steamin53

Thanks guys, I appreciate your help. Connector B-22 looks like it will be a real joy to get to . I can't imagine a pin backing out of the connector unless work was done and it was disconnected or something. We have changed the engine (multiple times ) but it's been working fine for 6 months or so. I'll save that "fun" for the last test as I have an ecu on the way now. The voltage tests of the cricuits from the ecu to the IAC that indicate the ecu at fault so I doubt it's the connector. One never can tell though. Thanks again. Steve

1996 Legacy Outback Auto Trans 2.5 engine. The ECM tests as bad in the fault isolation procedures for code P0505 High Idle. The IAC is clean and functions; it's the computer no doubt. My question is in regard to a statement I read from a used parts dealer that the computer will have to be recalibrated by the dealer after replacement. Is recalibration required, and if so, can only Subaru do it? I need a definitive answer from someone here who knows for sure. Steve

As always, an interesting discussion. No one has asked the Gent if he get's a transmission failure indication in the form of a blinking trans temp light after start-up. Unless I'm mistaken this would lead one to an electronic/electrical component as opposed to mechanical fault such as clutch plates that might be hung-up. I certainly don't know the answer but I do know that in it's final days of failure my trans clutches would not bind with the fuse inserted until after driving a few highway miles. After driving the clutches locked as tight as the front end on my old chevy 4x4 truck. I absolutely couldn't even pull out of the traffic lane into a parking place at walmart without a problem. Earlier on in the failure mode having the fuse in seemed to work to disengage the clutches; or so it seemed. The significant point is that things had to warm up before the failure manifested itself as torque bind. Go figure. I think (don't know for sure) that the clutch plates were dragging but not engaged as when hydraulic pressure is pushing them together. I do know that at least before I replaced it all, the duty solenoid did show up as a fault when I read the trans control module codes.

Having studied and corrected my torque bind issue on my 96 Outback, I learned a lot about the system. See my post http://www.ultimatesubaru.org/forum/showthread.php?t=78467 I must admit that I didn't repair mine as described in splended help provided in that post, but found a low miles tranny for less than I believed possible, disassembled the tail shaft housing to inspect the clutch plates, and for good measure, replaced the duty solenoid C while I had the new tranny on the table. So far ~7,000 miles and no problems. I will repair my original and sell it in the near future as the transmission and transaxle were fine making it worth the fix. It is my understanding that if inserting the fuse to create the Front Wheel Only mode corrects the problem then Duty Solenoid C may be good and that the clutch plates are either hanging up or not being permitted to disengage. The fuse really is only a jumper to permit a chassis ground to energize the duty solenoid and remove output to the clutch pack. Hence, if the solenoid is disabled and the problem goes away that means that the solenoid is capable of energizing and de-energizing appropriately. Thus when not disabled by the fuze, the solenoid is enabling torque to the rear drive shaft. That said, the duty solenoid mounts to a hydraulic manifold in the tailshaft entension housing which, through very small drilled ports. When enabled it ports hydraulic fluid (read pressure) to enable the clutch pack to engage and enable rear drive shaft torque. If that manifold became plugged by debris it would seem that the system could malfunction and torque bind could occur even if the solenoid itself were functional. Given that you had no symptoms prior to trans fluid service it would seem that this scenario most fits your description of events. I can't discount what Click and Clack the Tappet Brothers, the Public Radio hosts of the radio talk show Car Talk, refer to as "vital crud". This refers to material that can be dislodged in a pressure flush trans fluid change and migrate to be a problem in another place. Perhaps that is your problem. One would have to, at minimum, remove the tailshaft housing to access the solenoid and the manifold it mounts to. If I went that far I wouldn't even try to clean it. I'd just put in a new one. One can not however totally discount the possibility of the clutch plates hanging up and not disengaging even though the duty solenoid itself is working correctly and hydraulic pressure is removed. This would seem unlikely given the failure mode you describe. Nevertheless, if so, that problem may continue to worsen despite the fuse being in place for if the clutch plates are sufficiently bound together, the torque bind will likely worsen with or without the hydraulic pressure to them. Steve

Replacement tranny in. I changed the duty solenoid for good measure and everything is working great. $466 for the tranny with 70K miles on it; about $150 for a new duty solenoid and other misc. parts; and $350 to R&R the tranny (I'm too old to do that stuff lying on my back). Less than $1,000 to refurb the car with a much newer 70K vs. 211K trans. Not bad I'd guess. Apparently I was right in assuming that some wear on the drums was acceptable as there is no torque bind. Now I will do the torque bind fix on the working tranny I removed from the car and will offer it for sale or look for a car needing that trans and perhaps get a good deal together. Thanks again all. Steve

Well scratch that. The transmission supply house can't provide what I need. They do have the output shaft with the clutch (driven) drum but can't get the shaft with the driving drum. FYI the Subaru part number for the shaft and driving gear is 31458AA001 and is listed as Shaft Assy. Reduction Drive. This part is available for less than $200. Steve

I need the part number for the captive nuts for the license plate mounting screws on the rear gate of a 96 Legacy Outback wagon. Believe it or not, the local dealer can't find it. The generic pop-in square base captive nuts sold in the parts houses are just short of fitting tight enough to work. Help! Steve

One more thing. FYI I had considered replacing the drive drum to remove the grooves without grinding mine. With the help of good ole Emily at CCR in Denver, I located one with a transmission parts firm reconditioned for $75.00. They guarantee as new condition. (I don't really think your old Em) It seems that they are sold with the transmission output shaft as part of the assembly. I think it's odd that that is the case as the drum clearly mounts on a splined section of the output shaft and one can clearly see an internal retaining ring holding it in place. Subaru prices the part new at ~$175.00 at subaruofdallas.com using the internet discount. I didn't want to take down my tranny and void the "junk yard" warranty even though it isn't long term. Steve

We pulled the extension case on the donor tranny today. Let me refer to the two parts that drive the clutches and receive torque from the clutches as the drive drum (attached to the trans) and the driven drum (inside which the clutch plates are mounted). The transmission is said to have 73K miles on it. It came from a vehicle with wiring harness issues that was not wrecked. The driven drum does indeed have grooves in it from the clutches but not as deep as in the photographs posted by you; especially not toward the rear (aft) of the transmission where they are barely visible. I conclude that some portion of the clutch pack remains interfaced with the teeth (sprockets) of the driven gear even when the vehicle is not in AWD mode. I don't recall the actual distribution of torque to the front and read differentials in that condition but I know there is some torque to the rear all the time. As such, since the grooves are not significant toward the rear I am going to risk putting it in without smoothing out any of the grooves. I MAY RUE THE DAY I DECIDED TO DO THIS. I am as a matter of course, changing the duty solenoid and the attached valve body. I was surprised to see that the one I ordered came with the valve body too so since I already have it I'll install it. At this time I'm waiting for another gasket for the plate beneath the valve body as the plate gasket stuck to the old valve body and without knowing it I removed the gasket on the bottom of the plate by error. Had I known the plate had stuck to the valve body, I could have separated it and saved the bottom gasket. We should have it together next week. I do intend to fix the tranny I've taken out of my car or at minimum the tailshaft assembly. Thanks again for your help. I'll keep y'all posted. Steve

Absolutely spectacular response. Lewis "You're the Man". Best thread on the site! Thanks to all. Steve

Thanks John, That's how I understood it and you have confirmed my understanding. It looks like we have a winner. Steve

John, I need most at this time the answer to the significance of the last three letters in the transmission number; i.e. AAA vs ABA. I'm confused now. I just bought a transmission from a 96 Legacy AWD 2.5 engine manufactured 09/1995 with the transmission number TZ102Z2AAA-CG to use as a donor to replace the transmission in my 96 Legacy Outback manufactured in 1996 with transmission number TZ102Z2ABA-CH. Curiously the Hollander interchange software identifies my trans as that of a 2.2L car (which it is not). A quick check with Emily at the good ole guys at CCR out in Denver produced a look-up result from a Subaru reference manual that states that the gear ratio of both of these is 4.44 and the conclusion is that it will work. Now am I good to go or not? What's the verdict? What hasn't been addressed in the quoted data above is a 96 Legacy 2.5 AWD with the trans number TZ102Z2AAA-CG. I sure don't want to put this in if it's not the same ratio as the rear differential. I read somewhere on this site that only the first character i.e. A** is of significance and the the other two i.e. *AA or *BA have no meaning as regards the gear ratio of the transaxle. That may explain the Hollander interchange identifying this AAA suffix transmission as a match to my ABA suffix. I'm just confused about the statement in some of the dialog that indicates that the transmission AAA is from a non-outback legacy and will not sub as an ABA transmission in an outback model (I don't think that's correct but need verification). Steve Steve

By the way John your message box is full and can't be posted to. Steve

John, You posted this in response to a thread entitled transmission compatibility. I have a question. Originally Posted by johnceggleston i think in 99, when they went to the phase 2 trans, the impreza and the legacy 2.2 were the same. but i'm not positive. but these years are too late for your match. i'd stick to the legacy / outback models. 2.5L car is preferred, 96 - 98 (some early 99). if you get a trans out of a 2.2L car, you will need the rear differential, (unless it just happens to be a 96 2.2L outback with the trans # TZ102Z2ABA.) these trans should fit: TZ102Z2ABA = 96 outback (2.2L) TZ102Z2ABA = 96 outback (2.5L)..... same trans. TZ102Z2CBA = 97 outback...................may need TCU TZ102Z2CAA = 97 legacy LSi...............may need TCU TZ102Z2CCA = 97 legacy GT...............may need TCU TZ102Z2DBA = 98 outback (early 99).....may need TCU TZ102Z2DCA = 98 legacy GT...............may need TCU TZ102ZABAA + 96 legacy (all 2.2L cars except outback)........will need rear diff, maybe TCU TZ102ZACAA + 97 legacy (2.2L)...........will need rear diff, maybe TCU TZ102ZACAA + 98 legacy (2.2L)...........will need rear diff, maybe TCU the 95 legacy 2.2L trans may work, but there were some other changes that took place that year so unless it was free, i'd stick with 96 - 98. TZ102ZAAAA + 95 legacy (2.2L)...........will need rear diff, probably TCU i would suggest you search for year and model. find the best deal you can on a 96 outback trans. then look for a 96 GT trans and compare the cost. then look for a 96 LSi trans, then a 97 outback trans, then a 97 GT, then 98... etc. (i think you are going to find more outbacks out there than GT and LSi combined.) there are lots of things to consider price, shipping cost, mileage. some yards sell them all for cheap 300$ while some charge 1200$ for one with 200k miles. but there are lots of them out there. i'd look for a 96 - 98 outback with 100k or less, close to home. since yours is still running (?), you have some time to shop and wait. and finally, before you buy, ask for the model number off of the trans you are buying to double check. I'm confused now. I just bought a transmission from a 96 Legacy AWD 2.5 engine manufactured 09/1995 with the transmission number TZ102Z2AAA-CG to use as a donor to replace the transmission in my 96 Legacy Outback manufactured in 1996 with transmission number TZ102Z2ABA-CH. Curiously the Holland interchange software identifies my trans as that of a 2.2L car (which it is not). A quick check with Emily at the good ole guys at CCR out in Denver produced a look-up result from a Subaru reference manual that states that the gear ratio of both of these is 4.44 and the conclusion is that it will work. Now am I good to go or not? What's the verdict? What hasn't been addressed in the quoted data above is a 96 Legacy 2.5 AWD with the trans number TZ102Z2AAA-CG. I sure don't want to put this in if it's not the same ratio as the rear differential. I believe I'll post this on my thread about torque bind too. Steve

I'm confused now. I just bought a transmission from a 96 Legacy AWD 2.5 engine manufactured 09/1995 with the transmission number TZ102Z2AAA-CG to use as a donor to replace the transmission in my 96 Legacy Outback manufactured in 1996 with transmission number TZ102Z2ABA-CH. Curiously the Holland interchange software identifies my trans as that of a 2.2L car (which it is not). A quick check with Emily at the good ole guys at CCR out in Denver produced a look-up result from a Subaru reference manual that states that the gear ratio of both of these is 4.44 and the conclusion is that it will work. Now am I good to go or not? What's the verdict? What hasn't been addressed in the quoted data above is a 96 Legacy 2.5 AWD with the trans number TZ102Z2AAA-CG. I sure don't want to put this in if it's not the same ratio as the rear differential. I believe I'll post this on my thread about torque bind too. Steve

You guys (especially you Lewis) have been terrific in all the experience and help you've provided me and others on this topic. Much more definitive information has come out in this thread than perhaps in all the others I've read. I'd appreciate the additional pics if you can show 1. the clutches in place, 2. some view of the clutches out of the "drum", and 3. a view of the "fixed" hubs once the grooves have been "removed". Also, I read that it's difficult to "realign" the clutches when replacing them. Any experience or tips there? I've found a tranny with 70K miles on it from a donor car that hasn't been wrecked for $425 plus tax. Mine is working well except for the TB but after all it does have over 200K on it now. I plan on pulling the extension housing on the transplant and checking it before installing the tranny. I may or may not change the duty solenoid just for good measure depending on what I find in the way of grooves (assuming that would be an indicator of some solenoid malfunctioning). I imagine that avoiding pulling the housing down to do so after installation would certainly more than balance the cost of the replacing the solenoid befor installation.

One more question. Are the tailshaft extensions the same for all the 2.5L auto trans vehicles? Mine is a 96. I'm trying to figure out what others might fit so as to possibly get one, rebuild it, and simply replace mine as an assembly. Same concept as posted earlier by someone. Steve

Thanks Guys, I'm still a little confused though. It seems that the only way to "smooth" out the grooves is to remove material from the teeth to a depth equal to the deepest part of the groove. If I understand it the problem is that the hydraulic pressure leaks past the clutches via the grooves. If I remove material to smooth them won't that just increase the clearance through which the hydraulic pressure will leak? Please advise. Steve

I'd be grateful for a look at the information you mention. Can you post it here or email it to me? Steve

Excellent pics. Thanks much. I also pose the question regarding the grooves on the exterior of the "teeth"; are they to be removed in addition to those on the sides of the "teeth"? Does anyone know about interchange information for the tailshaft housing as a separate part? i.e., what years and models will work on my 96 model with a 2.5 engine or are all the automatics the same? Steve

What I would really appreciate if anyone has one is a pic of the infamous "grooves" in what ever assembly or part they are found. Does anyone have a good pic of that?

Pics would be terrific for me as well I imagine for others. About the tires. The Mrs. had failed to have the new tires rotated as instructed by me but at the origin of the symptoms the first thing we did was to rotate the tires front to rear without a change in the symptoms. I must assume that the tires were ever so slightly smaller on the front at that time but not by much as they were the high-end Michelin rain tires and only had ~15-20K miles on them. After that we put the FWD fuse in.... and it worked... for a shor time. It does seems logical that the critical element would be a scenario where the front tire size is smaller than the rear which would indicate to the monitoring systems that the front was in a slippage condition and thus would engage the rear drive train. I have no idea what the system would do if the rear were slightly smaller than the front (I understand the rear should normally be in free wheel mode if not in a lock up condition). In other words front tires at greater RPM than rear triggers normal lock up of the rear drive train. I'm not sure the system would even monitor rear wheels turning at a greater RPM than the front. Now all that said. I was able to retrieve the On Board Diagnostic tranny codes. We have Current Code 24 which is of course Duty Solenoid C fault and Historic Codes of 23 Engine Speed Signal, and 24 Duty Solenoid C. Next step here is to check the wiring to Duty Solenoid C and ensure no faults there. Any ideas about the Engine Speed Signal fault code? The fault code tables indicate that the symptom associated with this code is a lock up failure of the tranny. We have never experienced that problem. I'm tempted to clear all codes, drive, and then retest. Steve

Thanks for your input. I SHOULD have noted initially that the trans temp light does indeed flash on engine start-up indicating there is some electrical fault, but that it flashes 16 uniform time interval flashes and doesn't indicate a specific fault. No check engine or other fault indicator lights and my OBDII scanner finds no fault in the system. As I understand it, the duty solenoid C (or the TCU) can cause the temp light to flash indicating a fault. Kind of ambiguous isn't it? There is an alldata procedure for reading TCU generated codes on the AT temp light but as I understand it (from the instruction in the procedure to "turn the diagnosis selector switch to on" that the Subaru Select Monitor is required. Is that correct? It is also possible I suppose that "turn the diagonsis selector switch to on" could refer to the instruction on code retrieval regarding "grounding terminal # 5 of Diagnosis Connector B82, a 6 pole black connector located on right side of steering column, with one of the leads (either one) from the Diagnosis Terminal"? Steve

Thanks for the comprehensive response. A couple of more questions. I've gathered from talking with others that I might be able to pull the tail-shaft extension to do the work without removing the transmission. I assume that would eliminate the need to remove the header pipes from the engine. Please confirm. Also, my impression is that the grooves usually are found in the extension case. You mention the grooves being in the "clutch hub". Please advise. Finally, where is the TCU located on this car. I have all data for it but the location diagram is not clear to me at all. Steve

We're experiencing torque bind in our 96 Legacy Outback. 200K miles plus on this car. No question that torque bind is the problem. I've put the appropriate fuse in the FWD fuse holder and am puzzled by the outcome. SOMETIMES the FWD light on the dash will illuminate and the rear drive-train disengages...but sometimes not. Sometimes when starting the day and the vehicle is cool the FWD illuminates as described but after a drive of 10-15 miles it goes out and the rear again locks up. Sometimes it doesn't disengage at all when initially started and stays that way through the day. The intermittent nature of this makes me wonder if the transmission controller isn't malfunctioning as well as the duty solenoid C. Does anyone have any experience with this intermittent symptom? I'm not meaning to be rude in any way but PLEASE, I don't need speculation I need verified experience. This isn't the time for opinions. I'm really frustrated by this problem. Steve