GeneralDisorder

CCR does not build EA71's anymore. They can no longer source the head gaskets from Subaru and other necessary components to rebuild them are becoming scarce. Unfortunately it will be difficult to get parts for them and the problem is only getting worse. GD

55k to 60k on the EA82 belts. The newer EJ engines can go much longer (100k+) which is what I'm assuming the last poster is referring to. The EA82 belts were spec'd for 60k but they often don't make it that long. It's an inferior, thin timing belt and there are two of them rather than one. It's a rather obscure belt system as timing belts go. GD

You should note, if you aren't already aware, that Grant wheels use a 5 bolt pattern rather than the Momo's 6 bolt and the two are not compatible. GD

US bumpers are required to pass tests that AUS bumpers are not. GD

Momo used to make one - they have been out of production for a few years now. I believe Grant still makes one or your can search ebay. They are not the same as the EJ's or the EA81's. GD

UGLY. Remember these are transmissions, differentials, and transfer cases all in one unit. Many parts, lots of precision shimming and adjusting. The 5 speed's are actually simpler in design than the 4's. It's far cheaper and less time consuming to just find another one. All the parts needed to rebuild one correctly would cost more than a good used tranny. And 5 speed's are a dime a dozen. GD

Syncro's may be optional, but the design of the 4 speed causes them to fall out of gear when you let off the gas. They don't just wear and grind - they wear out and then are so sloppy they won't stay in gear without holding them there with your hand. It's usually 3rd. I've also seen them so bad the shift dog's wouldn't grab unless you held them in gear quite forcefully while releasing the clutch. GD

Sorry but no. The EJ engine was developed independently beginning in 1985. The EA82 was an evolution of the EA81 with overhead cams and carrier's added on top of slightly modified EA81 head designs. The block and heads are near identical to the EA81 dual-carb engines, and the EA82 turbo is the logical evolution of the EA81 turbo using the EA82 overhead cam designs and dual-port heads. It is my opinion the EA82's OHC design did not improve upon the EA series. Not for the consumer anyway. The EJ was developed by a seperate research group from 1985 to 1989 - it is a completely new design using none of the EA82 style OHC components. It was designed from the outset for turbo-charged applications. It was also the first Subaru engine designed entirely with CAD. GD

It's not a recommended combination without supporting mods like an intercooler. The EA82T's are not 8.5:1, they are 7.7:1, and not real reliable even at that. The carb blocks are 8.5:1. Dump the whole mess and install an EJ22. More power and 10x more reliable. GD

The final ratio is the same yes, but the low range is lower on the 5 speed. It's 1.45:1 on the 4 speed, and 1.59:1 on the 5 speed. Additionally the 5 speed is stronger and the syncro's last longer. They don't suffer from the 2nd and 3rd gear syncro problems and the entire shift linkage doesn't suck a$$ like the 4's. It's also easier to cruise at 25 MPH in 3rd. The 4's are either lugging in 3 or revving out in 2. They are also lighter and shorter. Then there's the stronger clutch options..... GD

Yes - automatic's were made so it would be either an Automatic push-button 4WD, or a 4 speed D/R. It will have the EA81. If it's an auto it will have hydro lifters as an added bonus. GD

As could I, but this conversation involves Subaru's. Not Corvettes, not Jeep's, and not anything else. I've owned many things besides Subaru's and will again. I've wheeled everything I could get my hands on in the military arsenal as well as a fair share of the civilian machines out there. I don't bring that here - it's not what this forum is about. For the record though - I wouldn't own a Vette because I'm not over 50. And I wouldn't own a Jeep precisely because it's no fun for me - I take no joy in buying. I enjoy the building and the engineering. I care not for things that can be bought and bolted-on because they have no value to me. There is no art in it. There is no skill there. No challenge at all. Flinging mud is no challenge for the smallest mind if he has a large enough wallet - lay down the cash and mash on the skinny pedal.... "big deal" I say. I will take the lifted Subaru even if it's inferior - if it fails I have no one to blame but myself and I simply redesign it for the next time around. Think of it as the difference between buying new kitchen cabinets and making them in your own garage. Etc. It's a fundamental way of living that we differ on. That's ok though - it takes all kinds. GD

With everyone starving for work these days.... yeah that's about right. Just having a key cut by code is like $25 now. I had new keys made for my hatch ignition from the code on the passenger door lock (if he needs to code that's where it's at BTW) and it was like $33 for three keys - one code cut and two copy's. This is why I always grab lock-set's from the junk yard when they have a key in the ignition. It's cheaper and faster to change all the locks on the car than it is to have them repaired. But in many parts of the country that's your only real option. They aren't difficult lock mechanisms. On my 91 legacy some previous owner had forced the lock and actually broke part of it internally. I got another lock cylinder from the junk yard and transfered the tumbler pins and springs from the broken cylinder to the new one and fixed the lock myself. The parts are small but they are no different than any other mechanical device. I save a pile of money and kept my car keyed the same thoughout. GD

I think that's definetely a possibility. The faster you can flow air over the compressor wheel the faster the turbo will spin up. Larger diameter pipes from the turbo-back allow better flow. In a turbocharged application the goal is to get rid of exhaust as quickly as possible. Any tuning of the exhaust has got to be done before the turbo - anything after just needs to be large and free-flowing. The 3" catless turbo-back system on my SS makes for smooth power with the stock turbo. It spools very easily at 1500 to 2000 RPM and makes for smooth power all the way through the driving RPM range. It's not the same engine, but the turbo size relative to the engine size is very similar and they were designed with similar goals of low RPM spooling and smooth driving characteristics. They both boost at about 8 lbs stock. GD

If it only took two quarts you should be fine. Your problems are almost certainly unrelated to the oil except possibly as noted you may have inadvertantly pulled a vacuum line loose. Spray around with carb cleaner to check for vacuum leaks. If the engine pitch changes investigate the area you were spraying for broken/cracked/disconnected lines. GD

Hhhmmm - not likely. $1500 for an *excelent* example isn't too bad. Although I would rather it be $1500 for an excelent GL. Loyale's just feel like an after-thought being made from leftover parts to eliminate stockpiles from the late 80's and clear out warehouses for the EJ's. I paid less than that ($1000) for my last 94 Legacy and it only had 133k on it. I'm sure you just haven't experienced the EJ's yet to understand what we are talking about. The EA82 is a half-baked first try at the Legacy, and doesn't really stand up next to the shining example of spartan, utilitarian reliability that the EA81 embodies either. Everything I could want can be found for basically the same amount of money in either an EJ or an EA81 so that relegates the EA82's to being parts. I drive a first-gen EJ daily because it's super reliable, refined, sporty ('91 SS), and fits a DIN sized stereo without modification. I drive a lifted EA81 as my toy because it's basic, simple (no t-belts), and light. Plus the hatch body is the ultimate in Subaru wheelbase for the off-road. I have a Brat for restoration because it's rare and my sweat equity will actually be worth something someday. Plus I can haul a bit in it, and it gets amazing mileage with the SPFI. Tell me where an EA82 fits in my world? I understand the tendancy to defend your personal choices, but I assure you that as your Subaru experiences grow you will end up at the same place as the rest of the pack. Unless, like Andy, you really like the ugly duckling. Which is fine too - just add an EJ22 to it like he and others that suffer from his affliction have done to keep their sanity and hair. GD

Then cut the stubs off with a die grinder so you have better access to work in there. A sharp drill bit and some lube will cut through the heads. Just make sure you center punch them REALLY close to center. You may have to sharpen your drill bit a few times but you will prevail if you work smart. GD

Easiest just to find another open diff. They are extremely plentiful. Otherwise you will have to punch and drill the rest of the head off and the stub should slip over the broken bolt shaft. Then you can deal with getting the bolt out once the stub is off. GD

Absolutely - since the timing belt runs both the cams and the ignition. Redo the belts, then reset the distributor. GD

They were standard on many 4WD GL's from '80 to '82. They were officially called "passing lamps" in 80/81, and then "center lamps" in '82. They are not at all any more rare than an '80 to '82 4WD GL. I have two of the 80/81 lamps in my garage and one of the '82 style..... and I only hit the yards about once a month. GD

I would say the timing could be off a tooth. It will still run, just won't have any power. All the air bled from the cooling system? GD

According to the Subaru literature the factory dual carb engines were 108 HP. These still were not the dual-port heads though - just better flowing. And it takes more than the heads because as mentioned the valves are reversed so you need the cam or a custom one to match. Subaru also made a variation which I have not seen outside of race/rally prepped vehicles that surely must have put down more than the 108 of the production model. It had carbs mounted to each head rather than to a manifold. I would guess that if it were anything like the RAM engines it was probably putting down closer to 130 to 140 HP. Perhaps even more considering that the Subaru engineers got 120 HP out of the 1.0 liter justy engine for bonneville. GD

I wouldn't pay that much because I know the failings of the EA82's and I know that given similar maintenance history the EJ22 with 150k on it is likely to last longer than an EA82 with 50k on it. Plus I don't care so much about mileage as I do about where the mileage took place (city or freeway), the maintenance history, and the condition. A 100k mile Legacy will be nicer, drive better, and just generally out perform a 0 mile Loyale any day of the week. The differences are largely in the design not in the mileage or age. Legacy's age better and you could get a supreme example with low mileage for $3700. Unfortunately the EA82's are, in my opinion, the low point of Subaru's offerings from 1970 to 2000. They are supremely ugly, heavy, under powered, and other than the 5 speed D/R and the SPFI, the drive trains are nothing to write home about. The Loyale's, not being offered with the D/R, and coming with generally fewer features than the older GL's are the low point of the EA82 line. The EA82's aren't all bad, and I would take one over most other brands and models in a pinch, but when you have owned many examples of everything Subaru has made before and since.... the EA82 is put into a different perspective. It's the reason there are many seasoned members here that own Gen 1's. Gen 2's, and EJ's but don't have a single EA82 save for hulks they have ripped the tranny's and SPFI out of. GD

You remove the entire aluminium peice that holds the cylinder and the switch by removing the 4 bolts that bolt the assembly to the column from the back. Use a pair of needle-nose vice-grips to break them loose and then work them out with needle-nose pliers. It's pretty simple really. The cylinder can be rebuilt by any good locksmith. They are simple and if your smith knows his work he can modify the lock to use the first tumbler pin as the key retainer instead of the original retainer that always breaks and allows the key to be removed in any posistion. GD

There are two sensors - one for the gauge and another for the ECU. They are *probably* the same physical unit, but with two outputs for two seperate circuits. Thus the two-spade terminal connection I mentioned earlier. The ECU side can fail and leave the gauge side working - in fact that's usually the case in my experience. GD