OB99W

Here's what Subaru has to say about size difference: http://www.endwrench.com/pdf/drivetrain/RearAxleBindingInfoF99.pdf

Same brand of oil and filter as before? Same weight of oil?

There seem to be some people whose attitude is "If I can't have it, you can't have it either.". Venting is understandable -- I'd likely feel the same way under the circumstances.

In my experience (so opinions of others may differ ): 1) Bearing noise in neutral with the clutch pedal not depressed could be either throwout or input shaft. 2) When depressing the clutch pedal: a) If the noise changes (but is still there to some degree), it's likely the throwout. If the noise completely goes away, likely input shaft. Do check the trans oil. 3) Driving (in gear) loads the bearings differently, and the noise may change, go away, or be masked.

Just to clarify this -- I didn't say the noise (which John didn't describe, making remote dagnosis more difficult) couldn't be caused by a bad throwout bearing. The throwout may well be the culprit, but typically when bad they're still noisy even when the clutch is disengaged, although the nature of the noise usually changes. I offered the alternative possibility of input shaft bearings because John said the noise "goes away" when the clutch is disengaged.

We don't disagree there. Sure, that can happen, but if John is saying that the noise is only present with the clutch engaged, then it doesn't eliminate the possibility of input shaft bearing noise.

I enterpreted "the noise goes away when you push in the clutch" to mean that the noise is there with the clutch engaged.

How about input shaft bearings?

I'll say "you're welcome", since I assume the thanks are for the pointer to the links at Motor Magazine that I posted a while back. I hope that with the timing issue clearer, you're indeed successful in getting the engine firing on all four again.

Perhaps Subaru owners whose cars reach over 200,000 miles would rather do maintenance than participate in a Consumer Reports survey.

Just to be sure -- the arrow on the crank sprocket is not the correct timing mark for belt replacement. Possibly relevant cylinder #1 info: http://endwrench.com/current/spring04pdfs/InsiderInfo.pdf

As others have said, using the correct marks is critical. For links to further info, see my post #2 in http://www.ultimatesubaru.org/forum/showthread.php?t=69365 .

Agreed. My own '99 has one of the "pieces of crap" 4EAT transmissions. Fresh fluid and very careful checking of the ATF level help a bit, but it still isn't "right". The 4EAT can be decent, but apparently not the early phase-2 ones ('99-'00 MY). Of course, the above won't help Sewoolf, who already bought the '99 and is having brake, not trans, issues at the moment.

Did you check with a dealer or SoA to determine whether your car had the master cylinder replaced under the recall? If your VIN qualifies, and it hasn't been done already, you should be able to get it replaced at no charge, no matter if the current problem is related or not.

If the compressor clutch remains engaged for an extended time, don't be concerned about the pressure switch. If the compressor "short cycles", for how long at a time does the clutch engage?

Specifically which code; is it P0400, or another one? If you haven't seen this already, it may help: http://endwrench.com/images/pdfs/Emissions.pdf

There was a recall on the '99 Legacy for the master cylinder secondary circuit failing in extreme cold weather, with the result being the pedal travel is increased and braking decreased. While that probably isn't directly related to the current problem, you might want to determine if the work was ever done on your car. See:http://endwrench.com/images/pdfs/SecondaryInfo.pdf http://www.automallusa.net/1999/subaru/legacy/recalls.html

Congrats. Ah, the joys of living in a "rust-belt" (road-salt) state.

As I've already suggested, checking runout of the rotor is a starting point. See the RUNOUT section of http://www.aa1car.com/library/2003/bf110322.htm

These are from the August 2002 issue of End Wrench: http://endwrench.com/images/pdfs/IdentifyInfo.pdf http://endwrench.com/images/pdfs/ABS.pdf There's more ABS info in that issue, so check the site. ABS relay sticking: http://endwrench.com/images/pdfs/ABSInsiderEWFall05.pdf ABS system check: http://endwrench.com/images/pdfs/ABSSystemInfo.pdf

It could also be be tire-related. Are the two rear tires the same (type and wear), and are they evenly inflated? What pressure are you using? Anything possibly bent or otherwise out of alignment?

What was the source of the "good used" axle? If from a "yard", can you be sure that the source car wasn't in a front end accident? It's also important that all mating surfaces are clean; some grit or rust between parts can cause problems. I'd suggest checking rotor runout, but if you find some don't assume the rotor is the culprit until other causes are eliminated.

What happens if you downshift and drive at a lower road speed that still has the engine RPM at 2800? I'm puzzled too :-\ ; please explain what you mean by "shut off motor and continue highway driving" in a bit more detail.

So how would you have those bumpers "shot out an extra distance", and what would absorb/dissipate the energy of the impact on the bumpers? Perhaps airbags with rapid inflation and controlled deflation underneath the bumper skin would work ? (And yes, I'm aware of the possible use of hydraulics, etc.) One of the problems is lack of standards for bumper height; this approach could get around that: http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/mars-rover-airbag.jpg

Nipper said "It really wont do anything for two 3000 lb cars meeting." Turbone said "This isnt the same as a airbag inside a car.[...]You get propeled backwards. The energy gets transfered thru the ball and into you. Dont think this one would work." I believe that the reality is somewhere between those two extremes. While I wasn't totally serious in my "suggestion" (note the tone of the preceeding posts by ericem and mtsmiths), don't be too dismissive of the concept. Properly designed, such a system could do something to reduce forces transferred to the vehicle occupants; I didn't suggest that it would eliminate all damage and injury, and of course the relative speed of the two vehicles would play a role in how effective it could be. In addition, SRS airbags have a very controlled but rapid deflation, and that's key for energy absorption/dissipation and minimized force transfer in any airbag system. Try a Google search on "Charles H. Duell" for perspective.