Jump to content


Welcome to Ultimate Subaru Message Board, my lurker friend!

Welcome to Ultimate Subaru Message Board, an unparalleled Subaru community full of the greatest Subaru gurus and modders on the planet! We offer technical information and discussion about all things Subaru, the best and most popular all wheel drive vehicles ever created.

We offer all this information for free to everyone, even lurkers like you! All we ask in return is that you sign up and give back some of what you get out - without our awesome registered users none of this would be possible! Plus, you get way more great stuff as a member! Lurk to lose, participate to WIN*!
  • Say hello and join the conversation
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get automatic updates
  • Get your own profile and make new friends
  • Classifieds with all sorts of Subaru goodies
  • Photo hosting in our gallery
  • Meet other cool people with cool cars
Seriously, what are you waiting for? Make your life more fulfilling and join today! You and your Subaru won't regret it, we guarantee** it.

* The joy of participation and being generally awesome constitutes winning
** Not an actual guarantee, but seriously, you probably won't regret it!

Serving the Subaru Community since May 18th, 1998!

Guest Message by DevFuse
 

Photo
- - - - -

Ultimate ea82 build


  • Please log in to reply
85 replies to this topic

#26 NorthWet

NorthWet

    Eeyore Incarnate

  • Members
  • 5,039 posts
  • Bremerton, WA

Posted 11 July 2013 - 09:29 PM

The engines are already pretty well balanced for their intended use.  Probably nothing to gain unless a person wants to spin the engine faster, and without doing something about flow that is a dead avenue.

 

LOTS of SPFI EA82s over here, especially on our West Coast.  I think that SC can work, just have to deal with the nature of it.



#27 djellum

djellum

    Eat, Live, Breath Subaru

  • Members
  • 601 posts
  • Vancouver WA

Posted 11 July 2013 - 11:59 PM

I think its natural to want to make our cars the best they can be, no matter what they are.  I used to dream of making my Chevette into a sleeper drag car, but reality stepped in and reminded me that it was a Chevette.  I would still have to start with the same wad of money that anyone else uses to make a drag car and just drape the Chevettes body over it.

 

every motor has a capacity attached to it.  big blocks arent faster than small blocks, HP is HP and weight is weight all day long.  however big blocks in most cases have a higher capacity for HP in general.  for most of us it doesnt matter, but as soon as you want to cross a certain line in the sand you will have to start with a base product that can achieve it.

 

EA82's, and really any EA motor, is just pretty much wrung out already.  Subaru pretty much set them up at their peak output while maintaining reliability.  sure you can do things to them, especially if you have money, but you really cant do much to it without taking it into the science experiment side of wrenching.  thats why so many members just say EJ it, theres no parts support, no available capacity, and little or no ability to handle the power reliably.  not to say there havent been 200hp EA's, but they were hardly cheap and even those that built them and knew them in and out had to be careful with their foot sometimes.

 

for the OP - in all honesty, if I were building what I view as the perfect or maximized EA82, I would do the SPFI pistons, Delta cams, a decent 2 inch or so exhaust with a good flowing or deleted cat, and a weber.  it wont make much more power, but I think you will get some better response in your foot from it, and it wont break the bank or blow sky high tomorrow (just watch your octane with the higher compression).  the only other thing I want to experiment with on mine, would be to have the distributor recurved.  it costs about $100 and it would be cool to see what the distributor rebuilders think of how the timing works in these cars, since they don't run much like anything else in the distributor sector.



#28 tweety

tweety

    USMB Regular

  • Members
  • 198 posts
  • Euroa Victoria Australia

Posted 12 July 2013 - 12:13 AM

nice reply djellum.  and that does make sense.

 

I'm pretty certain you guys in the states dont have the engineering requirements we have in Oz. Take an eA81 out of a Brat (Brumby) here and put in an EJ and you need an engineers report that is likely going to lead to 1/ a hefty invoive 2/ further mods like heavier front springs, anti pollution minimum requirements.

 

 

having said that I think the OP really just wants a darn good EA82.  We've covered it all here really.  The only thing I'd like to recommend is for EA81/2 owners is to squeeze 10-15 hp out of the stock engine and it will make a huge difference.  Want 130hp go to another engine.  Me, I like to adjust my valve clearances in 10 minutes and if I find a timing belt its to help hold my pants up....the ea81 SPFI will do me but then again I am only carrying around 900lbs of trike. 



#29 -tombba-

-tombba-

    USMB Regular

  • Members
  • 142 posts
  • Finland

Posted 12 July 2013 - 04:16 AM

It's always kind of funny reading these post where people set the maximum limit for EA82 to around 130 hp since here in europe all of the EA82T engines are rated 136 hp from the factory. All three of my EA82T engines has seen some sort of modding to gain some more hp from them and I've never had any issues with the reliability (ofcourse not including some overboost issues that broke my engine but that was a obvious turbo problem). I've seen many lightly modded EA82T engines that have lasted for a long time. One of those modded engines included only a added intercooler and a boost around 13-14PSI (1 bar)and ran fine for 100k km. This engine ran a dyno run with a result of 189 hp. The reason for that engines rebuild was the tick of death and a broken boost conroller that overboosted it badly. So not exactly the engine itself that had realiability issues.

 

I don't know what's the biggest difference between the USDM and EDM/JDM engines but ofcourse the different fuel ratings makes some difference but it just cant make that much difference itself. In all of my engines the boost have been set to around 9-10PSI from factory (0,6 to 0,7 bar). Biggest problem with these engines have always been the original T-shaped exhaust manifold in my opinion.

 

These are in my opinion the essential mods for better reliability for this engine.

 

-Better exhaust manifold

-Intercooler

-OEM oil cooler or similar

-At least 2,25" exhaust (no cat)

- Bonus: TD04L since the original turbo is so restrictive

 

But once again this is just my opinion so don't take it too seriously. I'ts common that we see this setup in EA82T engines around here but enough is always enough for any engine. So don't go mad and just tune the engine to work well not for the most highest hp. And by the way here in my country we also need some engineering requirements if we swap EJ engine to EA car. It's basicly always at least the disc brakes nad suspension from the most poweful version available of the car mo% of the model and for bonus pollution tests are needes and the power must not go over 20% from the most powerful version of the model versions. So the most powerful EJ engine you can put in here is 120kW or 160 hp and no more tha 2,25 litres in size. That's the main reason I'm sticking with the old EA82T engine since it makse already 136 hp (same as EJ22 in here) and it's not very cheap to change into EJ series.


Edited by -tombba-, 12 July 2013 - 04:24 AM.


#30 TallonX

TallonX

    USMB is life!

  • Members
  • 174 posts
  • Rochester, Wa

Posted 12 July 2013 - 10:28 AM

Interestingly enough valve spring installed height on the EA82 from 83-84 was 1.48" 85-87 1.12" 88-90 1.98"

To me this means the valves were longest in 88-90 increasing flow and duration can anyone verify the length of the valves?

Been reading a lot of numbers and essentially the EJs are stroked EAs I know casting and the like is all different but by the numbers my theory is sound.

Edited by TallonX, 12 July 2013 - 10:31 AM.


#31 Gloyale

Gloyale

    It's a sickness

  • Members
  • 9,019 posts
  • Corvallis, OR PNW

Posted 12 July 2013 - 10:48 AM

There were no EA82s in 83-84.  Not outside of the JDM market.

 

And all EA82 use the same valves

 

Valve opening is determined by Cam lobes.....regargdless of the valve length....the valve can be 20 feet long, if the cam only lifts it a half inch, that's all it's gonna lift.

 

Not sure what you are reading, but it's not correct.

 

And saying an EJ is a stroked EA is like saying an orange is an apple with more citric acid and a thick skin.



#32 Subruise

Subruise

    Official Party Pooper

  • Members
  • 1,433 posts
  • pierce county

Posted 12 July 2013 - 11:22 AM

Interestingly enough valve spring installed height on the EA82 from 83-84 was 1.48" 85-87 1.12" 88-90 1.98"

To me this means the valves were longest in 88-90 increasing flow and duration can anyone verify the length of the valves?

Been reading a lot of numbers and essentially the EJs are stroked EAs I know casting and the like is all different but by the numbers my theory is sound.

on paper, a 91 festiva is the same as an original mini cooper. but they arent the same car



#33 TallonX

TallonX

    USMB is life!

  • Members
  • 174 posts
  • Rochester, Wa

Posted 12 July 2013 - 11:22 AM

*shakes head

A book that you can't get obviously

I'm trying to figure out what makes the 88-90 heads different, ya know pick people's brains here... enter douchalong cassidy...

There's an obvious performance increase in 88 then cuts again in 89 with the introduction of the EFC

Lobe numbers are the same, installed valve spring heights are different...

The only thing I can think of is the cam towers themselves are taller, but with that comes a pretty hefty redesign.

#34 TallonX

TallonX

    USMB is life!

  • Members
  • 174 posts
  • Rochester, Wa

Posted 12 July 2013 - 11:38 AM

I've been saying by the numbers Subruise, I know the differences. I got a 00 Impreza and a 87 GLWag... I prefer the wagon honestly.

Don't get me wrong the EJ is cool and all but 97+ (phase2?) lost their tolerance when they stepped away from HLAs

But this is a thread about the EA, sorry to the OP don't mean to be rude :)

#35 TallonX

TallonX

    USMB is life!

  • Members
  • 174 posts
  • Rochester, Wa

Posted 12 July 2013 - 12:05 PM

Mad scientist moment...

We all know flow is the major factor here so...

Essentially your boosting an NA car but not lol

Anyone ever see them "electric" turbos at the auto parts store? Basically you make the engine not have to "inhale" or not as hard anyway, dunno what kind of well lack of vacuum issues might crop up lol

This wouldn't be forcing more air into the engine just tuned for optimum flow in. This idea would essentially work for any NA engine, just some time to work out the numbers and knowledge of electronics.

#36 -tombba-

-tombba-

    USMB Regular

  • Members
  • 142 posts
  • Finland

Posted 13 July 2013 - 03:49 AM

Those electric "turbochargers" usually don'tdo a thing to raise power or even flow. It's just not worth it to fit one of those cheap small fans into the engine.

 

 



#37 Gloyale

Gloyale

    It's a sickness

  • Members
  • 9,019 posts
  • Corvallis, OR PNW

Posted 13 July 2013 - 10:46 AM

*shakes head

A book that you can't get obviously

I'm trying to figure out what makes the 88-90 heads different, ya know pick people's brains here... enter douchalong cassidy...

There's an obvious performance increase in 88 then cuts again in 89 with the introduction of the EFC

Lobe numbers are the same, installed valve spring heights are different...

The only thing I can think of is the cam towers themselves are taller, but with that comes a pretty hefty redesign.

 

What are you talking about???

 

The heads are the same.

 

Performance increase in 88?  Introduction of EFC in 89?  Carbs were dropped in 88.  SPFI or Turbo MPFI (non-turbo MPFI in the XT)....that's it.  No new engine variation happened in 89.

 

 

 

Look man.....I've been working on these cars for 15+ years.   I have EVERY EA82 Factory manual, every volume, and most all of the supplements and updates.

 

EA82 heads ALL use the same valves. 



#38 Gloyale

Gloyale

    It's a sickness

  • Members
  • 9,019 posts
  • Corvallis, OR PNW

Posted 13 July 2013 - 11:22 AM

I am correcting myself here.

 

There are a few valve differences according to the FSM's

 

85 valve length = 107.3 mm in & exhaust  (this could be typo, 85 FSM is full of typos and ommisions)

 

86-94 valve length = 107.58 in & ex.       Turbo =108.1 ex.

 

 

Additionally 85 sedans, and all 86's have 51.7mm outer springs....while all others have 50.7mm outer springs

Inner springs are all 50.3mm

 

That's it.  Straight from the Subaru FSM's for 85,86,87,88,89,90 L series and 87 and 89 XT.

 

Definately not enough variation to yeild almost half an inch difference in installed height.  Nor do the year changes match anything claimed by TallonX.  NOt sure what books he has, but if that's the info in them......I'm glad I "can't get them"



#39 MR_Loyale

MR_Loyale

    20 Years of Ownership. 94-14

  • Members
  • 874 posts
  • Seattle

Posted 13 July 2013 - 11:55 AM

The confusion in the OP is the word "ultimate". It means different things to different people. To some, ultimate means more power. To others is means more reliability. 

 

To me personally, the "ultimate" EA82 would be one where the HLA's never develop a tic, the rotor screw never came off, it never leaked oil, never leaked coolant, hoses never broke and always started no matter what.  I don't need to climb rock walls vertically or show up Hummers by pulling them from the ditch. I don't care to race punks down the I5 zig zagging through traffic. Don't get me wrong, I am amazed at those that do that with their Subaru's(except the crazy racing ricers on the interstate), I just don't desire to do that with mine. Because the EA82 engine was never designed to be any of those things. It was designed to be an inexpensive, easy to service, modest engine for an inexpensive automobile. Mine still meets that design goal. When the time comes to rebuild mine, it will be exactly as stock when I bought it new. I still drive it daily and it meets my needs.

 

Will a McClaren haul a family of 9? Does that make it a failure as a car?

Can you tow your 32 foot boat across the country with a Lamborghini?

How many yards of dirt can you haul in a miata?


Edited by MR_Loyale, 13 July 2013 - 11:57 AM.


#40 SmashedGlass

SmashedGlass

    Eat, Live, Breath Subaru

  • Members
  • 667 posts
  • From CO, stuck in FL

Posted 13 July 2013 - 12:05 PM

Let's see...

 

New to board....posts sketchy information....'calls out' longtime well respected member of boards....and, inserts As Seen On TV device as something we should look into........

 

:lol:  :o  <_<  :wacko:  :blink:  :banghead:  :Flame:



#41 NorthWet

NorthWet

    Eeyore Incarnate

  • Members
  • 5,039 posts
  • Bremerton, WA

Posted 13 July 2013 - 12:08 PM

There are also valve timing variations with the turbo cams, but nothing major.  And the mere fact that all of these heads (within the dual-port/single-port distinction) and cams and cam cases are mix-and-match illustrates that there are no significant differences.

 

We are getting way off topic with these flights-of-fancy.  Outside of the fine folks at Delta Cams, there is no performance aftermarket for these engines, and no fancy performance parts from Subaru.  You have a choice of stock compression ratios, single-port or dual-port heads. With the dual-port heads you can get a pretty-looking but problematic "spider" intake manifold.  You can turbocharge it, but it really is not capable of handling this without luck or significant modifications.  And if your car is carbureted then going SPFI might be the best thing that you can do for it.

 

If that isn't enough, and money is TRULY no object, look to aeronautical companies such as RAM Engines:  They build Subaru engines for aircraft use, and at least used to sell components.  Their prices are commensurate with their target market.



#42 TallonX

TallonX

    USMB is life!

  • Members
  • 174 posts
  • Rochester, Wa

Posted 13 July 2013 - 05:53 PM

I've just been flipping through a fsm I didn't call anyone out, that's what he came off as. I didn't suggest someone run out and buy anything, just theories. I've been speaking by the numbers this entire time and get treated like some 16 yo ricer punk with no knowledge of stociometrics.

Read through my posts it was questions in the first place.

#43 TallonX

TallonX

    USMB is life!

  • Members
  • 174 posts
  • Rochester, Wa

Posted 13 July 2013 - 06:22 PM

And another speaking by the numbers...

EA82+EA71 Crank+Spfi Pistons+Boost=how long till it explodes?

Going by main bearing journal size btw I don't know if the fitment within them is the same

Edited by TallonX, 13 July 2013 - 06:28 PM.


#44 86BRATMAN

86BRATMAN

    Subaru Master

  • Members
  • 3,253 posts
  • Tazewell Virginia

Posted 13 July 2013 - 08:47 PM

while the crank from an ea71 would fit in the block, there is no provision for the timing hears to slide on it

#45 Subruise

Subruise

    Official Party Pooper

  • Members
  • 1,433 posts
  • pierce county

Posted 14 July 2013 - 01:39 AM

the bottom line is, has been, and always will be flow. those heads do not and cannot put up with the cfm needed to produce power. Tallonx: this is only the hundredth or so time this EXACT topic has been covered, and by linking something, you are suggesting it. unless you say otherwise whilst posting it. 

 

 

By the time Subaru/FHI got around to fixing the head flow issue among all the other performance inhibiting factors of ea series engines.....guess what? they had ejs. 

 

no one is being a douche, theyre right. cool your jets and go brush up on math and hydrodynamics



#46 djellum

djellum

    Eat, Live, Breath Subaru

  • Members
  • 601 posts
  • Vancouver WA

Posted 14 July 2013 - 03:29 AM

I dont know about the crank, id say adapting it to an EA82 would cost more than it would be worth.  I am assuming you want it for more stroke?  but the crank is only part of stroking out the motor, you have to adjust piston or crank arms as well to keep the piston from raising too high in the block.  I dont know if it may work with just the crank for sure though.  

 

if you want to add the turbo you need a proper computer out of the correct subaru, or spend money on a stand alone and laptop.  megasquirt is probably the best solution if your going to have to aquire the ECU anyway.

 

high compression and boost is possible but it will take a lot more than adding pistons and a turbo.  again the motor cant handle it in stock form, and will require some fairly major upgrades.  you will have to upgrade the injectors at least, and likely the entire fuel system so that it can keep up with the fuel demands of a motor.  the fuel system is rated for HP, and subaru didnt leave much if any expansion capacity in their fuel systems.   you probably dont need a cats meow fuel pump due to the low HP in general, but you will likely have to get at least a higher output stock one from another vehicle, get new injectors, and possibly run new fuel line.

 

the pressures in the combustion chamber can only take so much, when subaru added boost they dropped the compression ratio to 7.7/1.  this made room for the extra air and fuel that the turbo added.  adding that compression back is no different than putting on a bigger turbo (as far as dependability goes).  if you go all the way to 9.5 with spfi pistons, I dont know that I wouldnt run less boost than stock.  in my mind its a better system, to run less boost and higher compression, simply because it would give more power in town when your not on the boost a lot, but you will need to make sure your headgaskets are in top shape.  id be prepaired to replace them more often as well. 

 

the heads really are the beating heart of any motor.  its basically just a big air pump, the only real way to make more power is to pump more through it.  you can force more air/fuel into the chamber with forced induction or increase the amount of volume that the cylinder pulls.  thats why bigger motors stroke out, it allows them to push more through without stressing the components and running aviation fuel.  even a large motor starts with the heads though, thats one reason you get 3 different 351 ford motors that all have vastly different outputs.  

 

an EA82 is generally cut out from the most productive changes since there are no viable ways to increase volume significantly, and they cant take the heat and pressure from what most would consider minor forced induction.  

 

this really has been worked out.  experimentation isnt bad, you can and should find out things for yourself, but there have been numerous people, including some that have posted here, that have actual motor building experience, work in machine shop, etc, that have brought real science to this idea.  the heads have been inspected, modified, and found lacking, people have run big turbos, independant fuel mgmt, high compression, superchargers and the list goes on.  botom line is that you can have a reliable 110 hp car, a fairly reliable 125 hp car if you spend another 1k, or a suspect 135+ hp car for a few thousand dollars.  or you can have a very reliable 165 hp car for $1k - $1500 with a motor swap.  if you really want some decent advise you will have to start with a budget number, since money is the only real obstacle.



#47 -tombba-

-tombba-

    USMB Regular

  • Members
  • 142 posts
  • Finland

Posted 14 July 2013 - 08:16 AM

I still don't understand why the EA82T engine isn't reliable if
pushed over 135 hp ? My EA82T engines have never had any realiability
problems when in stock conditions. And since all of the EA82T engines
I've ever had has been rated at 136 hp from factory I really always been
wondering how come the engine can't handle more than 130 hp well. As
mentioned my earlier engines have been all modified slightly to gain
some power and still they have never broke down (altought the one that
had issues with aftermarket boost controller that overbooted it).

 

Maybe
it's just a fact that the USDM engines are weaker somehow but then why
not to rebuild them with JDM/EDM model parts to gain that 136 hp @ stock
state and it still would be very reliable engine.



#48 Crazyeights

Crazyeights

    SubaRube Goldberg

  • Gold Subscribers
  • 903 posts
  • PNW

Posted 14 July 2013 - 09:54 AM

I am convinced that some of it has to do with the maintenance the car receives. Perhaps it's partly do to taking good care of your car,  IE maintaining the cooling system and performing repairs at the first sign of trouble or even before.



#49 Gloyale

Gloyale

    It's a sickness

  • Members
  • 9,019 posts
  • Corvallis, OR PNW

Posted 14 July 2013 - 11:18 AM

I still don't understand why the EA82T engine isn't reliable if
pushed over 135 hp ? My EA82T engines have never had any realiability
problems when in stock conditions. And since all of the EA82T engines
I've ever had has been rated at 136 hp from factory I really always been
wondering how come the engine can't handle more than 130 hp well. As
mentioned my earlier engines have been all modified slightly to gain
some power and still they have never broke down (altought the one that
had issues with aftermarket boost controller that overbooted it).

 

Maybe
it's just a fact that the USDM engines are weaker somehow but then why
not to rebuild them with JDM/EDM model parts to gain that 136 hp @ stock
state and it still would be very reliable engine.

 

Well, as you mentioned fuel is different there, so are emissions and mileage regulations.  That alone could make for a drastically different tune of the engine fo EDM than USDM.

 

It may also be a conversion issue too.

 

Don't they typically measure in Kilowatts over there?  And is that Wheel HP or Crank HP

 

What rate do they convert from KW to HP at?  And does that conform to Subaru's conversions?

 

At any rate.......EJ22 makes 130 outta the gate w/ no turbo and EXTREMELY reliable.  Cheaper and easier to get parts for too.



#50 djellum

djellum

    Eat, Live, Breath Subaru

  • Members
  • 601 posts
  • Vancouver WA

Posted 14 July 2013 - 01:45 PM

stock ours came I believe at 110-115 hp.  I would guess that slight difference in the value of HP, or a slight difference in their advertising. theres a couple different ways hp is calculated.  the fuel could make a difference in the timing profile, amount of boost you can run stock, etc, so there may be an increase from that, but even people who have built them here and run only proper gas have had issues.  I would bet that your fuel there allows for more boost without having as many issues though.

 

its not so much that it will blow sky high at those power ratings, its just that without thousands of dollars in just accessories it cant run it reliably (here at least).  for example the injectors need upgraded out of the gate, if you want to do it correctly then you should at least evaluate the fuel pump and lines as well.  the computer can handle some increase, but above a small gain you will need to add a fuel management system (or reprogram the cpu) or risk running lean or having issues that will cause major problems.  then you add the turbo cost, boost controller, boost gauges and exhaust temp gauges.  exhaust, innercooler, etc.  this is without motor work.  now if you have the money and you do all this properly id say sure it can reliably driven, but if an injector fails and you run lean at those boost levels it will go quick.  also at this point head gaskets and head cracks become even more of a threat.  also drive train issues once you gain too much and start stressing those.  for less money you can run N/A 140 - 160 hp EJ with no turbo lag, better mileage, and more lifespan due to design and part availability.  still stress your drivetrain though.

 

really any motor with 40% increase in power is likely to have issues of some kind.  all cars break at some point, more often if you drive them hard, and even more often if you squeeze out the limits and then drive them hard.

 

Im not against EA82T's in any way. id buy one right now if I found one that was nice and had the money, but they already have issues that are just increased by these performance upgrades and my perfect motor is one that I drive often and dont have to fix.   






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users