davidschaffer Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 I just purchased a 99 Outback that had recently had a 2.2 ( 80,000 miles ) from an impreza installed. So far everthing seems ok. A little underpowerd going up hills but oh well. My main concern is the tranny ( 130,000 on car and tranny ). Its only been a week since owning the vehicle and my wife is the main driver but we have noticed on occasion that it has a delay going into drive, from park or reverse. This doesn't happen all the time but is an issue. I've read quite a bit about this issue and the seal that goes bad. It sounds like many have had success with changing the fluid and adding Trans X. Is this still the ideal solution? Any other things I should know about this car or the 2.2 swap? I like to do my own wrenching but don't have a garage so its difficult in the northern Mi. winters. Thanks for any help/advice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TKFlight Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 2.2 is a very good motor, non-interference. Whens the last time a tuneup has been done? Might explain why its lugging uphills. Probably time for a new PCV valve if it hasn't been done.Lots of people have good luck with just a drain and fill, flushing is where people get iffy. I've never had to add trans x but it looks like its worked for people. But yes still an ideal solution. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdventureSubaru Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 2.2 with an auto is a bit of a dog on the hills but it's a worthy tradeoff for the reliability. The usual fix for transX was most common in 2000 and 2001 autos but may well be a solution for you if it's the same cause. Check your fluid and be sure it's clean. Drain fill and see what happens. TransX is not expensive and certainly can't hurt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikaleda Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 2.2 is a very good motor, non-interference. Not all 2.2s are non interferance, only Pre 96 are nob interferance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikaleda Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 (edited) Double post Edited November 25, 2014 by mikaleda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikaleda Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 (edited) Dang triple post Edited November 25, 2014 by mikaleda 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rooster2 Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 2.2 with an auto is a bit of a dog on the hills but it's a worthy tradeoff for the reliability. The usual fix for transX was most common in 2000 and 2001 autos but may well be a solution for you if it's the same cause. Check your fluid and be sure it's clean. Drain fill and see what happens. TransX is not expensive and certainly can't hurt. The tranny delayed forward engagement primarily affects 99 and 00 models. I wrote the original post abut the merits of Trans-X, and 5 years later, it still helps my car. Best to do three drains and fills of ATF before adding 1 pint of Trans-X, as only half the ATF can be drained from the tranny at one time. Typical drain and refill is 1 gallon and 1 pint. As mentioned, it is good to know what year car your 2.2 came from, and have a good idea when the timing belt was last changed. Otherwise, if the belt breaks on a valve interference model, the broken belt will cause broken valves. That is a lot more repair work and cost, then simply replacing the belt. You may also want to replace the fuel filter. I was amazed how much more power my car developed with a new fuel filter installed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olnick Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Not all 2.2s are non interferance, only Pre 96 are nob interferance Just a clarification: the 2.2 was non-interference through '96. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiGL Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Don't complain about the 2.2. Here in NZ they sold a carbed EJ18 Legacy... Or a 1.6 injected Impreza with a 4eat... Now they are slow! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikaleda Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Just a clarification: the 2.2 was non-interference through '96. Exactly 96 was the first year of interfeance Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rooster2 Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 I know for sure that the '95 model 2.2 is non-interference. Wife's 98 OBW has that motor, and just last week it broke the timing belt. I had a shop replace the belt, and had no damage to the valves. If you replace the belt, it is a good time to replace the water pump, as minimal additional labor time involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olnick Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Exactly 96 was the first year of interfeance '96 was the first year for the 2.5 (EJ25)--it was interference. The '96 2.2 (EJ22) was not interference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikaleda Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 (edited) '96 was the first year for the 2.5 (EJ25)--it was interference. The '96 2.2 (EJ22) was not interference. Actually it was interferance, I have one sitting in my living room. They were solid lifter interferance. It is possible different areas had different motors, like California models Edited November 25, 2014 by mikaleda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdventureSubaru Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 As I understand, 96 was a switched year. I've seen dual port 96s with HLAs and single port with solid. I'm assuming dual port= non interference and single = interference. But both can be found on 96 cars. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidschaffer Posted November 25, 2014 Author Share Posted November 25, 2014 Thanks for the replys. I will change the trans fluid and filter next chance I get. The motor came from a 98 impreza so it would be an interferance motor. The guy that did the swap told me the belt looked new and to wait 60k. He would do the pump and belt at that point for $300. Thanks again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lmdew Posted November 25, 2014 Share Posted November 25, 2014 Don't pull the pan to change the internal screen/filter. If you have an external spin on filter, you may change it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rooster2 Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 Don't pull the pan to change the internal screen/filter. If you have an external spin on filter, you may change it. +1 on not dropping the pan. There is an internal screen that never needs changing. Besides, dropping the pan will most likely cause an ATF leak. Seems impossible to bolt up the pan without causing a leak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gloyale Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 96 2.2 are NOT interference. They are Single port, hydraulic rocker w/roller. 97 2.2 had the solid rocker w/ roller cam and different pistons.....those are interfernece. remeber....some 97 models were made in 96 so late 96 date production is interference. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xdeadeye1 Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 why don't you drop the pan and change the fluid and clean out the tranny pan.. ? I don't get it.. I did it to mine.. I think I followed the vid by Eric the car guy on you tube. I didn't flush,, I plan on changing the fluid again soon though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idosubaru Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 Original Poster - add a bottle of Trans X treatment and you're done. Works almost every time. Do not change the internal filter screen inside the AT pan. Change all the timing pulleys and tensioner. A 1998 is likely to be the new style tensioner. Kits are like $100 - $120 on Amazon for everything. I wouldn't wait very long, certainly not 60,000 miles - the timing pulleys are just as likely to fail as the belt. Best to replace cam seals and reseal the oil pump while it's out. As to the AT screens - The internal screens are pointless to replace - they're never "clogged" or needing replaced. If they're scattered with debris you have much bigger issues than a filter. As to 1996 EJ22's being interference - a very few have reportedly been interference. One case swears it was the original engine, but if it hasn't been owned since new it can't be verified. If there were interference engines in 96 they are rare, most are non-interference it seems. Looking at part numbers on opposed forces should delineate it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikaleda Posted November 26, 2014 Share Posted November 26, 2014 I would just treat it like it is interferance since breaking a belt will still result in a towing bill on top of a timing belt r&r. Better safe than sitting on the side of the road with a broken belt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonInMontana Posted November 30, 2014 Share Posted November 30, 2014 Thanks for the replys. I will change the trans fluid and filter next chance I get. The motor came from a 98 impreza so it would be an interferance motor. The guy that did the swap told me the belt looked new and to wait 60k. He would do the pump and belt at that point for $300. Thanks again Does the 2.2 swapped in have an EGR valve or is your check engine light perpetually on? Just curious, because if no CEL and no EGR, would like to know how this was achieved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idosubaru Posted December 1, 2014 Share Posted December 1, 2014 Does the 2.2 swapped in have an EGR valve or is your check engine light perpetually on? Just curious, because if no CEL and no EGR, would like to know how this was achieved. It's basically not possible with automatic transmissions is what i think the final conclusion is. Oddly I say that and I'm nearly positive I used to have a 1998 Impreza OBS automatic without EGR - I know for a fact the engine was non-EGR as i'm running it in a current vehicle. I swapped all electronics except the body side wiring harness to NON-EGR components and I get a check engine light: NON EGR intake manifold, wiring, sensors NON EGR ECU And it still has EGR related check engine lights I cut the EGR related wires in case they were "identifier" pins somehow - no change at all - car ran fine, but still CEL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davidschaffer Posted December 2, 2014 Author Share Posted December 2, 2014 Does the 2.2 swapped in have an EGR valve or is your check engine light perpetually on? Just curious, because if no CEL and no EGR, would like to know how this was achieved. I am not sure. If I get a chance I will ask the guy who did the swap. There is no check engine light on and everything works as it should. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
idosubaru Posted December 2, 2014 Share Posted December 2, 2014 Just in front of the brake master cylinder is the EGR valve on the intake manifold if you want to pop the hood and look for it. It's right here: http://www.porcupine73.com/pics/sensors/egr96-1.jpg But if there's no CEL and the CEL bulb is functioning properly then we can guess he's got an EGR equipped EJ22. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.