Numbchux

I'd double check all the brake hardware. It doesn't take much for something to hang up and drag. Bolt the caliper together without the pads, and make sure it slides back and forth smoothly on the pins (sometimes they will work fine individually, but once you get the caliper bolted on, and they have to move together, something binds). Also check closely that the pads can move freely in the clips. Rust on the clips, pads, or even on the caliper bracket can cause the pads to stick. Make sure everything is clean, lubricated, and moves freely. I fought this with all 4 wheels (one at a time, of course) on my wife's '03 Outback.

As far as I know, all the cars that got the remote filter had a second primary cat right under where the filter goes. So I do think that was the reason for the relocation. But that is not the case with the cars that don't have one at all. I agree that with the condition of the lines like that, it wouldn't be a bad idea to drop the pan and clean the magnets. I think the strainer can be cleaned, too.

+1 or possibly a CV axle joint. Not exactly common, but far more common than anything in the front diff failing.

Yea, at some point (looks like Imprezas manufactured after 05/07, I didn't look at the cutoff for other models) they stopped using them, relying on the strainer and magnets alone. The CVTs are like that as well (although they did away with the dip stick to prevent contaminants). Looks like the o-ring and cover that block it off, are the same ones used on the models that instead had the remote-mount on a 4EAT (certainly '01-'04 Outback 6-cyl and '03-'04 California emissions Leg/Outback 4-cyl). This would make me believe that the transmission case onto which they mount is the same, so you could probably thread that stud on there, and be able to add that filter. Of course, that case comes with the stud for the filter, where applicable. So it's a different part number, but that could be all that is different. We do not stock the o-ring, or the case (never sold either...), so I can't compare it to a filter. And, as it sounds like you've already found. The stud that threads into the case, and then the filter threads onto it, is part number 15211AA000, and has an MSRP of $3.70 So, while my answer is still a resounding maybe...there's some more information about it from the Subaru catalogs. I think I'd probably try it. Maybe order the part through your local dealer, and get under the car and take that cover off and compare it with the filter. FYI, Subaru (as with many manufacturers) is very finicky about returns, if the package has been opened, your dealer will probably not be able to get credit. So, tell them what you're doing ahead of time (and that you won't open it unless it looks like it'll work), and they'll probably be fine with it.

Here's the pinout from the wiring diagrams: Pins 1 and 2 are the fuse in question.

Well, you might call it a fact of life. But a higher cost of ownership is definitely a tick in the "con" column for virtually anyone. For some people it certainly might be worth it for the extra power. But not for many, which is why I don't recommend them for a Daily Driver.

Ignition coil has it's own 15A fuse on the relay block under the dash on the driver's side. Check those fuses, and check for power to them (although it gets power from the main relay, which is fairly safe to assume is good if the fuel pump is priming.

I wouldn't call them unreliable. But higher-maintenance. They're more finicky about when they get maintenance, and what parts/fluids are used. I don't think the parts failure percentage is any higher, but there are more parts involved, which does mean more failures. So for someone hoping to own the car to 300k miles or more, the SOHC non-turbo engine will probably cost considerably less (in time and money) in maintenance. And no, Bajas were not available with the VVT.

The non-turbo ones are right in the heart of the head gasket issues. Luckily, those do not (almost ever!) fail catastrophically. They start by leaking oil externally, and when they get really bad, they burn a little coolant. Check your fluids regularly, and it won't leave you stranded. My wife's '03 Outback has had head gasket symptoms since we got it, almost 50k miles ago. Subaru did update the head gasket part number, so as long as it's done with new OEM gaskets, and torqued properly, it shouldn't be an issue for a long time to come. The only other engine option is the turbo, which has a more stout engine, but the turbo adds complexity and therefore higher maintenance. While fun, I don't recommend it for a daily driver. My wife very much wants a baja, so I've got my eyes out for a blown up one, and then I'll swap the drivetrain from our '04 Outback VDC into it....

EJ axle with 23-spline inner is one option. '93-'94 FWD 5MT Impreza 1.8.

Since the thread title refers to the Loyale as a hatch-back (I assume is what HB means), it's possible that they're both EA82s. '85-'88 was confusing, as the old body style/engine cars overlapped with the newer ones, even though they were considerably different. EA81s were still available in the Brat, or hatch body style. That hatch looks like this: EA82s were available in Sedans, Wagons: or coupes: If both cars are EA82s, and either both turbo, or non-turbo, than yes, the exhaust should all fit. If not, some of it may work, some may not

First picture of my friend's Forester with the new tires. This is a 2013 forester X Premium, with a 2" ADF lift (strut spacers, and rear subframe spacers), 15x7 +40 Team Dynamics Rally wheels, and 235/75r15 General Grabber AT2s (Spec at 29.1" on Tire Rack). This is with zero trimming, and only a hair of rubbing on the rear of the front wheel well while turning (we will see once we start to flex it out). 2017-07-21_04-21-38 by Numbchux, on Flickr

I stand corrected, I just looked in the replacement parts catalog (gets updated more frequently), and there it is. Starting in '98 Forester, all others in 2000 G3210FC000 is the part number for it. Googling that shows some documentation about it.

Yep, and even then it was an accessory in all but the absolute top of the line models.

Yep, I use this one quite a bit, too. As it factors in wheel width and offset, too http://www.rimsntires.com/specspro.jsp

Oh yea, I've been looking at that, too. Calculators are extremely handy for making quick comparisons of different sizes, but I've also been referencing the measured size (width, diameter, and weight) of several different model tires on tire rack.

FYI, that part number is good for '02-'06 4EAT as well.

Probably going with Kumho Road Venture AT51s I really don't want to go coilover for several reasons. Mostly cost...

806910170 x2 MSRP $0.98 ea at your local dealer

Cool. With your 20mm spacer, your backspacing at the tire works out to be pretty close to the setup I'm looking at (I have a set of 17x7 +48s, and looking at 235/65r17 A/Ts). Ditto on the outer diameter. Due to the shape of the spring perch on the strut, I'm not sure there'd be a way to accurately measure it. I've measured the clearance from my existing tire to the perch, and it looks like it should work, but it'll be close.

I complete forgot about your rig...I've been using your tire calculator many many times over the last few days. Did you ever try those tires with stock struts? or just the coilovers? Do you know the width/offset of those wheels?

I'm in the planning phase. It looks like the front spring perch will probably be the biggest limiting factor (I'm not afraid of castor bushings, and body trimming). I've seen lots of 27s and 28s, but what about bigger? 29s? Bigger (with a traditional strut top block, and without big spacers)? My particular car is a 2004 Outback VDC, but other models would be relevant. Please post wheel dimensions, too (width AND offset, or original application).

Is the Legacy FWD or AWD? The struts themselves will bolt in, if you wanted to use the whole assembly with springs and mounts, I believe the rear strut mounts will have to be swapped.

There are 2 part numbers for those crank sprockets 13021AA17A, which says MT EJ25# 02/99-05/01 (This is from the '00-'04 Legacy/Outback catalog), and "01/03-02/04 (L#+GT+SUS#+OBK#).EJ25#, Spec U5" U5 is California emission. 13021AA16A, which only has a few teeth on it, and is the same as all the earlier EJ ones, and fits all other models (Looks like '00-'01 ATs, All '02-'03, and Federal/canadian '04s). Cam sprockets follow the same pattern.

Well...it's not just for that. The engine can spin backwards while parked and in gear, it can also prevent belt jumping should you try to bump-start the car (we had a WRX in last week that had recently had a timing belt installed somewhere else with the guide way to far out, and they bump started it, and the timing jumped several teeth and caused valve damage.). Correctly installed, the belt should not be able to jump, under any circumstances. But, your point remains, that just driving down the road, that guide shouldn't come into play. The TCK304 should be the correct one, we install a couple of those a month, and I don't believe we've ever had an issue with one.