GeneralDisorder

Harbor Freight used to sell a low-profile transmission jack that you would operate with a 1/2" ratchet. Back before I owned a shop and had to do this on jack stands I used this jack to remove transmissions. I would use 6 ton jack stands and get the car high..... HIGH like Giraffe pu$$y. Needed the height to pull the trans out with the jack attached. Be careful - the trans weighs a lot and you want a jack holding it not your body. I've done that and it's definitely for when you are young, broke, and stupid. GD

Trans goes out toward the back. We don't ever try to pull them up through the engine bay. Pop the ball joints and prop the knuckles and axles out of the way. GD

WELL - that might have been useful 10 years ago but seeing as google drive was launched in 2012 and this post is from 2011 it seems unlikely that this link would have applied. GD

Pull the fuel pump assembly and visually inspect the pressure cap on the (not installed) filter chamber. GD

Did you actually measure the fuel pressure at the fuel rail? Just because you have fuel doesn't mean you have sufficient pressure. A blown out pressure cap in the pump assembly will not prevent some fuel from getting downstream - just won't build pressure. Sounds to me like you don't have enough fuel pressure. But feel free to disregard my suggestion. I only do this every day for the last 12 years. As for the RPM reading - are you reading this off a live data scan tool or trying to visually see the gauge move? You aren't likely to see the gauge move at 250 to 350 rpm cranking speed. GD

Very possible to be cracked solder joints on the TCU circuit board. Might work if you jiggle the connectors, etc. Probably needs to be reflowed. GD

Test the solenoid resistance through the sub-harness. Could be a bad TCM. If the resistance doesn't check out I would get a new solenoid and transmission sub-harness from Subaru. "Known good" used parts aren't worth your time. GD

Mis-routed how exactly? The ECU driver provides a ground for the injector. The injector will have ignition switched power and generally all of the injectors get their power from the same source. If you don't have power then you have a problem with a fuse or relay or ignition switch, etc. But I'm guessing the ECU isn't driving their ground. Since you have some spark, that would tend to suggest you have a crank sensor signal. Since the ECU probably fires the plugs in wasted spark mode for which it wouldn't need a cam reference. But to know when to fire the injector in full sequential it needs the cam reference to determine if the piston is coming up on the compression stroke or the exhaust stroke. Oscilloscope's are REALLY cheap now. Everyone should have a couple around. If you want any hope of fixing modern electronic equipment you need waveform analysis ability. Also you may have insufficient fuel pressure - there's a pressure cap in the fuel pump assembly on those cars that likes to blow out. They have a locking ear the can tear away and the o-ring under the cap will partially blow out resulting in very low fuel pressure. If you changed out the pump but not the entire drop in assembly then this is a likely possibility. GD

You can see in his "clear" tubing how the condensate mixes with the oil vapor and forms the nasty white/grey muck due to his Air/Liquid separator. That wouldn't form with a normal PCV system that routes the condensate into the intake to be burnt. The Subaru block has it's own built-in crankcase breather box that is located in the block itself so is heated by engine coolant and block heat to prevent condensate from forming. This box has baffles to catch oil and keep it in the sump. GD

Computer isn't seeing the engine turning. Not enabling the injectors. Crank sensor and Cam sensor (trigger 1 and trigger 2) are primarily involved in the ECU syncing to engine RPM and firing the injectors. Check their signals with an oscilloscope and compare to known good reference waveforms. GD

We use a line of blue silicone hose called Purosil. There's several suppliers that carry it - we get ours from XRP in California. They have vacuum and heater hose variants - we use both for PCV and vacuum and have been doing so for years without any issues. All of the sizes have a minimum pressure rating of 50 psi and some are rated to 100 psi. GD

You'll have to make your own. I would suggest pre-bent stainless tubing for the bends, bead roll the ends, and connect the segments together with silicone heater hose. GD

I was a vacuum pump technician in a former career. I was a factory authorized repair technician for Busch vacuum pumps and was trained in Germany. I'm 100% confident I know a significant amount more about vacuum pumps and systems than you do. And yes - that's a gigantic waste of time on the EA engines. There's nothing significant to gain from running a crankcase vacuum pump on an engine without a power adder. But please - go ahead and put a turbo on that garbage engine - it will hasten it's demise and we won't have to be subjected to this stupidity. Being "different" is usually just stupid. Most of these ideas are already worked out and have been for decades. We have DIY customers come in all the time that are "different" and without fail they make less power than our tried and true formulas. How do you know your oil is "less dirty"? Have you sent it for analysis? GD

"Air/Oil separator" is the wrong terminology. They are Air/Liquid Separators and the vast majority of what they trap is condensate from cold start. Which mixes with the natural oil vapor in the lines and forms this milky white/greyish muck that should never have formed had the Air/Liquid separator not been installed in the first place. Condensate is burned in the combustion process with the factory PCV system. They are WORSE than a waste of time - the lines plug up with the condensate and oil paste and then the crankcase can't breath properly. The usual (mostly incorrect) reasoning for their use is to prevent oil vapor from reducing effective octane of the fuel/air mixture. On a 90 HP engine that runs perfectly fine on 87 octane elephant piss this is just a complete waste of effort. Not to mention it has no coolant circulation to even attempt to suspend cold start condensate, and has no return drain back to the engine so it's a collection bottle for a product that wouldn't even exist if the bottle wasn't there. Useful? Not in the slightest. And yes - you CAN do whatever you like. Just don't expect us to not tell you it's stupid. You came here for opinions and information right? Well that's what I'm giving you. Take it or leave it. What you CAN'T do is command us to not give our honest opinion when you come here and blatantly post pictures of stupidity and ignorance. GD

You don't need an air-oil separator. That's laughable stupidity. Remove that junk. They do nothing useful on that engine - in fact we don't use them on 500+ HP Subaru engines. That's more of the junk you hear on the "errornet". Stop trying to reinvent the (relatively) good engineering that was done when the car was built. Clear lines are generally not acceptable for many applications - the high pressure fuel injection lines being one of those. Subaru engineers are rolling over in their graves at the sight of the butchery you are doing in the engine bay. Put down the harbor freight tools and go get some education on proper repairs. And please don't modify 90 HP crap and shove it in our faces. We don't appreciate it. GD

Could also easily be a bad ECU. The factory ECU in my 90 Legacy loaner car went bad and threw about 6 codes we could never clear. Swapped that junk for a LINK plug and play and the LINK had no issue at all with the wiring or sensors - car ran flawlessly. That was the era where they started pulling the lead out of the solder and it cracks with age. Not to mention leaking capacitors, etc. It may simply be a bad computer. Best way to deal with that is to round-file the stock ECU and run it with something like the LINK Monsoon. https://dealers.linkecu.com/G4X-MonsoonX-ECU-V3 GD

Cold high idle results in higher transmission fluid pressure when engaging reverse. Rear diff to subframe bushings are probably shot. GD

Why scour the junk yard? They are like $35 from Subaru. Just buy a new one. https://www.amazon.com/Genuine-Subaru-13021AA141-Sprocket-Crankshaft/dp/B00I7978HO GD

Yeah a used OEM solenoid is a good option if you can source one. GD

We have had 100% success replacing the valve body and the short wiring harness. GD

Perhaps you haven't noticed the post count and join date of the various respondents to your thread? You might want to take inventory of the nay's, their post count, join date, etc and compare to your own. Do this. Promise you will be enlightened. GD

We ARE helping you. We CANT help you do something that is essentially an impossible waste of time...... I need help too. I need help building an anti-gravity drive. I have some ideas - would you like to see them? Perhaps someday you'll understand how incredibly lucky you were that I gave your post the gift of my responses. Ponder it for a bit. Look up my shop and what we do. GD

They blow up in STOCK form. And it's OLD. It will blow up if you so much as look at it cross-eyed. Let alone dump extra boost at it. The engine is JUNK. HOT GARBAGE and needs to be melted down into soda cans. It's not worth even 5 minutes of your time, let alone weeks or more likely months and years that you might spend on all this foolishness. MANY people on this forum came and went DECADES ago and tried all this and a whole lot more. After blowing up dozens of engines EVERY ONE OF THEM threw in the towel. It's a WASTE OF TIME and will still be a WASTE OF TIME regardless of how much you WISH it to be otherwise. No one is going to make you an MLS gasket. Why would they do this? There's ZERO market and therefore ZERO profit in it. People have tried copper - but that's race car stuff and not designed to last. They leak fluids like crazy and copper work hardens making it a short lived racing only kind of gasket. You could o-ring the block and head, but without custom tooling to do so and without gaskets designed with fire rings large enough for this to work it's unlikely to be successful. Generally this results in squirting the fire ring out from under the o-ring due to how thick and squishy the gasket is. Reducing the gasket thickness without a corresponding increase in chamber volume or piston dish will only drive up compression and make it more difficult to run boost without detonation. Removing any material from the heads is foolish - they are already weak. That leaves a piston dish volume increase so custom pistons...... NONE of this work is worth doing and is a fools errand. How are you going to girdle a split block Subaru engine? The block halves are their own girdle you goofball. This statement alone makes it obvious you have never, and will never do any of these things and if you do will certainly fail with misery. GD

As I figured - you have no clue at all what you are doing. The EA82T..... WILL NOT HANDLE MORE POWER. You got that? There is NO WAY to make it "reliable" at 150 HP. You see - to make 150 HP - you need the engine to move more air - an engine is effectively an air pump. So to move more air at the same RPM you will need higher boost pressure and that equates to HIGHER CYLINDER PRESSURE. The EA82T can't handle the required cylinder pressure for that power. And no amount of "technology" and "techniques" (you are really starting to sound like Elan Musk here with the vague references to sh1t that doesn't exist) will change the fundamental poor design of the cylinder head casting, the weak cylinder walls of the open-deck block, and the sh!tty thick composite gasket and head bolt setup. And to even consider increasing the power you will need larger injectors, fuel pump an intercooler system, full exhaust, and a larger turbo that doesn't blow red hot lava at more than 10 psi. Something like a TD04 at the very least. And most probably methanol injection. To control all this you WILL NEED a full stand alone. The Power Commander coupled with a 30 year old stock ECU is a terrible idea - you are going to save a few hundred bucks to use dangerously old electronics that can fail at any time and may potentially wipe out all your invested time and effort (although it's entirely wasted on that engine anyway so I guess.... WTH). As for "economy" tuning - this is highly dangerous territory. Leaning the engine out above stoich will result in HUGE increases in NOx emissions - fuxking the environment even harder than you already are. Not to mention you get into the realm of burning holes in pistons and burning exhaust valves, detonation if you don't come out of lean cruise at just the right moment before you start building load.... again you don't want to attempt hyper-miling with a piggy back. You don't want to attempt it with anything that isn't capable of true wideband closed loop AFR targeting. The EA82T hasn't got a wideband O2 so the stock ECU is only capable of targeting 14.7 AFR and that isn't going to change with a piggy-back controller. The LAST thing you want to mess with on a stock ECU is the closed loop narrow band O2 targeting system. It's extremely complex and manipulating it is likely to result in engine damage. Not to mention - don't do this as it's extremely bad for the environment and why the US government outlawed lean cruise systems. GD

Clearly you have never tuned anything at all and don't understand. I have assisted a customer in adapting a LINK to his EA82T. Which he did successfully. So I know 100% for a fact it will work and can be easily done. He got it running and (of course) promptly blew the HG's on it..... because it's HOT GARBAGE as I have mentioned on about 1000 occasions already. I don't have to have dyno tuned an EA82T to know exactly how to do it. It's a 4 cycle piston engine with port injection and a turbo - just like all the others. You could tune an SR20DET and it would be EXACTLY THE SAME process. The number one rule of tuning (tied for first place with buying injectors for which there is published data) is you GIVE THE ENGINE WHAT IT WANTS. And you will NOT be able to do this with a piggyback and the seat of your pants. You need a full stand alone at a dyno that can test HP, torque, monitor AFR, and you need det cans to listen for detonation.... and you need to MOST LIKELY turn the engine DOWN from where it was stock because it's OLD AS F and wasn't particularly reliable in stock form. Knowing where to STOP when tuning engines like the EA82T or a Mazda rotary is the difference of experience and trust me NO ONE you will be able to talk to here or elsewhere is stupid enough to have spent years tuning the EA82T to approach and exceed it's limitations so they can get a good "feel" for where to stop. Just like a rotary - you detonate it ONCE and you blow the apex seals. You get even a little stupid with the EA82T and you'll crack a head and/or blow out the HG's. The difference is that if you turn up the already sh1tty EA82T you'll just blow holes in it. That's the difference. And I don't need to have "tuned" one to know this. Ask anyone here..... In any case - what *exactly* are you hoping to gain with "finer control"? And what do you actually mean by "finer control"? Do you even know how fine of control the factory ECU has? What do you suppose you could do *better* than the hundreds of engineers that couldn't make this engine a winner working for Subaru being paid to design it? GD