All_talk

Richard, you and I are almost in complete agreement; I just feel that particular article is written with some misleading opinions and conjecture. And ignores that idea that the hybrid buyer is willing to pay more for reduced pollution. On the other hand, I’m a huge proponent of diesel and feel that VW is leading the industry with the TDI. I believe that current hybrids are falling far short of their potential, even with currently available technology. The marriage of hybrid with modern diesels would be a huge step in the right direction. Your math is correct, in a purely dollars and cents debate the hybrid gains you nothing and the current environmental payoff may be more than offset by the fact that building them (and recycling them) creates more environmental hazards than conventional cars. They will get better and may even make some sense at some point… but they are still a short term solution. All of this is a moot point for a guy like me, I simply can’t afford a new car payment. I drive about 4500 miles a month and currently do it on a ’91 Legacy SS at about 27mpg, even the TDI’s 45mpg wont cover the difference in operating costs… might cover the difference in insurance if I’m lucky, never mind the loan payment. Gary

True, hybrids are not the long-term future, they are a stopgap that can buy us some time and provide a cleaner way to burn off the remaining dead dinos. BUT, that article is full of misinformation and unsubstantiated BS. And what do they propose as the better solution… hydrogen?? Use in a fuel cell no doubt. Hydrogen production is a net loss… meaning it takes more energy to produce that you get back from it, its going to take a fundamental jump in technology before it has any commercial viability, if ever. The future is fully electric cars, charged from a truly renewable source like wind, water or solar. I fact, the sun is the origin of all our energy and research money would be best spent improving direct conversion efficiency, high density (low environmental impact) storage and propulsion system efficiency. The large corporations will slow this evolution (supported by ignorant and corrupt governments) because there is a LOT of money to be made selling the intermediate technologies. Gary

You're right Joe, just seems funny that Europe (and most of the rest of the word) managed to do this years ago... again the lumbering US lags behind. :-\ Its really our own fault, we're so damn complacent here, we accept whatever the big corporations and marketing geniuses cram down our throat... never an independent thought.

Subaru must do this if they want a significant market share in Europe… last I heard was that 2/3 of all vehicles sold there are diesel. And all “hybrids” SHOULD be diesel… I wont go into my long rate on this one, but there is a reason locomotives, earthmovers and stationary generators are diesel/electric. The problem with cars is that sometimes the best ideas get mucked up by marketing. Gary P.S. part of the "long rant" can be found here: http://www.ultimatesubaru.org/forum/showthread.php?t=33260&page=2&pp=10&highlight=diesel+hybrid+turbo+volkswagen

Just a short OT point... Its truly ridiculous that the US has still not converted to the metric system... its time to catch up with the rest of the world. The only reason we even get away with it is because we are a large enough economic power to force are will. Its a glaring example of how American laziness and arrogance is substituted for intelligence. Stepping off the soap box Gary

Any of the N/A EJ 5-speeds with matching rear diff would be the easiest fix (cable clutch), the turbo EJ units (and RS) will take the grunt of the 3.3 better but will require you fit the hydraulic clutch hardware. Gary

Just noticed you are back in PA... the pinch bolts are know to get rusty and snap off (I've never had a problem), be careful and maybe soak it with some penetrating oil for a few days before you do the job. Gary

Its not bad... a few tricks/notes: Disconnect the sway bar first, makes prying down the lower arm much easier. Get a 3 foot or longer pry bar, place it over the lower arm out near the balljoint then back under the mount point for the trailing rod to pry down the lower arm, and give you something to pound on to get the joint out of the socket. Use a short fat straight screwdriver or brake adjuster tool as a wedge to open the pinch slot on the socket (helps to have the steering turned all the way to that side). Use this coming out and going back in. A picklefork is often the only way to get the joint loose from the lower arm, beg borrow or steal one. Remove the joint from the socket first, then picklefork it off the lower arm. If the socket is rusty (it will be), take the time to clean it out. I small wire wheel in a drillmotor works well. This will make installing the new joint much easier. Use Anti-seeze on everything (especialy in the socket) when it goes back together, it will save you later when you replace a axle or wheel bearing. Gary

Yep, Greg you're thinking right (this is the basic idea I looked at with using the old VW bus reduction boxes). But this idea suffers from the same issues of cost, complexity and size. Most of us that would like to do something like this could live with the added complexity and could work around a lot of the packaging issues... but the cost is a killer. Even without considering engineering costs, a conservative estimate for a couple of gearboxes like this would be about $1500, and that's if you have a buddy who will give you a great deal on the machine work. If this project was given to me at work, total costs would probably top $5000. Gary

The basic idea seems sound, you'd need one for each output (4) which is a lot of extra gearing and not terribly efficient. You could cut it down to 3 units by using one on the drive shaft to the front and running a truck front diff (or flipped subie rear diff). Biggest problem I can see with this and the VW app is the added track width required to fit the "reverse boxes", they would add at least 8" to the transaxle width (and the track width is already 4" to wide). You could use custom shorten axels ($$$), but this would require a reduction in suspension travel to keep the CV angles in check. These same concerns are the reason I dropped the VW reduction box idea. There are a lot of ways to go at this problem, its just a matter of finding something efficient and practical (affordable). Gary

The required "break in" has a lot to do with the rings sealing against the pistons too. And one major reason for the crosshatch is to provide a place for a small amount of oil to get trapped and lube the rings so things don't wear so fast... looks like the OEM setup is working very well. Gary

My first thought is that its timing, with the quick stab you are probably out running the ECU/knock sensors ability to roll the timing back, with the slow pull the system can keep up. What grade fuel are you running? My stock RX does the same thing on low octane. As a test, set the timing back 5 Deg or so and see if that helps the ping (overall performance may suffer a bit). If it is fuel related a pressure gauge should tell the tail, make sure you tap it in at the end of the line at the regulator so it show the pressure at worst case. Just some thoughts Gary

You should check the choke operation and adjustment too, but yes you can adjust the fast idle. The screw should rest against the stepped cam on the choke shaft while the choke is active, the position of the step cam can be adjusted by bending the link to the choke, but you shouldn't need to change that. But be sure that once the choke is fully open that the fast idle screw does not touch the cam so that the normal idle screw can control the throttle opening. I've had best luck adjusting chokes by making small adjustments daily and checking operation on the next mornings first cold start. And I've also found that a good winter setting may not work so well in the summer, making seasonal adjustments necessary for best performance. Gary

Fast idle for cold start or A/C? The cold start screw sits on the choke cam (note: it should not touch the cam once fully warmed up). Not sure about the fast idle for the A/C, I've never had a Carbed Sube with A/C, but I'd bet its a solenoid. Gary

Damn Cory that really sucks! Sorry man, big bummer. Gary

Its a great idea, but I dont know anybody messin around with old Vee Wees(or old Subes) that could afford one of them. Gary

I thought they were LOW, thats why they need the resistors, to control the current. I thought low was around 3 ohms or less and high were around 12-16 ohms. I dont have my book here to check but the 2.7 number sounds right. Gary

Volumetric efficiency varies greatly over the RPM range, and is roughly proportional to the engines torque curve. From what I've seen of the EA82/EA82T curve the VE falls off sharply in the top end, I'd say 65% to 70% would be a better guess at redline. Gary

Just a couple of notes: As Pat said the hone job from the machine shop should have the cross hatch. The solid stone (3 arm) hones are used for sizing and squaring, while they will do a fine job crosshatching a new or rebored cylinder, they don’t work well for de-glazing/crosshatching when just re-ringing. I’d recommend the ball type (sometimes called a bead hone) for most home shops. There is a bit of a trick to pacing the up and down of the drill to the rotation speed to get a good crosshatch (hint: turn it pretty slow), practice on an old block if you can. And you should check the piston to bore clearance and the ring end gap before going crazy with the hone (specially with the 3 arm type). Gary

Sounds like fun, conversion parts to mount the EJ22 should work. But I think you'll be looking for a new trans real soon. Gary

Apparently, tank size and core placement may vary a bit from one manufacture to another (thanks for the info Caleb), so the core may move closer to the fan when switching from a single core to a double (mine didn’t as the single was already quite close). But the double should fit anyway. I have this double core radiator from Radiator Barn in my RX, fits fine and cools great under all conditions. http://www.radiatorbarn.com/s7.asp?ac=Y&year=1987&make=SUBARU&model=DL%2C+FE%2C+GF%2C+GL%2C+RS+OR+RX&submodel=ALL+MODELS&engine_size=H4%2C1.8L Gary

Sounds like you have run through some of the same ideas that I have, I was considering using old bus reduction boxes to reverse the rotation of the axles so I could use the Subie trans in a rear engine set up. I took a good look at the front engine option and I don’t think there is any good way its gonna fit in a bug. I hate to suggest this but if front engine AWD is what you really want you might have better luck with one of the transverse AWD drivetrains like the newer VW or DSM. Gary

The second row is in front of the other, and the tank thickness is the same. The two row will fit all the EA82/EA82T DL/GL/RX cars (I dont think the XT is the same). FWIW, my research shows only the turbo cars WITH the auto trans got the two core radiators stock, all others were singles. Also, single cores have plastic tanks, two cores are all brass. Gary

Hey Keith Well maintained Subaru bottom ends seem to be good for 300k+, but it does make sense to do it all while you're there, only difference is with the Subie (compared to other engines) if you leave the bearings you dont have to split the case. You gonna re-ring it too? Then again there is the sleeping dog theory... On re-reading, this post may be of little use to you, lol. Gary

No the ring gear in the Subaru transaxle cannot be flipped and no the VW parts will not fit. The VW boxes use a spiral bevel gear set which has the pinion shaft on center of the axle, the Subaru (and most other cars) use a Hypoid type gear set, similar to the spiral bevel but the pinion shaft runs below the center line of the axle. Gary P.S. Yes, you can run the rear diff upside down (its been done), but the higher fluid level required will add some drag and could cause some issues with oil foaming.