GeneralDisorder

I use this same one and it's never failed me. Good buy for the price. GD

6202-2RS can be had from any bearing house for $5 or less. NAPA sells them as alternator bearings. You can knock out the old bearing and install the new one with a bench vise, a punch, and a socket to drive in the new one. Very simple. GD

The pinch welds are very strong and will not collapse if you use a rubber pad on your lift to spread the load. They get crushed when shops don't spread the load. I lift all Subaru's from the pinch welds on my lift and I've never had a problem. GD

I do not beleive that is accurate. 36 psi above manifold *pressure* means the fuel pressure is 36 psi till you hit boost and then increases with each pound of boost. When they say 36 I think they mean at idle with normal manifold vacuum already compensated for. At least that's what I think the manual is trying to convey. As to the OP's problem - I beleive you have a bad CTS. The gauge does not use the ECU's CTS - it uses a seperate gauge sender. So you can't assume that because the gauge is working the ECU is getting the correct coolant temp reading. The connectors like to get dirty also. GD

Multi-port and Single-port are different castings. MPFI heads did not have the boxed EA82 symbol till after they stopped making the EA82T - 1990 was the last year that used the multi-port castings and thus no EA82T was equipped with gen-3 heads from the factory. GD

You don't need much for the sealed bearings - just a little for the lip seals on the knuckle. I put a smear on either side of each bearing to keep the seals moist and load up the groove in the lip seal. Red "japanese" grease. Nothing special. GD

Sounds like a possible wheel bearing. GD

The only switch used by your ECU is the neutral switch. And you don't even really need that. Just wire it to the clutch pedal switch that trips off the cruise control and it won't care what tranny you put in it. You can't change the front input shaft seal without splitting the case. Maybe.... I would have to look. I will soon enough as I'm building another EJ transmission with an OBX front for a customer. I have some flywheel's 2.2's and maybe a 2.5 - none are junk. They can be resurfaced for $30 or so and used no problem. GD

4EAT's didn't come out till '87. It's going to be a 3AT. Probably with 23 spline stubs but possibly with 25 spline's.... I haven't seen enough of those early turbo 3AT's to say for sure what it would have had. I suspect it would be 23. GD

Those 5 items should run about $35 to $40. Thats what it would be at my dealer anyway. GD

Ground is ground. The whole chassis is ground. Grounding the pump locally, while not what the engineer's intended, is not going to damage anything that hasn't already been damaged and if it gets the car running so you can drive it till he finds the resources to track down the true issue then it's a perfectly safe option. All the EJ powered Subaru's ground their fuel pumps through the chassis not through the ECU. This is proof positive that it's safe and works. The '85 turbo ECU might not be happy about it but as I said - that can be sorted out later. The ground runs directly to pin 50 on the ECU and if all else fails a new wire can be run there. But I doubt that would prove necessary. It should take about 5 minutes to determine if a new wire needs to be run to the ECU or if the ECU needs a new ground source.... Not 5 hours. If he wants to use dealer parts that's fine. But then not aquireing those parts for the customer is unreasonable. What he should say (in the interest of customer service) is "I will install those parts if you supply them but I will not warrantee the parts or the labor because I did not source them". That, IMO, is a fine policy. Though I do not agree with him that *only* OEM boots are acceptable. There are RACING boots made of silicone or urethane availible from the likes of Rockford CV, etc that will far outperform the factory one's. It's all a matter of what you want. And if the customer wants what I feel is inferior I will note my objection and the lack of warantee - if they still want it done then who am I to stop them? Bring the police. Take your car elsewhere. GD

First of all - lets take a look at a "newer" car shall we? 2006, 300 HP STi factory pickup tube: Notice the hole in the bottom that is only the size of the pickup tube itself. STOP! Backup. The pan gasket is NOT .070" when it's been torqued in place by the bolts. When it's torqued it's .030". And? What's your point? Really stupid to lift an engine by the oil pan. Sure pans get damaged. Sometimes it kills the engine. However - notice the little "tits" on the bottom of the STi pickup tube.... those are in case the pan get's crushed. Check out how tiny they are. That is enough oil flow to keep the engine from being starved (though I wouldn't risk putting it to the test - that is the idea behind them) . Pretty tiny. Perfect! Thank you! That proves my point. The sides of your clay cylinder there are many times larger in area than the tiny little tube that it feeds. Compare the area of the sides of your cylinder to the area described by that STi pickup hole I just posted. Its MANY TIMES larger than a 300 HP EJ257 pickup tube hole!!! Where the hell did these numbers come from? It's all fine an dandy to pull numbers out of your rump roast but expect to get called on it Doug. What "performance" Subaru source did this "5/8 to 3/4" measurement come from? I call BS. No math - just throwing numbers around - doesn't impress me or the crowd. Subaru didn't agree with you and your own measurements (though they are flawed because you didn't account for gasket crush) support that. And how do you know it would distort the bore? For the record I do torque the EA head gaskets to 50 ft/lbs (a whole 3 ft/lbs more than the 47 in the book) in order to insure I don't have to retorque them. It's never distorted a block, it's never pulled out threads, and I've NEVER had a repeat HG failure. So emperical evidence would sugest it's not a problem. Further - not a single engine I have built using a gasket replacement adhesive has failed. You haven't shown any evidence that supports your claim. Nothing but speculation. Nothing to even refute my measurements or my math from my previous post. If you read any of the dyno reports on them you would know that 180 to 190 is accurate. If and when I say "200" I always say "about" because the discussion is not talking about specifics just general performance. GD

Yeah the switch that's directly in line with the the shifter rod (for the main gears) is the neutral switch. You may find that that the rod doesn't have the v-groove to operate the switch.... but I've never tried to add a switch so I don't know. Just a possibility. All the part-time transmissions I've seen have had the 4WD switch.... I can't think of what a second switch would be that could be missing from another D/R transmission.... You can use a pedal-mounted switch for the cruise control as a surrogate neutral switch. When the clutch is depressed - might as well be neutral. I've done that on several FI swaps and it works great. I use anaerobic on all my transmission builds for all the flanges - both where the factory used Three-Bond and where they used a paper gasket and it hasn't been a problem. The factory gaskets are really, really thin. Little more than coated tissue paper. GD

Communication is key and I think the most troubling part of the story is that Jeff (the mechanic) is unable or unwilling to communicate with his customer or the resources (such as this board) necessary to solve the problem. Not returning phone calls is extremely troubling. Not being able to immediately solve the problem can happen to anyone but the key to excellent customer service is in being truthful, honest, and in the end making it right - if that means returning the customer's vehicle and money with an appology that you can't find the problem then so be it. But a better solution would be to ASK FOR HELP or find the resources - like factory service manuals - needed to do the job. The FSM's are still availible to order from Subaru. It's not the customer's job to supply them, or research the problem through internet forums. That's what the mechanic is being paid to do so the customer doesn't have to. Also - *guessing* at what the problem might be ("Darn those pesky new-fangled computers! Must be the computer!") and throwing expensive parts at the problem when the proper diagnostics have not been performed to determine if that's the right action or not.... is very unprofessional. GD

Have they all been used? Try just replacing the contacts. About $10 from Subaru. GD

Check the steering rack mounts on the cross-member. They may just need to be replaced and the rack is angling itself toward the column because of squishy rubber mounts. GD

You realize you need an adaptor plate to mate a 5MT D/R to an EJ engine right? GD

Apparently the engine will run if you ground the pump locally - but the way this old MPFI is wired the ground circuit for the fuel pump runs to the ECU and to some kind of ground "main junction" I would assume. (This is not how the EJ series computers are wired BTW - the fuel pump ground is just a chassis ground point not the ECU itself). So at this point the question is where is the problem - is it between pin 50 on the ECU and the pump, or is it one of the ECU's grounds (at the manifold perhaps?) that is the issue and pin 50 has no continuity with ground?.... Those are the tests that need performed. Check pin 50 for a ground connection and then check continuity on the wire from pin 50 to the pump. With the results of those tests we can move forward. GD

That all depends on how you handle it I suppose. The answer for most people on the carbed models is to just rip all that off and install a Weber. Don't really have any simple options like that for most folks. Sure there's MegaSquirt, etc but not everyone is comfortable with software and wiring, and all that. You and I may be - but we are also completely comfortable with the ASV's, the FPCU, and all that junk also. None of it is a big mystery to me. It is for people that don't know how the system works. And parts availability is very slim for both systems. The entire fuel and ignition systems are composed of parts that were made for only two years. With a non-turbo you can just throw it all away and buy a Weber. Can't easily do that with a turbo. Heads can be rebuilt. They are mechanical and unlikely to be damaged beyond repair. A little TIG welding perhaps - some resurfacing/valve job/cleaning of course. Nothing that can't be handled. It's the scarcity of the stock electronics, injectors, turbo, etc - that's the biggest problem. For that stuff you could be searching for a while or your other choice is to rip it ALL out and go with somethign like MS. At any rate - if you aren't familair with this stuff and comfortable with primitive and rare FI systems I wouldn't reccomemend doing the rebuild yourself. The *engine* itself is *similar* to the EA81 but there are many differences - the pulleys are all unique as is the water pump, power steering pump, rack and pinion, and a whole lot of other things. LOTS of rare and hard to find parts in that machine. GD

Why do you need one fitted in the pulley? You drive it out with a punch, and drive in a new one with a socket. You have access to a bench vise and a socket right? It's a ball bearing (not a roller bearing) - though it doesn't really matter what it is - knock out the old one and take it to a bearing supplier - they can match the numbers on it. What city do you live in? GD

An EA81 Turbo is not what I would call an easy and simple rebuild if you are not well versed in Subaru engines already. A non-turbo EA81 is the height of simplicity and is an easy task by comparison. The EA81T is a rare engine with many hard to find parts and strange vintage systems that were part computerized and part mechanical. The fuel system and ignition system are seperate and only loosely integrated..... If you want to bring it by my shop on the way down from WA I would be happy to check it out. Sounds like it needs to NOT be driven though. If it was severely overheated and that's what caused the low compression numbers you need to pull the engine and do a complete rebuild before driving it. I do that kind of work and have lots of satisfied customers if you are interested. You can PM me, etc. GD

Actually I agree with you to some extent. I choose to hate the EA82's and especially the turbo's because I've worked on tons of them and I know how much easier the EA81's and EJ22's are to work on. Every time I work on one it takes me twice as long to do the same jobs that are simple on EJ's and not even required on EA81's. But I HAVE worked on them and I know their flaws. People that haven't worked on the EA82(T) and/or have nothing to compare it to because that's *all* they have worked on - shouldn't be making qualitative statements and comparisons. They don't have all the data. The EA82 (and even the turbo) can be a reliable engine - but it takes a lot of effort to bring back an old turbo to a level where it can be safely driven even in stock form. When I got my '91 SS (EJ22 turbo) I marched right down to the dealer and said "give me every hose listed - coolant, oil, etc" and I replaced them along with plugs and wires, radiator (and heater core), along with repairing my water tank nipples, and other things along the way. Now I can safely drive it without fear of cooling system failure. It is my opinion that this was absolutely neccesary and the condition of the hoses I pulled out confirmed that it was. And the EJ22T compared to the EA82T is like comparing a jet fighter to a paper airplane. The biggest reasons I hate the EA82T is that it is difficult and time consuming to work on, they have troublesome timing belts and lubrication systems, poor cooling systems without enough overhead designed in, and they are stupendously complicated for the measly 115 HP they make compared to the EJ22 non turbo which makes 20 more HP and is simple and ultra-reliable. No brainer decision IMO. Especially when first generation Legacy's can be had for the same $200 if you look around hard enough. GD

That's not off-topic. It's ADVICE - which is what forums are for. What do you expect from my step-son? I keep wondering how that's possible without being married.... Go ahead and block everyone - makes the forum pretty much useless. And since you have all the answers I don't see why you come here Doug. *I* come here because I like helping people. Sometimes that means I have to tell them hard truths like "buy a Legacy!". But I don't block anyone - even you. That would be counter to the point of an OPINION based forum. All opinions are welcome - even your's. But don't expect to not get some $h1t about it once it a while. As for a $200 project car - well it's definitely that. Most of us would rather not deal with that headache of an engine but that's your call. MANY people have come and gone over the EA82T. They just get tired of replacing engines. GD

I know my '91 SS has a rev limiter also. I've hit it quite a few times - she likes to rev and it's so smooth that I hit rev limit before I make my shift sometimes. I think mine is 6500 . GD

Yeah..... that's why I'm learning machine work and buying the neccesary equipment when I have the chance - all the shops I know that do it are run by crusty old dudes that look like they might just keel over at any minute. No one is learning these trades anymore. Was the same when I worked on industrial machinery - there isn't anyone going to school for this stuff anymore so it's all on-the-job training and learning from guys that should have retired 20 years ago. And the kids these days have no patience for these arts. They want things to be fast and easy and at the click of a button - and these special hands-on skills that machines often require are anything but instant gratification. Thus they seemingly have no interest in it. What's even more sad is that as a result of this machines are no longer being built to be repaired. They are engineered to be thrown away and thus bring in repeat business for the manufacturer and cut out the repair man and the rebuilder. GD