Numbchux

that wire is for the self-shutoff control, which means the ECU can control the ignition relay. the diagram that I drew up is a simpler way to do it. I prefer to do it the other way, using the diode. But either way will work fine.

year range is '95-'99 for that body style. I know first gen 5MTs were 4.111, but a friend of mine has a '96 legacy brighton 2.2l 5MT that's 3.90. maybe I'll climb under my dad's '96 L 4EAT tomorrow and see what it is.

We put a hatch tank in a brat. wasn't too difficult, just used a steel plate ~3" across with some holes along each edge. bolted one to the tank, and the other to the mounts on the frame. Wasn't hard, but yea.....not a perfect fit. GL/DL are trim levels. there are FWD GLs that would not have the right tank, and 4WD DLs that would, or vice versa. as long as it's within the year ranges and body styles that McBrat posted, it'll be fine.

yep, I'm well aware of many of the issues. I'm putting a 4.3 and 700r4 in my toyota 4runner, so I've done a bunch of research on the 700. Most of that fabrication stuff doesn't worry me, but the bellhousing adapter was something we're a bit uncomfortable with. Anyway, I'll stop hijacking your thread. Love the project, and love where you're going with it. I'll be watching closely, and I might contact you sometime over the winter about buying a copy of those plans.

Yea, that's fine. Our project is very much still in the planning phase. So we're not in a hurry. And I think those plans would be worth something. We've been watching the thread about the adapter to go to a toyota 5-speed transmission. But this build would do much better with an automatic! I don't know the GM stuff all that well, but I think this would work with a 700R4, right?

Absolutely awesome! any chance you'd be willing to copy/share your plans for that adapter plate/hub?

?? VSS is the vehicle speed sensor. Which should be the signal coming from the speedo telling the ECU when you're moving. Not related to the tach

about 2" no, if the dust shield doesn't even reach the back of the trans....it's not enough.

The only downside to the 1.8, is they don't have a knock sensor. so they cannot adjust timing maps to compensate. This isn't a huge deal in stock form. but if you're beating on it, and if you ever want to step up to a 2.2 or 2.5.... Go for the EJ18. but I would highly recommend running it on a '96+ OBD II EJ22 ECU. You'll get the most out of the 18, and then you'll get the most out of anything beyond that (2.5 ECU is plug and play).

I don't remember if I ran into anyone up there last year. not a national event this year....but we'll be there, as well as almost 40 other entrants. Ziptie Rally will be running our usual #171 Open Class '04 STi, as well as the #858 Open Light '02 impreza, and #558 Group 5 Chevy S10 baja truck. Should be an awesome time! Stop by and say hi, we'll have the NOS energy drink tent, and will be handing out free NOS at service.

that's pretty common for just 1" spacers. since EJ cars have a camber adjustment between the strut and knuckle.

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.