Building a 92 Wagon for the Gambler 500

[Danceswithmutts]

As the title states, A friend and I are building a 92 Legacy wagon to participate in the Gambler 500. If you aren't familiar with the Gambler, here  is a Youtube post that explains it. The idea is that you drive 500 miles offroad, in a $500 car. 

Here is our chariot:

(actually she sits about 1 inch lower than this pic, the suspension wasn't settled)

Here is where we are so far. Doug already owned the car, but it was just sitting in a field. She's a 92 mid-trim model, with a 5mt and 340,000 miles on the original drive-train. She's a total hoss, Starts up and drives great. Previously, Doug had installed outback struts and a rear trailing arm bracket from a outback, for a cheap lift. After a couple of patient months on craigslist, our tires presented themselves. 225/60/r16 studded snow tires with plenty of tread on rims for $165! 

With the tires on, we needed to gear down to help the tired EJ22 turn those big meats. With another lucky Craigslist score, I found a 5MT, rear end, driveshaft and axles from a JDM forester STI for $400! That means 4.44 gears and a Suretrac in the back! We started with the rear end swap, because we had concerns about if the axles would work, however in another stroke of luck everything just bolted right in.  

Now I need some help with the trans swap. Does anyone have a recommendation for a clutch? The clutch is probably going to be slipped and abused a lot, most of what I am finding online are people recommending a stock clutch. We also need to convert to a hydraulic clutch, but that seems pretty straightforward. 

I need to fab up a couple of skid plates, and that's probably about all we are going to have time for before the event in June. 

 

Edited April 30, 2019 by Danceswithmutts

[Danceswithmutts]

Now we are looking down the road, if this year goes well, we'd like to modify it further for next year. 

We are certainly going to build a 25/22 hybrid with these SOHC heads, and make this beauty queen run on premium only. 

I believe that a 4EAT from a na forester would be the best trans for this application. 3:1 first gear, a 4.44:1 final drive and you can do some wiring to make a switch that locks the center diff. I'm trying to find info on swapping a newer auto into this car and I am hitting walls. Not many people are swapping 5-speeds for Auto's. I am mostly concerned with wiring. I think we need a ECU and TCU from a auto car, but probably from a similar vintage to this one? Then would a newer 4EAT talk to those older control units? I have found that IPT used to make a manual controller for the 4EAT, and that would be ideal if they still sold it

[heartless]

good luck with your beast!

I may not be of any real help, but perhaps this link can help you out.. FSMs for pretty much any Subaru..

http://jdmfsm.info/Auto/Japan/Subaru/

 

[Danceswithmutts]

1 hour ago, heartless said:

good luck with your beast!

I may not be of any real help, but perhaps this link can help you out.. FSMs for pretty much any Subaru..

http://jdmfsm.info/Auto/Japan/Subaru/

 

Thanks for the link, everbody needs a FSM.

[el_freddo]

No need to convert to a hydraulic clutch. Just use the cable clutch fork and move the pivot to match the clutch fork.  Then mount the clutch cable mount bracket to the gearbox. 

Sounds like the trip will be some good fun! 

And your issue with the auto swap is that you need the TCU, associated wiring - then work out how to mate the TCU in with the ECU so that they talk to each other. Best bet is to rewrite the vehicle with an auto loom from a vehicle of the same model. It’s a lot of work for little gain for most. 

Cheers 

Bennie

[Danceswithmutts]

31 minutes ago, el_freddo said:

No need to convert to a hydraulic clutch. Just use the cable clutch fork and move the pivot to match the clutch fork.  Then mount the clutch cable mount bracket to the gearbox. 

 Sounds like the trip will be some good fun! 

And your issue with the auto swap is that you need the TCU, associated wiring - then work out how to mate the TCU in with the ECU so that they talk to each other. Best bet is to rewrite the vehicle with an auto loom from a vehicle of the same model. It’s a lot of work for little gain for most. 

Cheers 

Bennie

So, a loom from a same body auto legacy, and whatever combinations of ECU's

and TCU's that make it work.  

I am starting to think that we could find a dual range JDM trans for less trouble. 

Edit: And thanks for the tip on the clutch! 

Edited April 29, 2019 by Danceswithmutts

[FerGloyale]

the 4.44 MT will do fine for most anything you'll find on a Gambler.  It's a nice trans to score. Use it.

It''s more about taking the abuse for the long haul than maximum Offroad Capabilities.

 

[Danceswithmutts]

18 hours ago, FerGloyale said:

the 4.44 MT will do fine for most anything you'll find on a Gambler.  It's a nice trans to score. Use it.

It''s more about taking the abuse for the long haul than maximum Offroad Capabilities.

 

I'm sure it will be fine, but were offroad junkies looking to make this thing as capable as we can, for as little money as possible. 

[heartless]

not sure if anyone else has this problem, but I don't see the picture.. just a big box with minus sign in it.

 

and while an old Legacy will probably do just fine on this little adventure, i think a Forester would be a little better for the offroad aspect.. shorter wheelbase with shorter tail overhang, slightly taller, bigger tires.. and that is bone stock, LOL maybe next year

 

[FerGloyale]

3 hours ago, Danceswithmutts said:

I'm sure it will be fine, but were offroad junkies looking to make this thing as capable as we can, for as little money as possible. 

well, then you want a 96-98 Outback trans and TCU.  That will be 4.44  Also a 98 Forrester auto trans/tcu would work.......but not 99+ for either.

I think that TCU will still plug in and talk to the 92's ECU......might throw a TPS code though......only difference I can think of.

But again, that's on an already Automatic car. You're in for ALOT of wiring to make the Auto work in a MT car.  Heck I'd do a full Engine and Trans harness swap and run all matching year managment if I had to do it. On the cheap, you already got the 4.44 MT and a MT car, run that and enjoy it.  Unless you're fitting 30's on it you'll have plenty of gear.

[Danceswithmutts]

20 hours ago, FerGloyale said:

well, then you want a 96-98 Outback trans and TCU.  That will be 4.44  Also a 98 Forrester auto trans/tcu would work.......but not 99+ for either.

I think that TCU will still plug in and talk to the 92's ECU......might throw a TPS code though......only difference I can think of.

But again, that's on an already Automatic car. You're in for ALOT of wiring to make the Auto work in a MT car.  Heck I'd do a full Engine and Trans harness swap and run all matching year managment if I had to do it. On the cheap, you already got the 4.44 MT and a MT car, run that and enjoy it.  Unless you're fitting 30's on it you'll have plenty of gear.

It doesn't sound like there is a reasonable way to do this without merging the loom. Sounds like the best way forward might be to find a cheap Forester or outback and put all the good bits from the legacy on it. 

The main reason I want an auto is for the center diff lock, a torque converter is a big advantage, but it'd be more fun as a manual with a locked center.  This is a wacky idea, but I wonder if I could weld the center diff in the 5mt, and come up with a means to easily disconnect the driveshaft for road use. 

 

21 hours ago, heartless said:

not sure if anyone else has this problem, but I don't see the picture.. just a big box with minus sign in it.

 

and while an old Legacy will probably do just fine on this little adventure, i think a Forester would be a little better for the offroad aspect.. shorter wheelbase with shorter tail overhang, slightly taller, bigger tires.. and that is bone stock, LOL maybe next year

 

I'm sure a forester would be better, but so far we have pretty much evened the playing field in terms of suspension height, tire size and gearing. I hosted the pic on a different site, try again. 

[Danceswithmutts]

Since I have a few eyes on this post, does anyone know what the heaviest flywheel I can find is? My research says that a EJ25 flywheel is heavier than a EJ22. 

[el_freddo]

I’m not 100% sure. All I know is avoid the dual mass flywheel as they tend to develop an annoying squeak. 

Cheers 

Bennie

[FerGloyale]

On 5/1/2019 at 5:15 PM, Danceswithmutts said:

Since I have a few eyes on this post, does anyone know what the heaviest flywheel I can find is? My research says that a EJ25 flywheel is heavier than a EJ22. 

 

EJ25 flywheel might be a hair heavier.  But it's not gonna matter.  If you are trying to have hill climb power at low RPM's you want a light flywheel. not a heavier.

 

[el_freddo]

4 hours ago, FerGloyale said:

EJ25 flywheel might be a hair heavier.  But it's not gonna matter.  If you are trying to have hill climb power at low RPM's you want a light flywheel. not a heavier.

No, light flywheels are for high revving race applications. 

For off-roading you want a nice heavy flywheel to keep engine momentum. A doubled up flywheel would be awesome - but that’ll seriously cost onroad drivability of the engine if it were possible to do this. 

Cheers 

Bennie

[FerGloyale]

4 hours ago, el_freddo said:

No, light flywheels are for high revving race applications. 

For off-roading you want a nice heavy flywheel to keep engine momentum

Respectfully disagree when it comes to wheeling a subaru.

even with the 1.59 lo range, turning 29~31" tires at a reasonable trail crawl speed up a hill means you are running 800-1800 rpms in first lo range.  Having to go deep into the throttle more to spin up a heavy flywheel every time you need a blip of power is lame.  Light flywheel = Snappy throttle response.  IMO that the big wheels are the flywheel in a sense.  Albeit, it takes a careful and quick foot to make sure you don't stall it out on a crawl trail.