legacycentral bbs

I'm interested specifically in items such as:

Timing belt
oil seals
thermostat
water pump
etc.

TIA.

If I don't run into a time issue, I will check for you tomorrow.

I'm inclined to say yes.

Thanks Michael

what constitutes a "new" 2.2?

aren't the later 2.2's interference? not sure if that would mean parts were different, but it would seem that things might be layed out a little bit differently

The timing belt is the same up through the EJ22EZ, which is still the Phase I motor, but with the solid lifters and 9.7:1 CR. The Phase II EJ22 (which I've seen coded as EJ222 or EJ223) has the same belt as the EJ251 and EJ253.

Keep in mind though, all I did is compare part numbers. The part number is different for the Phase II engine... BUT that doesn't necessarily mean it won't work on our cars or otherwise.

That's the only exception. Everything else is the same. Water pump, T-stat, and front oil seals all have the same part numbers.

What constitutes a phase II EJ22?

I really don't pay too much attention to all the phase crap & ej2325234823432432 stuff.

The main difference between Phase I and Phase II EJ engines is the location of the thrust bearing. Phase I's have the center-mounted thrust bearing, while Phase II's have the rear-mounted thrust bearing.

This is the main argument that is made when claiming that the USDM Legacy Turbo does NOT have the same engine as the 22B, because our EJ22T was Phase I, and the EJ22G in the 22B was Phase II.

1990-1996 had the same PhaseI EJ22.
1997-1998 had the interference version of the PhaseI EJ22 with a higher CR.
1999-01 had the PhaseII EJ22

That's pretty much what I've figured out. The numbers after EJ22 I don't really care about, there's so many ways of expressing it.

In 95' they changed the head design to a single port exhaust and I'm not sure when they did the change to the valve train by my 96' has solid lifters and a slightly different cam layout, not my old familar HLA valve train.

From what I understand, in 95'+ while the piston-valve isn't interference the valve train is interference so some things will still get FUBAR'd if the timing belt breaks.

The only way there can be valve-valve interference is if the engine is DOHC. Thus, if a timing belt breaks, and the cams on one head rotate independently of each other, the intake valves will hit the exhaust valves.

To my understanding, all Subaru DOHC engines are valve-valve interference.

skid542 wrote:In 95' they changed the head design to a single port exhaust and I'm not sure when they did the change to the valve train by my 96' has solid lifters and a slightly different cam layout, not my old familar HLA valve train.

From what I understand, in 95'+ while the piston-valve isn't interference the valve train is interference so some things will still get FUBAR'd if the timing belt breaks.

Nope. My 95 is dual port.

And it was somewhere in 96 that they changed it to solid lifters. One of the 96L owners has hydraulic lifters but single port exhaust. 96 was a confusing year

And my 95 isn't interference.

Okay. So the plot thickens...

So all the changes to single port and the lifters occured in 96'? Mine is definately single port and solid lifters (I've looked at them personally).

Are any of the SOHC valve-valve though? I never quite understood how they could be but I definately recall hearing that there were a couple years that they were even if they weren't piston-valve.

Thanks too for helping clear this up for me as I've been trying to figure it all out for a while.

Well, they didn't necessarily occur for the 96 model year, but probably during the 96MY. I don't know for sure, but I think some EJ22s in 96 had dual ports as well. There's a lot of crossover in the middle of a MY sometimes.

The guy I mentioned before's car was made late in the 96MY FWIW.

The only way I could see a SOHC engine's valves hitting each other would be if you revved the ever-living piss out of it and the valves float long enough that the intake and exhaust valves essentially open at the same time.

But under normal operation, it is impossible for a SOHC engine to be valve-valve interference.

So is the 97 EJ22 piston-valve interference?

Yes.

Doesn't Subaru use a different timing belt (stronger) for interference engines?

Is there any way to determine by looking at the engine if it's interference?

I believe the service interval on intereference engines is longer, so that would point to them having a stronger belt. But as Mike said, only the PhaseII EJ22 had the same timing belt as the EJ25. (and the EJ25s timing belt service is 90-100k or something like that, my EJ22 is 60k)

Mike also mentioned that the timing belt is the same throughout all phase I EJ22s.

Ok.....again....I'm not super clear on all the phase crap....so what he said really didn't sink in as it should have.

wiscon_mark wrote:1990-1996 had the same PhaseI EJ22.
1997-1998 had the interference version of the PhaseI EJ22 with a higher CR.
1999-01 had the PhaseII EJ22

no problem Josh. I really don't know the difference between the EJ22EE, EJ22EZ, etc...

Thanks Mark

I had a whole response written up where I was doing little more than mentally masturbating about EJ22E/EZ/2/3 stuff, but in order to avoid making things more confusing, the best thing I can say is that all SOHC Phase I timing belts are basically the same and will interchange. I can't say for sure when Subaru switched to the 105k timing belt interval, though.

Well to further confuse things. I checked the owner's manual, and the federal spec car still has a 60k timing belt, while the california spec car has a 100k timing belt.

um...

Crazy Californians...they have some really F'd up rules on cars..

Last month I replaced the timing belt on my "new" '98 Legacy wagon (with a 2.2L), originally an Oregon car. I got a Gatorback timing belt which I understand is good for 90K miles or more. The Subaru brand timing belt that was on the car since 78K (car now has 151K) is thicker and seems more rugged than the new belt and it looks like it would have been easily good for another 30 or 40K miles.