Jump to content
Ultimate Subaru Message Board

GeneralDisorder

Members
  • Posts

    23391
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    438

Everything posted by GeneralDisorder

  1. I think the idea is that you put the breaker bar in the slot, and apply pressure while hammering on the side of the axle tool. This way there is less bounce. Basically a ghetto impact wrench in a way..... Went over to busdepot.com as sugested and got one - $13.66 (with shipping). Hopefully it will save me from breaking breaker bars all the time. GD
  2. Yes - the trans will bolt right up - everything is there for it. I don't sugest doing this tho, as the Brat really should stay 4WD or you will devalue it considerably. I am with shawn - do the 5 spd 4WD tranny conversion instead. GD
  3. Isn't that the rolled Brat? I love that thing..... GD
  4. Yeah - I was thinking this weekend as well. Let me have a talk with my friend, since the party will be at his place. He won't be there Saturday, but he may not need to be. Likely his wife will be home anyway. GD
  5. Dude! don't take it to a shop! But if you do - there's a good Subaru shop in Portland operated by a board member - can anyone give him details about Ritchie's shop? GD
  6. Oh! My bad - didn't see the Automatic part... Still - I wouldn't think it was tranny related - try changing the belt. GD
  7. Actually - there was more than 2 gen's of pushrod engines before the EA81. Not sure how many - but there was the 1100, the 1400, and the 1600 at least. I agree with snowman tho - the EA82 was an experiment. But that doesn't make it an unfair comparison any more than 10 years of R&D leading to the EJ makes it unfair for comparison as well. The EA82, while certainly not as well designed as it could have been, is from the same vintage, and so in that respect is more fair a comparison than an EJ. Also - it wasn't the first OHC engine ever made, and I'm sure Subaru had a look at a few OHC engines before building the EA82 - I would also guess that they probably hired some engineers that had built OHC engines before, and knew how to design them. There's no reason for them to eat timing belts except bad design, and lack of intrest on Subaru's part of fixing it. I'm sure that if enough money was thrown at designing it, a kit could be built to upgrade an EA82 with the ablility to go 100k+ on a set of timing belts. 60k was obviously deemed "enough". and they moved on instead of fixing it's problems. They did fix some problems tho - the head's were redesigned twice - and they still crack. GD
  8. If you can find a digi that works (doubtfull), then you still can't use it. All the sending units are different - right down to the fuel level sending unit inside the gas tank. They all have different resistance values, and the wiring is not the same either. Big job, and as was said by craig - the early digi's aren't reliable. In fact they are so unreliable, they are nearly impossible to find. I have one in my wagon - and I'm just waiting for it to blow one day..... GD
  9. The pushbutton 4WD's use a vacuum line to engage the 4WD in the trans. There could be a leak in this system, causing rough idleing from the vacuum loss. This can change engine speed, and might cause the alt belt to squeel - just an idea of where to start. GD
  10. First - the third line out the top of the filter is the "vapor seperator" it's not a return line - it's for returning vapor to the evap canistor or the tank - I can't recall which at the moment. The fuel return line connects beside the supply line at the carb.... Also - there are 2 fuel filters - one under the hood, and the other under the car. On your Brat it's slightly behind the drivers door, on a little shelf next to the fuel pump. Both probably should be replaced. Do you have spark? Is your air filter clean? Is the choke operating properly? Etc. GD
  11. Yes - whining about changeing belts IS for suckers - I completely agree. On the other hand - a consumer whining abouy PAYING to have his timing belts changed every 60k IS NOT a sucker. You have not considered the economics of the situation. I have no problems changeing belts. But I do have better things to do with my time. That and the fact that the EA82 never came in any body style I like leads me to not own one. GD
  12. There's LOTS of 81 wagons out there still. I have an 84 wagon which is very similar. They are extremely easy to work on - you shouldn't have too much trouble - just ask if you have any questions. GD
  13. He has both actually - a high HP one in a non-lifted street Brat, and a torque ground one for the silver off-road Brat. I have yet to ride in the street Brat - but I hear it's a beast. I was never comparing them to EA82's - I'm simply addressing the previous statements about how you can't get high HP from an EA81 - it's been done. It is in fact easier than an EA82 - there's only one cam - no tendancy to blow gaskets - etc. I have nothing against EA82's - I just don't personally want to deal with em. And people saying that my EA81's are stuck behind UPS trucks is just wrong. In reality there isn't much difference between the EA81 and EA82 vehicle (power wise) if you consider the whole package. They both are pretty gutless really. If tuned right they are adequate, and more than capable of passing. And this thread was "why did subaru change...". Well - in reality - there's no good reason - since these engines are not playing in the "over 8,000 rpm" range. They swaped slightly more complex valve train (that hasn't been a problem) for unreliable timing belts, and crappy headgaskets.... it's all in the intrest of progress tho, and the consumer is the one who has to pay the price. GD
  14. My 84 wagon: http://usmb.net/gallery/albuo72/rear_wheel_well GD
  15. Basher - you can think whatever you like of EA81's - you haven't seen Qman's Brat in action...... now he's got two of em. Each running about 150 HP - these are not airplanes, and they are not highly modified. Slightly yes - but definately not "highly". Different cam, EA71 pistons (not stronger - just higher compression), and decked heads. With a Weber this combo really moves. I will say again - the difference in HP of the NA EA81 and the NA EA82 is 15 HP, and this is due to the larger carb, and intake, and different exhaust. Also - this 15 HP is largely nullified by the higher weight of the vehicle. EA81's can pas UPS trucks easily. Power to weight ratio is basically the same. Come on over and I'll put the 175's back on my wagon. and we'll drag race..... I've had that car to 110 MPH. I've had it to 100 MPH with 28" mud terrains. The reason most EA81's that are still around are slow is because they are old, and probably aren't running very well. If I go with an engine with timing belts it WILL NOT be the EA82. Subaru didn't get it right - the belts suck - lasting only half as long as the EJ engines. The headgaskets are a weak link as well. The engine, while decent, does not hold up to the reliablilty of the EA81. My next plant will be an EJ - probably in my Brat. And there is no reason that a pushrod engine could not be designed to go just as fast as any OHC - it's just a matter of buiding it. It would be more expensive, and have more moving parts - but anything is possible. GD
  16. One thing I would like to say - the stock y pipe is smaller than you think. It's double walled, and there's about 1/8" of space between the inner and outer walls. Making it about 3/8" smaller on the inside than it looks.... 2" from the heads is just way crazy big for a stock EA81. If you start adding a Weber, and a high flow intake, and a different cam, etc..... maybe, but even then I think it's probably too large. incidentally - I'm running a completely stock exhaust on my Weber'ed wagon - except I just left the muffler off. Yep - straight pipe. Pulls good considering I'm running 28" mudders. Sounds like a beast too. Purrs like a kitten at idle, but if you open both barrels - well - there goes the neighborhood as they say...... GD
  17. Seems like a pretty easy thing to fix yourself - just remove it completely. Wait a few years, and these will be all over the junkyard...... GD
  18. Yeah - I was talking about engine mounts when I said wheel hop - I didn't say that tho - sorry. As it was explained to me, the engine mounts load up when you dump the clutch (engine torques over to one side), and the engine mount being rubber, then acts like a rubber band - snapping back, and causeing the wheel to jump up and down. The stiffer urethane dampens the effect a lot, and doesn't load up as much when the engine torques down. This is all for a 2WD launch BTW - I've never experienced hop in 4WD hi. But then I can't get any wheels to break loose in 4WD - just a little chirp around corners off a stop light.... But your right - tranny mounts wouldn't have as much to do with wheel hop as the engine mounts I would think. Actually - the EA81 engine mounts are usually alright - it seems to be the tranny mounts that take a dump. I'm thinking about just doing the tranny mounts and seeing what effect that has. Most of the complaints about urethane mounts come from "idle vibration" - which since idling isn't moving the trans, I wouldn't think just urethnane tranny mounts alone would contribute to this. I'm hoping that they do a good job of secureing the trans, without really effecting the vibration, as most of that is taken care of by the engine mounts. We'll see tho. Vibration bothers me - but only when I don't know what is causeing it. If I know what is causeing it, and I make a concious decision to use mounts that allow more vibration, I'm ok with it.... does that make sense? At any rate, right now it's an experiment - a small scale one to see how the EA81 tranny handles them. I'll report my findings of course. It may be a while, as the Brat in my garage isn't moving for at least a few weeks - we've decided to pull the engine, and do some spring cleaning / POR15, and some welding in the engine bay to correct some off-roading damage to the radiator support. GD
  19. There have been V8 OHC engines - the Ford 427 "cammer" - around 1964 vintage I believe. It was conceived to tear up the hemi's of the day - which it did nicely being that it puts out 657 HP with dual four barrel carbs..... completely unsuitible for street use - only 50 were made, etc, etc. And yes - the EA81's producing 200 HP are aircraft engines - but the discussion wasn't about that - it was about being able to get a pushrod 4 cylinder up to high HP. The EA82 isn't rated at higher HP than the EA81 because of it's OHC design. It has a bigger carb, bigger intake, and a redesigned head with bigger valves. Besides that it's a measly 15 HP. I can guarantee that I would eat an EA82 any day with a Weber, and striaght pipes on a well running EA81. The OHC has nothing to do with the higher HP numbers. Not to mention that the EA82 cars are heavier than the EA81's - eating up most if not all of the advantage they had to begin with. Both are well designed engines, and I've seen both go well past 7k rpms - that's way past their power curve, so it really doesn't matter if the EA82 can go "faster" than the EA81 now does it? I guess I'm saying that the EA82, while a good engine, was the first of it's kind for Subaru. They eat timing belts like candy, and are not particularly better than an EA81. I wouldn't trust an EA81 at 200 HP, nor would I trust an EA82 at 200 HP - your money would be better spent on an EJ engine. The reason the aircraft guys use the EA81, and spend $10,000 or more building them up is BECAUSE they are OHV - timing belts CAN break, and that's a bad thing at 20,000 feet. Need I say more? GD
  20. There's still some play in em - their not completely solid. They will still absorb large shocks like shifting, and braking, etc. Small vibrations will transmit through - which shouldn't hurt anything - just make your hand brake and dash more annoying. The stiffer mounts will help control hard take offs, and eliminate the wheel hop that regular rubber mounts cause. Basically - they are still rubber - just a different kind of rubber, and a bit stiffer to dampen movement faster. GD
  21. My pictures of the tranny mounts - as promised: http://www.ultimatesubaru.org/usmb/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=10424 literally a 20 minute job - once the mounts are out.... GD
  22. That's way over the top for this coast - but not incoceivable for your side of the world maybe. Still sounds like a lot. I agree - no t-tops would kill the deal for me. I sure wouldn't own one without em. GD
  23. Nope - not rare. I've seen a number of auto Brats. After 84, the Automatic GL Brat did not come with the T-tops - but it IS still a GL. Frankly - it's not worth as much as a manual, with the T-tops. But if you want an auto..... Depends on what they want for it, and condition. BTW - the EA81 Auto's were crap transmissions - figure on replacing it at some point, or swapping it over to a manual. incidentally - this is probably why you don't see as many of these - they were either crushed for a bad tranny, or converted to manuals. GD
  24. Better HP? Nope - EA81's have been taken to 200 HP. Better mileage? Nope - I've seen EA81's get up over 35 MPG. Emmission? Nope - doesn't matter how the valves open - you can strap the SPFI to an EA81 and have the same emmisions equipment as the EA82.... You can make pushrods that are plenty strong enough for 300 HP - it's just a matter of making them from the right material, and making them thick enough. What everyone has failed to see is the accesebility of the overhead cam design. Your entire valve train is accesible right there in a small, removable engine peice, and is thus easily serviced. The EA81 has the disadvantage of having part of it's valve train inside the engine casing, and is much more difficult to service should something go awry. There is less moving parts in an overhead valve system - Subaru actually simplified things. I personally believe Subaru went with the overhead cam design because the engine is more easily tuned, and cams can be changed out, etc without removing the engine frorm the car - this has many benifits for rally teams, and race teams where modifications need to be done quickly. Now - having said this - I still will run my EA81 - because Subaru didn't get the timing belts right on the EA82 - the EJ's are better from what I understand, and I may eventually get one. For me - I can get just as much HP from an NA EA81 as anyone else can from an NA EA82. By simply adding a Weber, and a high flow muffler, I'm already higher than a stock EA82...... Also - EA81's are cheaper to buy, run and maintain. GD
  25. I have had my EA81's to at least 7000, with no problems. And the aircraft guys use a lot of stock internals too. But I do see your points. I think that rod breakage has a lot to do with the age of the motor. 7000 is nothing for a new engine of this design.... I think that was my point really. GD
×
×
  • Create New...