School me on outbacks

[jamal]

They did account for the added height on the outback by putting in spacers between the body mounting points for the subframe and suspension. So the geometry is actually pretty much identical between the legacy and outback. I have even removed all that stuff a few times to lower an outback to legacy height properly.

However, if 1-2 inches of suspension compression really generates almost a whole degree of toe in, then yeah, that would be excessive. I think there is something else going on though. I noticed one guy said he had very little tire tread, and uneven tire wear "but the mechanic said nothing was wrong." Well, clearly from the tire wear something's wrong. If your car is doing something like that, all the bushings and links need to be very carefully inspected, and you need to get an actual alignment printout with numbers, not just a guy telling you it's fine.

At the same time, that particular rear suspension from 00-09 is a one-off design among subarus and it's not my favorite.

[mattig]

Well I know some stuff about Subarus (although I'm more of a wrx/sti guy) and I'm kind of bored right now so I guess I can write some stuff out. So we're on the 6th gen of the subaru legacy, which is the basis of the outback. The generations go from 90-94, 95-99, when the OB was first released, 00-04, 05-09, 10-14, and now 15+

From 97-2012, the base engine was an EJ25. These are the ones that blow headgaskets, but the big problem there was the gasket design. In 09, they finally started putting in better MLS gaskets like in the turbo cars and that is also what you get from a dealer for replacements for all the old ones now too. Once it's been done once, it's less likely to happen again. In 05-06 they got a bump in compression ratio and some valve adjustment magic to make more power but the EJ is an old ass engine and there are better options.

The 00-04 body style brought in the 6-cylinder EZ30. If you look at Subaru's new FA/FB engines there are a lot of similarities and this was the first of the "new" engines that are now in almost everything (just not the sti). The 00-04 would be not be my pick though because it's one of the ugliest cars subaru ever made, it still has the old 4eat, and only makes like 200hp. For 05-09 the legacy/outback got a lot better looking, and the H6 got some fancy additions to the valve control. It's more powerful, more efficient, and more reliable. Also gets a new 5-speed auto instead of the 4eat from like 1980. The 2010 H6 got bumped up to 3.6. Downside is you can't get a manual with any of the 6 cylinders.

The 05-09 had a 3rd option- the turbo ej25 and I think you could even get one of those with a 5-speed. Basically the same as the wrx and sti motor so it will blow ring lands and have the oil pickup tube break. Only the legacy GT spec-b from 07-09 got a good 6-speed like the one in the sti.

The 2010 is a new body style, and dropped the turbo option but gives you a 3.6 h6 and some new transmissions. There's a CVT and a 6-speed, although that 6-speed sucks compared to the one in the sti and spec-b. It's pretty much the old 5-speed with an extra gear stuck on the back. I think the 3.6 comes with the old 5eat because it would break the other transmissions.

In 2012 the EJ finally went away on these and is replaced with the new FB25. Timing chains, probably not going to blow headgaskets, variable valve lift and timing. Stick one of those on a CVT and you get pretty decent acceleration and really good gas mileage compared to the EJ + 5eat. Not very exciting to drive though.

2015 I think keeps the same drivetrain options but has bigger hubs, wheel bearings, and brakes, and a 5x114 bolt pattern.

For the AWD, subaru has about 4 different systems. Most automatics do not actually have a fully mechanical connection to the rear wheels and just use a computer controlled clutch pack like every other honda cr-v rav-4 etc. But, it can transfer a good amount of torque and provides some pre-emptive lockup so you don't get that thing where the front wheels spin and then it kicks in. Autos with VTD, however, get a nice system that is mechanical, using a planetary gear set and clutch packs a lot like what is in the sti, just without the manual control dial. This is the best awd system subaru offers aside from the sti's DCCD. And then a standard 5mt or 6mt uses a real center diff with a fairly week viscous lockup mechanism. Additionally, only a few models get an actual LSD in the rear diff and it has mostly gone away on all the new cars and is replaced with traction control. I think the STI is the only car with a mechanical LSD now (and they put one in the front, too).

Props for this.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Cocximus]

The AWD has some mechanisms to limit slip between the front and rear, but on most models there's nothing from left to right.

With an open differential, the torque is always split 50:50 no matter what. That means if the left wheel has zero traction, the 50:50 split gives zero torque to the right wheel, even if it's on dry pavement, and you spin the one tire and go nowhere. You can floor it all you want, bang off the rev limiter, and spin the tire really fast, but with no resistance, no torque is generated or applied. With all open diffs, zero traction on any one corner means zero torque to every corner ("zero" of course is a simplification but makes it easier to picture). Nearly all subarus have open front and rear diffs

Some cars are better than others with low traction. The best setup is in the sti. It has a full time mechanical connection to all four wheels, a center diff that can fully lock up, and good mechanical (as opposed to viscous) limited slip diffs front and rear. The VTD outbacks are almost as good. They have an open front diff but some include a rear LSD (although a weaker viscous type). What that means is with the sti, even if only 1 tire had traction you could still move because the diffs are trying to resist a speed difference and will apply torque to the wheel with grip. Although with the sti helical type diffs, the low traction wheel still needs some traction. It won't work with a wheel in the air for example. Some stis have a clutch type rear diff which doesn't care. Speed difference occurs- cams push the clutches together.

The next step down is the standard manual setup. All the wheels are mechanically connected all the time, the center diff has a viscous coupling limited slip, and some cars have a rear LSD. The center diff viscous coupling is rated at 4kg-m per 100rpm. That means with a 100rpm speed difference between the front and rear, you get 4kg-m (26lb-ft) of resistance from the coupler. So say your front tires are on ice and the rears are on pavement and the fronts are spinning at 100rpm- that will send 26lb-ft to the rear. I can't say for sure that 200rpm difference actually means 52 lb-ft, it's not a linear curve and there is a limit, but if you really get it spinning and overheat the clutches it will lock up (called the "hump" effect). I notice it is pretty easy to get one end of the car's tires spinning on mine and even noticed the "hump" happen recently when I was trying to pull away from a slightly uphill stop sign on ice where the rear tires had better grip. Fronts spun for a second and then it caught and moved forward.

Moving on, the basic autos and cvts have a clutch pack sending power to the rear. No full time connection, lockup determined by speed, gear, throttle position, wheel speeds, steering angle, etc. I do not know the absolute limit of this system, but at low outputs I assume it could transfer 100% of the torque to the rear when fully engaged - if you mechanically lock the front and rear together it doesn't really matter how you do it unless that connection slips.

Really though it comes down to the open front and rear diffs which limit the amount of power you can apply in low traction situations. The other thing is tires, if you have bald or cheap, inappropriate rubber on your car it doesn't matter what kind of awd/4wd system you have. Also, new cars do have traction control. What that means is it brakes the tire that is spinning to create resistance and that allows torque to be generated and applied to the other wheels.

Great overview. I always thought there must be something up with subarus because the few I drove did have that hump, which is far from the renowned subaru awd which I guess is only on the high end models. I like my torsens.

[stuckathuntermtn]

If you know where the leak is you can replace yourself and have a shop evac/charge the system for you. If you have a leak you most likley don't have any freon in there anyway.

No, we had to cut through the condenser pipe. Maybe a good welder with aluminum experience can put a splice on it. Long story.

[HHTELE]

For anyone considering buying an 05-09 outback take some time and read this thread. The cliff notes are that the rear suspension design causes the rear tires to toe in (front of the tire points towards the center of the car like they are trying to turn) when the suspension is compressed which results in instability on slick roads and uneven tire wear on dry roads. What this means for us is when you load it up with your friends and family and all your gear and the rear suspension squats from all the weight your rear tires will be fighting each other. When that happens all it takes is a slight difference in traction and the rear of the car will shift, then shift back when the other tire gets more traction. They call it ghost walking because it feels like your ass end is just wagging back and forth. The real effect, how about 25mph all the way from Silverthorn into Steamboat in your nice new Subaru with a white knuckle grip on the steering wheel while 2wds are passing you? It took me a while to experience it again after that and finally figured out what was causing it. It takes the right conditions to set it off but when it happens it’s incredibly unnerving.

http://www.subaruoutback.org/forums/...#/topics/16527

Weird.
We regularly load our 05, and drive it in all kinds of weather. Never experienced this.
The car is a beast in the snow, including deep snow.

[skizix]

My guess is he meant CVT.

Yep cvt. Random brain fart there

[Kenny Satch]

Yep cvt. Random brain fart there

No worries
I once tried to sell some Smith Googles
It happens

[GPP33]

They did account for the added height on the outback by putting in spacers between the body mounting points for the subframe and suspension. So the geometry is actually pretty much identical between the legacy and outback. I have even removed all that stuff a few times to lower an outback to legacy height properly.

However, if 1-2 inches of suspension compression really generates almost a whole degree of toe in, then yeah, that would be excessive. I think there is something else going on though. I noticed one guy said he had very little tire tread, and uneven tire wear "but the mechanic said nothing was wrong." Well, clearly from the tire wear something's wrong. If your car is doing something like that, all the bushings and links need to be very carefully inspected, and you need to get an actual alignment printout with numbers, not just a guy telling you it's fine.

At the same time, that particular rear suspension from 00-09 is a one-off design among subarus and it's not my favorite.

I haven’t poked around under a 00-04 to know subtle differences between them and the 05-09, or if there are any beyond ride height. I’m also not 100% certain if the legacy has the same sub frame spacers as the OB but they certainly don’t make up for the full 3” ride height difference. The lateral links are at a higher angle.

Uneven tire wear is a direct result of this suspension design. You turn left, car leans to the right, right suspension compresses, right rear tire turns in causing it to skid along sideways trying to muscle the car straight again (that’s the understeer). The outside of the rear tires wear quicker than any other area on any tire. Right is worse since you usually take left turns at a higher speed and expierence more body roll than right turns. A somewhat effective solution is to toe your rear suspension out a little (Subaru issued a TSB for this) and increase the spring rate of your rear springs by using the Rallytek overloads. After doing this I didn’t experience any more ghost walking but still had shit for tire wear and a shit suspension. Then again I chose more often than not to take my truck if I knew the roads were going to be crappy since I didn’t really trust the OB and as engine reliably became an issue stopped taking it on longer trips all together.

It’s also worth noting that the European cars didn’t experience ghost walking due to the fact that they got a self leveling suspension. Why do they always get the good stuff?

I got rid of my OB this past summer so it’s all water under the bridge for me, just warning others of some serious faults with that gen OB. Unless you really like fixing cars, or writing checks to your mechanic, I’d stay away from Subaru’s, especially one with a turbo.

[simple]

05 outback Xt 5spd here w/ 140k miles. Tuned to stage 2 for a long while now.

Zero major issues. Not as reliable as my Toyotas but much better than any VW/Audi I've owned. I'm addicted to forced induction.

I've been test driving a few new and near new cars/suv and just can't find one I like enough to quit the XT. I have real AWD not a FWD with rear wheels that kick in on ice. No traction control is awesome. If it slips I tap the gas and it snaps into place. Sure it doesn't have Bluetooth, parking assist, and lane departure safety stuff but it feels connected and not saddled by computer control. They just don't make cars like this anymore. Get one while you can.

[GPP33]

05 outback Xt 5spd here w/ 140k miles. Tuned to stage 2 for a long while now.

Zero major issues. Not as reliable as my Toyotas but much better than any VW/Audi I've owned. I'm addicted to forced induction.

I've been test driving a few new and near new cars/suv and just can't find one I like enough to quit the XT. I have real AWD not a FWD with rear wheels that kick in on ice. No traction control is awesome. If it slips I tap the gas and it snaps into place. Sure it doesn't have Bluetooth, parking assist, and lane departure safety stuff but it feels connected and not saddled by computer control. They just don't make cars like this anymore. Get one while you can.

05 XT MT was the last car Subaru made without traction control, at least on the legacy platform. I wish they had put the STI 6MT in it but it was still a stupid fun car to drive. I really considered keeping it despite all the problems but in the end couldn’t justify another car or all the $$ I would have put into it. Thoughts of 400 HP fed through a 6MT and a redesigned rear suspension danced in my head.

You were smart going stage 2, the common theory is the factory tune is what burns valves and cracks pistons on those cars.

[LightRanger]

My mom destroyed the turbo on her 06 XT twice. First time was at 99,990 miles. The dealership was incredulous, but had to honor the warranty. Second time was at like 160-something. Sold after that.

Pretty sure she treated it like shit though.

[whyturn]

05 Forester XTI with 5 speed. 8” ground clearance and 325 HP at the wheel. My box on top and dogs in back and I can spank mustangs

[My Pet Powder Goat]

05 Forester XTI with 5 speed. 8” ground clearance and 325 HP at the wheel. My box on top and dogs in back and I can spank mustangs

Was going to mention this earlier. I'd take a 05 forester over a outback.

Equal clearance, better approach angles, 250lbs lighter, more usable room, impreza frame, and the 05 has a STI aluminum block and the huge ass sun roof

[Telemarketeer]

Our 2010 Outback with 3.6L has been great. Just drove through multiple snowstorms, cross country, with a big ass rocket box full of skis. Thing did 110 mph across WY still getting 23 mpg.

One complaint is the lack of wheel well room. Snow/ice gets compacted in there and creates tire rub. I gave my wife a massive flathead screwdriver and a rubber mallet to chip it out since she's commuting daily over Vail pass. Surprised she hasn't dented the body yet

If they ever build a Crosstrek with a turbo, we'll be getting one of those. Outback is nice, but a little too big. Need more room in the garage for bikes

[simple]

My mom destroyed the turbo on her 06 XT twice. First time was at 99,990 miles. The dealership was incredulous, but had to honor the warranty. Second time was at like 160-something. Sold after that.

Pretty sure she treated it like shit though.

Need to be religious with oil changes on that engine. Stab in the dark on why she killed two turbos.

[LightRanger]

I think they were pretty good about it.

I think it was more the whole "always being late for work" thing. Start it, no warm up, drive fast, park, no cool down. Repeat multiple days a week for several years.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[simple]

Was going to mention this earlier. I'd take a 05 forester over a outback.

Equal clearance, better approach angles, 250lbs lighter, more usable room, impreza frame, and the 05 has a STI aluminum block and the huge ass sun roof

Meh

The outback of that generation is quieter, more comfortable and used better materials. Outback got that sunroof as well not that i would recommend it. Potential creaks and leaks along with added weight. Anyway I rarely find either at the junkyard as are both good cars

[simple]

I think they were pretty good about it.

I think it was more the whole "always being late for work" thing. Start it, no warm up, drive fast, park, no cool down. Repeat multiple days a week for several years.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

Yep that could do it

[concretejungle]

Turbos died with very few miles because the engines turn into a solid hunk of metal eventually. Mine lasted to 180K or around there and two separate Subaru mechanics were surprised that it had lasted that long. The banjo filter was taken out of ours early in the cars life. Stay away from the turbo. Fun as shit to drive but no fucking way do you want to deal with that.

[skaredshtles]

I don't know of a single Outback XT that didn't end up with a blown motor/turbo. I wouldn't touch one with a 10-foot pole.

[simple]

I know of one local guy with 350k miles that runs over 300hp on E85 tune. He must be able to handle that 10 foot pole.

[skaredshtles]

I know of one local guy with 350k miles that runs over 300hp on E85 tune. He must be able to handle that 10 foot pole.

I stand corrected - I now e-know of ONE Outback XT that hasn't blown the motor.

[simple]

Exactly! All this anti turbo talk reminds me of those years ago that people discounted EV and Hybrid cars. "The batteries will die suddenly and then what?" "The motors won't last"

It is all just fear based propaganda incited by internet theories. Water cooler gossip. Meanwhile these same people can't even change a burnt out taillight bulb. We really are the dumbest 1st world nation. We love gadgets but have no idea how to maintain or fix them. An auto mechanic is looked at more like a high school drop out you can't trust than an advanced technician.

[skaredshtles]

Exactly! All this anti turbo talk reminds me of those years ago that people discounted EV and Hybrid cars. "The batteries will die suddenly and then what?" "The motors won't last"

It is all just fear based propaganda incited by internet theories. Water cooler gossip. Meanwhile these same people can't even change a burnt out taillight bulb. We really are the dumbest 1st world nation. We love gadgets but have no idea how to maintain or fix them. An auto mechanic is looked at more like a high school drop out you can't trust than an advanced technician.

Well, can you blame them with mfg'rs track record with turbos? Daytonas, Thunderbirds, etc.

When we purchased our F150 I specifically avoided the EcoBoost model simply because I didn't want to deal with the added shenanigans/cost that a turbo brings to the table - but I plan to keep the truck for 10-20 years.

I'd much rather have a fully electric, self-driving car, though.

[jamal]

It seems to me that the legacys and outbacks go through turbo at a much higher rate than the wrx/sti. They are basically the same engine, and same turbo, and you rarely hear about it on the wrx, so I don't really get it. Possibly a lower standard of maintenance is occurring? You really need to use synthetic oil in a turbo subaru and maybe some lady who brings her outback xt to jiffy lube is not doing that for example. The turbocharger itself is water cooled, so you really don't have to let it idle and cool down or anything after driving in most cases. Also there are some screens in the banjo fittings that provide oil to the turbocharger and avcs solenoids and those should get taken out.

I haven’t poked around under a 00-04 to know subtle differences between them and the 05-09, or if there are any beyond ride height. I’m also not 100% certain if the legacy has the same sub frame spacers as the OB but they certainly don’t make up for the full 3” ride height difference. The lateral links are at a higher angle.

00-04 and 05-09 rear suspension is identical. Well, the swaybar is a little different.

Don't forget the outback has taller tires as well. Basically 25" diameter for the Legacy, 28 for the OB, so there's 1.5" in ride height there. The spacers for the subframe are a little over an inch tall, so at most, the suspension only really experiences a change of 1/2" from where it is on the legacy.

Anyway, the wheel carrier/upright is all one big long piece that acts as the trailing arm too, so I was having a hard time picturing such a big toe change. But I found some approximate measurements and drew some circles and came up with my own estimated bump steer curve for the rear. It is highly dependent on the original position of the lower rear link, but worst case scenario I can come up with over a half degree of toe-in per side from standard ride height to the bump stops. And that's definitely too much.