EGR Flow malfunction, some parts replaced..

[wicklowwanderer]

Like many folks, I've had an ongoing issue with EGR flow malfuntion on my 1999 Outback. In reading archived threads, I found a lot of helpful information. I have so far replaced the EGR valve and the back pressure transduccer.

 

Of course the check engine light came back on, same issue again. I then followed this advice "a vacuum line on the right side of the engine that goes to the map sensor on the right shock tower. There is a inline filter that plugs up".

 

That filter had some oily stuff that came out when I blew through it, so I sprayed brake parts cleaner in and cleared it out.

 

My question is, could I have ruined that little filter by using that cleaner? If so, does anyone know what it's called so I can buy another?

 

Thanks in advance!

[WAWalker]

The part number for that filter is 2266AA010. It is a filter asembly, press sensor.

 

And for anyone eles who reads this............I recomened replacing this before spending money on the more expensive EGR valve, and PDT.

[porcupine73]

There's a good article on endwrench.com about this issue. There's also some metal lines that can plug up or rust out.

[idosubaru]

I just bought two of these, they were only like $7 or something like that, not much. the EGR system is crap. an unnecessary component that only adds parts, costs, and failure modes, that's brilliant. the XT6 has no EGR stuff and it's great...passes emissions, a 6 cylinder with the same gas mileage as an EJ22...Subaru went backwards on this one.

[WAWalker]

EGR is the only effective way to reduce NOX. Thats why it has been used since the invent of emissions controls and is still in use.

 

An old car only has to meet the emissions standards that it was required to meet at the time the car as manufactured.

 

Not saying I am a fan of the EGR system (it is the one emission control system that really decreses engine performance in the name of cleaner air) but it is just part of life.

[idosubaru]

why do they put it on some vehicles and not others? i've seen up to 1998 Subaru EJ engines (EJ22) without EGR. in 95 the auto's had it but the manuals did not? even in the 80's - all Subaru EA82's had EGR but the XT6 did not.

[WAWalker]

Now that is a good question.

 

As far as I know it has to due with the classification of the vehical, car truck ect. for one thing.

Like all Subarus are classified as light trucks, so they don't have to meet the standards set for passanger cars.

 

I think there are other things that play into it too. It would seem that the type of transmission plays some role. Auto's use more power= more emissions= need for more emissions control?

 

Honestly don't know.

[newg]

WAWALKER....I could not find any info on this filter using the P/N you gave (2266AA010). Could you please double check that number? Thanks......

[WAWalker]

WAWALKER....I could not find any info on this filter using the P/N you gave (2266AA010). Could you please double check that number? Thanks......

 

Will do.

[WAWalker]

Sorry was one number lite.

 

22663AA010

[WJM]

Like many folks, I've had an ongoing issue with EGR flow malfuntion on my 1999 Outback. In reading archived threads, I found a lot of helpful information. I have so far replaced the EGR valve and the back pressure transduccer.

 

Of course the check engine light came back on, same issue again. I then followed this advice "a vacuum line on the right side of the engine that goes to the map sensor on the right shock tower. There is a inline filter that plugs up".

 

That filter had some oily stuff that came out when I blew through it, so I sprayed brake parts cleaner in and cleared it out.

 

My question is, could I have ruined that little filter by using that cleaner? If so, does anyone know what it's called so I can buy another?

 

Thanks in advance!

 

What code is the ECU telling you?

[newg]

Sorry was one number lite.

 

22663AA010

 

 

Thanks!!

[WAWalker]

EGR is the only effective way to reduce NOX. Thats why it has been used since the invent of emissions controls and is still in use.

 

An old car only has to meet the emissions standards that it was required to meet at the time the car as manufactured.

 

Not saying I am a fan of the EGR system (it is the one emission control system that really decreses engine performance in the name of cleaner air) but it is just part of life.

 

I may be wrong about this, on the more modern cars.

 

I read something today, that claimed that today's cats will effectively remove NOX from the exhaust. Apparently to the point that EGR is no longer used to reduce NOX production during combustion.

 

It claimed that well controled use of EGR actually will increase fuel economy.

 

I will have to look into this a little more.

[WJM]

Hm. Funny how after I completely disabled the EGR on the RX it was getting 37mpg.

[WAWalker]

Hm, funny how that car is 20 some years old.

 

Fuel and emissions controls have come a long way in 20 years.

 

I didn't say fuel milage.................I said control.

 

The quest for more power and less emissions has hindered improvements in fuel milage. But it has been possible to make more power with less emissions through the use of better control.

 

If your RX made the same power and could pass the same emission standard as a modern car then we could start makeing compairisons to see were the manufacturer is going wrong.

 

The feds just pass a new CAFE standard law. 35mpg for passanger cars, I believe is what I heard on the news. Will be interesting to see what car builders are going to do about that.

I'm sure to start out they will find ways to exempt themselves. Like Subaru's increase of ground clearance so they would only have to meet the light truck standard rather than the passanger car standards.