Subaru ECU

@550 Phil You are correct in the fact that a proper EcU tune makes the engine perform much better than stock

Sn aftermarket ECU makes sense when your doing a new engine build even more.

From my discussions with LPerf an Ecutek tune chamges the stock ECU to make it perfect for that stock engine... ie bring up to max capacity for the stoxk engine which was detuned by the factory for ease of building. Approx $1500 

They would do a new ECU  Atom

about 3k$ As I said before that would be somewhat more flexible and has a full log of performance memory on it so you can read it after with a computer.  It helps diagnoae of fine tune the issues.

As far as raw costs are concerned a wrecked wrx turbo is very inexpensive ... just saying

bart posted:

My car has a 1776 cubic inch air cooled VW...it is trouble free ….if I want to go fast, I have cars that will do that......I ordered this car to replicate the original 356 not only in appearance but in performance….and to mow the lawn... 

My bad, not enough coffee this morning....obviously I should have said " 1776 cubic centimeters"  a little dinky one...... 

I know I'm odd-man out (except maybe @bart and @Jack Crosby  ), but the terminology MS, ECU, Microsquirt, TPS, MAP, Megasquirt, MAP, IAT, CHT, WBO2, ITB, MAF, WTF... I have absolutely no idea what they mean. 

Get in car, turn ignition, drive to local or out-of-state destination were the only terminoloy that crossed my mind in 15 years of logging 140,000 trouble-free miles with my previous 1835cc and current 1915cc all over the Western U.S.

 Alas,  that's why there's 31 flavors at Baskin Robins and manifests the beauty of this hobby. You can spend any amount of $$$$$$ (or not) reaching for your version of engine/ horsepower nirvana. There's room for everybody under the tent. That's what I really enjoy about this site and the folks on it.

For me, an old-school kinda guy, no matter how technology continues to antiquate old AC power, absolutely NOTHING can replace the sound of my dream car Speedster with it's AC Porsche 2.2 or 2.7 engine going through the gears.  

@Banzai Pipeline

Again: EJ25 case + SOHC EJ22 heads with dual exhaust ports + Cometic head gaskets + 2.5 injectors + Delta Cams 1000 grind (+18 degrees and 0.020" over stock) gets a reported 185 hp at the crank with a stock early ECU and yes it needs 91 octane because the static compression ratio is higher than the 2.2 had stock. Engine will peak at about 55-5600 and rev to 6500 with power and reliability. 

You could build it with a megasquirt or a stinger too but you won't get more grunt out of this package with the computer. All you'll get is more adjustability that will probably frustrate you as you try to set it up. 

You can get more grunt out of the engine easily with a turbo, but, for our purposes (which is putting these engines in plastic clown cars) this way lies madness and frustration for all but a very few very dedicated knuckle busters.

You also can get slightly more grunt from the 2.5 normally aspirated, using the bigger cams and an aftermarket ECU, as Phil alludes. BUT: this way lies expenses in both money and time. What's that last 15 horsepower really worth to you, fellas? $5,000? $7,000? Six months? A year?

Here's the news: ANY half-competent garage monkey can collect the parts and build a Franken 2.5 for south of $6,000, in a season of weekends, without ever cracking open a laptop and trying to load a spark or air-fuel table into it.

And without ever tracing the ECU harness and figuring out which pin does what.

You just take the wires and ecu out of the old Subaru 2.2, box them up, mail them to Tom Shiels with a check for $600 or $700 or something like that, wait a couple weeks for its return and then plug the damn thing in.

The only real challenge with the Frankenmotor is finding the older parts in the junkyard in decent shape. This is why it's NOT the way the guys who build lots of cars for a living are going: they can't be spending their evenings on Craigslist looking for servicable 1994 N/A Outbacks with 88k miles. They want crate engines, JDMs, etc., ready out of the box, as would I or you or anyone else in their shoes.

But there are still plenty of 1990s-era Subarus with low-medium mileage to be found, and the electronics on 'em are usually fine. Guys building one car can find them easily enough--as Mr. Stroud has demonstrated. 

On a bang-for-buck AND a reliability-for-buck basis you can't beat the Frankenmotor. I don't understand why more of youse guys are making 'em. 

So speaks Ed, he sees into the dark and reports to the masses on Subie technology

great post

Jim that sound is like a Siren call

I think @MusbJim and I were typing at the same time.

I hate when someone tries to cloud the argument for air-cooled motors with facts and logic.

Can't you just let me pursue my fantasies in peace?

I know, I know, once you're out there in traffic, duking it out with the Mustangs and Focus ST's, it's kinda natural to want more horsepressure to, well, to just keep up. Or at least to make a respectable showing on your way to the next stoplight.

But that's really not why I got this dumb car. If I want to try to turn it into a contender, I feel like every step in that direction is a step away from the original concept, and probably an expensive step, too.

It may be hard to remember that far back, but in 1950, Porsche was all about making the most out of a very little. Hustling down a twisty little road with a modest torque curve and a nervous, skittering suspension under you requires a certain knack. And one of the reasons I got this thing was to try to work on that knack. Adding a bunch of power to go faster is a different game. Not a bad game, mind you. Not a game without its own little jollies. But just a different game.

I've got faster rides in my garage. The Mini Cooper, while no fire breather, is a modern take on getting down a twisty road in the smallest possible time while spending the fewest possible dollars. Wind it up just right, work the pedals competently, and there are few quicker ways up the mountain and back on four wheels.

There are days when I fire up the Mini to do battle. But lately, there are more days when I'm in the Speedster. I'm still working on perfecting the knack.

Call me a mentally deranged dotard if you will, but I'm keeping the sputtering, impractical, anachronistic air-cooled engine for now.

And Amen to Mitch. FWIW, I think 185 hp is near the absolute ragged edge of what's desirable in the Speedster or Spyder replica packages, if those packages are to be left remotely similar to the ones we're trying to replicate. 

These cars are cool at any speed, so long as the wheels are down and the open side is up....

I was thinking of building an IM with a Subie 6, 3.0-3.3 liter in the beginning with a subie 5 speed tranny.  Imagine near 300hp N/A and only 58lbs more weight 2 inches wider/bigger.  I passed because I was concerned to be the first one doing it and the extra pendulum effect.   I like N/A rather than turbo launch systems. 

I've been on thin ice before with my thoughts regarding replica speedsters-- but it bears pointing out that aside from an iconic shape, the hobby varies wildly in expectations and execution.

The original cars were "giant killers" mostly in folklore and legend. The simplicity of the design carried the day for about 10 minutes before everybody else figured out how to make their own (more powerful) offerings handle and stop better, and before Porsche itself began dialing in more power to continue winning. In a day and age of 700 hp sports cars, and minivans that will run in the 13s, it's hard to argue for a 1600 cc, 90 hp lump out back.

Of course, if one's expectations of a speedster are simple, then simplicity and modest output carry the day. Arguments are made for modest power, simple suspension, 4-speed transaxles, and drum brakes. The idea is that these limitations faithfully replicate the originals, and should someone desire "more", there are no shortage of conveyances that will satisfy the desire. This is pretty clear-headed thinking.

Others just want the shape, and a car that lives up to modern expectations regarding comfort, reliability, and speed. There's nothing wrong with this, either. Not everybody can afford (or want) 5 different cars for 5 different applications. For these guys, the complexity and cost is going to be higher, and things like who's ECM ticks the most boxes starts to matter.

There's another group, and it's much smaller. These guys want everything the platform will allow. I've ridden in Jim Kelly's mid-engined, 300 hp turbo coupe, and it's astounding. I've wheeled two IMs with Porsche 6s, and they were the sweetest cars I've ever driven. I've piloted Rich Drewek's 2.6L Raby Type 4 Beck, and it was a monster. Marty G's turbo Subi IM  takes potency to another level. I've not driven Danny's Spyder, but I'm very familiar with my own science project, and it's a world away from the first car I owned. Phil's Spyder takes the 2.5L NA Subaru platorm about as far as it's currently gone. There's nothing wrong with this approach either. It's these cars that define what is possible, and it's likely the only "special" car that the owner has. My other cars are a minivan and two work-trucks. The speedster has to tick a lot of boxes for me.

We run the gamut from pan-based 1600 cc cars to tube-framed, mid-engined, water-cooled, turbocharged 300 hp monsters. The brakes range from link-pin drums to ventilated discs. The suspensions vary from swing-axles and beams to 911 front-ends and full IRS.

Aside from the shape, we're often comparing apples and oranges. It's kind've irrelevant to tell a guy who wants the best orange possible that you're perfectly happy with your own apple (and he should be as well). This thread is dedicated to people in the last two groups-- the guys who are uninterested in continuing down what all of us (even those of us who love the Type 1) know is a bad situation, only going to become worse. Water -cooled is not just the future-- in the day of a $35K "basic" new build, the air-cooled car is going to become the option, not what the average buyer is going to want/expect. Knowing the most sensible approach to making it the best it can be is good information, and that's what this discussion started out being.

I'm the most die-hard retro-grouch here, and I can see that I'm a dinosaur nobody should emulate. This stuff is not just the future, it's the present.

I'm not particularly concerned about the lofty nature of Ferdinand's purpose with 356 design, the noble utility sought by Porsche engineers, or the SIMPLE, PURE PURPOSE of our little cars.  I love the design, and I love to go fast.  Those are my primary concerns.  If your cars please you guys as much as mine pleases me, we're all in tall cotton, podna.

IaM-Ray posted:

I was thinking of building an IM with a Subie 6, 3.0-3.3 liter in the beginning with a subie 5 speed tranny.  Imagine near 300hp N/A and only 58lbs more weight 2 inches wider/bigger.  I passed because I was concerned to be the first one doing it and the extra pendulum effect.   I like N/A rather than turbo launch systems. 

Ray.  If a car is constructed and set up correctly - as Henry does - there is no pendulum effect with a larger engine at the back.  My IM6 is proof of that, and as Stan says above, this combination makes for a very sweet ride.  I don't know the weight differential of a 911 engine vs a Subaru six cylinder, so I can't add that into the comparison.

Anyway, your car is nice as it is...

Agreed, Jim, and especially Stan. I'm not the same caliber wordsmith as Mr. Galat, but I share the same passion. The original Speedsters and Spyders had a distinct characteristic: they punched WAY above their weight. This is what drives my desire to get the absolute most I can from this archaic platform. 

If I want to put EFI on my aircooled motor, I will. Or, I'll leave the carbs on it. We'll see.

I believe there isn't much left for me on the table. The suspension is about as sorted as it's going to get. The brakes are superb. The motor is running at the ragged edge of performance. But I have to try and eke out every last ounce I can. It's my nature.

Bob, I think the weight difference between the Suby 4 and Suby 6 is 20 to 40 pounds. Almost inconsequential, and if the car handled like yours and Marty's, I'd be in.

I'm still contemplating a 3.0 Suby 6(Tribeca) into an early 911. The extra front weight of radiator/plumbing/fan  would more than compensate any extra rear weight. Imagine power, reliability, heat, and AC that works in an early 911? Simultaneously thumbing my nose at all the "purists"! LOL!

Bob, Danny, when I did this exercise in 2013 ish the 3.0 was 58 pounds more and barely an inch which is why I was thinking about it.  I saw a video of a Ghia with one... quite the engine.  To get one fully rebuilt though was not inexpensive.  

IM at the time, was pretty much doing 4cyl N/A or turbo's and I wanted the boxer Subie engine.   I eventually went with a 175 hp 4 cyl and I wanted a subie tranny but I chose a 915 tranny like Marty.  In the end, we went with a subie 5 sp. 

As far as the pendulum effect in a rear engined car, IM builds probably the most stablest car with a 6cyl P engine car. 

The physics in and of itself, cannot be trusted to not have a pendulum effect should it lose traction.  Any rear lockup, or corner where you would lose rear traction would cause the weigh shift to swing the rear to come around. 

Trust me, I know this from experience.  I also am aware that Tomm had his car crash when he lost control in the rain?   I believe it was partly due to his 340hp engine causing the rear to break lose.  I could be wrong on these facts.

Am I thinking of upgrading my 2.5L today? No, but if the engine were ever to have an issue it would be part of the consideration with of course the 4 cylinders versions. 

The tech guys that I have built a relationship with that are close to me could handle any engine choice I would make, and could fabricate anything that would be needed to do the conversion as well as tune that engine to peak performance. 

Bob I really like my car!

Truth is, It was quite the journey to sort it out as I was the first full subie build.  That means a lot of R&D and fine tuning.  It was frustrating at times and very time consuming, I did a whole lot of trouble shooting and investigating of issues and I had a whole lot of fun and satisfaction especially when we finally figured it all out. 

In passing, a lot my R&D done with IM ended up in the IM product line that was built after my car.  From dual rads, thinner fan used, bigger gaz tank, and bigger gas filler, finally a microphone made as a button for the retrosound.  Obviously as you help source out different things IM does it's job of building what you want and they did a bang up job. 

IM has continued to improve the line and it's offering making the rad install even nicer as they go on.  

I finally got my car singing quite well, and have made use of the original ECU wiring.  Thanks to IM, and a close friend, who is an electrical engineer, who helped to finally decipher how to install all the needed stuff for a cruise control.  This was quite the project doing it mostly myself but as of late, I have been able to do a lot of highway cruising relaxed with cruise control.  Brings it to a whole other level of comfort.  

Carlisle will be a much more relaxed 6 hour drive.   

MusbJim posted:

I know I'm odd-man out (except maybe @bart and @Jack Crosby  ), but the terminology MS, ECU, Microsquirt, TPS, MAP, Megasquirt, MAP, IAT, CHT, WBO2, ITB, MAF, WTF... I have absolutely no idea what they mean. 

Get in car, turn ignition, drive to local or out-of-state destination were the only terminoloy that crossed my mind in 15 years of logging 140,000 trouble-free miles with my previous 1835cc and current 1915cc all over the Western U.S.

 Alas,  that's why there's 31 flavors at Baskin Robins and manifests the beauty of this hobby. You can spend any amount of $$$$$$ (or not) reaching for your version of engine/ horsepower nirvana. There's room for everybody under the tent. That's what I really enjoy about this site and the folks on it.

For me, an old-school kinda guy, no matter how technology continues to antiquate old AC power, absolutely NOTHING can replace the sound of my dream car Speedster with it's AC Porsche 2.2 or 2.7 engine going through the gears.  

@Banzai Pipeline

I hear ya bro......loud and clear  

With LOVE and ALOHA

Ray:  I know Henry learned somewhat from my build, and I know that since mine was built, he has received a number of orders for more 911 based builds.

It's good that builders can learn from their projects, and that makes it all the better for future customers.

 Your car is a great example of a six Porsche build   I also feel that when a car is built there is finally a demo vehicle that people can look at in the Build shop

This allows prospective buyers to have an example to copy

  All of a sudden there’s a lot more IM 6’sis out there   And a lot more of the subies

 There are times when you can hardly see a car let alone test drive an IM

if you go there

IM  continues to improve their line so when someone ask them to do something a little special cosmetically or mechanically it can turn out and work quite well. We all add a little to the product as we build a new one and ask for new options and features

 My point with my car simply is that there was so much change compared to a previously built IM subie

just the dual rad setup was a lot of R&D... very limited space and the fans had to be real thin not,  to mention the AC condensors.