OB99W

Good info on reading and interpreting the codes: http://www.endwrench.com/pdf/drivetrain/02Winter4EATDiagServ.pdf http://endwrench.com/images/pdfs/4EAatPh2Win04.pdf Note that a '93 would normally have a Phase1 4EAT, so not everything (especially in the second PDF) might apply.

Perhaps this will help: http://www.scoobymods.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=3057 The sensor is mounted to the block, and unfortunately the intake manifold doesn't help with the access. You'll probably have to move at least a hose or two and maybe some wiring. It's important that you tighten the mounting bolt to the correct torque; overdo it and you risk cracking the new sensor or at least having it respond incorrectly.

Yes, and some of the ECU parameter values can take several drive cycles before they reflect your car/driving. In addition, if the battery was really down, the alternator will use not-insignificant HP for a while to recharge it.

http://www.ultimatesubaru.org/forum/member.php?u=379

Is the pedal low, as your first post in this thread indicates, or that the pedal effort is more than you'd like, or both? If it's a problem with excessive effort being needed, then besides the things mentioned previously (contaminated fluid, vacuum booster failing, etc.), there's another possibility; since you indicated that the previous owner said brake work was done, perhaps the pads were replaced with non-OEM ones that don't have frictional characteristics equivalent to the originals. The symptom(s) could even be due to more than one problem. I'd begin by checking the booster as Nipper suggested.

Uncontaminated brake fluid can't be compressed (much); air can, and will allow the pedal to be depressed further than it normally would. Air in the hydraulic system also typically makes the pedal feel soft/spongy. As Nipper mentioned, failing brake flex lines can also cause that symptom. A pedal that's low but not spongy can be caused by pads that are too far from the rotor(s). When the brake pedal is released, the pads should remain very close to the rotors. However, excessive rotor runout or axial play can cause the pads to be knocked back further than usual, causing the pedal to have to be depressed more than it otherwise should. Pumping the pedal under this condition will often result in it becoming temporarily higher. Since you can't be sure of the car's history, bleeding and flushing would probably be a reasonable place to start. If that doesn't seem to cure the problem, make note of whether the pedal stays high after being pumped if the car remains stationary; if so, but the pedal is lower when driven, you might look into the possibility of warped rotors or excessive play (due to loose wheel bearings, for example) causing pad knockback.

I'm glad that the BBB was able to help you recover some funds. However, my point was that they may not be the disinterested party to go to when evaluating the reputation of a business. Personally, I'd rather not have a reason to try to get money back.

From http://www.answers.com/fender-bender&r=67 "A collision involving motor vehicles that results in minor damage." I get the feeling that an accident resulting in the insurance company declaring the car a total loss might be a bit more severe than a "fender bender". The reason the engine isn't starting could be as simple as a damaged cam sensor or wiring, but how about giving us a bit more specific detail about the damage? A picture or two might be worth the proverbial thousand words.

Nipper, I respect your knowledge of automotive engineering, diagnosis and repair, but you might want to reconsider your endorsement of the BBB. Rather than explain my experiences with them (both as a customer and a business owner), I'll let these links speak to some of the issues: http://www.thebluesmokeband.com/bbb.php http://www.ripoffreport.com/reports/ripoff1343.htm http://esotriv.blogspot.com/2006/09/bbb-joke-or-what.html

Of course, one option is something like this : http://www.outbackmotors.com/engine_blocks.htm

Anyone care to venture an opinion on the cause of the "whistle" that was originally reported? I'm trying to correlate that to the fuel filter and O2 sensor replacement having solved the problem.

I can only find the 22641AA00A listed for the Legacy/Outback 2.5. Is it also for the Impreza 2.2 (has the 22461AA000 been superceded)?

I believe that the 22690AA350 is correct for an MY99 (and perhaps early production MY00) Impreza 2.2. The later one (MY00/01) seems to be a 22641AA000, but it would be good to verify that before ordering.

My first reaction upon reading your description was "that could be from a partial exhaust restriction". After reading the follow-up posts, I thought "okay, there seems to be somewhat of a consensus". The fact that the problem shows on steep uphill grades could be due to the increased engine load, or possibly that a loose cat core or muffler baffle is shifting due to the angle of the car. Going downhill would of course lessen the load, and possibly shift obstructing material in the opposite direction, re-opening the exhaust. Although timing, vacuum (leaks) and fuel-delivery problems can cause some similar symptoms, I'm tending to agree with the others who've mentioned the exhaust system; I'd look there first (the whistling sound is what leads me away from the areas of timing or fuel). If there are no obviously collapsed pipes and/or rattles when banging the cat or muffler, a vacuum gauge can be used to help check for restrictions. Also, there are gauges for checking backpressure directly; often they can be attached by temporarily removing O2 sensors and using their fittings. Of course, if an obstruction is developing due to something shifting when going uphill, it might be harder to detect when the car is level.

See the attached PDF. Subaru - SB 02-75-90.pdf

This might be useful: http://endwrench.com/images/pdfs/2.5Timing.pdf

Weren't you having some oil getting past seals? It might do less of that if pressure due to blow-by is lessened by functional PCV.

It's also useful if the scan tool will display pending codes. Such codes are set by faults which have not yet caused the CEL to light, since the protocol for them is that the fault has to occur "x" times before the CEL is turned on but there haven't been "x" occurrences yet. You might wonder why being able to read pending codes is important. Well, let's say you're working on a fault that requires a few cycles before the CEL lights. You think you've found and repaired the cause, and have reset the CEL. With the ability to read pending codes, one drive cycle that duplicates the conditions that originally set the code will allow you to check if the repair has been successful. Otherwise, you have to wait for whatever number of cycles the particular fault requires for the CEL to light.

The problem could be due to a wiring or voltage supply issue (or possibly a real IAC fault), resulting in an IAC code and temporary shutdown of only one injector. You might want to read the last section (page 30, "Legacy and Impreza Engines with No Injection Pulse #1 Cylinder") of the following: http://endwrench.com/current/spring04pdfs/InsiderInfo.pdf

A colder plug may tend to foul a bit more (which can lead to misfire, etc.), but it's dependent on other factors. If your driving is primarily highway, the effect of one-range colder plugs probably won't be very noticable. However, it's possible that with low-speed stop-and-go driving, especially if the engine tends to run rich or burns a little oil, there could be some fouling.

Sorry, I misinterpreted what you wrote. How much voltage do you measure across the FWD fuse holder contacts (with ignition on)?

I wonder why it doesn't have the FWD fuse; Subaru seems to indicate that from '87-1/2 on the fuse should be there. See the last paragraph on page 20 of the following: http://endwrench.com/images/pdfs/EWPreOBDAug05.pdf By the way, it's interesting that the FWD fuse doesn't do the same thing in all models. See Page 5, "Variable Torque Distribution (VTD)": http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:mJ94bFClBQYJ:www.endwrench.com/pdf/drivetrain/02WinterInsiderInfo.pdf

Note that it was "Mountainbiker" who hit the rock; perhaps there's a connection.

As much as I often distrust assurances that certain things are "normal" (they often aren't ), in this case what you were told is probably correct. The phase-2 4EAT (used since MY99) has several shift maps; one of them is for "cold ATF". My own '99 has exhibited behavior similar to what you've described since new. I doubt if synthetic ATF will have much, if any, effect on the cold shifting in your '01. See: http://endwrench.com/images/pdfs/1999Info.pdf http://endwrench.com/images/pdfs/4EAatPh2Win04.pdf Having said the above, if you decide to try the synthetic and it significantly affects your Outback's shift characteristics, I for one would be interested in learning about it.

If this is in reference to the '01 Outback you've mentioned before, under the conditions mentioned I don't see a reason to drop the pan. The actual ATF filter is an external spin-on on a phase-2 4EAT. Although Subaru says that filter doesn't need to be changed unless damaged, if you didn't put on a new one along with the fluid, at least inspect it; mine developed leakage, apparently from corrosion due to winter road salt. With the fluid flushed and looking good, and assuming the trans is performing well, it would seem that at 45k miles there's probably no reason to go inside.