bulwnkl

I've run Red Line 10k before, but not in a Subie. I agree that it should run that far in a N/A Subie w/o much trouble IF you drive highway miles. All or a lot of city, short trips, whatever and it may well not. I never tried anything close to 18k on Red Line. You'd be very, very wise to get an analysis on anything you want to take that far. And don't wait for 18k and then test it! Red Line looks different in analysis and, especially if you're using Blackstone, the TBN can look lower than other oils and still be operating fine. Also, keep in mind that if your engine develops an internal HG leak, long drains w/o analysis in between can be extra bad compared to 'normal.'

I promised to not further in this thread. I only note my attendance of a University with huge biodiesel interests and my studies in that area. Then, my work at a State with a very large interest in biodiesel and a significant fleet test on biodiesel. Further, my own farm and production look at rapeseed for biodiesel. I'm as well or better versed in biodiesel production than most people, and I stand by my post.

Thanks for the links, Nipper. I still agree completely with your earlier post, and so I guess my point is that diesel fuel is the absolutely WRONG way to go to achieve that. Diesels are attractive, IMO, because of higher mpg than a traditional gasoline engine. However, you get more than double the gallons of gasoline out of a barrel of oil than diesel, and the energy difference is not anywhere near that spread. Add in ever-improving technology for gasoline combustion to get nearly or above diesel mpg, and gasoline is a huge winner over diesel in every way. Even cam and turbo the thing for diesel-engine output characteristics if you want. Not even close. Real life biodiesel production uses very large amounts of crude oil (diesel, etc.), and when you try to be 100% biodiesel on a farm, you end up using gigantic acreages of land to produce nearly no fuel even when you use rapeseed or canola (far better than soybeans). And don't even start on WVO. That only works when you're the only one in the neighborhood (or town) doing it. <End rant: I promise to not further the matter in this thread>

I agree. One thing I don't know the particulars of and hope you can help us all with is: How much more crude oil does it take to make a gallon of diesel fuel as compared to gasoline? I know it's more, but can't recall how much. IOW, how many miles per gallon of crude do these mpg figures work out to?

My Baja's an 05 turbo A/T and I love it. Only had it since this spring/summer, but I've wanted one since they came out. I'd have bought one for the farm at that time if things had been a little different. Check out Scoobytruck.com and the Baja-specific forum at NASIOC for more info.

Car and Driver built its reputation on more or less insulting its advertizers (auto manufacturers) by giving directly negative reviews of cars they didn't like. To think that C&D is American-biased is completely ludicrous, though. Hondas always get extremely good reviews from them (and I don't claim that's ad-bias; they just like how Hondas drive/are built/whatever) and domestics usually get a cold reception until they prove themselves. The simple fact is that STis are despised by insurers, and they get very poor mpg for their power output when pushed. That may not be noteworthy in a Z06 or a Lamborghini, but then the target audience is completely different for those compared to any Subaru at all. At the same time, if the only 'lows' you can find for a car is that it burns a whole lot of premium fuel and it has high insurance premiums, that's a pretty good review!

Not at all. I like Orgy's version a lot!

That's what I thought. Sort of a Ridgeline-Prius cross.

If it's a screaming-enough deal, go ahead. I don't know how much of your money they have already (I think you said you already put a deposit down on it?), and I don't know whether you have any real chance of getting any of that back. I'd be skeptical of that car myself. BTW, them saying they're only making $300 at this price probably just means they took this car in on trade against a new one, charged at least sticker price on the new one (maybe a bunch more), and gave a very high trade-in allowance on this one. Thus, they have a seriously inflated 'cost' on their books for the one you're looking at (compared with what it's actually worth down at the auto auction), and that's the measure against which they're claiming to only be making $300.

XT as in Alcyone? You think so? I listened to Orgy's version of Blue Monday a fair amount in my XT-6, but never put it together to be the car's theme song!

Hey, usaru, I saw that you already bought the Michelins, but thought I'd give my experience for anyone else still looking. I had a set of Long Trail T/As as OEM on my Toyota Tacoma in '01 (farm pickup). They were nice on the highway (reasonably quiet, reasonably smooth), but were not good in the mud or snow. I'd trade off the smoothness for the traction of All-Terrain T/A KOs on a farm pickup or my Baja, but a pavement Outback would probably do very nicely with them.

I'm sorry, Gary, that inconvenient questions remark wasn't directed at you at all. Thank you for posting and for the follow-up. I know you're scheduled to replace this trans anyway, but I'm glad you've (hopefully?) found a way to make it driveable until your desired replacement timeframe. If you find out more about this malfunctioning one's issues, I know I'm interested to hear what you find.

Do I just ask inconvenient questions sometimes? I'm glad to know your findings so far, Gary, and that your transmission is out of first (for now). I'm really interested in whether it'll stay out of first w/o the TCU once it warms up. I'm sticking with my idea that the bad pump thing is bogus until I hear that your transmission won't go into reverse when it's warm. Good luck!

Please see question in new gen thread.

Is a 4EAT different than the automatic transmissions that I know of? In the ones I'm familiar with, reverse requires the highest pressure of any gear to engage. So, in circumstances like these, if it would still engage reverse and move one would not diagnose low pressure/bad pump/bad seals. Are these designed differently?

I'm pretty sure we're either talking past each other or one or the other of us is talking way below or way above the other. Yes, I agree. Simultaneously there is always a 50/50 torque split between the 2 output shafts of the diff in consequence of its design. I agree with that but some of the information in or linked from this thread seems to suggest it's being done on purpose. I ask yet again: How does one incorporate a planetary system into the center differential? The planetary system is referenced at least here on USMB routinely as a component of the VTD system. OK, so then in contrast to an earlier post in this thread, M/T Subies remain not basically FWD cars, but basically AWD cars with a limited slip center diff which uses a viscous instead of a more 'traditional' friction system? There is a decent explanation on the Canadian site you posted that answers my question about where and how the viscous system is located in the output stream. I can't find one of the Endwrench articles that I was looking for on that backup site. Hopefully it'll come back or something. In any case, at least one thing that remains unclear for me given the present lack of Endwrench articles is how the VTD system operates. Is there a conventional center differential in place as there is in the M/Ts? Is it the 4EAT (phase II) that has no center differential but rather just a 'solid link' with a clutch pack (either friction or viscous) to decouple the rear end? Last I thought I read, the VTD system uses a planetary system somehow and a viscous (not conventional friction) pack somewhere in the center. What's the deal with the planetary system? Where is it and what is its function?

Yes, that website is one of the sites I was talking about above. Let's use engineering definitions for power and torque for a moment. In those terms, a 'regular' or open differential always distributes torque (but not power) 50/50 by design and definition, agreed? Because of this, and again in engineering terms, the power distribution can be from 100/0 - 0/100, though torque distribution remains 50/50 all the time, agreed? So, as you say, with an open diff when one wheel loses traction all the power goes to that wheel, however it still only receives 50% of the torque. What I'm trying to decide whether I have clarity about is the differential/viscous coupling combination. It appears to me that, even though the pictures I've seen make it look like the viscous coupling is present on the rearward, downstream side of the diff, that clearly cannot be the case. If that was the case, the open diff would transmit 100% of the power (engineering def.) to the rear output shaft and the car would not move. Then, the viscous coupling would heat up and start to 'bite,' and the car would move but it would, in effect, have a simple open center differential with extra, unnecessary complexity. So, it appears to me that the viscous coupling system must be integral to the differential itself and act as the limited slip mechanism would in a clutch-type LSD on a pickup. Is that the case, or am I still missing something? Also, I'm starting to think that the way a planetary system is incorporated here is as a very, very slight gear reduction system aft (meaning on the rear output shaft side) of the center diff as a means of putting some heat in the viscous coupling system to keep it 'tight' or in other words ready to lock tight with any additional wheelspin at all. This appears to me to be an effort to alter torque distribution so as to try to keep power distribution (engineering def.) closer to 50/50 but still allow the vehicle to turn corners and such without stressing the drivetrain or scrubbing tires too much. Is that what they're doing? If all these assumptions/guesses are correct, that would mean that only the Subies that don't have an actual differential in the center are the ones with the simple clutchpack (non-viscous) behind a 'solid' link (logically speaking) between forward and rearward output shafts. Is this correct?

Alright, so: - The center clutch pack with no diff is equivalent to a 'straight-through' or 'solid' driveshaft with a clutch pack to couple/de-couple the rear output shaft, - The center diff with a viscous coupling is... is... here's where I'm losing something. If there's a 'regular' differential with a coupling downstream to the rear (i.e. on the output shaft that goes to the rear), then that coupling would always have to be engaged in order for the car to move. If it was not, the 50% of the torque that is always coming rearward from the diff would simply spin that side of the diff's output and the car would not move (until that coupling's fluid heated up and locked the clutches) just as a pickup with one rear wheel off the ground or in mud will not move, it will just spin the one wheel with no traction. So, is the coupling somehow integrated into the center power divider? Is that center divider truly a regular differential (i.e. constant 50/50 torque split by definition), or is the term 'differential' just used out of convenience? Which brings me to my next question: How does a planetary system work in dividing power fore and aft? I only know how to use planetaries as gear reduction mechanisms.

Indeed, I am familiar with using the brakes to send power where it's needed most. I just meant the center 'differential' itself.

This is an area where I become confused as to the exact function of the 'newer' Subie center distribution systems. Straight mechanical open diffs like on my XT-6 I can comprehend: They're always 50/50 torque split until and unless you mechanically lock them. Then they're infinitely variable torque split up to essentially 100/0 - 0/100 depending upon traction. But, the over-simplified diagrams and/or English-as-a-second-language descriptions I see on various web pages make the 'new' systems look like nothing more than either a straight open differential with a clutch pack mounted aft of them or no diff but a solid mechanical link fore and aft with a clutch pack to decouple the rear driveshaft. The first scenario makes no sense and so I dismiss it. Is the second what they're doing? That wouldn't be 50/50 torque split (though I guess it would be more like 50/50 power split) but at least that way I could see how they can claim what they claim for splits and how the cars are basically FWD unless the system 'sends' power backwards. ?

OK. I guess the only aluminum-block sleeved diesel engines I've dealt with first-hand are from Mitsubishi (great turbo diesel in a pickup from the '80s as well as a whole bunch of construction equipment). The heavy ag and industrial stuff I've put my own hands on is all either iron w/sleeves or sleeveless (bad experiences).

Oh, so it's just a generalized concern of whether they employ qualified engineers or not. I thought someone was inventing some issue with using aluminum or sleeves or something.

How come? What's the issue you're seeing?

I'm with you! And yes, Sako, we know the Baja's discontinued. OTOH, so is the d/r transmission, and the diesel engine isn't quite real yet, so why not wish for what we're wishing for?

OK, well then you're probably fine. It's still not 'normal' per se, but may not indicate disaster.