wtdash Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 (edited) Look @ the bottom of this page and you'll see a list of Similar Threads. A couple may be relevant now that we have your trans ID. Also, go to OpposedForces.com, click the Subaru Parts catalog link, select your Model>>Year>>etc and it shows the similiar part #'s under the AT info HERE. For Legacy Outback 2.5: TZ102Z2ABA '94, November — '96, June TZ102Z2CBA '95, December — '97, July TZ102Z2DBA '96, July — '98, May TZ1A2ZJEBA '97, October — '99, May For Legacy GT 2.5: TZ102Z2AAA '94, November — '96, June TZ102Z2CCA '95, December — '97, July TZ102Z2DCA '96, July — '98, May TZ1A2ZJEAA '97, October — '99, May For a Forester '98-'02 : TZ103ZJ1AA '96, November — '98, June TZ1A3ZC2AA '98, March — '99, June TZ1A3ZC2AA '99, April — '99, December TZ1A3ZC2AA '99, September — '01, February TZ1A3ZC3AA '00, December — '02, February Looks like a Legacy GT....they had smaller/shorter tires 195/60-15 (in '96) vs. the 205/70-15 on the OB , and I'd bet the ratios in the trans are different - I know the 5th gear ratio in the 5-speeds on the OB is different than the GT, to make up for the taller tires??. TD Edited February 9, 2012 by wtdash Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weldersd Posted February 9, 2012 Author Share Posted February 9, 2012 (edited) Is there any way to see the ratios of the two and compare? This is making sense though, if it was made for smaller tires, then the engine would be laboring more with the bigger tires, dang, so now what, put on smaller tires, Thanks for the info Edited February 9, 2012 by weldersd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtdash Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 Subaru used to publish that info in the Owner's Manuals, but my '98 Forester did not have it....the FSM should have it if you can find one online. Td Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weldersd Posted February 9, 2012 Author Share Posted February 9, 2012 ok, so I have the service manual, it's showing some differences with the outback version vs the legacy, it's in pdf so this forum won't let me attach it. here's the differences I see, (legacy 2500cc vs outback 2500cc) TC: Stall torque ratio 1.8-2.0 vs 2.2-2.4 stall speed: 2200-2600 vs 2400-2800 Transmission: clutch number for reverse and low 6 vs 5 that's the only differences I can see per the legacy 1996 service manual. -one more clutch in the low clutch pack, why? stall speeds for TC different, Can I just put the old TC in? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jarl Posted February 9, 2012 Share Posted February 9, 2012 (edited) For what it's worth: (From "High-Performance Subaru Builder's Guide" by Jeff Zurschmeide) EDIT: Hold the press! I just found a nice table on my ('99) FSM, and it shows: w/ 2.2 engine: 1st: 2.785 - 2nd:1.545 - 3rd:1.000 - 4th:0.694 - R:2.272 w/ 2.5 engine: 1st: 3.027 - 2nd:1.619 - 3rd:1.000 - 4th:0.694 - R:2.272 The equivalent pages for the '95 show only the first set of ratios. Edited February 9, 2012 by jarl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weldersd Posted February 9, 2012 Author Share Posted February 9, 2012 As I posted there seem to be no differences in the gear ratios, only the clutch number and TC ratios, I wonder If I can get by swapping TC's with the old unit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weldersd Posted February 9, 2012 Author Share Posted February 9, 2012 OK, I think i'm on to something. the service manual shows the speedo gear ratio for non-outback at .83 and .76 for outback model, so I just went on a approx 6mi trip with my garmin gpsmap 76 and I got the following readings: when the car speedo shows 60mph I was traveling approx 63.5 mph according to gps. after a 6 mile trip the car odom read 5.5 mi I divided 200/6=33.3, then .5x33.3=16.65 so at 200mi my car odometer should read approx 16-17 more miles than it is, this would bring us back to pretty close to our original pre-trans swap numbers. so that's good, now the only question remains why the extra clutch plate in the low/reverse clutch brake? I wonder if it has to do with the increased stall speed on the TC? Now that I found out the TC on the new trans has a lower stall speed, I now notice it, definitely engages much sooner. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weldersd Posted February 10, 2012 Author Share Posted February 10, 2012 So nobody knows why the 96 OBW 4EAT have one more low/reverse clutch brake and a higher stall speed TC? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.