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
- - - - -

Interference or non?


  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#26 pntball&wheelin

pntball&wheelin

    New User

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13 posts

Posted 05 August 2006 - 07:28 PM

So it is safe to say that the 92 2.2 legacy is non-interference, correct?

#27 DerFahrer

DerFahrer

    Formerly subyluvr2212

  • Members
  • 2,411 posts
  • Orlando, FL

Posted 05 August 2006 - 07:49 PM

So it is safe to say that the 92 2.2 legacy is non-interference, correct?


Yes, it is non-interference. 100% sure.

#28 Rhinoculips

Rhinoculips

    New User

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 10 posts
  • Keystone

Posted 18 April 2008 - 06:02 PM

What is the benefit of engines with interference design? Seems to me that having a non-interference is more ideal in the "just in case" scenario. IE - why build an engine that can potentially destroy itself if the TB breaks when you can design one that won't?

#29 nipper

nipper

    Semi Elite Master of the

  • Members
  • 17,542 posts
  • Long Island NY

Posted 18 April 2008 - 06:44 PM

What is the benefit of engines with interference design? Seems to me that having a non-interference is more ideal in the "just in case" scenario. IE - why build an engine that can potentially destroy itself if the TB breaks when you can design one that won't?



Well its not planned that way. In order to get higher compression, more valves per cylinder, and cleaner emissions, you have no choice but to have an interfernce engine. There are fewer and fewer interfernce engines, and i think all 4 cylinders are now, and maybe all v-6's.

nipper

#30 grossgary

grossgary

    Elite Master of the Subaru

  • Members
  • 19,677 posts
  • WV

Posted 18 April 2008 - 08:46 PM

IE - why build an engine that can potentially destroy itself if the TB breaks when you can design one that won't?

another way to put what nipper said as an overview - it's market driven. you have probably even played a part in dictating the market based on prior purchases of goods. if not, then you are a minority but are subject to mass market based product offerings.

#31 nipper

nipper

    Semi Elite Master of the

  • Members
  • 17,542 posts
  • Long Island NY

Posted 18 April 2008 - 08:48 PM

another way to put what nipper said as an overview - it's market driven. you have probably even played a part in dictating the market based on prior purchases of goods. if not, then you are a minority but are subject to mass market based product offerings.


so its all HIS fault :banana:


nipper

#32 hankosolder2

hankosolder2

    Subaru Nut

  • Members
  • 689 posts
  • Chicago

Posted 18 April 2008 - 11:01 PM

another way to put what nipper said as an overview - it's market driven. you have probably even played a part in dictating the market based on prior purchases of goods. if not, then you are a minority but are subject to mass market based product offerings.


I agree with Gary here...most consumers are not going to be comparing whether the respective cars they are considering purchasing are interference or non interference design. Even many of those who recognize the difference may plan to trade the car in prior to the TBelt change interval, so it's "the next guy's problem." I have seen cars with timing chains touted as lower maintainance compared to timing belt equipped cars.

With the EJ22, one could make the argument that the modest HP gains of the Phase 2 redesign barely justify the loss of the bullet proof, non interference design of the Phase 1.

Nathan

#33 nipper

nipper

    Semi Elite Master of the

  • Members
  • 17,542 posts
  • Long Island NY

Posted 18 April 2008 - 11:07 PM

Well americans want cheap cars with lots of power, and thats the tradeoff. Tming chains are noisey, heavy and expensive, belts are cheap and light and quiet.

Every year we want more HP that most of us will never use, just for bragging rights. So there has to be more vlaves and more compression in a tight little space.

Then throw in emissions and bingo. Only so much you can do in a little space, and it all has to be timed properly.

BTW this is not a new thing, interfernce engines have been around since the 60's.

There is a return coming back around to chains, but thats more because of emissions then anythng else (since they are going to tighten up again).

nipper

#34 aircraft engineer

aircraft engineer

    Subaru Nut

  • Members
  • 518 posts
  • close to Tacoma

Posted 18 April 2008 - 11:48 PM

I think the HP increase between phase 1 and 2 was about 7

I like the bulletproof engine myself - easier to deal with if the belt breaks because of benign neglect

BTW - Interference engines have been around even longer than that - Mercedes diesel engines are interference in the OM-621 - break a timing CHAIN and it's bye bye CAM TOWERS (since the valves are straight up and down, not much chance of damage, but the pistons hitting the valves will snap off the cam towers right at the base - yeah, don't ask how I know...plus it's fun putting the timing back in - crank to cam gear to mechanical injector pump)

#35 nipper

nipper

    Semi Elite Master of the

  • Members
  • 17,542 posts
  • Long Island NY

Posted 18 April 2008 - 11:51 PM

In The HP wars, they dont care if its 1 hp more, its still 1 hp more then the previous year.

nipper

#36 grossgary

grossgary

    Elite Master of the Subaru

  • Members
  • 19,677 posts
  • WV

Posted 19 April 2008 - 07:07 AM

so its all HIS fault :banana:

hey, i put it nicely! it is my fault too, that's why i know something on the subject.

In The HP wars, they dont care if its 1 hp more, its still 1 hp more then the previous year

exactly...fits what i said perfectly. it's about marketing, not true performance.

#37 2X2KOB

2X2KOB

    Subaru Fanatic!

  • Members
  • 393 posts
  • Midstate MO

Posted 19 April 2008 - 10:54 AM

Well americans want cheap cars with lots of power, and thats the tradeoff. Tming chains are noisey, heavy and expensive, belts are cheap and light and quiet.

nipper



I don't care too much about power (I must be a non typical "American") but I think I'm going to look for an H6 in the next Outback, just for the reliability. I don't like worrying about when my timing belt is going to break, and I generally change them early. They both have 60k - 80k on them now. 2000 OBW 2.5's...

Let's face it, if it was horsepower I was after, I wouldn't be driving a 2000 Outback.

2X2KOB

#38 aircraft engineer

aircraft engineer

    Subaru Nut

  • Members
  • 518 posts
  • close to Tacoma

Posted 19 April 2008 - 12:16 PM

...
Let's face it, if it was horsepower I was after, I wouldn't be driving a 2000 Outback.

2X2KOB


Well...DUH! (same attitude HERE :lol: ) BUT mine is non-interference so I can go 100,000, fearlessly :)

#39 Hotshot

Hotshot

    I Break Stuff

  • Members
  • 215 posts
  • Fairfax

Posted 19 April 2008 - 01:03 PM

BUT mine is non-interference so I can go 100,000, fearlessly :)


You set your goals way to low.

Mine IS interference and has already been 235,000, and I expect to get at least another 100k out of it. :headbang:
(the engine/car, not the timing belt)


*knock on wood*

#40 2X2KOB

2X2KOB

    Subaru Fanatic!

  • Members
  • 393 posts
  • Midstate MO

Posted 19 April 2008 - 01:55 PM

You set your goals way to low.

Mine IS interference and has already been 235,000, and I expect to get at least another 100k out of it. :headbang:


*knock on wood*



How often do you change the timing belt?

#41 Hotshot

Hotshot

    I Break Stuff

  • Members
  • 215 posts
  • Fairfax

Posted 19 April 2008 - 06:05 PM

For me, ('97 2.5 DOHC) I think the dealer recommended interval is every 106k miles or every 106 months. My aunt was the previous owner. She put the first 195k on it, and had all maintenance, oil changes and all, done by the dealer on schedule. Only exception was when the timing belt was replaced when the head gasket went at about 80k, so I still have a while to go before worrying about it again.

#42 aircraft engineer

aircraft engineer

    Subaru Nut

  • Members
  • 518 posts
  • close to Tacoma

Posted 20 April 2008 - 11:50 AM

Have about 20k on the belt (got the service records with the car when I bought it) So planning to go 80 more or until about 230k or so. I'll probably order the kit and keep it in reserve until I need it. (BTW - 105k is your "California Required" interval but if 1k makes all that much difference, they have a miracle in statistics)

Think I might try 4oz of the grill cleaner terpene in the sump as a running engine flush before the next oil change. And I'm considering a trans flush as well - sis said it made hers run so much better

#43 2X2KOB

2X2KOB

    Subaru Fanatic!

  • Members
  • 393 posts
  • Midstate MO

Posted 20 April 2008 - 12:04 PM

You think your crankcase is dirty? Why would it be? I wouldn't put weird stuff in my oil. I use Mobil 1 though, so crud doesn't build up.

#44 Manarius

Manarius

    1995 Subaru SVX LSi

  • Members
  • 1,609 posts
  • Grantham

Posted 20 April 2008 - 12:15 PM

NOW, the SVX EG33 is technically valve-valve interference since it is a DOHC engine, but the EG33 was the only Subaru engine to have one cam gear-driven off the other. So unless your cams got out of sync with each other, which is a HIGHLY-unlikely scenario, it is basically a non-interference engine.

AFAIK, the SVX would never run into a interference problem period.

#45 aircraft engineer

aircraft engineer

    Subaru Nut

  • Members
  • 518 posts
  • close to Tacoma

Posted 20 April 2008 - 01:39 PM

The terpene is "orange oil" and is about the strongest natural anionic detergent you can find. It's why your hands can come so clean after peeling a really "oily" orange. The stuff is so powerful that it will lift off burnt on grease off a bar-b-q grill.

Previous owner had a motor flush done with one of the "butyl cellosolve" and petroleum distillate flush stuff - I think from the service description, anyway. I want to finish the job and baseline my oil changes. The vehicle is about 1500 miles into this cycle and the oil is a bit dark, so I suspect a residual of the flush is just floating up some more "stuff" (done at about 140k). I might just change the oil and see what happens from there.

#46 mwbean

mwbean

    USMB Regular

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 50 posts
  • Port Orchard, WA

Posted 16 November 2012 - 02:38 PM

The refrence was made that if you change your tb at 100K your ok, but that unless your mechanic is a idiot or is greedy and charges you for parts they did'nt change. I had a conversations with a customer who had their belt done and one of the new idler failed about 5k into the belt changed and trashed the engine. Lesson learned don't buy cheap parts!!




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users