NickNakorn

It's hard to tell from the pics but are the threads the exact same pitch and shape? I'd rather clean up the old ones than risk an unknown quality of hardware - do they feel smooth when screwed in? (I might well be wrong but they don't look the same to me even with my specs on!).

One way of looking at this problem is to take into account the fact that any work you do to your engine will cumulative and sorting out further problems will guarantee a trouble-free motor for many thousands of miles. The alternative, to start putting in second hand 'junk' engines, is to keep going back to the beginning and never having a reliable car that performs as it should. By the way, here in the UK, a back and forth movement in a shaft is called 'end float', is is called the same in the USA? 1/4 inch end float is huge and I would definitely have a look inside to see what's wrong. The centre main crank bearing has two thrust surfaces. Bearings are easy to fit but the real cost is in any work that might be required to the crank journals. I recently paid about over £100 to have my crank done (a first class job but London is one of the most expensive cities in the world) but I think it's worth it.

I'm not sure why play in the pump rotor shaft is considered ok for Subarus but not for any other oil pump; I would say that the pump shaft should be very snug in its bearing and should turn very easily with almost no resistance when lubricated. Pump rotors and housings are not expensive and last time I looked (2 years ago) they were still listed by Subaru. If the pump is not in good condition you'll have low oil pressure, oil aeration and consequent problems with lifters and journals. Its a personal choice of course, but I would never re-use a knackered oil pump rotor.

Great that you've found what was wrong! If you're going to do a lot more work on the bottom end, it'd be worth having a machine shop re-drill all the holes, tap with more common threads and supply some high-tensile bolts to fit. But if you're not planning to do the 'bottom end' I'd tend to 'loktight' the other bolts and use extra 'loktight' on the bad one. You could drill and re-tap the bad one using a different thread pattern (if you cant find the right tap) and mark it with a punch to make sure you knew which one it was. Leaving a bolt out altogether might be OK but you could have balance and vibration problems. One thing we used to do on race engines was to drill a small hole through each bolt-head and, after torquing down, wire them to each other with lock-wire.

The bearings will not be affected too much by the water but the crank journals might be. It makes sense to have the crank ground and fit new bearings all round. The little end piston pins (wrist pins in USA?) and rods can also suffer from water damage but dealing with them is more problematic; either you can ream the pistons and con-rods and fit over-size pins (if you can get them) or fit new pistons, pins and rods - if you can get them. But if the little ends are good then its worth having the crank ground: you can get bearings in 0.25mm or 0.5mm under-sized - a good machine shop will also match the centre thrust surfaces too. Very satisfying when it all goes back together smoothly!

In the photograph your car looks to be in excellent condition. It's the same age as mine. I bought mine two years ago and have just got around to doing the rust - very extensive - so see one in such fine fettle is great (though mine looked good from the outside too!).

My cheap engine crane (bought over 10 years ago) makes the job so easy: I normally work on my own so it's been a really good investment. It's only rated at 500kg but that's more than I'll ever need.

Skylar, remember you need a good strong beam to mount the hoist. If you're on a tight budget, a small engine crane is much better value because it's more versatile - you can use it anywhere and don't need a beam or a scaffold. You can also wheel the whole thing with the engine attached to a work bench.

While the teeth your starter motor are worn, they are not sufficiently damaged to have caused the grinding on your flywheel and they do not have sufficient 'reach' to have caused the problem. It looks to me as if something more substantial is stuck between the flywheel and the inside of the bell housing; probably a bolt has become loose and fallen from the clutch assembly. Your best bet is to remove the engine and check it out. Many years ago I was driving a Daimler Majestic Major to a friend's wedding and the 'blender full of spoons' noise happened; it turned out to be a bolt fallen from the torque converter assembly. It wasn't my car so I didn't see to the fix but it involved removing the gearbox (engine is very heavy on those old Daimlers). On 'our' Subarus taking the engine out is so easy you might as well do it and check things out - good opportunity for a new clutch too.

Hence my comments on the other thread 'is it worth it'. Ram seem to be very good value for money. I like their EA82 modified long block: http://www.ramengines.com/id17.html

I've had a series of pre-owned EA82 engined cars (L-series/leone/loyale) over the past 20 years or so and pretty much all the problems I've encountered have been due to poor maintenance - mostly due to previous owners but in one case due to my own failings when I was very busy for about 3 years and didn't lift the bonnet (hood) often for about 40,000 miles. Having said that, there's no doubt that simpler is often better - yet it depends what one wants to do. Pushrods, for example, can be troublesome if one is looking to tune an engine beyond its original design limits but, in standard trim, both the EA81 and EA82 seem to be dependable units; both are used in light aircraft. A local westcountry (UK) subaru racer (now retired) from whom I bought one of my cars told me he much preferred the EA81 for ease of maintenance between events. But I don't think either of these engines is bad and the EA82 is not really complicated. What seems to have prevented a lot of maintenance of both engines in the UK has been the horrific cost of parts; more than twice as expensive in the UK compared to USA. However, for all their faults there can not be many mass production engines of that era with such a good power-to-weight ratio and for me that makes both engines exceptional.

Hi Subruise, a good point... how do you know :-) I'll fix the hole at some point!

All good advice here. I've done the job on my old green machine (EA82 wagon) and the only thing I've noticed that isn't mentioned in this thread is that the heater hoses need to be undone - I forgot when I did the job and managed to split one of them at the heater end. Not only can they be damaged if the engine is lifted, they can prevent you getting the height you need. Also agree entirely about the exhausts - if they're undone it's much easier. I found a 1/4inch drive mini-socket with a UJ in it perfect for getting at those pesky back screws. I'd also tighten from the middle outwards rather than from the corners inwards but, frankly, they should not be hugely tight anyway if you want the gasket to last.

Lots of mud, twigs and sticks and stones when going off the tracks in woods like this.

I used to work a lot in woodland mending fences, putting up gates and restoring green lanes and I often had debris suck between the rad and the belt covers - that type of terrain very tough on radiators, CV boots too. It all depends on the type of work the car has to do. My inclination is to use the covers.

Goodness! What a strong reaction! clearly it's never ideal but over the years I've had to make do when times were hard (in reference to not doing what one can't afford to do) and have re-used with success - putting 70,000 miles on one of my L-series (on top of 130,000) before it succomed to excess crank-case compression. But I was not recommending it, just saying it's not at all impractical if you have to do it. In the case of this thread, the OP was happy to leave them be - so clearly I was just chatting... I've also made my own head gasket for an alluminium Imp engine (similar to Coventry Climax) but that only lasted about 20,000 miles; not bad for virtually no money.

If they're not too old, it's quite possible to re-use head gaskets - especially if you've just fitted them. Just re-torque plus 10% and use a quality head gasket sealant. Mind you, I'd probably have bought new gaskets!

Once the nuts and bolts are greased up, they only take a few minutes to remove again and I think the covers help reduce wear and damage to the belts, idlers and tensioners - especially on very muddy or gravelly roads or through brambles and brush. But I'm always a bit fussy about things being 'right' even when it makes not so much difference! :-\

I had the same problem on my 1991 EA82 (recently rebuilt) and I used a 'Dremel' mini-cut-off-disk to cut through the head of the bolt. I found that the heat generated by the process softened the plastic so the whole bolt and captive nut could be pulled out - but it made a bit of a mess of the plastic. Still, it all went back together ok with some new nuts and bolts. Ragged hole top left requited a 'penny' washer but other holes not too bad.

Wow, I'd most definitely re-do the heads - even if they fit 'the wrong way'. I didn't realise that the cam carriers could be fitted either way around but surely re-doing the heads is not expensive or particularly time consuming?

Yes, it's a very good resource. Of course, the UK is tiny - the whole country is only about 60million people and size-wise, well: http://www.ifitweremyhome.com/compare/US/GB So I think it would be more than feasible for individual US states. Not sure how the UK site derives an income as I haven't seen any advertising on it. A business idea for you? (when you're rich you can buy me a pint!).

Tom, I agree, the old Minors are excellent little cars but very crude in many ways:live axle at the back; low capacity, iron straight 4; underpowered, uncomfortable and a tiny boot (trunk). But they were very light (about 750kg I think) had fantastic steering and really superb handling providing the dampers, trunnions and bushes were in good order. I've only got a few old and blurred photos of mine from the 1980s at: http://www.nagara.co.uk/Morris.htm

Thanks Tom, and many thanks to all who have contributed to this thread and helped me get to grips with the wonders of the EA Subaru engine. It's a tribute to those engines that, having run various old and knackered L-series cars for over 20 years this is the first re-build I've had to do on one of them. In a much shorter period I rebuild my Morris Minor engine twice! - mind you, I used to thrash it to death every day.

Well, the engine now runs as sweet as a nut; no oil leaks, no water leaks, no valve clatter and a lovely quiet smooth tick-over. I never did find out what the problem was. Over the last few days I pulled the newly fitted engine and took off the clutch and flywheel - checked all was well, it was, and pit it all back. I checked and refitted the timing belts and all was well, I checked I had plenty of spark and fuel and all was well but the damn engine just would not run: it would splutter, backfire and run a bit on one or two cylinders but in a really erratic way. I checked the distributor loads of times and all seemed well. What on earth was the problem? I checked for compression (The gauge showed about 150psi+ on all cylinders). Then I decided I'd take the distributor to pieces. When it was on the bench I realised I knew nothing about it - I'm used to rebuilding dizzies with condensers and points. So I just blasted it with compressed air, blasted it with WD40 and again with compressed air to remove excess WD40. I put it all back and bingo! So there's some kind of damp or electrical fault inside the dizzy? Time will tell if it misbehaves again but I'm so pleased! It just goes to show that with semi electronic ignition a good healthy spark means nothing if there's some random firing due to an electrical fault. What the fault was I will never know - just damp I guess.

Hi Brat78, that was just a pic to show how badly the previous owner treated this car. That pic of the top of the rear wheel well (wheel arch in UK) was from underneath the rear trim inside the car. You can see how bad it was at http://www.nagara.co.uk/carhome.htm