long travel Outbacks or making Subarus faster and more reliable offroad

[slammo]

Oh, that makes sense.  Some of the rods may be adjustable, or maybe there's too much play in an end.  It sounds like the lock or latch isn't fully disengaging.

[pontoontodd]

Built a front bumper for my 2002 Outback.  4" square I used on my 99 seems overkill and blocks a lot of the radiator.  Went with 2" x 4" tubing for the main beam of this one.

The one on my 99 is a little lacking in protection for the fenders and lights since I built it to fit under the plastic bumper cover.  I'm not planning on putting the plastic back on this one so I used 2" x 4" by the lights and made it stick out a little wider.

Wanted to make the main beam out of one piece of tubing for strength and appearance so I got a little creative on this end clearing the airbox.

 

Used CAD (cardboard aided design) for the layout.  Blocked up the beam to get it level with the headlights.  Left about 4" between the lights and beam to allow room for a short light bar on each side  Also exposes a lot more radiator to direct airflow than my 99.

Built some mounting plates.  I had to knock out the mounting studs to get the bumper on and off with some other tubes I added later.  That was a real pain.

 

Passenger side of beam closed up and tack welded.

Bottom of the beam showing lift, towing, and winch points.  By my calculations those receivers on the sides should easily be able to support the weight of the car.

 

Tubes to allow sliding over obstacles, support a steel sheet, and brace the radiator support. 

 

 

 

Diagonal tube will hopefully keep branches and saplings from hooking on the end of the bumper and wrecking the fender when backing up in the woods.

Built some tubes on the other side for the same reason and to protect the airbox. 

Slotted the top mounts to allow the bumper/supports to get pushed back.

This is how it looks painted and installed.

 

Blockoff sheet didn't hurt cooling on my 99 and keeps the radiator much cleaner.  Would have to remove it for winching or towing, not cutting any holes in it for now.

 

Tried to build it to stick out about 2" from the fenders and lights.

 

[jf1sf5]

I would love to have your machining/welding skills !

[scalman]

its nice that in some places you can drive like that on road legaly. i was thinking making something similar but hide it under my cut plastic bumper , just for strenght but it would need be invisiable, but then i still hit or even touched nothing yet with my cut bumpers as they are, they just too high .

[travelvw]

If you can get away with building a bumper minus the plastic skin in IL like you can here in MO, what would ever be the interest in retaining such a thing? All they do is get ripped off, vibrate off and take your fenders skins with it. Front bumper cover was the first thing to get trimmed on my rig after running some forest roads.

So is the '02 the new adventure/exploration rig and the '99 for racing?

Bumper looks stout! I see opportunity around the plastic airbox (especially) and below the engine for a full skid plate? I personally drilled a series of small holes in the lower-center of my bumper to help with airflow to the radiator. Rad/engine don't seem to be getting very dirty and engine runs cool. The best thing I have done to keep mud and junk out of the engine bay is a full skid on the bottom.

I built my front bumper out of plate with a little bit of square stock in the middle, but I really think it needs more for impact, much like you have done. I did a full 4x4 square on the rear of mine like the '99 front, along with a little plate work. Its heavy, but ready to back in to a tree and not take out the rear end. Originally I was concerned with weight, but as I continue to build on mine, I realize I'm going to have to do something with the suspension to compensate for the additional weight no matter the fact that I want more clearance and articulation...King Springs/AGX are not going to cut it in the long run.

K

Edited March 2, 2019 by travelvw

[pontoontodd]

6 hours ago, scalman said:

its nice that in some places you can drive like that on road legaly. i was thinking making something similar but hide it under my cut plastic bumper , just for strenght but it would need be invisiable, but then i still hit or even touched nothing yet with my cut bumpers as they are, they just too high .

I used to do that with my 99 but it doesn't stick out far enough from the lights and fenders to really protect them.

 

1 hour ago, travelvw said:

If you can get away with building a bumper minus the plastic skin in IL like you can here in MO, what would ever be the interest in retaining such a thing? All they do is get ripped off, vibrate off and take your fenders skins with it. Front bumper cover was the first thing to get trimmed on my rig after running some forest roads.

So is the '02 the new adventure/exploration rig and the '99 for racing?

Bumper looks stout! I see opportunity around the plastic airbox (especially) and below the engine for a full skid plate? I personally drilled a series of small holes in the lower-center of my bumper to help with airflow to the radiator. Rad/engine don't seem to be getting very dirty and engine runs cool. The best thing I have done to keep mud and junk out of the engine bay is a full skid on the bottom.

I built my front bumper out of plate with a little bit of square stock in the middle, but I really think it needs more for impact, much like you have done. I did a full 4x4 square on the rear of mine like the '99 front, along with a little plate work. Its heavy, but ready to back in to a tree and not take out the rear end. Originally I was concerned with weight, but as I continue to build on mine, I realize I'm going to have to do something with the suspension to compensate for the additional weight no matter the fact that I want more clearance and articulation...King Springs/AGX are not going to cut it in the long run.

K

I drive in town and trial ride them both and my Impreza.  Didn't do any races last year, would like to at least do one in Texas this year.  The 99 is much more fun and consistent to drive with the 5MT and steering brake, so it's still my first choice trail riding.  It won't last forever though and the cage makes it less comfortable.  Keep thinking about what I'd replace the 99 and/or the Impreza with.  Leaning towards a first gen Impreza with H6, maybe 3.6 supercharged, long travel struts, and some kind of steering brake.  Might be 1000# lighter than the 99 and 50% more power.

Main purpose of the bumper is pushing over / rubbing around small trees when necessary.  I have a similar plate below the bumper on my 99 and it doesn't make the car run any hotter at highway speeds (tested with gutted thermostat).  I have full skidplates on the 99 but at this point I think that would just be extra weight and hassle on this car, trying not to make it super heavy.  Even if the airbox gets a hole or crack from a well placed branch, no big deal, just don't want it to be completely smashed.

After hitting a stump while blinded by glare one time I've been building these engine skids pretty heavy duty.

Like you say it's really handy in the woods to be able to just pull up or back up to a tree without damaging the car.  Have done that while winching someone out before too so the car doesn't move.

Definitely want to see how your King springs and AGX struts work in Arkansas.

[scalman]

so at first you had those tow place and recovery welded but then you covered all that with skid plate ? so how you get to them ?

those welded tubes on sides are for hi lift ? did any testing how they hold ?

is that air box on side that come out so you need  to cover it ? why not remove it and just make some straight tube to air filter passing that box. 

Edited March 2, 2019 by scalman

[travelvw]

I imagine I am not going to convince you to consider a turbo 4 cyl? If you want relatively lightweight and plenty of power, why not an Impreza WRX wagon? Cost/reliability? I too like the Impreza wagon body: small, yet large enough to carry all your gear. Perfect size to negotiate the tight trials in Missouri.

The King/AGX/Group N combo is fantastic for rowdy driving at speed, but no better than anything else out on the trails with 1/2" less travel than a Forester setup. Speed is what a modern Subaru does best, but it takes a lot of work to make it more capable off road.

I think you are on borrowed time with that airbox :). So that car is an auto?

I did a creek crossing not too long ago and hit a boulder I couldn't see in the water square on with the front of my bumper, rolled under, gouged the skid plate and down my floor pan. If I hit something like that at speed, it could really tear things up! I also nicked the rockers a couple times on that same trail. I think a body lift would solve most of that problem with good protection down the middle, along with some rocker protection. I don't want to take it as far as you did with the '99, and I don't think I will have to if the body isn't so close to the ground. It'll hurt the handling at speed a little, but I'm willing to give some of that up to get places I can't right now.

K

[pontoontodd]

23 hours ago, scalman said:

so at first you had those tow place and recovery welded but then you covered all that with skid plate ? so how you get to them ?

those welded tubes on sides are for hi lift ? did any testing how they hold ?

is that air box on side that come out so you need  to cover it ? why not remove it and just make some straight tube to air filter passing that box. 

I can just unbolt that plate if I need to use the tow points or winch mount.  Since it's an automatic it really shouldn't be flat towed.  We've only had to flat tow a car three times I can think of in the five years we've been doing this so it's pretty rare.  Most likely if we're going somewhere on the highway this would be towing a lighter car like my Impreza.  Winch has also been used rarely, maybe a half dozen times, and a few of those times we should have just used a snatch strap instead.

Haven't tested the lift points yet, need to make a 1.25" square post for my high lift and test that out, probably this week.

I thought about removing the air box like I did on my Impreza. 

That seems to be working but I figure the more intake length and twists and turns are in the system the less likely I'll get water in the engine.

[pontoontodd]

2 hours ago, travelvw said:

I imagine I am not going to convince you to consider a turbo 4 cyl? If you want relatively lightweight and plenty of power, why not an Impreza WRX wagon? Cost/reliability? I too like the Impreza wagon body: small, yet large enough to carry all your gear. Perfect size to negotiate the tight trials in Missouri.

The King/AGX/Group N combo is fantastic for rowdy driving at speed, but no better than anything else out on the trails with 1/2" less travel than a Forester setup. Speed is what a modern Subaru does best, but it takes a lot of work to make it more capable off road.

I think you are on borrowed time with that airbox :). So that car is an auto?

I did a creek crossing not too long ago and hit a boulder I couldn't see in the water square on with the front of my bumper, rolled under, gouged the skid plate and down my floor pan. If I hit something like that at speed, it could really tear things up! I also nicked the rockers a couple times on that same trail. I think a body lift would solve most of that problem with good protection down the middle, along with some rocker protection. I don't want to take it as far as you did with the '99, and I don't think I will have to if the body isn't so close to the ground. It'll hurt the handling at speed a little, but I'm willing to give some of that up to get places I can't right now.

K

I have considered a turbo, an STI would really be ideal with the stronger drivetrain.  The biggest downside is they're still expensive.  Also you can't fit 15" wheels over their giant brakes and I'm not sure our long travel struts would bolt up.  They're almost all sedans too.

I've thought about a WRX, that might be the best bang for the buck.  The low end torque is still terrible though, that's where the EZ36 with variable valve timing would be great, even better supercharged.  At that point you'd probably need a 6MT and R180 even in a light car though.

Aside from being light but still having decent cargo capacity, I like the first gen Impreza since it has manual climate controls, seats, etc.  Fewer things to go wrong even though that stuff holds up better on a Subaru than most other cars.

Yes, the white Outback has a 4EAT and EZ30.

I think if you're just nicking your rockers occasionally you're probably sitting about right.  The more you lift it the worse the cornering will get, you'll start to lose weight on the front end in hill climbs, and just put more stress on everything.

[travelvw]

WRX prices are falling as they age, but they still are not cheap. I will definitely be doing the STI upgrade in the near future while retaining my perfectly good OEM brakes and 15" wheels. STI 6MT I have heard is a great gearbox plus more gear choices and a better clutch. I have a little noise in the front diff on deceleration, but other than that my 5MT has held up well and shifts great, so the turbo 5 speeds seem to be improving (the bugeye 5MT I had was junk)?

You are correct, initial low end torque is not very good on a turbo car, but that could possibly be improved with a tune. H6 is likely better on the low end, although heavier than a 4 banger turbo.

I hear ya' on the lift, but I don't like having to drive like a grandpa down local trails. I started nicking the rockers when I got off the gravel/two tracks, and on to the real trails, which are tight, rocky and high clearance in MO. I can't clear most of the trails here. I also like to spend time out in NM and CO and those trails are no joke. Few more inches is all I need. Right now it sits about like a new Outback, so I have no intentions of going crazy with the lift. I think I can get a little more out of it on the trials and not loose much for handling, but I won't know for sure until I try it.

This '07 is the newest car I have ever owned. I like the old, all manual stuff too (everything else I own is that way), but the new stuff is surprisingly durable. The vacuum? actuated climate control setup in particular drives me crazy!

K

Edited March 3, 2019 by travelvw

[scalman]

that 4eat is like tank strong and reliable  and more power to it it just better. turbo wouldnt do much here i think . just more money to pay. i drove with forester club that have like half turbo models well 2.0 turbo and they didint do much in mud still not much more then me anyway. on some places i was just cruising buy and they need to floor it . none of them had sway bars removed , so i guess i got more travel or flex... later they said me that im just driving like its nothing ...calm face and all... 

Edited March 3, 2019 by scalman

[pontoontodd]

One of our friends got a 2004 Forester XT recently.  We built strut spacers and oil pan and gas tank protection for it.  Same as we've done the last few times, I don't think I took any pictures.  Will be interesting to see how it works on the trail.

 

One thing it has that we've never seen before is bracing under the front control arms.  Looks like it would be a little harder to work on the suspension and might limit lift or travel but that could be fixed.  My 99 Outback could really use something like that.  If my windshield keeps cracking maybe I'll build something like it.

[slammo]

The 02-07 Impreza has a similar brace, commonly known as a U-brace.  It would be a great easy place to attach a full-coverage front skidplate.

[travelvw]

I don't know much beyond the 02-07 Impreza and that brace, which I never gave much thought to before...so here is an aftermarket full skid i had on my '02 and now my '07:

K

[pontoontodd]

Built some slightly longer lateral links for the 2002 Outback.  This will allow more droop before we bottom out the inner CVs. 

These are the mockup links we made to determine length.  One end of each was welded to a bolt that threaded into a nut that was welded in the tube.  That let us change the lengths and allowed the ends to pivot since we didn't have bushings or ball joints.  Also shows the various link ends.

This is one set of links tack welded in the jig.

One set of links fully welded.  Had to bend the tube for the upper link to clear the bump stop part of the frame.  Could have notched the frame but wanted to make this as bolt on as possible.

 

Bushings pressed in.  The outer bushing for the upper link is offset so I cut it off and made a spacer.  This will allow me to eventually make a spare that will fit either side.  Used that same bushing cut down for the front lower lateral link since you can't buy those bushings separate.

Compared to stock links.

Installed.  Had to use a longer bolt for that long link since I made the little bushings on the end so the holes don't get wallered out.  Had to put a big point on that bolt to get it started.  Then had to pry down on the suspension to bolt the shock back in.  Not sure how that's going to go with a longer shock with more droop.

 

 

I've driven this a little and the axle doesn't pull out of the diff so I think it's good.  Made another set for the other side and painted them, just have to press in bushings and put them on the car.

I have the shafts and bodies I need now to make the shocks longer.  Might be a while before I get to that.  Need to make new upper shock mounts and put big holes in the floor to run the shocks through.  While they're apart I want to change the valving too.

Edited March 8, 2019 by pontoontodd

[scalman]

so how much drop now this allow ? like how much more then with stock links ? 

[pontoontodd]

25 minutes ago, scalman said:

so how much drop now this allow ? like how much more then with stock links ? 

About 2" IIRC.  Now I can mock up a longer shock and different shock mount and figure out exactly.

[scalman]

and it will still work with original axles ? 

[FerGloyale]

23 hours ago, pontoontodd said:

Built some slightly longer lateral links for the 2002 Outback.  This will allow more droop before we bottom out the inner CVs. 

These are the mockup links we made to determine length.  One end of each was welded to a bolt that threaded into a nut that was welded in the tube.  That let us change the lengths and allowed the ends to pivot since we didn't have bushings or ball joints.  Also shows the various link ends.

This is one set of links tack welded in the jig.

One set of links fully welded.  Had to bend the tube for the upper link to clear the bump stop part of the frame.  Could have notched the frame but wanted to make this as bolt on as possible.

 

Bushings pressed in.  The outer bushing for the upper link is offset so I cut it off and made a spacer.  This will allow me to eventually make a spare that will fit either side.  Used that same bushing cut down for the front lower lateral link since you can't buy those bushings separate.

Compared to stock links.

Installed.  Had to use a longer bolt for that long link since I made the little bushings on the end so the holes don't get wallered out.  Had to put a big point on that bolt to get it started.  Then had to pry down on the suspension to bolt the shock back in.  Not sure how that's going to go with a longer shock with more droop.

 

 

I've driven this a little and the axle doesn't pull out of the diff so I think it's good.  Made another set for the other side and painted them, just have to press in bushings and put them on the car.

I have the shafts and bodies I need now to make the shocks longer.  Might be a while before I get to that.  Need to make new upper shock mounts and put big holes in the floor to run the shocks through.  While they're apart I want to change the valving too.

Did you lengthen the links all equal amounts?  Or is it proportional to the difference in stock lengths?

The reason I ask is my own experience recently trying to lengthen just one link.....alot.

What I discovered in researching why it was throwing off my toe as it traveled, is that the ratio of the difference in length of the 3 links, is proportional to the distance from the pivot for the trailing arm.  If you made all links say an inch longer, then you have changed the ratio.  If we call the rear link the %100 percent mark, then the upper link, being attached at about %80 of the trailing arms total length....hence the upper link is about %80 of the length of the rear lower.  And the forward lower, being on;y about %50 of the distance from the trailing pivot, hence the lower link is %50 percent of the length of the rear lower arm.  Now, these number are estimates.....I haven't actually measured exactly the stock setup.......and there may be a few other variables such as inner pivot locations changing angles.  But the basic concept is that since the knuckle moves in an arc (not up and down like the 99 with it's own pivot at the knuckle, and equal length parallel arms) Then the arms CANNOT be equal length......they must be proportional to the amount of travel they make depending on where on the trailing arm they pivot.

Maybe not enough to matter.....but you should examine the toe change carefully, or you may find that you eat tires, and worse yet, you may have "ghost walk" effect in the snow, especially on bumpy roads.

I will be moving my links back to the stock length for now.  But if your mods work well, I may duplicate them.  Keep up the fantastic work.

[pontoontodd]

20 hours ago, scalman said:

and it will still work with original axles ? 

yes

18 hours ago, FerGloyale said:

Did you lengthen the links all equal amounts?  Or is it proportional to the difference in stock lengths?

The reason I ask is my own experience recently trying to lengthen just one link.....alot.

What I discovered in researching why it was throwing off my toe as it traveled, is that the ratio of the difference in length of the 3 links, is proportional to the distance from the pivot for the trailing arm.  If you made all links say an inch longer, then you have changed the ratio.  If we call the rear link the %100 percent mark, then the upper link, being attached at about %80 of the trailing arms total length....hence the upper link is about %80 of the length of the rear lower.  And the forward lower, being on;y about %50 of the distance from the trailing pivot, hence the lower link is %50 percent of the length of the rear lower arm.  Now, these number are estimates.....I haven't actually measured exactly the stock setup.......and there may be a few other variables such as inner pivot locations changing angles.  But the basic concept is that since the knuckle moves in an arc (not up and down like the 99 with it's own pivot at the knuckle, and equal length parallel arms) Then the arms CANNOT be equal length......they must be proportional to the amount of travel they make depending on where on the trailing arm they pivot.

Maybe not enough to matter.....but you should examine the toe change carefully, or you may find that you eat tires, and worse yet, you may have "ghost walk" effect in the snow, especially on bumpy roads.

I will be moving my links back to the stock length for now.  But if your mods work well, I may duplicate them.  Keep up the fantastic work.

We did make them all the same amount longer.  I see what you mean now about having the ones farther from the trailing arm pivot longer than the ones closer to the pivot.  Thanks for bringing that up, hadn't thought about it.  It's not that extreme though, the fowardmost link is about 70% of the way back, the middle one is about 80% of the way back.  So even if you made them all an inch longer you're only talking a quarter inch or so error, the bushings flex that much.

These links are not much longer than stock, just enough that we can get more droop before we bottom out the inner CVs but the axles don't pull out of the diff at ride height.

At the moment it doesn't seem to matter with all the flex in the various bushings but I'll probably experiment with at least making the link closest to the trailing arm pivot shorter when I start on the longer shocks.  Will probably just pull one bolt out of that one and cycle it and see if it should be longer or shorter.  Fabbed up, painted, assembled, and installed another set on the driver's side last week but haven't really driven the car since then.

I'm a little temped to just remove that forwardmost lateral link, it really shouldn't be needed except as others have pointed out the trailing arm bushing is super soft and it would be the only thing controlling toe.

Edited March 10, 2019 by pontoontodd

[pontoontodd]

Got the windshield in the 99 Outback replaced over the weekend.  It was very cracked by the end of last year.  While it was out I welded up most of the cracks in the cowl and hammered/ground down the high spots that looked like they were hitting the windshield.  Hopefully it will last a while without cracking but I doubt it.

 

I've wanted to upgrade the lighting on my Outbacks for a while.  There are so many options now, the best modern solution seems to be projectors and I'd read that The Retrofit Source is the best place to get them.  They sell 70mm LED projectors for $80 per pair so I figured I'd try to fit a pair in each stock headlight housing.  I have some extras so if this didn't work out I could just go back to stock.  The first one took me a long time.  I may have spent an hour or two prying it apart. 

By the time I was done it looked like a racoon had chewed it open.  Before I did the second one I read online that you just put it in an oven at 200-250F for twenty minutes and it pulls right apart.

Here is the first one cut to fit two projectors.  Not pretty but no one will really see it behind the plastic cover.

The one on the right in this picture doesn't stick far enough out the back to hold it on with a nut so I cut some slots in the bottom of the housing and used a hose clamp.

The pictures below are with HID bulbs in the stock location on both sides for high and low.  On the passenger side are the two projectors.  On the driver's side is a KC 2"x4" spot with an HID bulb.

Here are just the low beams.  The pattern without the plastic cover is pretty crazy.  Ignore the aiming, I did that later.

High beams, cover on left, no cover on right.  You can see the cover really spreads out the light.  We did polish the covers we put on in the end and that reduced the spread some.

Projectors on the right with no cover.  You can see the pattern is pretty tight.

Now with the cover on the right (pre polishing).  Clearly far more light output than the two HIDs on the left.

Now some pictures with two projectors in each housing and HIDs for the stock high/low beams.  Old KC is unplugged (used the plug for projectors).  Pictures are blurry but you can get the idea.  Notice the utility pole and trees you can barely see in the first pictures show up with the projectors.  Also you can see much farther down the road.

Low beams

 

High beams - hard to tell from these pictures but the high beams do aim up a bit and shine farther down the road.

 

High beams with projectors.

 

Also even with all these lights on, the AC, and the defroster, voltage was steady at 14V.

 

Still planning on getting a pair of 10 or 12" light bars to fit under the headlights on the 2002 white Outback.  If I like those I'll probably put a pair on the 99 too, can't have too much light for desert racing.

[pontoontodd]

I think I finally figured out my main hatch opening problem.

This is a picture I took of a parts hatch I have showing how the latch and lock works.  I'd already taken the power lock actuator out of this one, that is normally in the bracket on the right.

The lock works by lifting the slotted mechanism at the bottom.  When it is up it is locked and when you pull on the handle for the hatch it just slides past the little L shaped arm at the bottom and the hatch won't open.  When it is unlocked the little tab at the lower right pushes on that L arm and opens the hatch.

The top of that opening rod where it attaches to the hatch handle is threaded.  A while back on my friend's Forester we had to lengthen that a bit since it was not opening fully.  So I tried that on mine.  Seemed to work for a while but this morning I could not get it open despite a lot of wiggling, pushing, pulling, and cussing.  It's hard to see on a good hatch, especially closed, but once I pulled open the interior panel inside the car it looked like the slotted arm at the bottom was too far to the right.  That makes it sit on top of that L shaped arm.  Then when you try to unlock it, it can't swing down into place.  So I shortened the threaded rod and it seems to work fine now, I locked and unlocked it and opened and closed it a bunch of times with no issues.  It seems like the root of the problem is that the handle doesn't have a lot of extra throw so that adjustment is very important.  Maybe someday I'll make a handle with a longer arm on it.

If you're having this problem and your hatch won't open the best thing to do would be to pull the interior panel out and then remove that threaded rod from the handle.  Then pull up on the rod, unlock the hatch with key or power lock, and then push down on the rod and open the hatch.

[travelvw]

Well, I had an absolute blast hanging out with the long travel guys from IL, and more short travel from TX! We did a little bit of everything from hiking, to jumps, to water crossings, to rowdy trail riding. Although us short travel folks kept up just fine on everything but the jumps, the long travel simply ate up the boulder-strewn water crossings and rock shelves. Ground clearance plus articulation can't be beat. My rockers definitely took a beating plus two bent trailing arms and a slashed tire! Looking forward to the next round...

Short travel teetering down the ledge:

Long travel bombs it:

K

[travelvw]