspicion.
Last edited by MrNoisy; 03 May 2016 at 07:14 AM.
03 May 2016, 10:13 AM
#402
Scooby Regular
Yep, knowledge in the community about this seems poor, but tbh in my experience 90% of people on forums and Facebook groups simply re-post crap they find through Google rather than having a clue what they're actually talking about.
*Especially* true for SIOC - Some of the most stupid advice I've ever seen found right there from people who barely understand how to drive in many cases let alone work on a vehicle and properly maintain it! The argument is always "but my car's fine because it hasn't blown up"...yeah great counter lads!
Anyway, back on topic it seems all the (reputable) engine builders are more than aware of it. Tim Farmer, Paul Finch and Alan Jeffrey - spoke to all of them, and whilst all said the widetrack engines are strong units, both Paul and Tim immediately suggested that would be the cause of the problem.
Another chap on here had a black widetrack that wouldn't crack 340 because his valves were knackered, so the answer is luck and maintenance tbh.
The valves tend to suffer on cylinder 3 which gets the hottest but apparently the widetrack design means they often have to be reseated. It's not a small amount of work - believe the guy who bought my car is doing the work.
Basically you can push but long term for a reliable (STi) engine 360+ you want forged would be my suspicion.
*Especially* true for SIOC - Some of the most stupid advice I've ever seen found right there from people who barely understand how to drive in many cases let alone work on a vehicle and properly maintain it! The argument is always "but my car's fine because it hasn't blown up"...yeah great counter lads!
Anyway, back on topic it seems all the (reputable) engine builders are more than aware of it. Tim Farmer, Paul Finch and Alan Jeffrey - spoke to all of them, and whilst all said the widetrack engines are strong units, both Paul and Tim immediately suggested that would be the cause of the problem.
Another chap on here had a black widetrack that wouldn't crack 340 because his valves were knackered, so the answer is luck and maintenance tbh.
The valves tend to suffer on cylinder 3 which gets the hottest but apparently the widetrack design means they often have to be reseated. It's not a small amount of work - believe the guy who bought my car is doing the work.
Basically you can push but long term for a reliable (STi) engine 360+ you want forged would be my suspicion.
03 May 2016, 02:27 PM
#403
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Middlesex
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Should it not be what power has been run safely on the standard parts, if the engine needs to be changed or something else has blown up it means its not safe, just my thoughts on the matter
03 May 2016, 02:41 PM
#404
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (23)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: In the fast lane
Posts: 3,458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep, knowledge in the community about this seems poor, but tbh in my experience 90% of people on forums and Facebook groups simply re-post crap they find through Google rather than having a clue what they're actually talking about.
*Especially* true for SIOC - Some of the most stupid advice I've ever seen found right there from people who barely understand how to drive in many cases let alone work on a vehicle and properly maintain it! The argument is always "but my car's fine because it hasn't blown up"...yeah great counter lads!
Anyway, back on topic it seems all the (reputable) engine builders are more than aware of it. Tim Farmer, Paul Finch and Alan Jeffrey - spoke to all of them, and whilst all said the widetrack engines are strong units, both Paul and Tim immediately suggested that would be the cause of the problem.
Another chap on here had a black widetrack that wouldn't crack 340 because his valves were knackered, so the answer is luck and maintenance tbh.
The valves tend to suffer on cylinder 3 which gets the hottest but apparently the widetrack design means they often have to be reseated. It's not a small amount of work - believe the guy who bought my car is doing the work.
Basically you can push but long term for a reliable (STi) engine 360+ you want forged would be my suspicion.
*Especially* true for SIOC - Some of the most stupid advice I've ever seen found right there from people who barely understand how to drive in many cases let alone work on a vehicle and properly maintain it! The argument is always "but my car's fine because it hasn't blown up"...yeah great counter lads!
Anyway, back on topic it seems all the (reputable) engine builders are more than aware of it. Tim Farmer, Paul Finch and Alan Jeffrey - spoke to all of them, and whilst all said the widetrack engines are strong units, both Paul and Tim immediately suggested that would be the cause of the problem.
Another chap on here had a black widetrack that wouldn't crack 340 because his valves were knackered, so the answer is luck and maintenance tbh.
The valves tend to suffer on cylinder 3 which gets the hottest but apparently the widetrack design means they often have to be reseated. It's not a small amount of work - believe the guy who bought my car is doing the work.
Basically you can push but long term for a reliable (STi) engine 360+ you want forged would be my suspicion.
I'm not disputing that EJ207s might suffer in general from valve issues, but surely the same internals are fitted to W/T and non W/T cars?
03 May 2016, 03:18 PM
#405
Scooby Regular
Apart from the chassis differences, what other design differences exist between W/T and non W/T cars that would have an influence on valve failures?
I'm not disputing that EJ207s might suffer in general from valve issues, but surely the same internals are fitted to W/T and non W/T cars?
I'm not disputing that EJ207s might suffer in general from valve issues, but surely the same internals are fitted to W/T and non W/T cars?
As far as I was aware the differences were,
Suspension, hubs etc.
Does anyone know for sure or can prove any differences internally in the engines of either ?
04 May 2016, 07:40 AM
#406
To my knowledge the earlier blob STI's had slightly weaker engines (not suffering from valves but just weaker generally from what the late JGM said - it was he who pointed me at widetrack originally), but much of it's luck tbh lads. My mate's lightly modded (320) widetrack valves went at 40,000 miles, another friends that made 360 and had done 70k also had low compression but on all cylinders (wasn't really looked after); mine started to go on cylinder 3 around 80,000 but car had run 440/390 (vpower) spec for 2+ years (and was regularly serviced).
I was told it'd probably keep going another 3-4 years with light compression loss before it would have needed a build at which point you'd have been talking 100k on the engine.
A mate ran 480 on meth on his bug STi for several years too.
In other words you may get lucky or you may not. Ultimately if you want a reliable engine at high 300's or 400+ long term you want forged. It's a consideration - can you afford £5k+ if it goes bang!
Will you keep the car?
I was so tempted by a 2.1 but you'll never see the money back again when you come to sell
I was told it'd probably keep going another 3-4 years with light compression loss before it would have needed a build at which point you'd have been talking 100k on the engine.
A mate ran 480 on meth on his bug STi for several years too.
In other words you may get lucky or you may not. Ultimately if you want a reliable engine at high 300's or 400+ long term you want forged. It's a consideration - can you afford £5k+ if it goes bang!
Will you keep the car?
I was so tempted by a 2.1 but you'll never see the money back again when you come to sell
Last edited by MrNoisy; 04 May 2016 at 07:44 AM.
04 May 2016, 07:52 AM
#407
The engine builders I spoke to all seemed surprised that this engine had suffered a problem at this mileage. It's obviously considered a good unit.
Cams and heads according to the late JGM
http://www.southeastscoobies.co.uk/v...ead.php?t=7089
There were also changes to steering rack, sensors, DCCD the list is quite long.
I suspect the thread you've found is for the USDM model (not the same)
All the UK cars supposedly have forged Pistons unlike JDM, but the best person to ask is an engine builder. We can all use Google but ultimately they're the guys who strip these down and have seen the facts first hand!
Last edited by MrNoisy; 04 May 2016 at 08:03 AM.
04 May 2016, 08:19 AM
#408
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (23)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: In the fast lane
Posts: 3,458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I really find this hard to believe.
Basically what you are suggesting is that Chassis, ancillary equipment, and electrcal design differences between standard and wide track cars are the (possible) cause of failure of internal engine components, where, for all intents and purposes, the two cars are fitted with the same EJ207 engines.
Basically what you are suggesting is that Chassis, ancillary equipment, and electrcal design differences between standard and wide track cars are the (possible) cause of failure of internal engine components, where, for all intents and purposes, the two cars are fitted with the same EJ207 engines.
04 May 2016, 09:36 AM
#409
Scooby Regular
I really find this hard to believe.
Basically what you are suggesting is that Chassis, ancillary equipment, and electrcal design differences between standard and wide track cars are the (possible) cause of failure of internal engine components, where, for all intents and purposes, the two cars are fitted with the same EJ207 engines.
Basically what you are suggesting is that Chassis, ancillary equipment, and electrcal design differences between standard and wide track cars are the (possible) cause of failure of internal engine components, where, for all intents and purposes, the two cars are fitted with the same EJ207 engines.
Ask for part numbers on major components,
Piston, Rods, Valves, Cams etc.
And see if they share the same part number.
Or better yet just see if the part numbers for the long and short blocks are the same.
04 May 2016, 09:58 AM
#411
Scooby Regular
04 May 2016, 10:26 AM
#412
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (23)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: In the fast lane
Posts: 3,458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just for clarity's sake, I'm not tryng to start an argument, but when information like this surfaces and there is reasonable doubt for it's veracity, I like to get it from the horse's mouth. I've known Paul long enough to know he's about as good an authority on engines as you're likely to find.
As said it was a brief conversation, through email, I asked the question and Paul replied. Essentially the facts have got mixed up somewhere. But whatever causes premature valve failure in W/T 207 engines has nowt to do with the fact it's a W/T chassis.
I'm sure Paul won't mind me quoting the relevant part of his reply. It's not edited BTW.
"There is no difference with valves across the STI range in newage, so why its got wrapped up with widetrack is the only one that suffers is not true"
As said it was a brief conversation, through email, I asked the question and Paul replied. Essentially the facts have got mixed up somewhere. But whatever causes premature valve failure in W/T 207 engines has nowt to do with the fact it's a W/T chassis.
I'm sure Paul won't mind me quoting the relevant part of his reply. It's not edited BTW.
"There is no difference with valves across the STI range in newage, so why its got wrapped up with widetrack is the only one that suffers is not true"
04 May 2016, 10:40 AM
#413
Scooby Regular
Just for clarity's sake, I'm not tryng to start an argument, but when information like this surfaces and there is reasonable doubt for it's veracity, I like to get it from the horse's mouth. I've known Paul long enough to know he's about as good an authority on engines as you're likely to find.
As said it was a brief conversation, through email, I asked the question and Paul replied. Essentially the facts have got mixed up somewhere. But whatever causes premature valve failure in W/T 207 engines has nowt to do with the fact it's a W/T chassis.
I'm sure Paul won't mind me quoting the relevant part of his reply. It's not edited BTW.
"There is no difference with valves across the STI range in newage, so why its got wrapped up with widetrack is the only one that suffers is not true"
As said it was a brief conversation, through email, I asked the question and Paul replied. Essentially the facts have got mixed up somewhere. But whatever causes premature valve failure in W/T 207 engines has nowt to do with the fact it's a W/T chassis.
I'm sure Paul won't mind me quoting the relevant part of his reply. It's not edited BTW.
"There is no difference with valves across the STI range in newage, so why its got wrapped up with widetrack is the only one that suffers is not true"
Nice
So we are all in it together haha
05 May 2016, 07:05 AM
#414
The piece I got the valves and widetrack being reseated bit from was Tim Farmer not Paul Finch although I don't think there was a need to go on the witch hunt you appear to have done really was there?
There was also no need to misquote me to try and back up your own argument that's unnecessary - I didn't say anything about chassis and electrical equipment being a difference in causing valve problems - you said that.
I offered up cams and valves as a *possible* difference but didn't know for certain - that you ignored, and it sounds to me like you have no more expertise or knowledge in that area so why not try and find out what the actual differences are instead of just trying to rubbish what I offered with no evidence.
Fine you called Paul and asked about valves. Why didn't you then ask him what the differences were between the engines and then post that rather than giving it the whole "you're full of it, I don't know much more but I know I'm right" attitude!?
Its brilliant - "I'm not trying to start a fight" - and then the pair of you immediately start mud slinging, one of whom reached out to me for advice a few months back, so great thanks for that...
If you'd have just posted up saying I asked Paul and he said X that's fine and I'd have said great, good to know. Instead there's animosity and juvenile behaviour now.
This is one of the reasons I left the subaru scene. No need for behaviour like this at all.
There was also no need to misquote me to try and back up your own argument that's unnecessary - I didn't say anything about chassis and electrical equipment being a difference in causing valve problems - you said that.
I offered up cams and valves as a *possible* difference but didn't know for certain - that you ignored, and it sounds to me like you have no more expertise or knowledge in that area so why not try and find out what the actual differences are instead of just trying to rubbish what I offered with no evidence.
Fine you called Paul and asked about valves. Why didn't you then ask him what the differences were between the engines and then post that rather than giving it the whole "you're full of it, I don't know much more but I know I'm right" attitude!?
Its brilliant - "I'm not trying to start a fight" - and then the pair of you immediately start mud slinging, one of whom reached out to me for advice a few months back, so great thanks for that...
If you'd have just posted up saying I asked Paul and he said X that's fine and I'd have said great, good to know. Instead there's animosity and juvenile behaviour now.
This is one of the reasons I left the subaru scene. No need for behaviour like this at all.
Last edited by MrNoisy; 05 May 2016 at 07:13 AM.
05 May 2016, 09:45 AM
#416
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (23)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: In the fast lane
Posts: 3,458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to put a few more facts straight.
You mentioned Paul, Tim, and Alan Jeffrey, and 'All the (reputable) engine builders'. I just decided to contact one of those that I know personally. Does that really constitute a witch hunt? Hardly. Just a bit of fact finding. If I had contacted 'All the (reputable engine builders)' that would have been a witch hunt.
Nowhere did I quote you in any respect. It was merely my proposition that if the engines are essentially the same, then something else must be a contributory factor in valve failure.
I did just that, by email through a forum contact, not phone as I have already stated. Here is the question I asked -
"Hi Paul, I'm reading a thread on SNET where somebody (Mr Noisy) is quoting you in post number 400 as one of the engine builders that are saying engines in wide track Imprezas suffer valve failure simply because thay are fitted to wide track cars. i.e. that the chassis differences are a causal factor in valve failure.
I'm not trying to solicit support for my 'side' of the debate but I do find this hard to believe, and obviously I have a particular interest in this as the owner of a W/T car. I was wondering if you would comment on the thread directly and at least there would be comment from an informed and experienced source."
Paul declined to comment directly here for his own reasons. I have already posted the answer.
I think if you read my posts again you'll see I have made no derogatory comments about you.
Show me the mud stains you have sustained as a result of a comment I have made in my posts.
That is what I did in posts #410 and #412. Nothing therein is my opinion, just recounted facts as told to me.
There certainly seems to be, but not from me.
Well at least we agree on something.
It's a shame you have elected to adopt this attitude to someone disagreeing with something you have stated on a public forum. I thought my response was entirely reasoned and proper.
I offered up cams and valves as a *possible* difference but didn't know for certain - that you ignored, and it sounds to me like you have no more expertise or knowledge in that area so why not try and find out what the actual differences are instead of just trying to rubbish what I offered with no evidence.
Fine you called Paul and asked about valves. Why didn't you then ask him what the differences were between the engines and then post that rather than giving it the whole "you're full of it, I don't know much more but I know I'm right" attitude!?
Fine you called Paul and asked about valves. Why didn't you then ask him what the differences were between the engines and then post that rather than giving it the whole "you're full of it, I don't know much more but I know I'm right" attitude!?
"Hi Paul, I'm reading a thread on SNET where somebody (Mr Noisy) is quoting you in post number 400 as one of the engine builders that are saying engines in wide track Imprezas suffer valve failure simply because thay are fitted to wide track cars. i.e. that the chassis differences are a causal factor in valve failure.
I'm not trying to solicit support for my 'side' of the debate but I do find this hard to believe, and obviously I have a particular interest in this as the owner of a W/T car. I was wondering if you would comment on the thread directly and at least there would be comment from an informed and experienced source."
Paul declined to comment directly here for his own reasons. I have already posted the answer.
I think if you read my posts again you'll see I have made no derogatory comments about you.
There certainly seems to be, but not from me.
It's a shame you have elected to adopt this attitude to someone disagreeing with something you have stated on a public forum. I thought my response was entirely reasoned and proper.
05 May 2016, 09:53 AM
#417
Scooby Regular
The piece I got the valves and widetrack being reseated bit from was Tim Farmer not Paul Finch although I don't think there was a need to go on the witch hunt you appear to have done really was there?
There was also no need to misquote me to try and back up your own argument that's unnecessary - I didn't say anything about chassis and electrical equipment being a difference in causing valve problems - you said that.
I offered up cams and valves as a *possible* difference but didn't know for certain - that you ignored, and it sounds to me like you have no more expertise or knowledge in that area so why not try and find out what the actual differences are instead of just trying to rubbish what I offered with no evidence.
Fine you called Paul and asked about valves. Why didn't you then ask him what the differences were between the engines and then post that rather than giving it the whole "you're full of it, I don't know much more but I know I'm right" attitude!?
Its brilliant - "I'm not trying to start a fight" - and then the pair of you immediately start mud slinging, one of whom reached out to me for advice a few months back, so great thanks for that...
If you'd have just posted up saying I asked Paul and he said X that's fine and I'd have said great, good to know. Instead there's animosity and juvenile behaviour now.
This is one of the reasons I left the subaru scene. No need for behaviour like this at all.
There was also no need to misquote me to try and back up your own argument that's unnecessary - I didn't say anything about chassis and electrical equipment being a difference in causing valve problems - you said that.
I offered up cams and valves as a *possible* difference but didn't know for certain - that you ignored, and it sounds to me like you have no more expertise or knowledge in that area so why not try and find out what the actual differences are instead of just trying to rubbish what I offered with no evidence.
Fine you called Paul and asked about valves. Why didn't you then ask him what the differences were between the engines and then post that rather than giving it the whole "you're full of it, I don't know much more but I know I'm right" attitude!?
Its brilliant - "I'm not trying to start a fight" - and then the pair of you immediately start mud slinging, one of whom reached out to me for advice a few months back, so great thanks for that...
If you'd have just posted up saying I asked Paul and he said X that's fine and I'd have said great, good to know. Instead there's animosity and juvenile behaviour now.
This is one of the reasons I left the subaru scene. No need for behaviour like this at all.
What did i say ???
Did u get out of wrong side of bed ???
Sorry to upset uou
05 May 2016, 02:06 PM
#418
Afaik only the bugeye block had the forged pistions uk/jdm the rest were stock I believe due to saving building costs, the newer the model, the cheaper cost cutting parts was used.
Look at the late blobs with the plastic header tanks which are brittle and break,
Look at the late blobs with the plastic header tanks which are brittle and break,
07 May 2016, 08:18 PM
#419
Just to put a few more facts straight.
You mentioned Paul, Tim, and Alan Jeffrey, and 'All the (reputable) engine builders'. I just decided to contact one of those that I know personally. Does that really constitute a witch hunt? Hardly. Just a bit of fact finding. If I had contacted 'All the (reputable engine builders)' that would have been a witch hunt.
Nowhere did I quote you in any respect. It was merely my proposition that if the engines are essentially the same, then something else must be a contributory factor in valve failure.
I did just that, by email through a forum contact, not phone as I have already stated. Here is the question I asked -
"Hi Paul, I'm reading a thread on SNET where somebody (Mr Noisy) is quoting you in post number 400 as one of the engine builders that are saying engines in wide track Imprezas suffer valve failure simply because thay are fitted to wide track cars. i.e. that the chassis differences are a causal factor in valve failure.
I'm not trying to solicit support for my 'side' of the debate but I do find this hard to believe, and obviously I have a particular interest in this as the owner of a W/T car. I was wondering if you would comment on the thread directly and at least there would be comment from an informed and experienced source."
Paul declined to comment directly here for his own reasons. I have already posted the answer.
I think if you read my posts again you'll see I have made no derogatory comments about you.
Show me the mud stains you have sustained as a result of a comment I have made in my posts.
That is what I did in posts #410 and #412. Nothing therein is my opinion, just recounted facts as told to me.
There certainly seems to be, but not from me.
Well at least we agree on something.
It's a shame you have elected to adopt this attitude to someone disagreeing with something you have stated on a public forum. I thought my response was entirely reasoned and proper.
You mentioned Paul, Tim, and Alan Jeffrey, and 'All the (reputable) engine builders'. I just decided to contact one of those that I know personally. Does that really constitute a witch hunt? Hardly. Just a bit of fact finding. If I had contacted 'All the (reputable engine builders)' that would have been a witch hunt.
Nowhere did I quote you in any respect. It was merely my proposition that if the engines are essentially the same, then something else must be a contributory factor in valve failure.
I did just that, by email through a forum contact, not phone as I have already stated. Here is the question I asked -
"Hi Paul, I'm reading a thread on SNET where somebody (Mr Noisy) is quoting you in post number 400 as one of the engine builders that are saying engines in wide track Imprezas suffer valve failure simply because thay are fitted to wide track cars. i.e. that the chassis differences are a causal factor in valve failure.
I'm not trying to solicit support for my 'side' of the debate but I do find this hard to believe, and obviously I have a particular interest in this as the owner of a W/T car. I was wondering if you would comment on the thread directly and at least there would be comment from an informed and experienced source."
Paul declined to comment directly here for his own reasons. I have already posted the answer.
I think if you read my posts again you'll see I have made no derogatory comments about you.
Show me the mud stains you have sustained as a result of a comment I have made in my posts.
That is what I did in posts #410 and #412. Nothing therein is my opinion, just recounted facts as told to me.
There certainly seems to be, but not from me.
Well at least we agree on something.
It's a shame you have elected to adopt this attitude to someone disagreeing with something you have stated on a public forum. I thought my response was entirely reasoned and proper.
Nothing to do with me disagreeing with anyone you just didn't give me any chance to respond you started mud slinging and accusing me of being wrong straight off the nub but crack on seems to be the future on forums. Throw accusations ask questions later.
Nice one, good luck with your stories in the future.
No pretence here I've been honest throughout rather than offer unsubstantiated advice.
Last edited by MrNoisy; 07 May 2016 at 08:30 PM.
07 May 2016, 09:24 PM
#420
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (23)
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: In the fast lane
Posts: 3,458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok you don't like my research and reasoning (or anything else I have written for that matter). I can live with that and not throw a tantrum.
So perhaps you could give us the benefit of your knowledge and experience to offer an explanation of the following :-
So perhaps you could give us the benefit of your knowledge and experience to offer an explanation of the following :-