Has anyone put a EJ-18 Motor into a Forester

[tbreaden]

I wanted to know if anyone has installed a EJ-18 into a 99 Forester? I am just looking for fuel mileage. I am looking for feed back on mileage and performance? Thanks, Todd

[EVOthis]

the only thing i can tell ya is that it would be a pretty underpowered Forester....obviously the main thing that is holding all subarus back from getting better fuel economy is the AWD standard im not sure how much you will gain from going from a 2.5 to a 1.8...but when it comes to fuel economy AWD def. isnt the way to go....

[idosubaru]

i just finished up swapping an EJ18 into an EJ25 Legacy. i've got 2,000 miles on it. can't say much about gas mileage, it drives great but still have a few issues to work out.

 

automatic or manual trans forester?

 

AWD, automatic, roof rack, boxy car...are you driving mountains too. probably more effort than it's worth to slap an EJ18 in it.

 

the main issue you may have is that your forester is probably a SOHC Phase II EJ25. if that's the case it's probably not worth considering because there's a number of work arounds and issues to deal with. but you could swap a Phase II EJ22 in it's place fairly easily. don't know that you'd gain much there, probably not enough to justify the swap.

 

don't know that EJ engines really differ much in gas mileage. gas mileage seems much more dependent on transmission and weight/aerodynamics. the early impreza's do well (okay aero and the lightest EJ vehicle).

[tbreaden]

It is a automatic Tranny. I will be driving on country roads and some highway. I am not looking for performance. Thanks, Todd

[idosubaru]

probably not worth it to you.

 

i can post back my mpg once mine is finished, right now it's only mid 20's...even after converting it to FWD trans too! i still have to swap the ECU, get new O2 sensors (picked up today), fix noisy brakes, remove the rear 4WD driveline stuff, and fix a noisey rear wheel bearing.

 

are you looking for easy or some work is okay... i mean any engine swap is a big job but wiring and experimenting may be needed for your 1999. if it was a 1998 it would be much simpler, you might want to double check...do you have the SOCH or DOHC engine (should be SOHC). you can tell by looking at the front of the engine, or just post a picture for us.

 

if it is SOHC (which it should be), it's going to either have to be a phase II EJ22 (which can be hard to find for a good price) or you'll have to be doing some intake/wiring harness swapping playing around with not much information to go on.

 

pushing a forester with an AWD auto trans might not make it a stellar ride. do you have many mountains to drive? mine does okay but i don't know how the extra size/weight and worse aero of the forester would treat it.

 

any chance of getting a manual trans, they do much better for gas mileage?

[Gloyale]

The new imprezas get an EJ15:eek:, in Russia. 107 hp(still more than an EA:rolleyes: ). Petrol prices and fuel econony are probably the reasons.

 

On a side note, that would be a great engine for a first gen brat or wagon 4wd.

[offroadsubaruguy]

im geussing that the fuel mileage would drop alot because of lack of horsepower. the 2.5 has around 160ish b.h.p. and the 1.8 has 90 ish b.h.p.? yeah, you would work that 1.8 to death. not to mention the fact that it would take you forever to accelerate. the forester weighs alot more than the little impreza that it came in........ i would say stay away from it, its definately not worth it in my opinion.....stick with the 2.5 and try some other things. like a full exhaust and maybe an intake..... quite a few performance upgrades will actually help with gas mileage, they just dont advertise it...........

[Gloyale]

im geussing that the fuel mileage would drop alot because of lack of horsepower. the 2.5 has around 160ish b.h.p. and the 1.8 has 90 ish b.h.p.? yeah, you would work that 1.8 to death.

 

 

First, EJ18 has something like 115 HP, not 90. But that's an aside.

 

You're thinking is backwards. If he stayed out of the gas, and drove according to best milage and not speedy acceleration, he would DEFINATELY get better milage. Espescailly on the Highway, were the 1.8 could keep the ball rolling fine. unless you're heavy on the gas, City driving would be about the same or abit better. It would be easier to get a bigger difference with manual vs. auto. But there would be a difference.

 

Forresters are not THAT much heavier than a Impreza. Hell the 2008 Imps probably way more than the older first gen Forrester. And like I said, those 2008 imps have 1.5 liters(with 107 hp:)in them in some global markets, for fuel economy.

 

I think the car would drive reasonably(although wimpy) and you would see gas milage improvement.

 

Enough to justify the work and overcome the interchange issues????

 

Perhaps,....... but perhaps not. It'd be doing it for the sake of doing it really.

[The Dude]

If would be far more effective to SELL your Forester and buy something like a Civic DX. Of course, then you're driving a Civic DX. There ain't no free lunch. Also, check much you'll actually save with higher mpg car based on your actual annual mileage. For most people, it's less than you think, a few hundred bucks, maybe.

[rverdoold]

First, EJ18 has something like 115 HP, not 90. But that's an aside.

 

Forresters are not THAT much heavier than a Impreza. Hell the 2008 Imps probably way more than the older first gen Forrester. And like I said, those 2008 imps have 1.5 liters(with 107 hp:)in them in some global markets, for fuel economy.

 

Not so sure about thouse 115hp, my EJ2.0 (non turbo, SOCH) gives 116. The EU rateded the EJ18 at 105hp, thats not a lot for a heavy car. Dunno how much 1 hp will do though.

[Gloyale]

Not so sure about thouse 115hp, my EJ2.0 (non turbo, SOCH) gives 116. The EU rateded the EJ18 at 105hp, thats not a lot for a heavy car. Dunno how much 1 hp will do though.

 

 

If a Legacy wagon can get around with a Carbed EJ18, which I know some markets got, then a First gen forrester can do fine with an EJ18. won't be quick, but it'd be effiecient. More so than a 2.5.

 

2.5 vs 1.8 for MPG????

 

1.8 FTW Hands down no brainer, Duh.

 

worth the effort??? Like I said, that's up to the one doing the work and spending the money on gas. Buying a more effiecient car would be easier, but then it wouldn't be an AWD Subaru.

[Manarius]

The cost of putting in the EJ18 would probably far outweigh any of the gas savings throughout the life of the car.

[tbreaden]

Does anyone know the weight of a Impreza? Todd

[johnceggleston]

it would be a lot cheaper and a lot easier to change back, if you just removed the rear section of drive shaft and all but the spindles in the hubs of the rear axles. then you wouldn't be pushing ALL of the rear wheel stuff, just the transfer clutch stuff. this might boost your mpg a little for a lot less money.

 

removing the front section of drive shaft would be even better, but you need something on the end of the trans to keep the fluid from flowing out.

 

opening the transfer clutch and removing half of the clutch would help too, but then you'd have some real labor invested.

 

more expensive and maybe more effective would be to replace the trans / front and the rear differentials. this would make the car a 4.11 to 1 instead of a 4.44 to 1. (i'm guessing that the final drive of the forester is the same as the outback.) swapping in a 4.11 final drive would give you about 8 to 10 % improvement on economy, i think.

[idosubaru]

The cost of putting in the EJ18 would probably far outweigh any of the gas savings throughout the life of the car.

i assume you're talking about paying someone to do it, which would definitely be a terrible financial move!

 

if you do it yourself you can make money. EJ25's are worth quite a bit. EJ18's and EJ22's are a dime a dozen. i did the swap and i got a 100,000 miles EJ18 with 3 month warranty for $150. not hard to sell an EJ25 for $1,000.

[Manarius]

i assume you're talking about paying someone to do it, which would definitely be a terrible financial move!

That was the assumption I was making.

[tbreaden]

I am doing all the work myself. I would rather have a non interferance engine. but I guess I am going to install a EJ22 phase 2 or a 96 EJ18. I am just looking for advice for the best swap. Thanks, Todd

[idosubaru]

there's another thread going on right now about doing a very similar swap, you might want to read through that.

 

the EJ18 intake manifold and wiring is a mess - junk it.

 

minor issue - Phase I and II bellhousing bolt holes will differ i think. one will have 4, the other will have 8. but the 4 line up with the 4 out of 8 in the other and it will work just fine. you'll have to attach the starter with one bolt or create the other mounting spot for it.

 

to summarize - i think you have two options, but both have two questions i'm not sure about, personally i'd check into Option I first so you get the EJ22 ECU in the end:

 

Option I:

EJ18 engine

EJ22 intake manifold

EJ22 intake manifold wiring

EJ22 ECU

???? – vehicle wiring???

 

check the wiring. if Phase II isn't any different, an ECU swap would be cake and make this simple. you can look at wiring diagrams (just verify all the inputs are the same). and check the ECU plugs to make sure they're the same. this would avoid the cam swapping issues i know have come up before. EJ22 and EJ25 ECU's are interchangeable on Phase I's. (but EJ18's are not).

 

 

Option II:

EJ18 engine

EJ22 intake manifold

EJ25 intake manifold wiring

EJ25 ECU

??? – cams???

 

i know of one other swap that didn't work because of cam issues...but that was a Phase II to a Phase II so it was easy actually to fix. i guess the trigger marks may be different on the back for the cam sensor between EJ22 and EJ25. not sure what happens when going Phase II to Phase I with this. be nice to see these two cams side by side. so that's why i say swap the cams (if they're swappable) or swap the ECU (if the wiring is the same). i guess it's possible that issue i'm thinking of was for other reasons, but i'd be ready for it.

 

i'd pick which of those options you like best and then start another thread asking about wiring/ECU differences or cam differences. people can comment, post pictures, and look in their FSM's to help you.

 

good luck!

[The Dude]

it would be a lot cheaper and a lot easier to change back, if you just removed the rear section of drive shaft and all but the spindles in the hubs of the rear axles. then you wouldn't be pushing ALL of the rear wheel stuff, just the transfer clutch stuff. this might boost your mpg a little for a lot less money.

 

removing the front section of drive shaft would be even better, but you need something on the end of the trans to keep the fluid from flowing out.

 

opening the transfer clutch and removing half of the clutch would help too, but then you'd have some real labor invested.

 

more expensive and maybe more effective would be to replace the trans / front and the rear differentials. this would make the car a 4.11 to 1 instead of a 4.44 to 1. (i'm guessing that the final drive of the forester is the same as the outback.) swapping in a 4.11 final drive would give you about 8 to 10 % improvement on economy, i think.

 

 

This sounds like a great idea. However, during the nine years that I have been on this board a number of people have tried disconnecting the rear drivetrain to get better mpg. The result? Not even one achieved a significant increase in mpg. Almost all had no increase in mpg.

[idosubaru]

The result? Not even one achieved a significant increase in mpg. Almost all had no increase in mpg.

i've never noticed any difference in highway mileage on XT6's. haven't had any EJ's to do this with, as in the past it's been out of necessity due to failed rear diffs or driveshaft ujoints.