Author Topic: JDM WRX on huskey 94 octane (Read 7853 times)

Guglianoh · « **on:** July 15, 2009, 03:26:07 pm »

Hey everyone, i have a 1994 JDM WRX and ive been running her on shell since iver had her (about 3 months) with no issuses. i descided to try out huskeys 94 octane just to see how it was (i heard you get better performance). im on my 3rd tank of it and ive noticed every since the first tank that my car idles weird, it will be fine (around 800 rpm) if im at stop light or something and then all of the sudden it will drop to 500-400 then back up and keep dropping and raising until i go. this only happens sometimes. any thoughts? and no my car has not been tuned wats so ever and the only real mod i have is intake

Speed Stick · « **Reply #1 on:** July 15, 2009, 03:51:27 pm »

So if you switch back to shell does the problem go away then? It sounds like it could also be your idle air control valve since it only happens at idle. I haven't had any issues with mine on 94

Guglianoh · « **Reply #2 on:** July 15, 2009, 04:05:40 pm »

im going to switch back after this tank, yeah it was so weird but it only happens once and a while no frequently

Speed Stick · « **Reply #3 on:** July 15, 2009, 04:19:48 pm »

Yeah let your current tank of 94 run almost completely dry then use 91. It will give a better idea of what the problem is.

93GC8 · « **Reply #4 on:** July 17, 2009, 01:23:31 pm »

Funny your mensioning this! I usually fill with one or the other and recently only huskey 94 and have had a couple "puttering" issues myself!Hmmm maybe ill try the shell and see wht happens!

doubtless · « **Reply #5 on:** July 18, 2009, 03:18:01 pm »

Just quoting what Subaru techs at Rally Suby in Edmonton passed along to me... for these old JDM's everyone should be sticking religiously to the 94 juice unless a tuning solution is installed on the car, and even if that's done, avoid Shell.

Per said techs, Shell should be avoided as it has the most history of poor quality control, and the highest number of engine failures directly related to the quality of fuel being used.

Stick to the Husky/Mohawk fellers, and invest in a tuning solution, Speed Stick and I can both vouch for the gains you get out of it.

Guglianoh · « **Reply #6 on:** July 20, 2009, 10:11:16 am »

really? huh i guess i should stick to your advice, my car probably is just getting used to the higer octane.... i hope

Speed Stick · « **Reply #7 on:** July 20, 2009, 12:37:30 pm »

Well when you change fuel imagine it will take a couple tanks for the ecu to adjust all the timing to find the maximums. I'm running it and I don't have problems. I was running 91 for a while then switched back to 94 after my tune and i think I could feel a positive difference.

93GC8 · « **Reply #8 on:** July 20, 2009, 02:08:36 pm »

So I filled up with shell the past couple days and ran into that idle problem that you are explaining it only happened after a long drive to the lake but it was my third tank of shell! And it didn't do that on huskey! So I'm going back to huskey! Period. However I think that idle air control valve is soundin like a preventative maintainance peice!

Speed Stick · « **Reply #9 on:** July 20, 2009, 02:33:10 pm »

93gc8 did you end up cleaning or replacing your acv yet? Just curious because I've been meaning to clean mine.

AdamMc · « **Reply #10 on:** July 20, 2009, 02:41:10 pm »

Quote from: doubtless on July 18, 2009, 03:18:01 pm

Just quoting what Subaru techs at Rally Suby in Edmonton passed along to me... for these old JDM's everyone should be sticking religiously to the 94 juice unless a tuning solution is installed on the car, and even if that's done, avoid Shell.

Per said techs, Shell should be avoided as it has the most history of poor quality control, and the highest number of engine failures directly related to the quality of fuel being used.

Stick to the Husky/Mohawk fellers, and invest in a tuning solution, Speed Stick and I can both vouch for the gains you get out of it.

Im sad to hear this! Shell v-power 91 is what my car runs the best on thus far. Everyone has their horror stories and opinions, im hoping that the mechanics word of advice isnt anything more than that.

It would be hard for me to switch to husky 94 - my fuel mileage tanks.

Guglianoh · « **Reply #11 on:** July 20, 2009, 03:08:42 pm »

i cant even switch tanks.... just found out my head gasket is leaking!!! :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'( :'(

Speed Stick · « **Reply #12 on:** July 20, 2009, 07:10:27 pm »

Oh man that sucks. What's the mileage on your car anyways?

doubtless · « **Reply #13 on:** July 20, 2009, 08:36:49 pm »

Quote from: AdamMc on July 20, 2009, 02:41:10 pm

Im sad to hear this! Shell v-power 91 is what my car runs the best on thus far. Everyone has their horror stories and opinions, im hoping that the mechanics word of advice isnt anything more than that.

It would be hard for me to switch to husky 94 - my fuel mileage tanks.

Well you wouldn't need to, you're driving a 2009, they're meant to run on our gas.

Guglianoh · « **Reply #14 on:** July 21, 2009, 07:54:41 am »

im at 104xxx

Grasp · « **Reply #15 on:** July 21, 2009, 08:39:13 am »

Guglianoh, I'm really sorry to hear that!

. I really like your car by the way - I never saw any blue up for auction when I was looking, and I looked for a couple months. Do you have plans/means to fix it? I know you've had some issues with it already - so that's really too bad.

Guglianoh · « **Reply #16 on:** July 21, 2009, 12:17:36 pm »

yeah i took to pretty much the only place that will touch my car mechanically All Makes auto repairs there a Subaru specialits and there awesome, there trying to find me a replacement and so am i

Speed Stick · « **Reply #17 on:** July 21, 2009, 12:24:41 pm »

Oh man 104xxx is still fairly low to have a bad headgasket. Mine has 150xxx and it doesn't leak or burn a drop of anything. Well hope it all gets worked out.

Guglianoh · « **Reply #18 on:** July 21, 2009, 12:33:07 pm »

yeah i no! lol well my buddy has a 2.5 with a ej20 swap and his leaks and hes almost at 110

Speed Stick · « **Reply #19 on:** July 21, 2009, 04:54:07 pm »

Yeah that's really low. Weird.

Guglianoh · « **Reply #20 on:** July 21, 2009, 11:13:08 pm »

i no just my luck of the draw :'(

Grasp · « **Reply #21 on:** July 23, 2009, 12:19:41 pm »

Mine will be coming in with 70K on it, so I should be good for a while I should hope.

As for the 94, I now have it on enough authority that the husky is not healthy for these cars. I will in no way put husky 94 into my STi.

Speed Stick · « **Reply #22 on:** July 23, 2009, 12:44:29 pm »

I'm switching back after having a discussion with my tuner. 91 it will be, and most likely not from Shell.

Hurricane · « **Reply #23 on:** July 23, 2009, 02:47:55 pm »

Quote from: Grasp on July 23, 2009, 12:19:41 pm

As for the 94, I now have it on enough authority that the husky is not healthy for these cars. I will in no way put husky 94 into my STi.

Would you care to enlighten all of us, I'm curious.

Grasp · « **Reply #24 on:** July 23, 2009, 03:42:53 pm »

Same as Speed stick - the discussion that I'd guess he's referring to is one that Speedstick and myself were involved in on another forum with Stinky_1. Basically the gist is that he's seen from experience tuning on 94 husky vs 91 that the ecu is doing way more correction and losing much more power on the 94. I'm not interested in that at all.