Forester XT and WRX Recall - LSPI?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I've read through the forester and nasioc threads and I think I may have only counted ONE person who had an issue and confirmed that they do, in fact, use high octane. I'm actually very surprised octane used hasn't been a MAJOR part of the failure mode questioning.

I'm wondering whether failures are more prevalent in cases where 87 octane was used, which is 100% A-OK with Subaru. Even if the highest octane was used, some states only have 91 octane available, and a [censored] version at that!

For those of you with Turbo (any make or model) vehicles, you should think twice about using the lowest ALLOWABLE octane and strongly consider using the HIGHEST recommended octane.
 
Originally Posted By: bluesubie


I actually read recently that's it's best to wait until at least the mid-cycle refresh/facelift on a new model. I highly doubt I'll buy a brand new model turbocharged Subaru in the first year again!

Although a turbocharged Crosstrek would be very tempting and maybe they'll have the engine kinks worked out if that car comes to fruition.


I think it depends on the new model. For example, I only had minimal reservations about getting my '09 Forester back in '08. It was the first year of the redesign, but because the engine and transmission were carried over from the previous year, I was okay with it. I would've been more hesitant purchasing a 2011 model when they updated the engine. I don't want to be the first on a new engine, I want to make sure everything is worked out before I have to deal with it.

I'm the most hesitant when a completely new model comes out. I know someone who got a first year VW Touareg when they first came out. They had countless complaints about it, and it was constantly in the shop due to manufacturer recalls.
 
I'll have more time to really explore the change when we drive 2+ hrs to visit family next weekend, but I had some time to drive it yesterday (about an hour total of mostly highway driving) and here's what I think so far:

1. Startup: since the update, the startup cat-lightoff behavior seems different. By this, I mean that it used to stumble and run a little rough until the secondary air injection pumps turned off, and then things would smooth out. now, it's smooth and remains smooth through the whole process.

2. Acceleration: acceleration seems to be smoother, with a little more linear throttle response. Before the update, throttle response was a little too punchy, with instant 4-5# of boost and a surge forward at tip-in, unless you very gently depress the accelerator. Now, the same level of throttle will produce a pound of boost or so.

3. Power: Seems, so far, to be unchanged. Again, it's much less punchy, but, with a little more application of throttle, it seems to pull about the same.

4. Other Changes: Boost control seems a little more refined. Aside from the above-mentioned effects, acceleration seems to occur at a more appropriate RPM. Before the update, RPM wouldn't vary a ton, with boost building when more power was needed. Now, RPM seems a little higher, with lower boost, for the same load. I don't hear as much turbo spool noise, but that's not a bad thing.

Boost doesn't seem to spike as much, remaining relatively steady once max boost is achieved. I don't accelerate at max boost often, so I'll have to spend some more time feeling out the change.
 
Originally Posted By: 06VtecV6
I almost bought a 2015 brand new until I found the 95 Sc used.


Pretty much the same vehicle, if you ask me - many people comparison shop these two.
 
Originally Posted By: gathermewool
I'll have more time to really explore the change when we drive 2+ hrs to visit family next weekend, but I had some time to drive it yesterday (about an hour total of mostly highway driving) and here's what I think so far:

1. Startup: since the update, the startup cat-lightoff behavior seems different. By this, I mean that it used to stumble and run a little rough until the secondary air injection pumps turned off, and then things would smooth out. now, it's smooth and remains smooth through the whole process.

2. Acceleration: acceleration seems to be smoother, with a little more linear throttle response. Before the update, throttle response was a little too punchy, with instant 4-5# of boost and a surge forward at tip-in, unless you very gently depress the accelerator. Now, the same level of throttle will produce a pound of boost or so.

3. Power: Seems, so far, to be unchanged. Again, it's much less punchy, but, with a little more application of throttle, it seems to pull about the same.

4. Other Changes: Boost control seems a little more refined. Aside from the above-mentioned effects, acceleration seems to occur at a more appropriate RPM. Before the update, RPM wouldn't vary a ton, with boost building when more power was needed. Now, RPM seems a little higher, with lower boost, for the same load. I don't hear as much turbo spool noise, but that's not a bad thing.

Boost doesn't seem to spike as much, remaining relatively steady once max boost is achieved. I don't accelerate at max boost often, so I'll have to spend some more time feeling out the change.


Those are a lot of things to notice but some changes after a refresh can also be caused just by the fact that the ECU was reset. I know I can tell the difference obviously on my 2011 WRX after an ECU reset, for a few drive cycles.
 
Originally Posted By: rationull
Originally Posted By: gathermewool
I'll have more time to really explore the change when we drive 2+ hrs to visit family next weekend, but I had some time to drive it yesterday (about an hour total of mostly highway driving) and here's what I think so far:

1. Startup: since the update, the startup cat-lightoff behavior seems different. By this, I mean that it used to stumble and run a little rough until the secondary air injection pumps turned off, and then things would smooth out. now, it's smooth and remains smooth through the whole process.

2. Acceleration: acceleration seems to be smoother, with a little more linear throttle response. Before the update, throttle response was a little too punchy, with instant 4-5# of boost and a surge forward at tip-in, unless you very gently depress the accelerator. Now, the same level of throttle will produce a pound of boost or so.

3. Power: Seems, so far, to be unchanged. Again, it's much less punchy, but, with a little more application of throttle, it seems to pull about the same.

4. Other Changes: Boost control seems a little more refined. Aside from the above-mentioned effects, acceleration seems to occur at a more appropriate RPM. Before the update, RPM wouldn't vary a ton, with boost building when more power was needed. Now, RPM seems a little higher, with lower boost, for the same load. I don't hear as much turbo spool noise, but that's not a bad thing.

Boost doesn't seem to spike as much, remaining relatively steady once max boost is achieved. I don't accelerate at max boost often, so I'll have to spend some more time feeling out the change.


Those are a lot of things to notice but some changes after a refresh can also be caused just by the fact that the ECU was reset. I know I can tell the difference obviously on my 2011 WRX after an ECU reset, for a few drive cycles.


You're absolutely right, but this is my wife's vehicle, in which she had driven maybe 100 miles since the reflash. I'm not sure if this enough to set all parameters in the ECM, but her having driven the vehicle prior to me hopping in and driving around is different than my experience might have been had I driven it directly after the reflash.
 
Originally Posted By: gathermewool
I'll have more time to really explore the change when we drive 2+ hrs to visit family next weekend, but I had some time to drive it yesterday (about an hour total of mostly highway driving) and here's what I think so far:

1. Startup: since the update, the startup cat-lightoff behavior seems different. By this, I mean that it used to stumble and run a little rough until the secondary air injection pumps turned off, and then things would smooth out. now, it's smooth and remains smooth through the whole process.

2. Acceleration: acceleration seems to be smoother, with a little more linear throttle response. Before the update, throttle response was a little too punchy, with instant 4-5# of boost and a surge forward at tip-in, unless you very gently depress the accelerator. Now, the same level of throttle will produce a pound of boost or so.

3. Power: Seems, so far, to be unchanged. Again, it's much less punchy, but, with a little more application of throttle, it seems to pull about the same.

4. Other Changes: Boost control seems a little more refined. Aside from the above-mentioned effects, acceleration seems to occur at a more appropriate RPM. Before the update, RPM wouldn't vary a ton, with boost building when more power was needed. Now, RPM seems a little higher, with lower boost, for the same load. I don't hear as much turbo spool noise, but that's not a bad thing.

Boost doesn't seem to spike as much, remaining relatively steady once max boost is achieved. I don't accelerate at max boost often, so I'll have to spend some more time feeling out the change.


I bet they re-tuned the STFT.
 
Originally Posted By: dgunay
Originally Posted By: gathermewool
I'll have more time to really explore the change when we drive 2+ hrs to visit family next weekend, but I had some time to drive it yesterday (about an hour total of mostly highway driving) and here's what I think so far:

1. Startup: since the update, the startup cat-lightoff behavior seems different. By this, I mean that it used to stumble and run a little rough until the secondary air injection pumps turned off, and then things would smooth out. now, it's smooth and remains smooth through the whole process.

2. Acceleration: acceleration seems to be smoother, with a little more linear throttle response. Before the update, throttle response was a little too punchy, with instant 4-5# of boost and a surge forward at tip-in, unless you very gently depress the accelerator. Now, the same level of throttle will produce a pound of boost or so.

3. Power: Seems, so far, to be unchanged. Again, it's much less punchy, but, with a little more application of throttle, it seems to pull about the same.

4. Other Changes: Boost control seems a little more refined. Aside from the above-mentioned effects, acceleration seems to occur at a more appropriate RPM. Before the update, RPM wouldn't vary a ton, with boost building when more power was needed. Now, RPM seems a little higher, with lower boost, for the same load. I don't hear as much turbo spool noise, but that's not a bad thing.

Boost doesn't seem to spike as much, remaining relatively steady once max boost is achieved. I don't accelerate at max boost often, so I'll have to spend some more time feeling out the change.


I bet they re-tuned the STFT.


I'm not sure I know what that means. STFT, or short-term fuel trim, is the ECM adding or subtracting fuel based on the O2 sensor input, as compared to the MAF sensor. STFT is a live correction, whereas LTFT is more of a semi-permanent correction, based on long-term STFT trends.
 
Originally Posted By: gathermewool
Originally Posted By: dgunay
Originally Posted By: gathermewool
I'll have more time to really explore the change when we drive 2+ hrs to visit family next weekend, but I had some time to drive it yesterday (about an hour total of mostly highway driving) and here's what I think so far:

1. Startup: since the update, the startup cat-lightoff behavior seems different. By this, I mean that it used to stumble and run a little rough until the secondary air injection pumps turned off, and then things would smooth out. now, it's smooth and remains smooth through the whole process.

2. Acceleration: acceleration seems to be smoother, with a little more linear throttle response. Before the update, throttle response was a little too punchy, with instant 4-5# of boost and a surge forward at tip-in, unless you very gently depress the accelerator. Now, the same level of throttle will produce a pound of boost or so.

3. Power: Seems, so far, to be unchanged. Again, it's much less punchy, but, with a little more application of throttle, it seems to pull about the same.

4. Other Changes: Boost control seems a little more refined. Aside from the above-mentioned effects, acceleration seems to occur at a more appropriate RPM. Before the update, RPM wouldn't vary a ton, with boost building when more power was needed. Now, RPM seems a little higher, with lower boost, for the same load. I don't hear as much turbo spool noise, but that's not a bad thing.

Boost doesn't seem to spike as much, remaining relatively steady once max boost is achieved. I don't accelerate at max boost often, so I'll have to spend some more time feeling out the change.


I bet they re-tuned the STFT.


I'm not sure I know what that means. STFT, or short-term fuel trim, is the ECM adding or subtracting fuel based on the O2 sensor input, as compared to the MAF sensor. STFT is a live correction, whereas LTFT is more of a semi-permanent correction, based on long-term STFT trends.


That's why now you have a smoother ride. The more STFT gets close to 0%, the smoother ride you'd have (when it's in closed loop indeed).

The car needs to run 300+ miles to get LTFT properly adjusted.
 
Originally Posted By: gathermewool

You're absolutely right, but this is my wife's vehicle, in which she had driven maybe 100 miles since the reflash. I'm not sure if this enough to set all parameters in the ECM, but her having driven the vehicle prior to me hopping in and driving around is different than my experience might have been had I driven it directly after the reflash.


Yeah, sorry I wasn't actually trying to imply that the reset was the only cause of the changes. Just came to mind because I'd been surprised in the past by how different mine drove after a battery disconnect. I would've thought 100 miles would be enough although I think some parameters can also take a certain number of hot/cold drive cycles to set correctly.
 
Originally Posted By: gathermewool
Originally Posted By: 06VtecV6
I almost bought a 2015 brand new until I found the 95 Sc used.


Pretty much the same vehicle, if you ask me - many people comparison shop these two.


More like supply and demand. They can't get one so they are forced to get the other.
 
Just picked up my car...got the old plugs back and they definitely look well used, but I am not sure what they are supposed to look like with that mileage. I did notice upon close inspection that one had a chip in its insulator, but I'm going to be a nice guy and assume that happened during the removal process.

The leakdown test results...
Cyl 1 - 3 PSI
Cyl 2 - 2 PSI
Cyl 3 - 2 PSI
Cyl 4 - 3 PSI

The drive back to work was short, I will drive it more tonight and see how it feels. Guess it will take a while for the ECU to "learn" the car with its new program, anyway.
 
Originally Posted By: Virtus_Probi
Just picked up my car...got the old plugs back and they definitely look well used, but I am not sure what they are supposed to look like with that mileage. I did notice upon close inspection that one had a chip in its insulator, but I'm going to be a nice guy and assume that happened during the removal process.

The leakdown test results...
Cyl 1 - 3 PSI
Cyl 2 - 2 PSI
Cyl 3 - 2 PSI
Cyl 4 - 3 PSI

The drive back to work was short, I will drive it more tonight and see how it feels. Guess it will take a while for the ECU to "learn" the car with its new program, anyway.


Glad it worked out.
 
Originally Posted By: rationull
Originally Posted By: gathermewool

You're absolutely right, but this is my wife's vehicle, in which she had driven maybe 100 miles since the reflash. I'm not sure if this enough to set all parameters in the ECM, but her having driven the vehicle prior to me hopping in and driving around is different than my experience might have been had I driven it directly after the reflash.


Yeah, sorry I wasn't actually trying to imply that the reset was the only cause of the changes. Just came to mind because I'd been surprised in the past by how different mine drove after a battery disconnect. I would've thought 100 miles would be enough although I think some parameters can also take a certain number of hot/cold drive cycles to set correctly.


You're absolutely right, and I replied to clarify. I didn't take your post as anything other than inquisitive, since "how long after the reflash" is a pretty key piece of information when describing changes.
thumbsup2.gif


Originally Posted By: dgunay
Originally Posted By: gathermewool
Originally Posted By: dgunay
Originally Posted By: gathermewool
I'll have more time to really explore the change when we drive 2+ hrs to visit family next weekend, but I had some time to drive it yesterday (about an hour total of mostly highway driving) and here's what I think so far:

1. Startup: since the update, the startup cat-lightoff behavior seems different. By this, I mean that it used to stumble and run a little rough until the secondary air injection pumps turned off, and then things would smooth out. now, it's smooth and remains smooth through the whole process.

2. Acceleration: acceleration seems to be smoother, with a little more linear throttle response. Before the update, throttle response was a little too punchy, with instant 4-5# of boost and a surge forward at tip-in, unless you very gently depress the accelerator. Now, the same level of throttle will produce a pound of boost or so.

3. Power: Seems, so far, to be unchanged. Again, it's much less punchy, but, with a little more application of throttle, it seems to pull about the same.

4. Other Changes: Boost control seems a little more refined. Aside from the above-mentioned effects, acceleration seems to occur at a more appropriate RPM. Before the update, RPM wouldn't vary a ton, with boost building when more power was needed. Now, RPM seems a little higher, with lower boost, for the same load. I don't hear as much turbo spool noise, but that's not a bad thing.

Boost doesn't seem to spike as much, remaining relatively steady once max boost is achieved. I don't accelerate at max boost often, so I'll have to spend some more time feeling out the change.


I bet they re-tuned the STFT.


I'm not sure I know what that means. STFT, or short-term fuel trim, is the ECM adding or subtracting fuel based on the O2 sensor input, as compared to the MAF sensor. STFT is a live correction, whereas LTFT is more of a semi-permanent correction, based on long-term STFT trends.


That's why now you have a smoother ride. The more STFT gets close to 0%, the smoother ride you'd have (when it's in closed loop indeed).

The car needs to run 300+ miles to get LTFT properly adjusted.


I don't think so. Fuel trim is simply based on the difference between what the ECM should be and what is, applied as a correction factor, based solely on sensor input (in this case, the O2 sensor, compared to the MAF sensor.)

BASE fueling tables might have been changed, but I'd put my money on the following:

1. Throttle mapping: change the requested torque tables for throttle positions, so that response is more linear.

2. WGDC: Just like aftermarket offerings, Subaru has taken what it knows from driver and test mule feedback and adjust waste-gate duty cycle tables to more smoothly control boost, and limit over-boost conditions.

3. Other: I'm sure timing adjustments, boost and, as previously alluded to, fueling, were all fine-tuned.

What I'd be curious to know, is whether Subaru does more than fix a problem when they do these types of updates. What I mean, is do they apply a fix AND add some refinement, based on empirical data? In this case, did they not only fix the pre-ignition and rough idle issue, but also apply other fixes to make the overall tune better, too?

Originally Posted By: Virtus_Probi
Just picked up my car...got the old plugs back and they definitely look well used, but I am not sure what they are supposed to look like with that mileage. I did notice upon close inspection that one had a chip in its insulator, but I'm going to be a nice guy and assume that happened during the removal process.

The leakdown test results...
Cyl 1 - 3 PSI
Cyl 2 - 2 PSI
Cyl 3 - 2 PSI
Cyl 4 - 3 PSI

The drive back to work was short, I will drive it more tonight and see how it feels. Guess it will take a while for the ECU to "learn" the car with its new program, anyway.


Please report back. I'm curious to hear what you think.
 
I've been tuning my cars for a very long time (current car has more than 20 different maps including variable timing for each 10 degrees), and I am 100% sure that properly adjusted fuel trims (means less than +-3% for me) helps to smoothen the ride and throttle response. The more it is properly adjusted, the less primary 02 + ECU have to manipulate the a/f ratio in order to reach stoichiometric efficiency (14.7) in the closed loop.

I am not saying they only changed the fuel trims, but it's the #1 factor that smoothens the ride when it's in the closed loop.
 
I forgot to add (no edit)

......and the less ECU manipulates the a/f ratio based on primary o2 readings (which means closer to 0), the smoother ride you get. So our aim is to prevent fuel trim spikes in order to get the best results when tuning a car(especially if it's daily driven).

So what I am trying to say is, adjusting fuel trims are not that "simple" as you mentioned. Even though ECU compensates the fuel trims, it isn't properly adjusted and there will be fuel trim spikes. Fuel trim spikes make your car run [censored].

If you search google, you'd find tons of rough idle/acceleration problems due to unadjusted fuel trims.
 
I just realized that my paperwork says PSI instead of %, as shown above...what the heck does that mean? I guess I don't understand this test well enough. I'm hoping they pressurized to 100PSI and gave me the loss, something like that??? Argghhh...

Car felt great on the drive home last night, and I did catch that the sustained boost on a long climb up on onramp at full throttle was 13 PSI...didn't catch the peak. This was at about 40 degrees, I know that I have seen 15-16 PSI sustained before but at more like 80 degrees. Car was also not 100% warmed up for the climb last night, oil temp was probably about 150. Last time I watched the boost closely on a full throttle climb it was about 30 degrees and I also saw 13 PSI then.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Nuclear_42
Amsoil Power Foam Spray & GDI Applications
Replies
6
Views
155
Pablo
john_pifer
Help Me Decide on Oil for new 2024 Elantra N
3 4 5
Replies
84
Views
12K
02zx9r rev2
T
Spark Plug Pics, Oil in Spark Plug Well - 2015 Subaru WRX
Replies
4
Views
114
twX
BISCUT
2014 X3 N20 Maintenance
2
Replies
20
Views
689
The Critic
wwillson
Pennzoil - Chelsea DeNofa Q&A Answers
Replies
0
Views
4K
wwillson
Back
Top Bottom