jonathan909

It's often said, but I'll say it again: The toothed idler has a failure rate that's staggeringly higher than the smooth ones, so if you're doing the belt and tensioner and not a whole kit, be sure to do the toothed one too. Also, I stick with Mitsuboshi belts.

I think that anyone interested in figuring out the difference (I include myself, but don't have an H6 running at the moment - it's next in the garage queue) should take a look at that extra alternator signal. Pin 3, black w/ red tracer, goes to pin C10 aka pin 10 of ECU connector B136 (this is the '06 Tribeca). My guess would be that it's an output that the ECU senses, but I could be wrong. Throw a meter on it. Try disconnecting it, probing the two sides to see which side is driving and which is listening, see what the ECU thinks of that signal going away and whether the alternator continues to output properly. Should be able to figure out pretty fast whether it matters.

It looks like this is going to take a little digging, because the relevant circuits are spread across a bunch of pages all over the manual. However, at first glance I'd question the above statement. If you arrived at "reference voltage the ECU uses" by reading "REF. TO ENGINGE (sic) ELECTRICAL SYSTEM [E/G-01]" on the schematic, my interpretation would instead be "refer to engine electrical system drawing", based on similar indicators on the schematic.

All on the mark. I'd say, though, that you're probably being overly generous in your lexical interpretation. Simple fact is that alloys are described (by number) in the UNS, and within those alloys there are grades, and the word "military" has no place at all in that taxonomy, hence Geoff's highly amusing dismissal. Of course, GM did a much simpler takedown of that twaddle in their ad, in which they pitched an empty toolbox into the back of an F-150, resulting in a hole punched in the bed. Sadly, Mencken (though it's been more broadly attributed in various forms) remains right: "No one in this world... has ever lost money by underestimating the intelligence of the great masses of the plain people." The F-150 remains the best-selling vehicle in North America. But we're getting pretty OT here. Lemme pull that schematic.

I'm not sure I buy that argument. Might be a factor, but there are just too few engineers out there who know when to take a step back and say, "I know I can do this. The question is, should I do this?" Ford: I just finished a timing job on my daughters' '05 4.0 V6 Mustang (the plastic chain guides went to pieces). We had to pull the motor to do it because those morons took a perfectly good V6 and made it OHC by replacing the usual V cam (with lifters and push rods) with a jackshaft that in turn feeds the cams, one of the chains for which is at the back of the block. As if that isn't bad enough, we had to buy a special toolkit to time it because none of the timing sprockets are actually keyed to their shafts and are kept in time by hugs and prayer. And on their aluminum trucks: I know an aeronautical engineer (through sailing - he used to build Tornado catamarans). This is a brother who knows his alloys. I told him the ads for those trucks made me yell at the TV, and here's his reply: > Incidentally, the Canadian TV commercials for the Ford F150 truck > boasts that the body is made of Military grade aluminum. There is > no such material as military grade aluminum, so it must be a figment > of some marketeers imagination. Who would knowingly buy a truck > with a body made of an imaginary material?

Just so I'm looking at the right drawing, which year is it?

I appreciate that it may not always be the best approach, but it's usually how we roll: Don't bother with extremely detailed minutae that's only going to be useful once in a lifetime - until you need to. Okay, this is getting stupid. I'm irritated by the idea that the ECU should somehow be involved in making an alternator run, because it's easier not to put it in the loop. Leave well enough alone and don't be a busybody engineer getting a computer in the way of things that don't need a computer - it only reduces reliability. Before I crack the schematics out of sheer annoyance, have you checked all of the alternator wires end-to-end for shorts and opens? Do you see the same voltage at both ends of each of those wires with the engine running?

This shouldn't be taking this long to sort out. When you say "on just the battery", what do you mean? That you had the alternator disconnected?

Smarter yet would be to buy an actual can of freeze spray, which is intended for just this purpose. Electronics suppliers carry it.

Probably part of the fuel pump assembly (in the tank).

The main thing is to get that it's not a "tab". It's a locking lever that keeps the connectors mated and engaged rather than vibrating apart and bringing everything to a halt. Normally the function of those locks is purely mechanical, but it's possible for an interlock switch to be integrated into it, so that the system won't work if it's not in the mated+locked position. I don't think Subaru did this, but I'd have to dig up a spare ECU here and confirm. But from this photo it doesn't look broken. Does it actuate and lock the harness connector?

Time to close the loop on this - I had too much going on last fall and it sat over the winter. In retrospect, I'd run down a rabbit hole and gotten lost, thinking that out-of-range manifold vacuum might be affecting injector rail pressure, and that bad vacuum may be a product of maladjusted valves - all of which was just getting too arcane. So I backed up, considered that the only source of parametric combustion feedback is from the O2 sensors, and that (despite them not generating any error codes) it would be stupid not to replace them both on spec - fastest and cheapest thing to try. So I just did that and now it's as happy as a baby in a barrel of t!ts.

So Portland has been restored?

Sure, but since that's an input to (rather than an output from) the ECU, it suggests either a different pressure sensor or simply a different operating range (I'd tend toward the latter). That doesn't mean a different ECU is needed, rather that the ECU just needs to know whether it's in an AT or an MT car.

And do you mean "ailment" or "alignment"?

I'm with you 100% on that. My 95's alloys make me One Posh Bitch. If I had that Eye-talian car I'd mos def feel broke-@ss ghetto.

If that's correct, and the tolerances are too tight, I can see that all the expensive replacements in the world won't fix it. But the tape-over-the-CEL thing isn't happening. That worked for the Velvet Underground, but otherwise it sounds like pretty bad advice, as that way you don't see the blinks when additional codes are thrown. And we don't have to do (periodic) emissions testing around here, so that's not a consideration, but being able to use one's cruise control - as well as getting decent mileage - is. So I'd like informed opinions on the various fixes appearing around the 'net, because for the most part they appear to be on the edge of bogus. For example: Cleaning out your cat with soapy water. A can of commercial cat cleaner in the gas tank. Putting a spacer between the O2 sensor and the cat. etc.

Not if you're in Italy.

Umm... "Italy".

Again, by coincidence, this just popped up on the '06 OBW I recently did the head gaskets on. I didn't know this is A Thing. Would you please be so kind as to direct me to the best summary on the problem/solution?

No, these ones. On the plus side, at least the two parts didn't rust together!

At P+P? You're kidding, right? Those guys are butchers, and you won't find a car in the yard in which the catalytic converter hasn't been pulled by simply chopping through both of the manifold Y-pipes. They don't give a toss. A few years ago I was trying to replace same on my old '95 Legacy - which is tough enough because there are two head variants, one exhaust port or two. The couple of single-port manifolds I found had been destroyed in this manner. I happen to know the manager at the bigger of the (two) Calgary yards (he used to manage one of the electronics disties here in town), and I complained to him as well as up and down the food chain: Please, guys, you can get that cat out with a single cut aft of the flange instead of two in front of it. Nothing changed. They just don't care. Aside from exhaust systems, it's almost impossible to find a good truck (esp. 4x4) driveshaft there because they're utterly careless in forking the cars around. And gas tanks - I think they must have running contests to see how many holes they can punch while draining them.

That's just goofy - the EJ25 used in those cars is the same as that in the Legacy/Outback. Maybe they didn't list those cars because they had other engine options e.g. DOHC, H6, etc., which it obviously wouldn't be compatible with. But if yours is a SOHC it should be the right one.

I feel you. Completely understandable to go the extra kilometer and get that baseline peace of mind. Today's fastener coincidence: I'm in the middle of some lightweight front end bodywork on my girls' '05 Mustang ragtop - they clipped a deer last fall, so we're replacing bumper cover, a fender, and a couple of lights. In another case of what-fscking-slob-had-his-mitts-on-this, we found ample evidence of a previous front-end "event", and where there should be a metal plate with three captive studs that anchors the fender, bumper cover, and turn signal together, the old, rusted-out original plates were used, but held together with - wait for it... those big screw-in drywall anchors. And wire ties. Lots of wire ties. Sheeeeeeeee-it.

I get the "peace of mind" thing, but I still don't get why people routinely install these kits when there's no evidence of problems with the pump or tensioner and most of the hard components aren't all that failure-prone. When I do timing, if the pump isn't leaking and the tensioner's tensioning, it's the belt and the toothed idler (which has a much higher failure rate than the smooth ones).