GeneralDisorder

Yes, quite different. GD

You can make new hardlines if they are rusted out - order the molded hoses from the dealer if they make any sharp turns. It's worth it. GD

Typically this is related to a weak ignition in my experience. The lean mixture of a warm carb is difficult to ignite if the ignition is weak. Last time I saw this a new ignition coil fixed it right up. Check/test all your ignition parts. GD

They don't need much. On the '95+ EJ's they mount the ECU in a hole in the floor on the passenger side and cover them with carpet. AFAIK - there isn't any airflow to them at all in that configuration. And not much when mounted in the dash. Hell my SPFI powered EA81 has the ECU in the glove box with no airflow other than what gets around the edges of the door. Mounting it in the engine bay is feasible if you go with a water-tight arrangement but it's not ideal. Best to keep it in the cabin - I go for the glove-box because if water gets that high on the inside I'm not going to be trying to drive it :-p GD

It sounds like either you are feeling air that is being directed through that hole from around the spark plug or from around the EGR pipe or the passage the EGR pipe threads into. Sometimes there are casting flaws that can lead to leakage even years after the car was made. It could be that some of the post-casting machine work punched into the exhaust port.... What symptoms are you haveing that would cause you concern other than this apparent leak? GD

The only way to get 4.111 or 4.444 is to go to the AWD transmission. If you get an EJ dual range from europe you can do it easily - many of them came with 4.11 in the first place. You will lose the 2WD and you will lose the 50/50 torque split but you will gain gearing. The easiest and cheapest way to get good gearing and off-road capability is to swap over to the 4EAT automatic. The torque converter acts like a low range, you can easily get 4.444 final drive from any outback, and you can run them with modded TCU's for paddle shifters as well as stand-alone without a TCU and also you can add a duty-c controller that allows anything between FWD only and full 50/50 lockup for the clutch packs. They handle more power than the 5MT - some of the first 800 to 1000 HP turbo's used the 4EAT - before the 6MT came out it was the only option for big HP. GD

Change the O2 sensor and clean the MAF. Also check the resistance of the coolant temp sensor. That's a good start. Injectors being clogged would cause a lean condition not a rich one. GD

You will have to be more specific about where you are feeling air escape. Are you sure it's not an exhaust leak? GD

You don't want to run a 2.2 in front of the 4 speed. You will want a 5 speed D/R to take the power and torque of the 2.2. And for the lower "low" range of the 5MT D/R. The 4 speed's are junk. GD

Backfireing is a result of a combination of problems - too rich of a mixture, and exhaust leaks that allow in fresh oxygen that combines with the unburnt fuel and ignites in the exhaust tubing or muffler. It has nothing to do with lifters. GD

'81 Brat with an EA81 (if it's a GL) or EA71 (DL) will not have hydraulic lifters and cannot, therefore, have the TOD. Do a valve adjustment. It's reqiured every 15k miles on your engine. Also check your oil pressure and replace the pump if it's looking chewed up inside. GD

Overheating is VERY bad for the EA82T. You should likely start looking for a new engine or plan on rebuilding yours. Either that or just get a nice Legacy and forget about that POS. They are a huge headache unless you drop some serious money on doing a proper rebuild with all the trimmings. Cost is likely more than the car is worth. GD

Looks like Subaru breaks it down to just the "Switch assembly-magnetic, starter" which is #7. Runs about $70 or so it looks like. Cheaper than a new starter at least! But if you figure out which denso starter model it is - you should be able to buy the contacts online. I've seen them for sale and looked into it before. GD

Leak down test won't tell you anything. That is purely for checking the valves and rings. Compression test and leak-down test are not going to show a blown HG or a cracked head unless the problem is extremely severe. GD

Absolutely - over 100k is questionable territory for any O2 sensor. I just replaced both front and rear sensors on a Ford with a "bank 1 lean" code at 156k - problem solved - passed emissions the next week. If you are going to replace sensors - replace them ALL. Fronts and rears. They aren't that expensive and if one is going out or has thrown a code or you suspect it's the cause of a rich condition (0420 code) then the other's can't be far behind it. GD

The ECU can't always detect sensors that have gone lean or rich. The right combination of bad sensors will throw a 420 code - if the front starts reading lean the ECU will start enriching the mixture - more fuel means more for the cat to deal with and pretty soon you have codes being thrown around. The sensors are cheap and quick to change - they are the first thing to eliminate. You don't throw the most expensive parts at a problem till you rule out the cheap ones. With new sensors you can be SURE that what the ECU is reportiing is correct. And if it still throws codes - then you probably have a leak. GD

The irony of someone on dial-up building a hi-po EA82T is not lost on the author of post #53. GD

Agreed - not an issue if the bolt is tight. The key does not "hold" anything - it's simply for alignment. If the bolt were too loose the key would chew up the front of the cam - I've seen it happen. GD

Amazon. I use www.rockauto.com to get the part number and then buy them off Amazon to avoid the shipping. If the light is always on and the non-fouler is in place - you have bad sensors. GD

Sensors - again use NTK. I don't like the Bosch stuff personally. If that doesn't fix it - put a spark non-fouler between the second sensor and the pipe. That will cure it forever. I agree - don't blow a grand on a 300k vehicle. If it's going to be a problem - throw in a non-fouler and be done with it. Cost is about $8. I do them all the time for people (for off-road use only ) . GD

Trust me - if you have to ask - you can't afford those heads.... and "shipping" will be probably 5% of the cost or less - if you think "shipping" is stopping you.... get prepared for the sticker shock of your life when/if you get a quote. Very likely he didn't reply because he knows it would be pointless..... A "cheap" engine to the experimental aircraft guys is $10,000. With the complexity of the build required to use those DOHC heads (belt, tensioner system, oil pump drive, etc) he probably isn't interested in selling them seperate. Likely it would be part of a conversion "kit" that's going to cost more than half a dozen old EA82 running, driving vehicles, or it's going to come as a complete finished engine for $15,000 or something rediculous. What's the point in that? Just buy a WRX and move on. GD

The cylinder walls are just liners - they are actually quite thin. The liners are cast in place below the deck height and while the block can be sleeved, the cost is very high. Boring these without proper equipment can be a problem - it can cause the liners to shift in the bore. It *can* be done - but it's not cheap to have it done the right/safe way. And you can't bore them very far because the liners are only a couple mm thick. GD

What engine? There were some issues with flex-plate cracking in some of the EJ engines - I'm assuming EA since you are in the EA forum but figured you ought to clarify. Also important if you are running a FT4WD tranny as that's going to likely be different. GD

You can turbo the EJ22 - just don't exceed 5 psi. Bad things will happen and I'm not talking about the head gaskets - those aren't what blow. GD

Defeats the purpose of solid lash adjusters if you have a spring in it. . The whole point is to not drag on the cam - that's the one important benefit to solid lifters. There is no good way to do solid lash adjusters on the EA82 because you can't easily limit the play in the system to between the follower and the valve stem - not without a spring under the cam lobe follower to keep the follower in 100% contact with the cam lobe which there isn't room for. You are making too many changes at once without testing them. No science and all speculation. You risk failure from multiple areas and there won't be a reliable sequence of changes that you can go back to for failure analysis. GD