Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
RAM TRX - TRX-Forum.com
Bronco Raptor - BroncoRaptorForum.com
Forums
GEN 2 (2017-2020) Ford F-150 Raptor Forums
Ford F-150 Raptor General Discussions [GEN 2]
Low Mileage Maintenance Schedule
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TurboTJ" data-source="post: 1485348" data-attributes="member: 33074"><p>I love how the only things you bring up are Subaru marketing propaganda and no substantive facts. If they had a fast car, they should have raced it where it could be compared with many other cars as a benchmark. Cars are normally faster than bikes... don’t know why Subaru wasn’t. </p><p></p><p>But we know what they say about opinions so let’s stick to the technical facts about why it’s a terrible design. </p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Boxer engines create a lot of complexity for little/no benefit. For example, there is twice as many cam shafts which mean twice as many actuators for VVT, twice as many head gaskets (which are know to fail and repair requires REMOVING the engine) twice as many cam seals. All of this more or less equates to twice as many problems</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The cylinder is flat meaning getting an even oil distribution is difficult/impossible. <br /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The turbocharger cannot be located near the exhaust ports meaning you must run a smaller turbine wheel to get decent spool. Smaller turbine wheels lead to higher EGT’s which create a ton of problems (don’t ask me how I know). This is why for a long time, the STI despite having 25% more displacement actually had a smaller turbo than the Evo. <br /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The exhaust routing makes equal length headers more difficult making twin scroll less/not effective </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The entire engine is cantilevered in front of the front wheels! Mass ahead of the front wheels REDUCES the weight measured at the rear wheels. This is already a problem on front engine cars and Subaru has exacerbated it<br /> </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Top mount intercooler. I probably don’t need to say more </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Try changing spark plugs </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Turbocharger plumbing - turbo plumbing is already difficult but when you locate all four cylinders in the four corners of the engine bay, you make it worst and getting perfectly even flow in/out of each one is hard</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Timing belts must be twice as long (which makes stretch an issue) or you must have two</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Basic maintenance on the cylinder heads requires removing the entire engine. </li> </ul><p>Subaru will tell you “but it lowers the center of gravity” which is true... kind of. The engine is lower but you raise a ton of components higher in doing so and make things complicated. They have never offered any numbers on how much it lowers the CG and that’s because it’s a gimmick. Compare these problems to an I4 like in an Evo and you will see why they make so much more HP with significantly fewer engine problems than a Subaru. </p><p></p><p>Having said all this, Subaru’s are well made and there is talk of going away from the boxer engine. This would mean better performance, reliability and fuel economy. I’m all for this. </p><p></p><p>Remember, there is a reason why no one else mass produced boxer engines in front engine configurations.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TurboTJ, post: 1485348, member: 33074"] I love how the only things you bring up are Subaru marketing propaganda and no substantive facts. If they had a fast car, they should have raced it where it could be compared with many other cars as a benchmark. Cars are normally faster than bikes... don’t know why Subaru wasn’t. But we know what they say about opinions so let’s stick to the technical facts about why it’s a terrible design. [LIST] [*]Boxer engines create a lot of complexity for little/no benefit. For example, there is twice as many cam shafts which mean twice as many actuators for VVT, twice as many head gaskets (which are know to fail and repair requires REMOVING the engine) twice as many cam seals. All of this more or less equates to twice as many problems [*]The cylinder is flat meaning getting an even oil distribution is difficult/impossible. [*]The turbocharger cannot be located near the exhaust ports meaning you must run a smaller turbine wheel to get decent spool. Smaller turbine wheels lead to higher EGT’s which create a ton of problems (don’t ask me how I know). This is why for a long time, the STI despite having 25% more displacement actually had a smaller turbo than the Evo. [*]The exhaust routing makes equal length headers more difficult making twin scroll less/not effective [*]The entire engine is cantilevered in front of the front wheels! Mass ahead of the front wheels REDUCES the weight measured at the rear wheels. This is already a problem on front engine cars and Subaru has exacerbated it [*]Top mount intercooler. I probably don’t need to say more [*]Try changing spark plugs [*]Turbocharger plumbing - turbo plumbing is already difficult but when you locate all four cylinders in the four corners of the engine bay, you make it worst and getting perfectly even flow in/out of each one is hard [*]Timing belts must be twice as long (which makes stretch an issue) or you must have two [*]Basic maintenance on the cylinder heads requires removing the entire engine. [/LIST] Subaru will tell you “but it lowers the center of gravity” which is true... kind of. The engine is lower but you raise a ton of components higher in doing so and make things complicated. They have never offered any numbers on how much it lowers the CG and that’s because it’s a gimmick. Compare these problems to an I4 like in an Evo and you will see why they make so much more HP with significantly fewer engine problems than a Subaru. Having said all this, Subaru’s are well made and there is talk of going away from the boxer engine. This would mean better performance, reliability and fuel economy. I’m all for this. Remember, there is a reason why no one else mass produced boxer engines in front engine configurations. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Members online
v2500hd
nemx735
snt505
Old-Raptor-guy
elpechedepeche
eanevarez
krmzn
Coyote_695
P4SHOCAT
KAJRIP
4xfun
24NoVARaptor
Jorge Acosta
3Dog
OrangemanOtto
LayinWatts69
gt942nv00
Controlsguy21
sambhutta
jgsmithsae
HORN HIGH ACES
gatorbyteme
Hambone
RaptorMach3p5
MidnightSpecial
debauch
hingedthinker
kevo_lo
Todd Turbo S
XSTNKT
WhiskeyTangoGTFO
970rap
Keamg5
Turning Blue
DFS
Fire Ball
BenBB
RLB18
Irregular F150
ToadSmasher2K1
brianh87
Yukon Joe
HighNoon
kocher93
WH7
ShadyRaptor
James O
MZRaptor72
KingKoopa17
BBR
... and 43 more.
Forum statistics
Threads
93,201
Posts
1,955,904
Members
56,485
Latest member
bjorn-dpc
Forums
GEN 2 (2017-2020) Ford F-150 Raptor Forums
Ford F-150 Raptor General Discussions [GEN 2]
Low Mileage Maintenance Schedule
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top