Oh dear you're rattled because once again you have been caught out bull****ting, its all there in black and white......Anyway I'm done now another early start in the morning, I've another Lift to commission ;)

Nighty night Mr Mitty.. :thumb:

:notworthy

Glad to see it's not only me that get's it.

Sorry everyone, but I take no sh1t from nobody, this cnut and his pals have been giving me sh1t for ages and I have finally had enough, sorry you had to be a part of it, in my day we'd have taken it outside.

Gone past 10 pager so mods have to let it go until one of em goes crazy....er and either bans themselves Or they meet up and give each other a big cuddle :luvlove:
Either way I've read 13 pages and still don't know why a Scooby has such bad gas!?!?

Beans.

Sleep tight mr stalker, don't forget to kiss the dog, oops I mean Mrs, still not answering then. :wonder:

You're another one I hope I never meet. :thumb:

What no comments about my fictional engine build. :lol1:

Mr big man wage slave. :lol1:

I actually think a romance is blossoming here and we've all be blind to it!

:lol1: best post on the thread. :thumb:

I think it's a tad one sided. ;)

This post is just for the mods, and I'll be pressing the RTM button myself.;)

Since the 11th of september 90% of this cnuts posts have been about me, and there have been a fair few, that's just his recent history, I can't be arsed to search the rest.

ARE YOU GOING TO HAVE A WORD WITH THIS CNUT OR JUST LET IT CARRY ON???????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????????

P.S Just in case you're wondering who I'm talking about, it's jayallen. :thumb:

the best laugh for me on this thread is one of the comment makers doesn't even own a subaru anymore if his avatar is to be believed. so why the firk did he even post on a thread about subaru fuel consumption, to answer the op's question its all about the design layout of the engine it's a flat 4 so you have 2 pistons on each side conflicting with 2 on the otherside, it's never going to be economical like a normal engine, look up the design of subaru its all about a low centre of gravity and the asymmetric 4 wheel drive system, and in order to keep the low centre of gravity like alfa romeo they chose to use a flat 4 engine and then throw on a turbo to make it go better :thumb:

MODS! Can you please ban this member for attempting to put the thread back on course. Cheers :lol1:

This is now 13 PAGES?!?! Best read I've had for ages, defo a bit of romance going on here. :luvlove:

Why would you Rtm it?...it's not your thread and you were having a reasonable discussion, deal with it and stop throwing the insults about... :lol1:

Come again? You said "Revs pick up quicker but also drop quicker which means more throttle to maintain a set speed" which is fundamentally wrong.

RTM - because of his wealth of knowledge in all things, he know's what's what and can do anything. Don't stand in his way because he don't suffer fools gladly and will just f**k you off and go elsewhere.

call the anti-bullying hotline sh1tcnut

Heavy duty clutch and gearbox oil pump!!

Fcuking epic :lol1:

Certainly tell the dark nights have started and the kids can't stay out late to play :lol1:

well that escalated quickly, not logged on for a few days lol

well played mods about time walter mitty got what he deserves.
always crying when people question his lies,yet threatens and abuses members.
looks like his request was granted

http://i890.photobucket.com/albums/a...psr5x5e0wc.png


i feel sorry for him really, obviously a very sad man who has to spend his time making up stories on a subaru website.

All i can say is i hope my life doesnt go so well that when i get to 50 and all i can afford is an old wrx wagon and a rover 25 .

hmmm, it would appear some folks have been banned...
Now if only the mods would tidy up this thread and remove all the wrx vs sti stuff to its own thread and the personal attacks to the fight club (I assume that is what that is for? I don’t have access) we can get back to discussing our crappy MPG and maybe a few ideas about how to improve it a little? I know when I tell the wifelet I got 24 MPG this month she is a little happier than when I say I only got 18…

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Steve001 (Post 11752175)

Results would be interesting, is it a special ecu for this and who did your mapping? Cost would be nice too

---

When I next fill up I'll switch map and keep a record.

I can’t recall the ECU, might be Syvecs, might be Alcatek, I’m pretty sure it's not ESL. Duncan @ Racedynamix did the mapping and as I said it is just a simple duel map; the only discernible difference to the end user (IE me) is low boost pressure or high boost pressure. I can’t even recall the pressure figures, it was done a couple of years ago and I normally just leave it on higher boost :)

id leave it here, id hazard a guess ditchy wanted it removed to hide his lies and the abuse and name calling he hands out.

on the subject of mpg.

my 350 bhp sti got somewhere between 70 to 80 miles on £20 of vpower.

no idea what this equates too but a tank used to last somewhere between 220 and 250 miles.

just because its possible to eek out 30 to 35 mpg whats the point.

the mpg should be calculated with normal driving as if you drive around off boost and sitting at 56 mph on the motorway you have bought the wrong car.

Hello m8

eyup gayve

Well said that man!

Managed to used half a tank in 45 miles :D

Quite agree it sshould be based on 'nomal driving conditions' and not what might be possible.

When my car was an almighty WRX PPP (before I made it much slower into it's current guise) I used to have to commute 40 miles a day, mainly motorway driving, I used to average 250 miles before I would have to fill up, that was normal cruising and a few squirts of boost here and there. On a long motorway run I could get about 300 miles out of a tank.

Then I upped the power to 340bhp ish and guess what, I still averaged 250 miles, and could still squeeze 300 miles on a long motorway cruise.

Now that I have gone backwards and made my car slower (according to some on here) and stuck in a 2.35/GT35/1050cc injectors and have well over 600bhp on tap, I can still get 300 miles on a tank on a long motorway cruise, granted the tank empties a hell of a lot quicker when you squeeze the pedal, and if I leave it in cal 1, approx 430bhp, stick to normal driving conditions as above, then it will be somewhere around 200 - 220 before I have to fill up.

I'm sure that if I drove at 50mph non-stop then the mpg would be higher, but who does that everyday so it is not reflective of average driving.

I should add that my car is now a weekend toy and defintely not my commuting mule, but ultimately when off boost these flat fours offer pretty much the same mpg no matter what the level of tune, from my experience :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fat-thomas (Post 11752494)

id leave it here, id hazard a guess ditchy wanted it removed to hide his lies and the abuse and name calling he hands out.

---

Fair enough :thumb:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fat-thomas (Post 11752494)

on the subject of mpg.

---

Oh, I completely agree and I certainly don’t drive like I have Miss Daisy in the back
I’m always happy to fill up and I tend to do so every 250 miles (I agree that if I were worried about the cost I wouldnt be able to drive anywhere and would drive the wifelet's car more often), but I cant let it lie - I have to know my MPG, it’s just something I’ve tracked ever since I started driving nearly20 years ago. And if a little experiment by me can show a few extra MPG that may help others, I don’t have a problem with that



edit: trying to edit out the double quote, but it keeps going back in. Odd, that.

but surely that can't be the only reason

Porsches have boxer engines and I was always under the impressive that "pound for pound" they were much more economical that their direct competition

that's only because you weren't trying hard enough! i would have though you could have got it down well below 40, less using the pussy pedal and more aggressive use of loud pedal in future! ;)


In my MY99 when new with ppp i could get 28 mpg but what's the point, used to average around 18/20. STI RA V1 - who cares....it was all about the noise and acceleration

So when your wrx was 340 bhp it averaged very similar miles to my 350 bhp sti.
This makes sense as our 270 bhp wrx was only slightly better on fuel.
I have managed nearly 300 miles to a tank when we did run up to nbo bit this was on a motorway and not what I'd call average driving.

why is it funny that someone has posted on a thread and they dont own a subaru anymore??

jay has owned a selection of imprezas so id say his advice is much better than that of a known bullsh1tter and internet fantasist who's only experience of a newage sti is some cock and bull story of once test driving one or an idiot who thinks an anti roll bar gave him more mpg.
advice is something that should come from experience not someone who has only owned one model of impreza for five minutes.
The permanent 4wd is mostly what cost the mpg on an impreza that alongside a turbo charger just adds up to losing more mpg.

im not sure the boxer layout has much of an effect though.

engineering facts state that the pistons oppose each other therefore creating thrusting opposing forces, the conventional layout is more of a rotary inline motion using less resisting forces, this is the reason a rotary turbo diesel engine developed many years ago was shelved by ford as it was far to economical it was said at the time in 3 cylinder 900cc form in a mk3 escort it would return approx 90mpg, i cant be bothered to look it up but remember reading it in a engineering magazine while at college many years ago :thumb: