Gnuman

The pictures were fine. I would worry most about the condition of the bolts holding ont he crossmembar. Take some PB Blaster and spray it on them to loosten things up. Be careful pulling them off as well as you don't want to bust the bolts. they will be 17mm or 19mm IIRC. Alignment is optional, but a good idea here. you may have to drop (not remove, just disconnect soit hangs) the rear diff to get it loose from the crossmember. Good luck on this project!

I actually do that. I'm mobile, meaning I come to you to do the work where you are. Shoot me a PM or email if you want to consult.

In theroy it should work. in practice, it works in theroy. Here is the show stopper: the ignition and fuel metering are controled by the computer that also needs to be fed juice. Thus, you might get it started if you are just under the amount of juice neded to turn it over. Otherwise you would have to get the engine moving fast enough to let the alternator feed juice to the computer and injectors. A better solution would be a jumper pack and a remote starter switch. The switch circumvents any bad sensors in the tranny that may be preventng the starter from kicking in, and the jumper pack gives a boost to the battery in time of need. This type of kit would be much smaller than the kit you would need to start the car with mechanical force alone.

OK, I can't keep this in any longer. Every time Subaru comes out with a model that looks different from the previous ones, there are a dozen or so threads one after the other bashing the new look. c'mon now! Who ever sooks at a Subaru on teh dealership floor and says "Oh! that is so pretty, I must have it!!!"? Subarus are not sold that way. Subarus are sold during the test drive, where they show thier superior handling and stability, or they are sold by reputation as a rock solid car that is likely to last longer than the payments. Every small change Subaru makes in the looks of thier cars will forever be determined to be vomitously ugly, 'til the end of time. At least until the next year when they change something else, and the old version suddenly becomes beautiful. . .

Gene, one question: can you pull the arm that the slave pushes against away from the slave by any significant distance (more than 1/4")? If you can move the fork (the item I just asked about) easily, the problem is likely inside the bell housing. Oh, and what year aned model are the car? And miles on the car would also be good. This will give us a better picture to work from. . .

Yes, the 2.5L parts will work. The hlutch may feel a bit heavy as the pressure plate has a higher clamping force than the 2.2L version. This is b3ecause the 2.2L engine has 135Hp and the 2.5L has 160HP. When I took off hard in my 92 wagon, I would tend to break traction on the clutch (the clutch would spin, sort of like kids "peeling out" only with the clutch instead of the tires). Because of this I went to a 2.5L clutch kit, and that problem is totally gone. Well, almost. The tires will now just break traction on a hard start. I suspect that my engine has just a tiny bit more oomph than it is rated for. . . Of course, considering that I only have 240K miles on it. . . Oh, and my preference for a clutch is to get an Exedy clutch kit: http://http://www.autopartswarehouse.com/search/?N=11736+1719+4294967270+9191 Try that site. the 2.5L version is abotu $50 more than the 2.2L version

The holes on the heads are on all DOHC 2.5's. When I saw them, I assumed they were for a COP (Coil On Plug) option. Never saw the wires that cover them though. there is no bolt that goes into them at all on the standard configuration. I have done dozens of these HG's. skip those bolt holes. It is bad enough that the wires sit almost right up against the frame rails as is. . . Adding a bolt there will only make your life harder as you maintain the vehicle down the road.

Well, Bethel Island is only 50 miles away. . . When would this be happening? PM me and I'll see if I can get there. . .

Yes, it will stuff up the system over time. Yes, it is an overheating fluid issue on both the manual and the automatic transmissions. the tires need to have the same circumfrence within +/- 1/4 inch (Something like 5mm) to prevent it. No, you will likely not notice it when not on pavement. It will also not be real noticable on pavement untill it is real bad. Yes, it is repairable. Actually easier on a manual than on an automatic. On the manual, there is one failure point, and only one way to fix it: replace the VC that serves as a center diff. How it fails is that the Viscious Fluid heats up (normal) causing it to solidify (which locks up the VC to transfer teh power to the other set of wheels). When it is too active for too long, that fluid bakes to a near solid state, and does not return to the free moving condition. What this causes is the rear wheels are locked to the front ones. In that state, tight turns (well all turns to some degree, but it is most noticable on tight turns) the front wheels, which want to turn at a different speed than the rear ones, fight against the turning of the rear wheels. This causes them to act as if the brakes were applied. In bad cases, the wheels will actually break traction and "skip" on tight turns. replacing the VC will return the transmission to normal operation. The problem with this is that the part is not cheap, and you have to take the rear of the transmission apart to replace it. If you are not doing your own work, that is expensive as well. If you are doing yhour own work, it is simply a pain in the arse. . . If this sounds like I have gone through this. . .you are right. . .

First things first: by 94, teh AUX jack was gone. That radio/cassette unit has been swapped with a pre 92 unit (89-91). This should not affect the CD player itself ( a seperate unit) unless the CD player is from that same pre 92 car. If the CD Player itself is from 92 or later, the wiring is simple. Previous to that, however, the wiring was slightly different with regards to the lighting, and power. One likely problem you have is that the internal power supply board is gone bad. This can be replaced, and parts are available ( I found them att one time, but did not have the cash at the moment, and do not remember quite where I found them. A Google search found them for me, though) At this point your alternatives include: repairing (or having repaired) that unit, grabbing a new(er) one from a salvage yard (good luck finding one. look in any SVX, or pre 99 Legacy or Outback. You might also find one in an Impreza), Or you can go the easy route and replace the entire headunit. I have one of these as well, from a 91 LS, and replaced it with one from a 92 SVX when it started acting the same way yours is. Now the one from the SVX is acting up. . . and I still don't have the cash for parts. . . No problem, though, as I use an MP3 player with the AUX jack. ..

And have you seen how much crap collects back there? In a 93, the drain hose may even stick out of the rear of the fenderwell (the plastic piece that defines the inside of the wheelwell) towards the rear of the front wheels. If you have compressed air, and do not want to drop the headliner, you can blow the dirt out from the bottom. It will, of course, collect in the tray. One other point is that the drain hoses sometimes come loose from the tray, causing the tray to drain right onto the headliner. Your best bet at this point is to drop the headliner and inspect before trying to fix a situation you are not sure of the nature of.

The general got a good hit on why they were put in on the 89-91 models. In 92 the car underwent a "facelift" and with the prices of in dash CD players going down, they opted on saving a few pennies and doing away with the front AUX input. During this facelift we also lost the rear organiser pockets for the height adjust seats, and the forward to back adjustable headrests for them as well. In addition, the rear swaybar was dropped from the L models, only being standard on the LS and better. . . It is similar to the later conversion to the plastic thermostat housing, and plastic oil seperator in the 95-99 models. We can call this trend in Subaru history "The Attack of the Bean Counters!" and yes, it makes no sense at all. . .

Heh, I've started telling people that my car is so old, it has come back into fashion!! The AUX in is just starting to come back into car radios in order to support MP3 players. . . And yes I do use an MP3 player as my primary music source. . .

Hey, I have a spare one of those laying around. Came out of my 92 when I swapped it for a 91 unit. (the 90 and 91 models have a front AUX jack that went away in 92. . .) If you want it, I can send it up to you for the price of shipping. send me a PM or email if you are interested.

I second the evap canister. This is a durable item (it does not wear out). Why do you need to replace it?

Mainly because the cheap white toothpaste is a very fine abrasive. It is like edible plastic polish. . . Well anything polish actually, but harder materials will take a lot longer than the plastic used in the headlights.

Flip the column swich a couple of times to be sure it is off. . . That is the Subaru Virgin Switch, and it may be halfway between on and off, so it looks to be off, but is really on. . .

Yes, they did. It plugged into the back of the radio unit with a DIN13 cable and replaced that small pockey (with a door) that sits below the radio. The AUX input in the 89--91 radios was to facilitate a portable CD player at the time, but it works with an iPod (or 0ther MP3 player) just fine. In 92 they took the AUX input out of the radio without changing anything else. I have had both types apart, and the circuit traces are still on the board for these years (at least the 92 has them). The AUX input was taken away as a cost saving modification, and the radio is a direct swap into any 90-94 Legacy. The total radio space for these models was 2.5DIN where IIRC the 98 Imp had a 1DIN opening (perhaps a 2DIN). This makes the stock 91 radio unusable to them. If, however, anyone with a 92-94 Legacy wants a stock looking radio with AUX in, DO go for the 89-91 radio. I have one in mine (with the CD player from an SVX) and it works great. Heh, my car is so old, it is in fashion again Please note also that the FM transmitter is susceptable to interference. Quite badly, in fact, and only really usable when you are so far out that no other radio signals can reach your antenna. . .

To tow with a dolly, disconnect the driveshaft at the rear diff. Otherwise you can tow with all four down in neutral. I have done this on several occasions. just take the four bolts (12mm) that hold the rear U-joint to the flange on the diff out and store them in the ash tray (or the armrest if you actually use the ash tray <yuck >). There is a guard just forward of this that will hold the shaft safely off the ground during the trip.

OK, I can't stand it anymore. I have to chime in. The car is a 92 Legacy 2.2L manual, 230K miles on it. The "feed me" light (c'mon, that is what it really means. . .) comes on intermittantly just below E, then I have about 40 miles range before the car goes bingo (out of fuel). The one time I let it go that far, the station was across the street, ande I got 15.3 Gal. into it. That last .5 gal was wasted, as the pickup could not get at it. Letting the fuel get this low is hard on the pump and on the engine, so I do not do so often. Emily (my car) likes Arco gas (BP), and I get between 20 and 30MPG depending on how I'm driving. All told I'm averaging about 25MPG on a 15 year old car with over 200K on the ticker. At that I'm also getting really good emmissions readings. I use about a quart and a half of oil in my 5K change interval (synthetic, but I do not trust the filter past 5K). Recently the feed me light has started to lie to me, going on when the guage is above E. I tell it to fsck off and after a bit it goes off, returning at a more reasonable time. Hey Nipper, got any thoughts on that one? I am considering pulling the fuel guage sender and cleaning it up sometime soon as well. Does anyone have a recomendation on a cleaner?

My guess is that there is some gumming up of the works in the tranny due to the age/condition of the tranny fluid. This caused the inhibitor valve to lag long enough to stall the engine and give a (un)healthy jolt. the inhibitor valve is the second stage defense against this incidence. the first is the button on the shifter, which needs to be looked at. As for the insides of the tranny, a good flush and fresh fluid is indicated. I do not suspect that any serious damage was caused by this incident. I would be more concerned if the car stopped completely and drove badly after that. It does not sound like anything that serious happened. Follow up question: Is the car behaving normally now? If not, what has changed.

that would make more sense except that the speedo is cable driven from the tranny. Later cars went to an electrical one, which would behave exactly as you describe. Duty B has been ordered, and will be installed when it arrives.

A 93 Legacy will be an EJ22. Bone simple to work on, and the EJ22 is damn near indestructable. The rest of the chasis is also built to keep up with the engine. this engine was actually even better (OK, slightly:rolleyes:) than the EA82, which is a feat in itself. Get this car, or put them in touch with me and I'll take it.

OK, the first thing you need to replace is that "Service Manager". You (or anyone else for that matter) should never have to put up with that kind of treatment. Ever.

I'm pretty sure, yes. When I punch it, I do not break traction. If all of the power was going to the front, I would peel big time. I know. I had to drive an Outback that had the driveshaft pulled. Got stuck in a spot that I had to punch it to change lanes. . . the front tires did not stop spinning until I let off of the gas as it was drifting to the side. . .