Numbchux

actually.....the fronts would work. the 3-bolt EJ strut top pattern is only slightly different than the EA82 one. a few minutes with a dremel (seriously, less than a mm on each hole) and it would work. http://www.subtle-solutions.com/product_info.php?cPath=21_23_35_86&products_id=98 BUT, since there's no camber correction, it would push the strut tops out a bit from the center of the car, which would give it even more positive camber.....yikes. And, it would only be the front.

RockAuto has them Huh....I guess you guys are right. I have always been under the impression that they were externally regulated, but now that I look, I can't find where that came from. . I swear it was in the gauge cluster.....Oh well....I'm an idiot, carry on :-\

nope, I'm 100% positive that the EA82s are externally regulated. Most cars are internally regulated (including EJs and XT6s)....so it is weird. I thought EA81s were external too, but I've never owned one, just worked on a few. but yea...fusible link would do it too.

You're definitely having voltage regulator issues, and the EA82 system is externally regulated. I don't remember where the regulator is...but I know it can be replaced.

"adapt" makes it sound way harder than it is. you don't "need" to do anything to make it work. jumper the neutral start switch so the starter will engage, and it will work great. rpms might drop when you clutch in, but that's about the only actual symptom. and it will cause the CEL to come on. or....2 wires. ground the AT/MT identification pin, and hook up a neutral switch (which, with an '87 trans will have to be a clutch switch).

no need to swap the ECU, they're the same, just has an AT/MT identification pin. besides, the '95 has different ECU pinouts than any other year. and the plug is completely different than the ones on the '90 legacy. Only a '95 ECU will work, and most (if not all) '95 2.2s were autos. the EA pedal box will not be a direct swap in the impreza. you might be able to modify it to work...I don't know if the spacing of the 4 mounting bolts is the same, but the EA has the gas pedal as part of the box, so you have to drop the steering column to get it out. whereas the EJ has a separate mount/pivot for the gas pedal, making it much easier to swap. the carrier bearing mount location and shape is different. so you will need to modify the EJ one for length. 2" longer should be perfect. assuming your car is a 2.2, your rear diff is a 4.111, so you will need to swap it to 3.9. the EA one will physically bolt up into the crossmember and to the driveshaft. you might need to swap the rear mount studs, as I'm fairly sure they're longer on the EJ. The issue is the axles. I'm pretty sure the impreza axle shafts will have male stubs that go into the diff, whereas the GL is the opposite, and the GL has very different axles on the outsied. first-gen ('90-'94) legacy rears have male stubs on the diff, so axles from one of those would work in your impreza. You might be able to make hybrid axles with the parts you have, but don't count on it. OR, you could get a rear diff from a 2nd gen legacy with the 2.2 and a 5MT. front axles are also an issue. the axle stubs on the D/R are 23-spline, and your imprezas are 25-spline. Again, you might be able to make some hybrid axles with what you have, or '93-'94 MT imprezas have 23-spline inner axles. you'll have to jumper the neutral start switch so the car will start (this is true of any MT swap). Also make sure the car is in park when you pull the battery before starting the project....otherwise you'll have a fight to get the key out Yea, the '87 won't have a neutral switch. So you'll have to either rig a clutch switch, or live with the CEL being on (what most people do with a MT swap). There will be a little linkage fabbing. I think the shifter hole in the tunnel is a bit further back relative to the transmission on the impreza, so the linkage might need to be lengthened, and a mount made. You could get the front transmission crossmember from a legacy 5MT and drill holes in it for the EA tranny mounts. Exhaust hanger should line right up. Either speedo cable should work, although IIRC the AT one is shorter. And the stuff that's already been said. EA82 starter, modified flywheel, and clutch kit (although I'd recommend a stronger XT6 pressure plate, or at least an EA82t one). don't forget to hang onto the flywheel bolts from the EA82, they're the same thread pitch as the EJ, but longer for the MT. adapter plate.

ONLY 93-94 MT axles have 23-spline. so if they work with an XT6 transmission at all, they are definitely AT ones. Also, EJ axles won't seat correctly in XT6 wheel bearing seals. I forget which is larger, but that might be your issue. If you've got an XT6 trans and XT6 hubs/knuckles......than you definitely want XT6 axles.

I absolutely love it when people talk about balancing the rotating assembly so they can rev high. Really sorts out the engine builders from the weekend mechanics. balancing has little to do with revving high (I say little, because obviously if it's way out of balance, it won't work...). Allowing an engine to rev, means running very tight tolerances at the main bearings to prevent much crank movement. This isn't as difficult in a small-displacement inline motor because they don't make a whole lot of torque with each combustion, and all the force is directed in the same direction. the smaller displacement of a 2.0 helps in the torque department, but it's still a boxer, which inherently means a lot of crank movement due to the firing order and direction. When you're running extremely tight bearing tolerances, crank movement means contact between the crank and bearings, which means wear. And everytime those 2 pieces contact each other, those bearings are going to shift a bit.....which means you're another fraction of a mm closer to a spun bearing. I know the jdm clusters print the redline at 7.5k. As I mentioned, the 2.0 can get away with it, because it doesn't make much torque, but I still think if you're making more than ~150ft/lbs at the crank, using bearing tolerances that allow 7k+ is asking for trouble.

....to build. BUT, you have to keep in mind, it will require premium (91+ octane) fuel due to the high compression.

not a lot. they rev more freely. but even then, the best built boxer isn't reliably going to spin above 7, maybe 7.5k. go for the displacement and torque curve. The jdm sti heads are way better than the USDM ones, though.

the classic boxer-4 rumble is awesome. But a flat 6 is at least as sexy.... the single-exhaust-port heads on the EZ30D mean it doesn't sound quite as good as an EG33 or an EZ30/36DR, but....still pretty good. There's no replacement for displacement. and the EZs are only 1.5" longer bellhousing-to-crank pulley than an EJ. Going much more than stock is not cheap on an EZ, but stock is still pretty respectable (210hp/230tq at the crank for a 30D, IIRC. more like 250/250 for a 30DR). btw, http://www.copart.com is a great source for donor cars Forgot to mention my preference in components. in a case where aftermarket internals are needed.....Cosworth bearings, NPR rings, CP pistons, Eagle Rods (not ecstatic about these, great bang v. buck choice for pretty decent power, but if you're talking about more than 400 or so.....no), OEM phase II crank, undecided on Cams. got a couple EJ builds (22t block with 205 heads hybrid. and our 257 rally car) that will be getting head work in the next year or so.....and cams are a big source of debate there.

"Best" is obviously an EXTREMELY vague term. there are thousands of combinations of use/desire/budget. So really this thread won't be the be-all and end-all of EJ build threads. BUT.... This is something we've been looking at for RallyAmerica #171. Since we are looking at running Nationals next year, and being somewhat competitive in Open Class. But, being a privateer teem, we need the engine to last the full season. the 22t is VERY overrated. I was there a couple weeks ago when Graham "Whiskers" Evans (for those that don't know, Whiskers worked at Prodrive, and was Richard Burns's Crew Chief) got his first look at a 22t block up close. First thing he said (as I have always suspected) is that the cooling passages are all full of aluminum. But, the main thing (as is the problem with all phase I blocks) is the size of the bearing journals. the Phase II setup is noticeably more beefy. And the #3 thrust bearing position is.....well....not ideal. Yes, it's possible to do a little machine work and use a Phase II crank, but then your crank journals are even smaller. Seriously, as far as shortblocks go, you need a LOT of power to need the cylinder wall strength of a fully-close deck over semi-closed like an EJ207/257/255 and some 20Gs. And once you're at that point, you will need more support at the crank bearings, and better cooling, so you'd still be better off sleeving a Phase II block. That said, we've decided to stick with our high-compression (10.5:1) EJ257 for next year....Although with the addition of a GEMS ECU for anti-lag and a VF36 twin-scroll turbo. For a best bang v. buck N/A 4-cyl build. GDs right on the money. the HLA heads soak up too much valve movement to be good for performance. they're kind of like having a sponge in the linkage.....solid is much better, although requires a bit more maintenance. If it had to be stock, I would definitely go OBD II for the ECU. much smarter and quicker than the old OBD I units. But to make the most of the higher compression, I'd spring for a standalone. But, that's really irrelevant. because if I were building another frankensubaru. it would/will, without a doubt, have an EZ30 in it. probably a 30D. The EZ30DR is a great motor, but would require a new Hydra or Link standalone. which would add a massive investement to the project. and a stock EZ30D is going to get better power (and probably similar mileage) on 87 octane and stock ECU than the high-compression 2.5 hybrid will. and since it's not a hybrid, it'll be more reliable too. I think the EZ30D is the most underrated Subaru motor available right now.

it really is. I noticed a substantial difference going from 4-lug 4-wheel discs to 5-lug, just using single-piston FWD legacy front brakes. the extra diameter in the rear discs alone is a noticeable upgrade. That said, I know there are some newer Chevy minivans that use 6-lug. Also I think the Cadillac CTS-V does

I would say, as a rule of thumb. other than maybe moving things around the yard (low range 4WD) that Pontiac vibe is going to be a much safer bet for towing.

yea, look closely, you can see the rear output/U-joint on the trans. not sure what's holding that in (presumably you're leaving it in FWD and shifting hi-lo separately). Awesome!! Firewalls? eh, who need's 'em!!

I was in a group of jeeps all weekend (that blue YJ is a good friend of mine's, running a Ford 8.8 rear end and a spool). almost all of them with at least one locker (not only did I not have a welded rear, it was not even an LSD). I got hung up pretty nasty on a trail called Pucker Point. It was quite awesome, I intend to pull the doors off my 4Runner when wheeling (although I do intend to get a set of tube doors for the external protection that 91Loyale mentioned).

good theory. But not so much in practice. Get a wrangler teetering on 2 wheels (RF & LR or vice versa), and then open the doors. when you go to close them, you'll find the latch is inches off. do it in a subaru....they'll open and close all day (unless it's really rusty, in which case, might be time to get a new shell. That was kind of the indicator on the PoopenVagon). Also, when I pulled them on the poopenvagon, I contacted the local sheriff's office to see what the legal perspective was on it, and after a few days research he called me back, and said the only thing that might effect it (this was in MN, about 5 years ago. do not consider this legally concrete), were the rear-view mirror laws. And then he said something about a jeep being designed to run without doors, to which I reminded him that you have to buy aftermarket brackets to relocate the mirrors to legally run without doors. When I did it for the Crawl 4 the Cure 2006, I just brought a ratchet-wrench. 4 bolts, and one plug (there's a great plug from the factory just a few inches into the car). And I pulled off the front doors when we got to camp.

Excellent. My first reaction to your first post was that you need an incline-o-meter in there. looks like you've even modified it to read more angle than stock (stock, it stops at about 30 degrees). here's the one in my buddy's 4Runner a few years ago up at the offroad park: not sure on the Tercel, but I know late '80s pickups/4Runners in SR5 trim had them.

every dimension which would make the above information applicable.

"Fuel pump relay works, ignition relay works" define. wired as stock (ECU controlling them) or not? more info on the EJ22?

the mounting holes between XT6 and EJ caliper brackets and knuckles are different. also they have slightly different rotor offset. BUT, XT6 calipers will slide onto early 2-pot (as mentioned, T-leg, I have a set of '93 JDM WRX calipers that are the same) caliper brackets, which can then be bolted to any EJ knuckle.

My preference. a '96 2.2. most will be non-interference. but still have the smarter OBDII ECU (better mileage, more power), and simpler wiring (the way it's laid out is so much simpler. yea, a couple of the optional wires for an OBDI setup become mandatory for OBDII....but no big deal). I wouldn't shy away from '97-'99 ones either.....yea, they're interference, so you'll have to maintain the timing belt. But that also means higher compression, so even more power, without sacrificing mileage. '90-'94 ones are more common, as the donor cars in great donor shape are more common and cheaper. '95 2.2s have some goofy wiring. nothing wrong with them, but make sure you get 1995 wiring diagrams, as the ECU plug looks the same, but the pinout is not. A '95 ECU will plug into a '96-'99 harness, but it will not work.

the VSS on older cars (both the cars listed in your first post, EA82 and legacy, fit that category) is not a seperate sensor. it is the speedo. just a signal wire. you will already need to track it down and splice it for the EJ22 ECU. so no more work there for the cruise control. yea, the EJ switch might work for either system. You should install a working cruise-compatible switch in your EA82 and get the cruise system working now. and then it will work after the swap. it should be much simpler.

using the EJ cruise would be possible, but difficult. the EA82 cruise actuator is mounted on the throttle pedal. so nothing changed by the EJ swap will effect the way the cruise works. I bet with the trans (and pedal-box) swap, the brake switch didn't get swapped. the cruise system needs a second switch on the brake pedal that's reverse polarity from the brake light switch (depressing the pedal turns the brake lights on, and the cruise off). here's the switch for cruise, climb under there and see if you've got the 2-switch setup: I bet if you replace those 2 switches, which you'll have to do anyway, the EA82 cruise system will work (btw, rockauto has that setup on closeout right now for less than $10...). either way, you will probably also want to hook up a clutch switch. it has the same functionality as the brake switch, so you could hook it up in sequence with it. So if either pedal is pushed in, the cruise is cancelled. yes, VSS on both cars is in the gauge. you'll probably be hooking that up for the ECU anyway, so you could get it there.

WOW!!! :slobber: that's pretty much all I have to say.....