85Sub4WD

STAY AWAY FROM THE AUTOMATICS!!! they use ECVT technology, which really had not been perfected at the time the car was produced; there are no good years for the automatic transmission fuel injection is highly desireable - try to get a fuel injected car; more power and better mileage than the carbed version - not to mention that it is more reliable and needs less maitnence 4WD is also highly desireable, but that is obvious as to why as with any older soob, check carefully for rust - also check the maitnence history - I do not know interval for the Justy's timing belt, but it (and all coolant hoses/belts) should be checked and replaced if necessary while I have never personally owned a Justy, I know several who have/do and all were pleased with it - one person has one that is completely rusted out, but he refuses to part with it because it is a 5-speed 4WD 4-door, which is somewhat rare - it is not a powerhouse, but it is a very good point A to point B vehicle I would avoid ebay, because they seem to go for far more than they should on ebay. Don't rush either.

EA81 and EA82 are engine designations - as subaru tends to keep the same series of engine in a particular body line, it is easy to refer to a body series by the engine designation - EA81 is the earlier, overhead valve 1.8 Liter engine - not as powerful or high-reving as the EA82, but a real workhorse, however except for the rare turbo version, all are carbureated the EA82 is a later engine, with overhead camshafts (and timing belts) - more powerful and higher-revving than the EA81, but also more complicated - however, most were fuel-injected, and required less periodic maitnence and tuning each engine has its camps - yours is a SPFI (single-point fuel injected) EA82 - it is a very reliable design, and requires very little service compared to a carbed car EA81 bodystyle ran from 1980-1984 (Brat from 1982-1987, Hatchback 1980-1987) EA82 bodystyle ran from 1985-1989 and the Loyale series cars from 1990-1994 There is a LOT of parts interchangeability within any bodystyle, and some between bodystyles. The driveshaft you would need would have to be from a manual-transmission EA82 sedan (4WD of course) the specific type of manual transmission does not matter; turbocharged EA82 cars had rear disc brakes, and it is a popular upgrade to replace the stock rear drums with disc brakes. Some turbo/air suspension cars came with a rear swaybar - not necessary for offroading, but nice for street use. The transmission and rear differential need to be taken from the same car, as there are two different rear differentials on the cars - all 5-speed Dual Range transmissions (save from turbo cars) have 3.9:1 rear end ratios - that is what you want; you do NOT want a turbo transmission for offroading because the gearing is lower

that's tricky - it depends on the junkyard you get parts from - you will need a transmission (and shift linkage), driveshaft, rear diff, rear trailing arms, and rear axles - maybe some other stuff too and you will have to fab (maybe weld) the bracket to hold the driveshaft bearing - it will probably not be cheap, but once again, a good (cheap) junkyard does wonders for mods - if you have enough $$ to buy a car that is already 4WD, it would be an easier solution, but then again, the car is very clean (engine and body) so the decision is up to you keep in mind that it is perfectly fine for street use as a 2WD car, and you are just getting started - it should really serve all your needs for the time-being as is

not necessarily - it is possible (but not easy) to convert it to 4WD - and as I said, it is a decent car, especially consitering that it is running, and cost $100

you can theoretically run in FWD if the car has a manual transmission, and you engage the diff lock - this could potientially damage your tranny though as you have a center differential, but I don't know for sure - I would recommend driving gingerly at least - I think all EA82 or so rear axles will fit the XT6 rear end, but the XT6 axles are beefier - check for play in all the axles and rear driveshaft though before deciding that it is a rear end problem, sometimes it turns out to be something different good luck

sorry, I did not catch the clutch Q if it does not have a button that says "4WD", a lever for 4WD, or a "diff lock" switch, then it is a 2WD - easiest way to check is look under it and see if you have a rear driveshaft - if it is 2WD, worry first about making it 4WD before lifting it - a 4WD conversion is not an easy task

I am WELL AWARE OF THAT - the front diff is much larger than the rear diff and the 5MT front diff is larger than the 6MT front diff - the idea is that as the Subaru and Nissan 160's are basically the same diffs (in fact they are interchangeable) - Nissan also made a 180, and a 200 - LSD's are available for both diffs - the question is if the Nissan 180 or 200 LSD would fit the front diff, or if the LSD case from one could be redrilled to fit the stock Subaru crownwheel

OK - first is it an auto or manual tranny - manuals are FAR better for these cars (less tempermental, more reliable) - if it is 4WD and a manual, there are two types of trannies it may have - either the Dual-Range 5-speed (better - being a GL, it is probably what you have) or the pushbutton single-range (OK) even if it is an automatic 2WD, it is still a very good car - I don't see any rust (biggest problem - always keep the car clean, and garage it if possible) mechanically, the timing belts MUST be changed every 60k, and the auto trannies MUST have clean tranny fluid in them - other than that, they take a fair amount of use/abuse pretty well - check all fluids, and make sure the cooling system is maintained well, overheating the engine can/will blow a headgasket - these engine do tend to consume at least a little oil, so check the oil level frequently (whenever you are gassing up) looks like a good car from here, take care of it, and it will serve you well

15mpg is WAYYY too low for any tranny - ususally there is no more than 3-4 mpg difference between auto and manual - I would recommend that you check to see that the Weber is jetted right for your car, that would cause it to run richly - also if the choke is sticking, or the timing is wayy off - I have a good friend that got ~24-28mpg in town on his '84 with the D/R 4-speed 4WD tranny (better mpg on highway) - it also had a weber carb if you are running so rich you are getting 15mpg, you are actually losing power and a lot of it; peak hp output is obtained by a correct mixture (~14.7:1 air:fuel), not by putting in a ton of gas - you should notice a power, and fuel economy increase with proper adjustment just out of curiousity, what disty did you use, and what did you set the engine timing to?

no, it wouldn't - the swaybar is essientially a torsion-bar, and if you cut it, you destroy the tempered nature of it, and you seriously weaken it I really don't have any magic hints I would recommend - my technique is too dangerous for me to recommend, and still go to sleep tonight

is the front diff like a standard Nissan one? I know the rear is the R160 or something like that; and I know the front is larger; I just know that there were LSD's available for Z cars, and that they use a larger diff - if their rear diff is the same size as our front; we may be able to adapt it to work

thanks for posting - my current filter is a carquest - I'll check it ASAP!!

the problem I have with that is that it was not a civillian vehicle - it is like the jeep in that it was intended only for military purposes - the jeeps just proved to be popular enough that they went into civillian production (CJ-series) - at 669 units produced, it is hardly a common vehicle either - and for that matter, they basically a car body mounted it on a truck frame, and adapted to work - I give them credit, for the ingenuity but it was simply not that significant - Subaru's design is different in that it is unibody, and there are simply other basic differences - I have worked on bugs as well - (who hasn't??) I think the decision to do a flat four was also affected by the 360 - changing an inline-two cylinder engine design into a water-cooled flat four is a safe change in design - I have no doubt that the VW bug affected the decision to go for a flat-four, but it was the next logical step - for that matter, the VW bug was NOT the first car to use the air-cooled flat-four design, nor was Ferdinand Porsche the originator of the flat-four design - VW was sued in fact, for copying a Czech design called the Tatra T97 - if you look the car up, it looks almost exactally like the beetle, and it uses the same basic drivetrain as the beetle - VW lost the suit, and had to pay Tatra 3 million Marks in 1961 Audi was the first to do AWD, but not the first to do a 4WD car - the big deal is not however the difference between 4WD and AWD; it is the difference between driving 2 wheels, and more than 2 wheels - the difficulty of running axles to all four wheels of the car, and creating a drivetrain to run it all - not to mention the fact that solid axles were not used, and the shift-on-the fly concept is distinctly Subaru (and maybe the 4WD VW's) - If you look at the AWD system Subaru uses, it is virtually identical to the 4WD system, save for the output end of the transfer case; in fact, the gear that drives the 4WD/AWD system is EXACTALLY the same for both transmissions .... Realize also that there were different incentives for the two companies to do 4WD/AWD - Subaru did not go for rally until the first generations of the RX ~1984, the initial was for a car that could function in extreme conditions, and still transport people from point A to B - and do so cheaply - Audi was after performance, which is a different reason entirely - the RX was anyting but a copy of audi's Quattro - if you look at the design differences between the two, it is readily apparent I have serviced many German and Japanese cars, and the more I work on German cars, the more I think they are very overrated - From my personal expierence, Japanese cars seem to handle abuse much better than their bavarian counterparts, and maitnence schedules are far more relaxed; anyone who has serviced an Audi/BMW/Mercedes-Benz can tell you how problematic and extremely complex the electrical systems are on the car. That is probably a big reason why they are not doing well in most of the consumer magazines at present.

I would check the alternator as well

sounds like a dirty lifter - being an '84, it will be an EA81 with hydraulic lifters - some ticking is normal for these engines, so I would not worry too much about it - best recommendation is to use Marvel Mystery Oil during oil changes, and use a synthetic oil - frequent oil changes help too

Subaru predated Audi by over 5 years in the development of 4WD in cars; and the AWD concept was around MANY years before either ventured into the drivetrain, so it is simply incorrect to accuse Subaru of stealing ANYTHING from Audi -- the only thing they remotely took from anybody was the flat-four engine design from Porsche/VW, and the front-wheel-drive transmission design from Citroen - the 4WD concept was not a part of the initial design, and the way they went about adding 4WD was merely the simplist method of acchieving their goal - the rear diff is the same type used in many RWD Datsun/Nissan car from the 60's through the 80's

Do it yourself - these engines aren't that hard to work on - if you use OEM gaskets, have the heads resurfaced, and follow the instructions in the Factory Service Manual you won't need to worry about future failure (if it is not turbo) the total cost for parts will probably be well under $500 - versus CCR's new engine

Actually, if you use the EA81 style NAPA gaskets, they work REALLY well - and for that matter, I used a pair of OEM Subaru gaskets and had the EXACT same problem - torquing the exhaust studs enought is CRITICAL to prevent gasket failure

Subaru GL-10 body, with sunroof and all ammenities - then cram an EJ25 or better engine; or even a ER27 with forged pistons (9:1 CR or higher), copper head gaskets, custom FI system and a turbo I don't ask how I would fit the ER27 into the body - maybe if I want it to really look like a sleeper, I should put a 4EAT in it. An ER27 turboed would really scoot if you wanted it to.

how are the plugs/wires/coil pack? my mom's van did the same thing, and it turned out to be bad plugs/wires good luck

all 1985 GL-10 FWD cars were MPFI - for that matter, Subaru called the trim lines differently in 1985 from all other years - all GL-10's were FWD, with MPFI engines, all Turbos were 4WD, with the same trim as the GL-10 (maybe some minor differences, but they are almost identical) it was not until 1986 that a car was both labled GL-10 and Turbo - all 4WD/FWD GL's could get ~90% of the options that the GL-10's had - IE digidash, power everything, sunroof .... - the only thing that really set the GL-10's apart was the MPFI system - SPFI did not come out until 1986, and that displaced the MPFI system in 2WD GL-10's I think that it was not until 1988 that all carbs were dropped from the GL/DL (Justy still kept them for a couple years) - I got my FI system for my 1985 off a 1988 DL wagon.

usually fuel pump problems are actually fuel filter problems - people forget that they need to be changed periodically, and eventually they clog up - it is easy enough to do

if you run the #'s yes, it is 9.5:1 CR - that question has been asked before - unless your block has been changed (then the lowest it could have is a 7.7:1 for turbo pistons) - and I doubt your timing is set right if you can run on 87 octane gas anyway - mine recommends 90 or higher octane, and if I run 87, I get problems - for that matter, engines today can run 87 octane with a 10:1 CR or higher and not get pinging due to the high quality engine control systems in them, so 9.5:1 is not far fetched at all, given the fact that timing and fuel advances on that car are determined by the computer try running 87 in a carbed engine with that CR from the 60's and you have a different story .....

Audi started the Quattro system after subaru started their 4WD system - Subaru introduced 4WD into a car in 1975, the Quattro came out in 1980 - the center differential concept came from the Jeep Quadra-Trac system of the 1970's I wouldn't say Subaru STOLE the ideas, it merely combined a number of ideas from different manufacturers into it's final design. For that matter, the 2WD subaru drivetrain is very similar to the Citroen 2CV's design, albeit the subaru has twice as many cylinders and is water cooled - and the 2CV came out about the same time as the VW beetle - for that matter, the FWD concept/design behind the early 2WD cars goes back to the "Traction Advant" (also made by Citroen) from the early 1930's - it had a water-cooled I4 too - It also PREDATED THE BEETLE!!! So Subaru stole from Citroen as much, if not more than it did from VW

the heads would have to be swapped (at least the left head for cylinders 1/3), because the NA engine will not have the oil/water connections for the turbo the headgaskets will need to be O-ringed if they are to last, as they are already prone to blowing, and the added stress is only going to increase the chances of them blowing