johnceggleston

wow that's a shiny car. let's see.... you bought the car in portland, you list north carolina as home state, and you fly your VT, not vermont, flag. you sure do get around. are you driving this back and forth across the country?? any way, welcome and enjoy your car!! :banana:

my 95 4eat went bad at 165k miles, but i had driven it 90k miles with no service what so ever on the trans. that's my fault. but i was spoiled by driving my 93 4eat from 98k to 173k miles (totaled) with no service what so ever. it is amazing how much you can learn and how much trouble you can avoid by reading and following the owners manual.

i pruchased a 97 2.5 outback (98k miles) because it had "engine noise" and i had a 96 2.2L engine ready to put in. when i got the car i determined the the noise was piston slap and decided to gamble on 600$ for timing belt, water pump and seals. that was 25k miles ago and it is still running great. i'm at 123k miles and no HG problems so far. it just keeps on slappin'. my advice is to drive it until it breaks, then decide to repair or replace. this means more miles for your money. when they look at you funny at the stoplight, tell them it's a bio-diesel. if the 2.2 is really that good a deal, buy it and store it , correctly. but a 95 auto or a 96 would be a better choice, they are non-interferrence engines.

yes, you will need the splined shaft, wheel end, of the axle mounted in the wheel hub to keep the bearing from decentigrating. you wil also need to keep the first section of drive shaft attached to the rear of the trans, or modify the trans so it will not leak fluid. every thing inbetween can go.

http://scranton.craigslist.org/car/704852134.html

check the mileage on a 300 mile hiway drive. that will tell you how well it is working. if your mileGE IS ONLY 19, MAYBE IT'S BECAUSE YOU ONLY DRIVE 2 MILES TO WORK EACH WAY EVERY DAY. i don't really know, but it all depends on how you drive, where you drive and ......

is my memory right, does the 95 FWD have a 3.7 final drive ratio?? higher, more economical than the AWD.

it all depends on what you like, what you want, how many miles you drive a year and how long you plan to keep it. the first one is a little better bargain by my calculation, 64 + 41 = 105, where as the second is 132 + 34 = 164. that's a pretty big difference. but if you want an outback, then that's the one for you. i bought an outback for this very reason, and now realize i would be just as happy with a legacy wagon with outback struts and wheels. there are some 96 outbacks with 2.2L and manual trans. the service history may be a deciding factor, just because it's low mileage doesn't mean it will be trouble free. some / many maintence items are mileage and/or month sensitive. the timing belt may be due even if the miles don't indicate it. both have a great engine, is the first one a wagon or sedan? does the price difference matter to you, probably not. double check for oil leaks, and drive it in tight circles at slow speeds to check for torque bind. more common on auto trans than manuals. i think they are both priced a little high. generally i can buy good 96 outback 1500 to 3000; 95 should be a little cheaper.

oops

if you warped the head that much you better double check the block for problems.

unless you don't know your left from your right, you can do the air filter and plug wires your self. get a haynes manul, order the wires online from a 'subaru' dealer and put them in yourself. my shop wanted some rediculous amount of money to do it (150 - 200$). i bought the subaru wires from my local dealer for 90$. you can get them on line for 50 - 60 i think. you just take off one wire , find the matching new one and reinstall it. do them one at a time. search here for tips and read up on it. if you have any mechanical ability you could probably do the plugs as well, but this takes a little more patience and some tools. what was the car doing before the catalytic converter was replaced? any CEL / trouble codes? did the replacement improve how it runs? if not i would suggest the front o2 sensor be replaced, but it probably already was with the converter.

the problem is not converting you AWD to FWD and increasing you mileage, it's that you can't convert it back with out a LOT of work. so once you do it it's not like you can change it back for the wekend. also, i suggest you put in the FWD fuse under the hood, if it's an auto, and try driving it in FWD. if you've had your subaru for any lenght of time, you won't like it. there is a very noticable difference in how it handles. so as stated above, get a honda, or a 96 FWD subaru. the parts interchange software that all the junk yards use actually lists a FWD auto trans for 97, but i've never heard of anyone actually having one. i wonder if the option will come back wit hgas prices going up.? the weight you save by removing all that hardware is like not having an extra passenger. there will be some savings in gas, but i suspect the real savings come from not wasting engine power pushing all the mechanics, not the 200lbs or so. the other way to acomplish this would be to install thoses axle disconnects that they sell for cars w/ auto trans towed behind an RV. then you could put in the FWD fuse, disconnect the rear axles, and as long as the duty c holds out you are FWD, w/o the weight savings. now calculate the cost of mods vs. the gas savings .....

http://www.car-part.com sort by distance.

ther are a couple of posible solutions: 1. use outback wheels but smaller tires, same diameter as the legacy L. the speedometer will not be off. you gain height from the struts, but none from the wheels / tires. but your wheels / tires may look small in your wheel wells. 2. swap in an outback TCU and/or ECU , (i think ECU, but TCU is probably cheaper ). i've never tried it, but one of them, or maybe the combination interprets the signal from the front speed sensor and converts it to MPH. 3. go to the tire size calculator, http://www.miata.net/garage/tirecalc.html , figure out how off it will be and then make a mental note to adjust your speed accordingly. at 60 mph you will really be going 65.2 mph or something like that. just go 10% slower than you want to, you want to go 75 mph, set the cruise at 67.5, want to go 66, set the speedo at 60, you'll be ok.

i wondered where i parked it .....

generally, i would have agreed with you since that has always been the way it was in the building industry. if you met the code when you built the house, then you were 'grandfathered' in for any code updates. but, they are in effect outlawing all TVs with rabbit ears. they are giving you a way to still use them, but ...

i'm not completely sure what you are trying to accomplish, but smaller tires will give you more power. of course in an off road? situation, smaller tires may not be what you want.

if the mechanical eror is any where except your tach head, the scan tool will read the same as the tach. both wil be receiving the same information from the sensor. what kind of gas mileage do you get.? what kind of driving do you do?

what is your speed at the same rpms for each forward gear.?

the work to pull the trans, separate the front diff, and reattach is not that tuff, even i could do it. the challenge is setting the clearence and alignment between the pinion gear and the ring gear. not impossible but unless you are very lucky , (or one setting fits all, which i doubt) it is a delicate process. others have done it. i sent gary a pdf file explaining how to. i have since lost my hard drive and the file. good luck.

an observation about swapping a trans and going with a new final drive ratio. when subaru first introduced the 4.44 final drive in the outback in 96, they matched it with 15 inch wheels which had larger diameter tires. the legacy's had 14 inch/ smaller tires and 4.11 final drive. the difference in final drive ratio and the difference in tire size complement each other. in other words, there is no substantial difference in the fuel economy or the power ratio in these 2 tire / differential combinations. this is why the outback has about the same gas mileage as the legacy. if you want more power put on smaller tires. if you want more economy, put on larger tires. but don't expect the car to drive the same. if you swap the final drive and want the car to drive like before, change the tire size to match. one exception to the above statement, the 96? - 99? leg GT has the outback 4.44 final drive and the smaller tires (on 16 inch rims) equal in diameter to the legacy L. this makes it "quicker", more powerful and slightly less economical to run. this is true for a/t , manual trans have different final drive ratios (3.9 leg vs. 4.11 outback, 96 - 99), but the relative proportions are the same. larger tires = more powerful final drive and vice versa. any questions ???????????

and this: http://www.ultimatesubaru.org/forum/showpost.php?p=585831&postcount=15

this is about as close as you will get ot understanding the part number. http://www.ultimatesubaru.org/forum/showpost.php?p=581064&postcount=6 plenty of informatrion in the thread it came from. http://www.ultimatesubaru.org/forum/showthread.php?t=71754&highlight=tz102z2%2A

suggestion, try swapping the tcu and ecu from one to the other to see if it will run. this is a very long shot and the eng/trans swap may work even if this doesn't. but if this experiment does work you should be ok. this of course assumes at least one of these cars does in fact run. ps, the limiting factor in going from 99 to 00 in an outback trans is the wiring, if the connector is the same that part wil probably work.

if they both have a spin on trans filter it may be ok. the 99 (late) is a phase 2 trans with a different connector from 98. i do not know about the 2000 legacy trans. it should be phase 2 but i don't know. does it have an external spin on filter. in 00 or 01 legacy and outback, used the same auto trans, same part number. this was a first. if the connector is the same, i'd bet it will work, except the final drive won't match.