NorthWet

After a couple minutes searching (not P/Ns. but some useful info): http://www.ultimatesubaru.org/forum/showthread.php?t=127947 And its pointing to a possible DIY fix: http://www.ultimatesubaru.org/forum/showthread.php?t=127177

Now that it is running... do what grossgary said. Soon.

Ya wanna guess how I know what the engine acts like when the screw comes out??? The sad part is I figured it out quickly, but had no tools with me to fix it.

The sudden quit along with the lack of wanting to start and occasional "backfire" makes me seriously think it may just be a wayward distributor rotor. The backfire implies some spark plug activity, which implies distributor rotation, which implies disty-side t-belt is not broken. If the backfire is inconsistent, then that implies the timing is varying... so, that points at the rotor not staying in phase with the crank, either through the rotor becoming adrift or the T-belt skipping teeth. (The latter state can happen easily if the tensioner bolts slack off.) Rotor check is pretty quick and easy.

Also, depending on what you plan to do you don't even need to remove the engine. You can pretty good access to the flywheel/clutch area by just unbolting the engine and shifting it forward. And if you are set on removing the engine, a buddy + 2x4 + chain can lift it out. They really aren't that heavy. My thoughts about the flywheel moving fore/aft was based on your photo: the edge of the opening appears to have been sawed-at (like by a spinning disc) rather than pummeled/cracked/abused by a loose object. So, another thought: Have you checked your crank-pulley bolt to see if it is very loose?

And GL!0 is just a gussied-up version with the "10 best options" (not really 10, but that's marketing...). Basically, just a high-end GL. Upgraded interiors, "upgraded" transmissions, usually turbocharged, rear disk brakes.

Are you currently getting backfire while trying to crank the engine, or was this a previous condition? If current, that probably means that the left side belt (distributor-side) isn't broken (since it drives the distributor), but still might have skipped some teeth. My suggestion is to remove the distributor cap and see if the rotor is still firmly mounted: Most (all?) EA82's use a screw to mount the rotor, and it is fairly common for this little screw to back out. If the rotor is OK, see if cranking the engine causes the rotor to turn. (Disable the coil so that you don't electrically stress it.) If the rotor doesn't rotate, the disty-side belt has broken. (If the other belt breaks, you typically will get an engine that tries to start, may even do so, but is hard to keep running.) You can check the belts by removing the rubber plugs in the belt covers, one on either side of the crank pulley: these are used to get at the tensioner-mount bolts, but also lets you check the belts. There are excellent write-ups on the Board for doing the belts, so I won't go into that. The 2 most troublesome tasks are to loosen that crank pulley bolt, and remove the small bolts that hold on the timing-belt covers (the nuts are molded into the plastic back covers, and tend to spin when you try to remove the bolts).

I would suggest that you put a prying tool into the timing/inspection window and see if you can shift the flywheel fore and aft.

+1 on grossgary's comments. I have removed fluid that looked like mud and had the most incredible smell, and still the trannies functioned Ok after proper flush.

IIRC (please get confirmation from someone else before assuming that I am correct), you can look down the snout of the trans input shaft and see the pump drive-tangs. Casual abuse should not snap/bend these, but EASILY damaged if TC not totally seated and you try to draw engine and tranny together with bellhousing bolts. There is a procedure for seating the TC somewhere on this board, mostly involving how to seat each shaft. Make absolutely sure that the TC is seated, and ensure that it doesn't slide forward out of engagement while horsing the beast around; some people use steel wire to immobilize the TC during installation. (BTW, I didn't follow my advice when I did one, and snapped the pump tangs. I had been feeling frustrated and in a rush. Bad combo...)

On some models/years (details escape me), the problem is at the connector rather than the switch.

All ea82 coolant leaks look like they are at the bottom... gravity at work. Check radiator hose and thermostat housing, little-bitty hose running from side of t-stat housing to underneath intake manifold (common leaker), intake-manifold-to-head gaskets (have a coolant passage), waterpump-bypass hose, heater hoses. Anything leaking on the topside of the engine will resent as drips off of the bottom.

I have done the ones in the valve area of an EA81 while it was still in the car. A little annoying, but doable. But, then, the EA81 has a little more room between its rails. Not really that big of a deal to pull the engine all the way out, or even just forward enough to tilt each side for access.

I have had torque steer with a failing (dry) cv joint, and also when my anti-roll bar link came unbolted (causes the body to roll with the torque, altering geometry). Probably the first thing that I would do is check the CV boot for tears, check the anti-roll bar link, and tighten the axle-nut. The axle nut should be periodically checked for tightness (especially after axle R&R) and could be causing your growling.

Year and model information would be helpful.

Epic fail on flare wrenches. (Generally, good luck with other wrenches.)

Distributor is driven off the US/CAN Driver's-side ("left") belt, same as oil pump. Physically check that the rotor is still keyed to the distributor shaft by its screw by grabbing the rotor and trying to gently turn it. '94 "should" have single-point fuel injection (SPFI), and the pump should put out a very vigorous flow (50-100L/hr?) at up to 60psi. HOWEVER, the pump will only run for about 5 seconds when you turn the key to "on" (run). It then waits until it gets a signal generated by your distributor telling it that the engine is rotating. No signal, no pump. Other things can disable pump, but this particular item can be bypassed by reconnecting those green diagnostic connectors: The pump should then cycle on and off every few seconds. You should be able to validate the coil by ensuring plus side has voltage, and using a stand-alone wire on the ground side to touch ground and see if spark results from the coil HT lead. Start by ensuring it has spark before worrying about fuel.

The flathead can still be found on many/most lawnmower engines.

I have two of those that I got from others.

As a member of the camp that does not think that it is a worthless engine, I say do not casually add mods to this engine unless you plan to be stranded somewhere with a broken engine. It is a 25 year old economy engine, and it has not gotten any better over the decades. Casual modifications will result in GDs prediction coming true.

Are you certain that it is a N/A MPFI? I have heard of the possibility in non-XTs but haven't actually seen one.

Did the "rear cat" get rudely awakened also? Sorry, I couldn't resist. I am VERY glad that you survived and that your Subaru helped to keep you that way. My one encounter with road debris was "motorcycle vs 100cm chunk of something heavy", and the "something heavy" won. I nailed the chunk with my front wheel at 45mph (75Km/Hr), the wheel stopped and I didn't. I learned that day that I liked leather, and that you should never look at the object you are trying to avoid hitting. (Hand-eye coordination is a double-edged sword.) Again, I am glad that you are safe.

Sorry nipper, my casual opening comment was meant for the universe, not in any response to your previous post. If I offended, I will extend my daily self-flagellation. Truly, my comments were unrelated to yours, and frankly, I had never really considered that a long stroke requires a large crankcase to handle the crank throws, and not just a long cylinder to handle the piston's stroke; thanks for making me realize the previously unconsidered. Of course you are right that the throw of the crank is the major part of why long-strokes can produce greater torque. On to other things... Although the piston speed might stay under generally accepted limits up to 14,000rpm (I haven't done the math, and the "generally acceptable" varies somewhat with what metallurgy is involved), bearing speed might be an issue, and rod bearing oiling might put a lower limit on things. (A "simple" change to improve oiling to the rod bearings on race-modified Datsun 240Z engines caused a large number of failures from oil starvation due to centrifugal effects at higher crank speeds.)

edit: the next line was NOT meant to be in response to any previous post, but rather a general feeling about how people tend to not really understand mechanical things. (BTW, I actually started this overly-long ramble before the previous post was added... I a a slow typer.) endedit So many misconceptions, so little time... Cylinder configuration is all about packaging, and little or nothing to do with ability to produce power and what type of power. (even the use of "power" here is inaccurate/incorrect.) A cylinder of the same design will produce the same amount of "power" regardless of how they are stuck together with other cylinders. The Subaru H4 is NOT a naturally torquey engine because of it's layout; in fact, it's ability to produce torque is hampered by the overall engine layout. Its short stroke is optimized away from ability to produce torque, and towards its ability to fit between frame rail. Such short strokes (compared to displacement) are usually used on very high-revving engines (which our H4s are not.). So, you need a narrow engine, but it can be long? Use an inline design. It has to have lots of cylinders, be of moderate length but can be wide? A V-arrangement might be what you need; just; just select the V-angle tat suits the width and height available. (BTW, the our horizontally opposed engines are really just 180deg-"V"s). OK to have a wide and tall engine, but it needs to be super short? Use a radial engine. Need something to spice up your company's "who are THEY?" image? Pick a Wankel rotary. Special rules in your racing organization? Pick a "W" a "true H" (ala BRM's H-16) or something even more exotic. Usually, the engine designers do not get to pick the engine package, as it is dictated by the "look" that the car manufacturer is trying to achieve: The engine has to fit the car. Or, almost as bad, the new engine has to be able to be built using the existing tooling. So, now that you know the arrangement, what are the compromises? Inline engines have long crankshafts compared to V-engines of similar cylinder count and design, and can not be revved as high before the crank breaks due to harmonic and torsional vibrations. (One of the reasons that some exotic V-12s take thir power from the center of the crank rather than one end.) But inline engines can be lighter (less redundancy) and have simpler and more effective intake and exhaust systems. (Running tuned exhaust headers of the tri-Y style is virtually impossible on a standard 90-degV/dual-plane-crank V8.) V-engines get the nod for higher-revving applications, or where the engine space is more boxy than long-and-narrow. They can be made lighter (if just OHC) and they can be made stiffer. They are less tall, typically, than an inline (except a leaned-over inline, like the Dodge slant-6, various BMW and Datsun designs.), so the lood can be lower. Radials get the nod if you like planes with lots of power that are fault-tolerant. Or if you like dumping a couple of quarts of oil on the ground each time you try to do a cold start. The number of cylinders and their angle relative to each other (and crank design) determine engine vibration. You get one type of vibration from the power stroke of each cylinder, and another type just from the rotating/oscillating mass of the piston/rod/crank-throw. To get the least amount of vibration from the power pulses, you want the cylinders to have their power strokes evenly spaced. For a 2-cylinder 4-stroke (all the following will assume 4-stroke), you want the pulses 360-crank-degrees apart. With a 4-cylinder its 180deg, with a 6-cylinder its 120deg, and with am 8-cylinder its 90deg. To get the least amount of vibration from the rotating masses, you want the masses to counteract each other, or at least not add. That means that you can get an inline twin in either primary balance or secondary balance, but not both: To get the power balanced, both pistons would have to go up and down at the same time, which makes the rotating mass vibration feel akin to riding a pogo stick. To get the rotating balance minimized (still causes an end-to-end rocking couple) the power is delivered 180deg-then-540deg apart (bu-bump, bu-bump). If you put 2-cylinders into a 180deg "V" (aka horizontally opposed) then it achieves both primary and secondary balance (with still some rocking couple). Inline-4s are mostly in balance, but still tend to shake... can't remember exactly why right now, but seems to me that it is because an inline has to have at least 6 cylinders to be in proper secondary balance. 180deg V-4s are better off. Options for 6-cylinder engines open up. They are well balanced in inline and V-angles that are multiples of 60deg. Quite a few 60deg V-6s, some 120deg, and some notable and familiar 180deg V6s. Detroit (and others) have built 90deg V6s, and then spent years and millions trying to tame the vibrations. (Typically done with a special crankshaft that offsets paired crankpins.) 8-cylinders start to get too long for inline design except in low-revving applications (typically industrial/diesels). V8s can be smooth and well balanced, with 90deg-multiple V-angle. Typical V8s are smooth but near impossible to put a good exhaust system on, because complimentary exhaust pulses can occur on opposite cylinder banks due their dual-plane crankshaft design. Attempts to "fix" this used either a "basket of snakes" exhaust system, or used a single-plane crank that made the engine essentially into 2 inline-4s fighting to tear the engine apart. Let's back up... How much displacement do you need? How many cylinders do your want to put that into? More cylinders generally means smoother, but it means heavier, bulkier, and less fuel efficient. (A lot of fuel gets used moving piston rings up and down cylinders, and the smaller that you break up the displacement the more ring surface there is.) For most of our purposes, 4 cylinders will work, especially in a 180deg V4. Do you want the engine to produce lots of torque, lots of power (now we use power properly, as HP, KW, et all), or fuel economy? Pick one, or maybe two. Torque is optimized with longer strokes, smaller bores, and lower speeds. Torque is a value that can be moved around, both in number and location on the engine's rev range. Torque is torque... Power is optimized by faster engine speeds, and the shorter strokes and larger bores that allow you to get there. Power is a product of torque multiplied by engine speed, and is thus majorly dependent on engine speed. You can have an infinite amount of torque, but if the engine isn't turning even a little then it is producing 0 (zero, nil, naught) power. similarly, an engine not producing any torque but moving at infinite RPMs still produces 0 power. You have to have engine speed to produce horseposer, and you have to have the engine producing torque to produce horsepower. Torque AND RPM. So, our little engine produces (in USA terms) more ft-lbs of torque then HPs of power. Both are made-up systems by long dead Europeans. Don't infer anything generally useful from them. Within the context of our meauring units, it is common for the torque number to be higher than the power number; it just happens that way. More important that the unit-system or even the numbers, is where all of this happens. The figures are peak values, and everywhere else they are less. How much less, and where? In general, the higher output an engine is, the more that it has been optimized to produce its peak values at a certain RPM, usually much higher than most of us will use. The closer torque peak is to HP peak, the more highly tuned and "peaky" the engine will be. The greater the spread in RPMs between those peak values, the less "peaky" the engine will be because the torque curve is flatter, with little drop off above and blow the RPM its peak. Less peaky is FAR more fun to drive in the real world. How do you get more power? Make the engine rev higher. How? Short stroke (minimizes piston speed which has physics implications), big bore (fits bigger/more valves), stronger drivetrain (DOHCs, multiple/smaller valves, stonger valvesprings that are often paired/tripled to control harmonics leading to spring surge)... and tuning the cam timing, the intake, and exhaust systems to shift the peak torque condition to the highest possible RPM. Back to our beloved opposed-4. Very oversquare bore-stroke ratio would suggest that it was meant to be a high-RPM engine, but the valve gear, intake and exhaust systems say "no way". The stroke is short to allow the wide opposed-4 design to be narrow enough to fit between the frame rails of an economy vehicle. The bore has gotten big to allow for the needed displacement increases over the years. It now looks like something that it was never intended to be, and even the EJs don't make any use of the RPM potential. My 71 Datsun has a higher rev-limit. Didn't intend to end on what sounds like a sour note, but got to eat lunch. :-\

My first thoughts would be the usual: Corroded CTS connection (check it, double check it, and then do GG's fix anyway ), and high-tension system. In my experiecnes, turbo models seem to be finicky about their high-tension systems, possibly due to poor management of A/F ratio causing variations in required spark-voltage. I have had bizarre issues with EA82Ts having flat spots in different portions of the its RPM range, curable with new plugs/cap rotor. Sounds like you already took care of the spark plug wires. If the turbo itself failed I wouldn't expect much other than evenly lacking power, maybe top-end power dropping off due to exhaust restriction. The uppipe to the turbo is prone to cracking at the turbo-inlet flange: This tends to make a hissing/whirring noise at idle but quiets as revs increase. But this tends to delay the onset of boost, plus decreasing it to low levels rather than poor running at low RPM and ok running on boost. The smoke near the turbo during seafoaming may be coming from a broken uppipe flange, or just some other exhaust gasket. How did you "check the timing"? Did you connect the green connectors near the ECU in the trunk, set the timing to 20dBTDC, and then disconnect the green connectors.