johnceggleston

i know there is at least one member who has direct evidence that not all auto trans cars had EGR and that not all manual cars did not have EGR. but i can not find any evidence on http://opposedforces.com to show the same. the only cars listed that show an ''egr pipe'', (an integral part of the EGR system,) are the auto trans cars. none of the manual trans cars show an EGR pipe as a part number. so for the sake of discussion, and based on the opposed forces web site, 95 - 98 ej22 cars with auto trans have EGR and NONE of the cars with manual trans had EGR. this is not a guarantee, this is simply a trend. sometimes reality is different than the plan.

the link shows that it was used in the jan 96 - may 96 outback step roof manual trans ej22 car. i have seen it posted several times there is no EGR on that car. and there is usually no EGR on the mnaual trans ej22 96 - 98. so the ECU does not care if the car has EGR. it has to be the wiring harness. also, your link shows your ECU was used in the 96 ej22 outback manual trans car. but when you look that car specs up it does not list your part number. odd. but it appears any of those part numbers listed in the link are interchangeable for the listed cars. that is how the auto trans id numbers work out. you look up the auto trans for the 97 outback ej25 and it will show the different part numbers for each year, 96 - 98/9 with the corresponding trans ''id'' numbers. if you look at the usage info for any one part number, any one trans id number, it will show that it was used in all 4 years, 96 - 98 and a few early 99s. so you need an ECU from a late 96 or 97 - 98 ej22 car. lots to pick from.

actually the ej22 went phase 2 in 99, all of them. so 99 - 00 ej22 will fit, legacy or impreza. but there are lots of ej25s out there that you can use. using an earlier ej22 will be quite a project and not recommended. even if you are just trying to prove it can be done. you can use a short block from 97 - 03/4 i think. i know the 99 ej25d is the phase 2 block with the phase 1 heads. so it would make sense that you could go the other way. let us know what you learn.

actually, the u joint is designed to slide further onto one of the shafts with the pinch bolt loose and the other bolt removed. (one bolt is obviously a pinch bolt, the top i think) on the the lower shaft, remove the bolt, then loosen the top and slide the joint more on to the lower shaft which will release the top end.(you may have to clean up the splines to get it to slide.) then slide back up and off. i suggest either both wheels on ramps or one wheel on the ground when doing this. it is hard enough to keep the steering wheel ''straight'' (tie it off) without the wheels loose and flopping around. i may be mis-remembering the wheels flopping around but you want them to be pretty stationary. it is easier to tie off the steering wheel than to mark the shaft under the car. tying in 2 directions may be your best bet, triangulate. the less slop the better.

chances are it is either the rack as you are questioning or the u-joint. iirc, it is about 2.5 rotations from full left to full right, more or less. 5 would mean it binds every half turn. (i know it was a guess but still it fits.) so every time one of the u joints is in a certain position, either right side up or up side down, it binds. maybe mark the u-joint when it first starts to bind, and then when it next binds. see if there is a pattern as you go from full left to full right.lightening the load on the tires might make it easier to turn and yet still bind. have you tried it with the wheels in the air? without a load the binding should be less? right? but if you can still feel it you may be able to better identify it . i guess you can tell i think it is in the u-joint. that is a more common fail point than the rack, as you know.

what is the frequency of the good, very tight, cycle.? how many times, lock to lock?how large is the pinion gear in the rack? maybe just an odd worn spot on the pinion, or a seal slipped down onto the gear or maybe just swap in one of those racks you been scrapping for all these years since they never fail. i think i would disconnect one of the tie rod ends and see if that makes a difference. see if there is any binding in the knuckle it self. then do the other side. then see if the rack has an issue with out the knuckles attached. this should isolate the problem. you probably want ot have a spare rack on hand when you do all of this. you will be 2 bolts and 2 fluid lines away from removing the rack.

what!! i can't believe you are still here? i thought you were just 'trolling'', start a fire and move on. good luck with the justy.

attached is a link for the ECU for the 90s, ej22, wagon, auto trans. the dates listed with the part numbers are build dates. if these are like most others there is a fair amount of over lap in the dates. (FYI the ecu is located in the ''engine electronic'' section, ''relay & sensor''. ) http://opposedforces.com/parts/legacy/us_b11/type_25/engine_electronic/relay_and_sensor_engine/ same below for manual trans : http://opposedforces.com/parts/legacy/us_b11/type_24/engine_electronic/relay_and_sensor_engine/ it appears that the ECUs are used for both the auto and manual trans cars. it is my understanding that the wiring harness, not the ECU, is what determines if it is auto or manual trans designated. i would assume the same is true for the EGR, but i do not know. and if that is the case, i would have thought someone would have found the correct pin to ground out. but i'm pretty sure the ECU is not trans specific in 96. if you click on the part number in the link above and then the ''usage info'' it will list the cars that use the ECU. and i have swapped a 96 'L' ECU into a 97 GT with out any headache. (if you are not in a hurry, the 96 ECU is available. i just have to locate the 97GT ecu and swap it back in. let me know if interested) but i cannot say the same for a 97obw ecu in a 98obw. the car will run fine but you will have ''ghost'' trouble codes. there will be a CEL but no real trouble. just an ECU looking for info on a pin that it is not receiving.

add some dye and get a black light.

i had a 90 something outback that acted the same way, but some one had removed the remote entry / alarm unit. i think this is a common issue, guaranteed issue, if the unit is removed.

it's called a senior moment, get used to it. we're not getting any younger.

no specifics, but i think when the remote entry is in stalled it does in fact cut one / some door lock wiring. i would look for the install instructions to see if you can identify the wire. when they pulled the unit, did they removed the wiring harness for the remote entry or just the unit it self? if the harness is there, try installing the brain to see.

the 99 2,2 will not swap into the 99 obw 2.5L car. but the 95 - 98 ej22 will, IF, IF, IF it has the needed EGR. this is usually found in the cars with the auto trans. so think of the 99 ej25 car as a 98 and swap away. the 99 does have the 8 bolt phase 2 block, but every thing else is the same as a 98. just use the bolts that work and go ahead on. ej22 swap list is the same for 99 is the same as the ej25 cars 96 - 98. in order of preference: 1. 95 ej22 w/ EGR (usually auto trans car) 2. 96 ej22 w/ EGR (usually auto trans car) you will need the exhaust y-pipe. 3. 97 - 98 ej22 w/ EGR (usually auto trans car) need the y-pipe. the 95 - 97 engines will have 2 small metal lines on the front of the intake near the top rad hose that you will not need. they are supposed to go to the charcoal canister, but the 99 canister is in the rear. so i connect them to each other and call it a day. if if is an auto trans car, use the flex plate that came with the ej25 engine. and if available use the power steering lines that came from the ej22 car. you don't need them but the install will be cleaner. about your 99 ej25, it is probably puking coolant because when you removed the t-stat you also removed the gasket that seals the plastic pipe to the water pump. it sounds like you do have a bad head gasket and the overheating the seller failed to tell you about probably blew the rad. so a swap is probably best. but it may not be as bad as you think. but it is definitely UNKNOWN. note: when talking to parts yards, i tell them what i am looking for, i never tell them what i am going to do or what car i'm working on. usually they only know what the interchange (what fits) software tells them and they get confused or say it will not work. sometimes they will void the warranty, if there is one. good luck.

way cheaper to replace the entire hatch. start now and quit when you find the hatch you want in your color.

nipper, you are evil for starting this thread. the anti-christ even. i use what ever is on sale at a discount when i need it. i need it every 5k miles for each of the 4 or 5 cars i have on the road at the time, it varies. i have done this since 1982 when i bought an isuzu / chevy luv diesel pickup. and as mentioned above, i have never had a lubricant related failure. i believe changing it is more important than what you use. 82 isuzu diesel pickup - drove it from 0 miles till the manual trans failed in 1990, miles unknown i just can't remember. 90 nissan pick up - drove it from 0 to 170k miles, still have it - farm use. 93 legacy - drove from 98k to 175k and wrecked it. 95 legacy - drove it from 75k to 165k, replaced the auto trans, my son drove it to 208k at college, sold it this year. 97 outback ltd - drove it from 95k to 145k w/ piston slap and sold it 2 years ago. she wrecked it at college. 97 GT w/ ej22 swap, bought it with 125k (bad ej25) and still driving it at 157k. 97 toyota avalon - my wife has driven it from 62k to 202k and is now talking about replacing it. i do not recommend recycled motor oil for you car, but using fresh recycled / re-manufactured oil is better than not changing the oil you have now and running it another 3k - 5k. just my opinion.

some times subaru makes changes that defy logic, but usually once they make the change they stick to it for that model year and more. for the auto trans cars they were pretty consistent. i assume the same is true for the manual trans. having said that, there are odd situations for some models in some years. before this thread i would have sworn that the 95 outback auto was a 4.11 like all the other 95s leagacys and imprezas. and that the 95 outback manual trans was 3.9 like all the other 95s. i have been checking and learning final drive ratios since i needed a trans in my 95 lego in 05. and i have never come across a 95 trans that did not match the above info. but i could still be wrong. 95 outbacks are not very common in my opinion. and i have never seen a one in real life. so how could i be sure. and i do know that subaru swapped the ratios between the auto and the manual with the 95 MY. auto went from 3.9 to 4.11 and manual went the other way. go figure. but if someone at subaru spec-ed the 94 trans in the 95 outback so be it. anyway, i follow the the patterns and then double check on opposed forces. the problem with that in, this particular case, is that they do not list the ''outback'' as a model in the 2.2L engine manual trans section for 1995. so it is hard to double check. for most years and models you can search for the ring and pinion gears in the drive ''TRAIN'' section and it will list the ratio.

the 94 legacy has the same suspension and clearences as the 95 - 96. and both of those years will handle the 97 GT 205/55/16. the issue however is that the tire you spec-ed is .1 inch larger than the GT tire. this is .05 inch larger in radius. this is a very small amount, so i would say yes it will fit. but i'm not %100 sure. i take it that you found a deal on the 195/65/15 ? assuming you are not buying these new from a tire store, i would mount one and install it on the car with weight on it. then stick your finger in between the tire and the spring perch. if there is more is room you are ok. usually the rear clearance is tighter than the front. the front usually comes into play with wider tires that rub when turning. your speedo will be off. you will be driving faster than the speedo says, about 2.3 mph. so be careful.

that is the same trans listed in the original post. how did you learn you have a 3.9 ratio?????

+1^ what he said.

i must say, the early 90s were confusing. but the late 90s were fairly consistent. ej22 4.11 for the auto trans 3.9 for the 5 spd trans ej25 4.44 for the auto trans 4.11 for the 5spd trans the 95 outback 5spd is the odd ball and does not match the above info. and the 96 outback 5spd is different as well. it has the ej22 but it has the 4.11 5spd trans. it would fit the trend if it had the ej25 engine, but it doesn't. as soon as i think i know something, i learn something new.

i cannot argue with that chart. but if i remember correctly, the chart has been wrong in the past. but it does appear that the ......AAAA trans was a 94 trans that was used in the 95 outback. and that would mean that it has a 4.11 ratio. nothing i said above contradicts this. i just wanted confirmation before some one spent engine / trans dollars on incorrect info. the outback manual trans is apparently the only manual trans produced in 95 that had a 4.11 ratio. ALL other 5 speeds in 95 had a 3.9 ratio. glad the ratio is confirmed. but again, if a 4.11 ratio is needed, get one from a 96 - 98 outback.

try spraying somre lubricant on the steering u joint. it it is old and stiff it may be your problem. the spray will only be a short term fix, but at least you will know what the problem is. you can swap in any steering u-joint 95 - 99 that is NOT and outback. outback is different. an oil can with 30wt oil may do the job, if you can reach it, and it may last longer.

are you sure it is 4.11 ratio? the ...AAAA trans was used from march of 94 - dec of 95 according to opposed forces. click on usage info. http://opposedforces.com/parts/info/32000AD010/ the 3.9 pinion and ring gear were used in the ''outback'' starting in july of 95 - july 97. click on usage info. http://opposedforces.com/parts/info/38104AA010/ i don't have enough reliable info, and it seems hard to come by, to say it is not a 4.11 trans, but i would make sure before you base any expensive decisions on it. but considering what you are talking about doing i doubt it makes much difference. but if you want a 4.11 ratio from a manual trans just use one from 92 - 94 legacy or a 97 - 99 outback. (the 92 - 94 speedo gears will match your car.) but i'm still not sure the 95 outback manual trans had the 4.11 ratio. i'm not sure it does not either. the legacy L 5spd didn't have one. 5spd trans, 95 - 99 legacy L, brighton, ej22 has a 3.9 ratio. auto trans, 95 - 99 legacy L, brighton, ej22 has a 4.11ratio. HTH

+100, too high. i have a 00 legacy wagon w/ 85k, auto trans, new head gaskets, ready to go, for $5000. clear coat peeling on hood. let me know if you are interested.

there are several good post on the replacement of the contacts. do a search.