Subaru Ascent Forum banner
1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,115 Posts
The eco block pulls the MAF sensor out of the air stream according to their web site. Does that mean it is tricking the computer into thinking that there is less air flow and then running the engine lean to save fuel? I’m not sure that’s a good idea. Maybe I am not understanding something.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
542 Posts
IMO, if Subaru could squeeze 8% better fuel economy without sacrificing reliability they would of done it. Companies are doing things active grill shutters, start stop, aero features on taillights, aluminum bodies, 10 speed trannys, etc to get that last mpg gains so I doubt a spacer will do it without compromising reliability.

Items like this remind me of the electric turbocharger, gas line magnets, and vitameatavegemin
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
918 Posts
Hello Fellow Ascent Owners has anyone tired this from Crawford performance Eco block claims to improve power and increase fuel economy
In 25 years of modding cars, I've never seen anything like this that ISN'T a scam!

As another poster mentioned, if Subaru could get any % improvement out of the car and keep it reliable they would have! With the government mandates pushing up the average mpg requirements for a fleet you can bet every last percent is squeezed out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: zulater

·
Registered
Joined
·
9 Posts
Hello Fellow Ascent Owners has anyone tired this from Crawford performance Eco block claims to improve power and increase fuel economy
In 25 years of modding cars, I've never seen anything like this that ISN'T a scam!

As another poster mentioned, if Subaru could
get any % improvement out of the car and keep it reliable they would have! With the government mandates pushing up the average mpg requirements for a fleet you can bet every last percent is squeezed out.
That isn’t 100% true. Manufactures have to give the cars a tune that would work in the worst market area they are sold at. For us US market that would be ACN. Arizona California Nevada. That is why the tuning market is so big because you can go in and have your car “pro tuned” or get an off the shelf map that would work better than factory.

There’s a reason Cobb is where they are at now. I know from personal experience that the stock maps have a Lot of room for improvement. How much we have with the ascent I really don’t know. But my Sti and previous subies all saw great improvements from just an aftermarket retune. Not only in power but once I got off that high of speed, much better mpg. Newer cars don’t see improvements for bolt on parts alone because the ecm corrects it back to stock levels.

You need a tune to tell the ecm where to add fuel spark or even boost. Adding in a spacer like that or even an o2 adapter to try and trick the car only multiplies small issues that can easily be fixed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
918 Posts
That isn’t 100% true. Manufactures have to give the cars a tune that would work in the worst market area they are sold at. For us US market that would be ACN. Arizona California Nevada. That is why the tuning market is so big because you can go in and have your car “pro tuned” or get an off the shelf map that would work better than factory.
Yeah, should have been more clear. I mean these quick and cheap "add ons" that make a huge difference are always a scam.

Buy a tuned CAI, remapping chips, etc and you're good. But adding on a $50 part that will give you a 10% boost isn't going to happen!

With my 1999 Hyundai Tiburon I got 15whp from a CAI and aftermarket exhaust. Great boost on a 140hp car :D
 
  • Like
Reactions: Robert.Mauro

·
Registered
Joined
·
680 Posts
In 25 years of modding cars, I've never seen anything like this that ISN'T a scam!

As another poster mentioned, if Subaru could get any % improvement out of the car and keep it reliable they would have! With the government mandates pushing up the average mpg requirements for a fleet you can bet every last percent is squeezed out.
+1 on 1st part
STFT and LTFT will readjust based on O2 readings and ECU table will be back to same fuel use with in minutes ...
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
10,955 Posts
These are your answer

The combination of these is all you need to know. At best, it will give you short lived fuel economy gains until the computer re-learns to make the car burn fuel in a fashion it thinks is proper.

I SOOOOOO wouldn't waste my money. If it worked, car manufacturers would include such for an "ECO Mode" capability and earn even higher EPA and CAFE ratings.

The eco block pulls the MAF sensor out of the air stream according to their web site. Does that mean it is tricking the computer into thinking that there is less air flow and then running the engine lean to save fuel? I’m not sure that’s a good idea. Maybe I am not understanding something.
IMO, if Subaru could squeeze 8% better fuel economy without sacrificing reliability they would of done it. Companies are doing things active grill shutters, start stop, aero features on taillights, aluminum bodies, 10 speed trannys, etc to get that last mpg gains so I doubt a spacer will do it without compromising reliability.

Items like this remind me of the electric turbocharger, gas line magnets, and vitameatavegemin
Yeah, should have been more clear. I mean these quick and cheap "add ons" that make a huge difference are always a scam.

Buy a tuned CAI, remapping chips, etc and you're good. But adding on a $50 part that will give you a 10% boost isn't going to happen!
+1 on 1st part
STFT and LTFT will readjust based on O2 readings and ECU table will be back to same fuel use with in minutes ...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
66 Posts
The combination of these is all you need to know. At best, it will give you short lived fuel economy gains until the computer re-learns to make the car burn fuel in a fashion it thinks is proper.

I SOOOOOO wouldn't waste my money. If it worked, car manufacturers would include such for an "ECO Mode" capability and earn even higher EPA and CAFE ratings.
If NOx emissions were not such a big deal you could probably get 10-20% more horsepower out of any engine. Dumping exhaust gases back in to the intake manifold through the EGR system suffocates the engine with the only benefit being that it cools the combustion process to reduce NOx. Its like taking a track-star at the Olympics and wrapping a towel around their mouth and saying "ok, go run the 100 meter dash NOW!"

Other things like dumping the oily, wet crankcase gases in to the intake manifold contribute to the bad reputation that Direct Injection (DI) engines get when there is carbon buildup and fouling on the backsides of the intake valves. Being DI, there isn't a wash of atomized fuel to clean off the intake manifold right before the valves.

Yea, probably most boosted engines could run at a higher pressure or with more air flow but there is a point where that eats in to long-term reliability. Maybe an engine with 0.2 more Bar of boost pressure has a 10% greater chance of eating itself by 200 km. Also you then get in to the circular chase of more air= leaner mix, so lets up the fuel delivery, oh now we need higher capacity injectors, and on and on and around it goes.

Sooner or later when you are chasing horsepower or torque or faster 0-60 times, whatever... You will run up against another constraint in the system; Engineering is getting pretty good at just designing to the spec and not leaving much room to go beyond it. (sometimes the bane of our existence as engineers, (I am one)). We get beaten up when we over-design; to the point that it affects your annual performance review if you end up spending an extra week of time in trying to irk out more capability beyond what was specified.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
573 Posts
Any AOS designed for the FA20 should work just as well for our FA24, I've not seen much difference in the two platforms other than displacement and intercooling. But the cost for them is quite outrageous.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
223 Posts
Any AOS designed for the FA20 should work just as well for our FA24, I've not seen much difference in the two platforms other than displacement and intercooling. But the cost for them is quite outrageous.
Does that include the tubing diameter and connections? I did contact Crawford to inquire and they said they are in development for the Ascent FA24. I did not specifically ask if another product would work though.

Has anyone successfully installed an AOS or catch can? I'm looking to do this but don't know what product(s) to use.

Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
573 Posts
Crawford wont recommend a product to you they didnt specifically design for the Ascent. I doubt if the FA24 has different breather connections. Best thing to do would be to watch the installation video on youtube and match the connections to the Ascent to ensure they are all accounted for.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top