McDave

I've read here that loose cone washers can cause front bearing and hub problems, so I plan on replacing them along with the other washers, and bearings and seals. I don't seem to be able to find them online though. Anybody have an online source and/or part number? Thanks. '93 Loyale 2wd 3AT. PS I already looked on the GenuineSubaruParts.com website. Either they're not listed or they call them something odd.

Right now in some cities like Santa Monica you can get the hydrogen for free! Note: Hydrogen powered car required. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/06/21/eveningnews/main4200339.shtml?source=mostpop_story

There's a new start-up sports car being build just down the road from me that plans to use hydrogen-on-demand with gas. I can't help but think the plan has more to do with attracting investors. http://gas2.org/2008/06/04/company-unveils-hydrogen-hybrid-supercar-available-fall-2008/ http://www.kvue.com/news/local/stories/060308kvueScorpion-cb.59cea584.html http://www.tgdaily.com/content/view/37792/113/

A year without HHO, a year percolating but not using the HHO, then a year using the HHO. This is going to take a while. Actually that method has it's faults too. For instance, last year here in Central Texas it started raining in March and didn't quit until late August. It was the coolest, wettest year on record. We didn't hardly have a summer. Only one day over 100 and just several in the 90's. This year we are in an extreme drought and already have 25 or so days over 100. Hottest June on record. Running the heck out of the a/c. It was the first thing I fixed on my "new" Subaru. Turning on the compressor is like throwing out an anchor on these little 90 hp motors. So yeah, my yearly averages would be skewed, just like my 47 mile 1.2 gal trip was. The whole idea of my suggestion for a couple hundred mile test is to minimize the effects of weather and temperature extremes and other variables. Besides, we don't want to sit here that long staring at our monitors waiting for definitive results. We want results now! If the guys, once completing their systems, would map out a round trip/circular course of say 250 miles that is virtually all hwy with only a couple stop lights, and carefully top off their tanks each time, I believe they could easily be accurate within one mpg. And the three 250 mile trips could easily be taken in three consecutive days during a calm weather pattern. It could even be done in one or two days if the weather and temps are particularly level and the driver that motivated. One reason I pick 250 miles is because if these systems are supposed to improve gas mileage by as much as 60%, then it stands to reason that on the trip where they are percolating without using the HHO, then their gas mileage would be expected to drop by at least 60%, and we don't want them to run out of gas!

Ok, that sounds better. In your original post it sounded like you were saying it was impossible for there to be blow-by. Confusion on my part ensued.

Mental note... sometimes it really is the starter!

I forgot to mention that one of the tech tips the scanner made was to ensure you had good grounds to the ecu wiring harness, or suffer possible drive-ability problems. They even suggested running an extra 10 ga. ground wire between the battery and the ecu harness ground spot on the intake.

Standing at the front of the car looking at the throttle body, the vacuum port on the left goes to the egr solenoid. Depends on which type tps you have. Check out this post... http://www.ultimatesubaru.org/forum/showthread.php?t=79393

I had a '93 Loyale come in the shop today with the CEL on. Code was 34 - egr system. The customer said the light was intermittent and since it had gone off shortly after reading the codes I started with the usual checks - blip the throttle to see if the valve would open, and when it did I manually opened the valve at idle to see if it would stall. It did. For grins I hooked up a Snap-on scanner and found a bunch of info that I haven't found yet in the fsm. For instance, while in D-check mode the ecu will pulse the egr solenoid off and on. So I connected the green test connectors and turned the key on to enter D-check mode. Battery voltage at the + terminal of the solenoid? Check. Ecu pulsing the ground terminal at the solenoid? Check. While the ecu was pulsing the solenoid I watched the voltmeter while wiggling underhood wires, then checked all the harness connections including the ground wires above the left valve cover. No problem found. At that point it becomes an educated guess whether the solenoid or the ecu is the one acting up intermittently. As it turns out, receipts show my own Loyale had a code 34 CEL light and the solenoid replaced shortly before I bought it, and the light hasn't come back on since. With that in mind I priced a new solenoid from Subaru at $180, then found the same Subaru brand part at rockauto.com for $57 + shipping. I'll know next week if it's fixed, but I already feel confident it will be.

That's going to be the hard part... getting true before and after data. That's why I posted the Hypermileage info - to show how driving style can so affect mileage. One of the posters in this thread (post #58) said he was "(not trying to drive it any more fuel efficiant, driving at my crazy normal pace)." while setting his mpg baseline. Seems to me that would make it easy to pad the After mpg figures. Your Before mpg should be the best you can get too. To get more accurate Before, During, and After readings, they really should all be run on the same day, or at least similar weather conditions, over the same route, and preferably on a hwy route with few stop signs and light traffic. The route would also need to be long enough so you could make sure the gas fill-ups closer reflect the true amount used. When I drove my "new" Subaru home last month I filled it up to the top, drove it 47 miles home on the hwy, and filled up to the top again and calculated the 1.2 gallons used gave me 39 mpg! That can't be right, I thought. So thinking I might not have topped it off fully, I re-calculated it with 1.3 gallons and the mileage drops to 36, and at 1.4 gal it drops to 33 mpg. So just by not filling that extra .2 gal I "gained" 6mpg over the 47 mile course. It really needs to be a couple hundred hwy miles for each test.

Boy you sure got me thinking now as this goes against everything I've known about pcv systems in V and I engines over the past 38 years. Could it be because the OHCam H engine's valve train/cover area has no direct link to the crankcase, other than through the pcv system? Surely then the OHValve H engines could have blow-by to the airbox? BTW... I just found your SPFI website. Great stuff!

I found this photo on GeneralDisorder's SPFI website. It's the blue one... http://home.comcast.net/~trilinear/EA81_SPFI/ECU_plugs_and_relays.jpg

And if that doesn't fix it, you probably have too much blowby past the piston rings.

The correct o-rings for the cam towers are still available from Subaru. I got a pair in today. I also got some lifters from Mizpah today and was disappointed with the quality. A couple had so much metal ground off the tip that they are .008ths shorter than the others and most of the hardened surface on the rounded (now flat) tip is gone. I'll be calling them in the morning. BTW The fsm recommends you stand the lifters upright in an oil bath and pump them up until they don't compress more than .5mm (.020in) before installing them in your motor.

Hypermile-ing I ran across this site a few days and got a kick out of it. These guys are getting 70, 80, 90 mpg or more in mostly Hybrids without any real mods (except for lightening the load, shaving cargo racks, pumping up tire pressures... the usual stuff). Be sure to check out their Forums: http://www.cleanmpg.com/ I've been playing around with it a bit this week. My last tank of the usual zipping around in city driving with a/c on yielded a disappointing 20mpg ('93 Loyale Wagon 3AT). I'll know in a few more days if a little hypermileing can make much of a difference. What the hey, it's free! Here are the basics from the main "Beating the EPA" article... ***************************** "Section II - Basic FE saving techniques * Do not use quick accelerations or brake heavily: This reduces fuel economy by as much as 33 percent at highway speeds and 5 percent around town. EPA tests do not account for this kind of vigorous driving. * Do not idle excessively: Decreases average FE. The EPA city test includes idling, but drivers that experience more idling experience lower MPG. * Do not drive at higher speeds: This increases aerodynamic drag (wind resistance) and mechanical friction which reduces fuel economy. The EPA test accounts for aerodynamic drag up to highway speeds of 60 mph, but drivers often exceed this speed. * Cold weather and frequent short trips reduce fuel economy, since your engine doesn't operate efficiently until it is warmed up. In colder weather, it takes longer for your engine to warm, and on short trips, your vehicle operates a smaller percentage of time at the desired temperature. Note: Letting your car idle to warm-up doesn't help your fuel economy, it actually uses more fuel and creates more pollution. Drive to your furthest destination first and then as you are heading home, stop at the closer destinations in order from furthest to closest as the car is warmed up for longer portions of your drive. * Remove Cargo or cargo racks: Cargo and/or racks on top of your vehicle (e.g., cargo boxes, canoes, etc.) increase aerodynamic drag and lower FE. Vehicles are not tested with additional cargo on the exterior. * Do not tow unless absolutely necessary: Towing a trailer or carrying excessive weight does decrease fuel economy. Vehicles are assumed to carry three hundred pounds of passengers and cargo in the EPA test cycles. * Minimize running mechanical and electrical accessories: Running mechanical and electrical accessories (e.g., air conditioner) decreases fuel economy. Operating the air conditioner on "Max" can reduce MPG by roughly 5-25% compared to not using it. * Avoid driving on hilly or mountainous terrain if possible: Driving hilly or mountainous terrain or on unpaved roads reduces fuel economy most of the time. The EPA test assumes vehicles operate over flat ground. * Do not use 4-wheel drive if it is not needed. 4-Wheel drive reduces fuel economy. Four-wheel drive vehicles are tested in 2-wheel drive. Engaging all four wheels makes the engine work harder and increases crankcase losses. Maintain your Automobile: A poorly tuned engine burns more fuel, so fuel economy will suffer if it is not in tune. Improperly aligned or under inflated tires can lower fuel economy, as can a dirty air filter or brake drag. Try to purchase high BTU content gasoline if available: Fuels Vary in Energy Content and some fuels contain less energy than others. Using oxygenated fuels or reformulated gasoline (RFG), can cause a small decrease (1-3%) in fuel economy. In addition, the energy content of gasoline varies from season to season. Typical summer conventional gasoline contains about 1.7% more energy than typical winter conventional gasoline. Inherent Variations in Vehicles: Small variations in the way vehicles are manufactured and assembled can cause MPG variations among vehicles of the same make and model. Usually, differences are small, but a few drivers will see a marked deviation from the EPA estimates. Engine Break-In: New vehicles will not obtain their optimal fuel economy until the engine has broken in. This may take 3-5 thousand miles."

I'm going through the same thing with my '93 Loyale Wagon... it upshifts way too quickly through all three gears, has poor throttle response under 2200 rpm, and doesn't downshift at low speeds unless you floor it. It's as if the throttle position sensor is not functioning in the middle ranges, yet it tests good. I have a factory service manual coming and will be getting into this problem deeper once it gets here, but for now I'm shifting manually and it's much improved since I can keep it over 2200 rpm in 2nd and 3rd. I will let you know if/when I figure something out.

Thanks Gloyale! Thank will save me some searching for the wires. and head scratching should I ever decide to change out the head unit.

Psstt... read post #3.

Right now I need all the floor space for my bike' date=' camping gear, air mattress, ect, and once hunting season gets here I'll be hiding my guns and gear under the cargo cover. Besides, I'm not [u']that[/u] much of an audiophile. The 6 x 9s may be enough for me (and cheaper).

I've seen mention in these forums of the aftermarket cables stretching. Apparently the dealer cables are much better. In fact, as more and more aftermarket parts are coming out of China, quality continues to decline. Our shop recently decided to buy as much from the dealers as is practical, without bottle necking the work flow too much. Too much crap out there these days.

Hey thanks for the suggestions guys! I hadn't thought about the rear hatch. I pulled the cover off it and there's plenty of room for some 6 x 9s. I may even be able to hide them behind the existing vents in the panel. I had forgotten about the compact powered subwoofers, dhise. I used to have one on a car long gone. Wish I still had it now. Will be on the lookout for a cheap one.

While replacing the front speakers and wiring in a cd changer, I noticed the factory dash unit had enough wires coming out of it so that some of them must be for rear speakers. If so, where are they headed? Are the rear doors pre-wired, or do the wires head to the back of the car, or do they stop short under the dash somewhere? I need some more bass and since there isn't enough room in the car for my Bazooka, I'm thinking of installing some 6x9's. Where would you install them? Rear doors, rear pillars, rear inner wheel wells, or other? Dave