The AUSubaru.com.au Forums

Posted: **Sun Mar 29, 2009 10:42 am**

Having finally been able to get my L Series EA82T powered sedan up to a satisfactorily driving level

with its new valve springs and nice 5 speed manual with 3.7:1 diffs, I now ask the old debated question of ~ EA82T v EJ20 /22

The EA82T is supposed to be on par TORQUE rating with the EJ22

Can the EJ20 or 22 be better than EA82T as far as GO is concerned? Or is it more to do with not as old and more reliable more modern engineering? End cost and availability of parts?

I have found project Cheap Grief to be so bloody quick I am glad i did not bother with the extras involved in EJ conversion although EJ AWD is now a thought in the near front of my mind. I am certain if MY or L owner properly rebuilt an EA82T with new slugs, valve springs HVLA's and welch plugs and hoses they'd have a great engine serve them a long while without the extra wiring of EJ conversion, matching hoses, radiators, spacer adaptors, rear diff and all those other little bits that crop up and cost more money and time.

And there is nothing like experience. I suppose once you have done one EJ conversion you won't look back and know how to rip into the next one?

Don't get me wrong. I have spent and wasted much time and not too many dollars on this baby and I am so pleased with the result I am sure those who go down the EJ path a likewise satisfied with their outcome.

Posted: **Sun Mar 29, 2009 10:45 am**

Can you get a non turbo EJ 20 in Australia though?

Posted: **Sun Mar 29, 2009 11:11 am**

Is it really that fast? I bet you havn't been driving many fast cars lately. Have a drag race with a standard V6 commodore, I bet if you win it won't be by much.
Sure you can boost it up and it will go faster than a EJ22 which doesn't really have much performance options itself, but you will be pushing an old motor and it will hugely deminish it's reliability.
EJ20/22 could be improved alot in the Go department but only really by things like changing cams, stroking etc. Only real bolt-on option is supercharger.
(everybody knows air pods and exhausts are pretty laughable as far as real increases in performance go).

It's great you are satisfied by the EA82turbo but yeah, the best path forward for you now for more improvement is to go EJ - that's what Subaru did.
Naturally if you want the performance you need EJ20turbo and AWD.

(non turbo EJ20 engines are found in about a billion Australian delivered Foresters).

Posted: **Sun Mar 29, 2009 11:24 am**

having had both both i can give a pretty good opinion. i wasted a fair bit of time and money getting my ea82t up to a decent power level, and found i was still spending a bit keeping it at that level. if it was a road car only i would of kept the motor as it is very enjoyable to drive. however after seeing the benefits of extra torque down low, i whacked one in and mechanically and performance wise it hasnt let me down. id say its on par with road going power but definitely has some more kick down the bottom end where you'd usually have heaps of lag.

Posted: **Sun Mar 29, 2009 2:39 pm**

stock ej22 is quicker than a stock ea82t. ea82t needs a decent amount of mods to come even close to ej(this has been proven many many times).....and then theres the reliablity factor.

Posted: **Sun Mar 29, 2009 10:27 pm**

the reliability factor..... it has got this far and I am watching the welch plugs in the manifold.
Hey it is Subaru gear after all !!

I did forget the turbo hassle factor that the EJ does not have as I was comparing NA EJ torque figures and it was EJ22 that had close match with EA82T. EA's don't have the big open water jackets where EJ head gaskets go.

I have seen 4 psi boost below 2000rpm so haven't got much lag, just keep seeming to go for the next gear and the next and the next.

What have I driven??? Big fat Mitsubishi GTO 3.0 AWD TT, Various Skyline imports, BMW Mini Cooper S, 200SX, 350Z Track 2005?, 350Z 2008, 2007 Lib GT 2.5, 2008 Golf GTi DSG, Falcon turbo BA. I was happier letting the owner of a Kuwait delivered F512 do his own brake test so missed that opportunity. Best ride was Honda NSX - still want one

Hey , it is the best value $3000 fun car so far !! FEELS like it goes, does not feel like it handles whereas the others above DO!! $20k to $50k difference

A DSG six speed would be an interesting application here - what after I went to the trouble of getting the manual in??!!

Posted: **Mon Mar 30, 2009 3:52 pm**

dont forget that the ea82t hits its peak torque at 2800 rpm where as the ej22 hits it somewhere close to 4000

Posted: **Mon Mar 30, 2009 9:36 pm**

Keffa wrote:stock ej22 is quicker than a stock ea82t. ea82t needs a decent amount of mods to come even close to ej(this has been proven many many times).....and then theres the reliablity factor.

I would have to disagree with your idea,s on the ea 82t the torque starts much earlier on the 82 over the 22....i currently run one in my manx,it weighs around 700kgs,its so light it needs no detonation sensor at all...coming into the rhelms of motorcycle power to weight things start to change,not that my ride is as light as a bike,ever wondered why they can run 12.5:1 on a bike with pump gas an no pinging? its all about the weight..anyway mine runs 12psi and a 7.5 psi over boost injector which supply,s 300cc liniar,after 7.5psi.....you would have to bring along one bad STI fitted with an aftermarket ecu to see me in your rear vision mirror....serious. I have not yet had any wrx come close.
The 82 is so wicked i could not help but to recently build a primo reco spare engine whilst parts can still be had to do so.....the 82t is a much lighter engine over the ej...weight reduction is something often forgotten in the search for a quick ride.
In my case this is most suitable for my application...

Posted: **Tue Mar 31, 2009 4:21 pm**

It's a 64 billion dollar question but I'm staying with the old school EA82T because it matches an L Series where an EJ does not IMO .

My thoughts only .

A L Series is fairly light though the weight is biased frontwards because the front diff has to be inline with the front hubs , the space required for optional DR gears (just above and ahead of the crownwheel) means the engine has to sit a long way forward biasing the weight distribution frontwards .

L's have diabolical front suspension geometry and having any extra weight up front just makes them worse .
L's also have slightly fragile transmissions which is why Subaru tried so hard to limit torque output on EA82T's , also front drive turbo L's that make real torque are wheelspin city and understeer on power something chronic .

So in light of this fitting a heavier engine , which is longer between the flywheel and crank pulley , sits even further forward excentuating the factory ills .

The engine electrics (EFI) is far simpler on EA82's and the parts are cheap and available if you know where to look .
EJs being more complex are harder to fit because you are patching old into newer and there are no factory wiring solutions . Hate the ign sw crap .

IMO an L Series is about being lightweight and not needing 500 Hp to make it go .
Subaru helps you with EA82T's because they gagged them in std form so all you really have to do is remove them .

To honestly have a "good" EA82T you need to properly rebuild it and thats where costs start to hurt , IMO the main advantage of an EJ is that it's generally younger and less used up .
I don't see the point in pushing an 18+ year old engine with worn rings and even lower than std compression pressure , turbo engines really have to have rings and valves that seal properly or the extra cylinder pressure they attemp to develop ends up in the crank case breather system .

A fresh EA82T engine can stand some enhancements and whilst inside it why not ? A bit of work with porting tools helps particularly in the exhaust ports , theres not a great deal you can do about the 4 inlet ports mainly because of the lifter bulges in 2 of them .

Like was done to mine , deck the cases enough to get the static CR up to something better than 1985 mouthwash grade ULP could stand .
If I had my time again I would have had the valve reliefs in the piston crowns cut deeper and the cased decked more to get 9.0 CR .
Later MPFI NA cams are just a smidge warmer than the best factory turbo cams and available at your nearest dead late 80's EA82 .

If you can track one down throw a Spider on it because every little factory enhancement helps .

Not surprisingly the hardest parts to get for an EA82T in Australia are the "other" spec (see factory WSM) turbo cams and the IHI VF6 turbo which is as per usual except for the larger ratio turbine housing (R15 instead of R12) .
The NA MPFI cams should be ok with the higher CR and the larger direct fit R15 VF6 turbo should move the boost range up a bit in the engines rev range . The higher boost threshold I doubt you'd feel because the high CR and slightly less restrictive cam timing should more than make up for it torque wise .

I believe you walk a fine line with the std EA82T EFI system before it runs out of air flow measuring and injector capacity .
I haven't reached it yet but I know its there and its why more efficient turbos etc without necessarily much higher boost pressure is at the heart of the whole package .
What I seek to do is raise my engines volumetric efficiency so that it makes better use of the air and fuel it gets before the fueling and computer/AFM go beyond their limitations .
Their are a few must do's like an adequate fresh fuel pump (VL-T) and possibly a adjustable fuel pressure regulator .
Obviously a low restriction (but not over the top) turbo back exhaust is on the cards to get anywhere near an EJ .

If you are using an early distributor type EA82T (86/86) the ignition system has to bve in good order ie no stuffed vac can diaphragms or dodgy pickups .

Nice things like a WAIC are a help provided they work properly .

If you are going to push the thing hard you need to find ways to reject more heat meaning newish water pump and I reckon the 170/77 deg thermostat is the go .
I don't see a problem with the std RX radiator as long as its a real Japanese one ie Koyo or Calsonic but you may need a booster elec fan which I'd mount on the front pass side . All the manufacturers tell you than these fans move more air in pusher than puller mode .

AWD is more than a luxury with such a car and unfortunately the short locking RX/XT4 version is the lightest - and rarest .

If you get it all right you can have a car that goes a lot better than people expect it to and thats how you catch them out .

You are never going have a world beater in an L Series no matter what you do to it , but as long as its good enough to impress yourself thats all that matters .
When the constabulary pulls you over and finds a std looking (and sounding) engine they've got little on you .
If you drive sensibly it may never happen .

Cheers A .

Posted: **Tue Mar 31, 2009 7:12 pm**

My thoughts in amongst Disco's...

discopotato03 wrote:It's a 64 billion dollar question but I'm staying with the old school EA82T because it matches an L Series where an EJ does not IMO .

My thoughts only .

A L Series is fairly light though the weight is biased frontwards because the front diff has to be inline with the front hubs , the space required for optional DR gears (just above and ahead of the crownwheel) means the engine has to sit a long way forward biasing the weight distribution frontwards .

L's have diabolical front suspension geometry and having any extra weight up front just makes them worse .
L's also have slightly fragile transmissions which is why Subaru tried so hard to limit torque output on EA82T's , also front drive turbo L's that make real torque are wheelspin city and understeer on power something cronic .

So in light of this fitting a heavier engine , which is longer between the flywheel and crank pulley , sits even further forward excentuating the factory ills .

So for the basis of your aurgument here, exactly how much heavier is an EJ22 than an EA82turbo? I have never ever heard of anybody who's fitted an EJ to an L series complaining that the massive amount of extra engine weight has buggered up their handling.

The engine electrics (EFI) is far simpler on EA82's and the parts are cheap and available if you know where to look .
EJs being more complex are harder to fit because you are patching old into newer and there are no factory wiring solutions . Hate the ign sw crap .

Simpler....Inferior. Get somebody who knows how (lots of places do this) to cut the EJ harness down, hook up power to it and connect up to your dashboard guages, fuel pump, thermo fans etc - it isn't difficult at all. If you want something simple then stick with a carby. If you want something good, well get something more modern. Hey if EA82 EFI is so fantastic then they should still be using it on all Subarus, but then they tend to like developing things to be better...

IMO an L Series is about being lightweight and not needing 50 Hp to make it go .
Subaru helps you with EA82T's because they gagged them in std form so all you really have to do is remove them .

Have to agree here, best thing to do with EA82T's is to remove them!

To honestly have a "good" EA82T you need to properly rebuild it and thats where costs start to hurt , IMO the main advantage of an EJ is that it's generally younger and less used up .
I don't see the point in pushing an 18+ year old engine with worn rings and even lower than std compression pressure , turbo engines really have to have rings and valves that seal properly or the extra cylinder pressure they attemp to develop ends up in the crank case breather system .

A fresh EA82T engine can stand some enhancements and whilst inside it why not ? A bit of work with porting tools helps particularly in the exhaust ports , theres not a great deal you can do about the 4 inlet ports mainly because of the lifter bulges in 2 of them .

Like was done to mine , deck the cases enough to get the static CR up to something better than 1985 mouthwash grade ULP could stand .
If I had my time again I would have had the valve reliefs in the piston crowns cut deeper and the cased decked more to get 9.0 CR .
Later MPFI NA cams are just a smidge warmer than the best factory turbo cams and available at your nearest dead late 80's EA82 .

If you can track one down throw a Spider on it because every little factory enhancement helps .

Not surprisingly the hardest parts to get for an EA82T in Australia are the "other" spec (see factory WSM) turbo cams and the IHI VF6 turbo which is as per usual except for the larger ratio turbine housing (R15 instead of R12) .
The NA MPFI cams should be ok with the higher CR and the larger direct fit R15 VF6 turbo should move the boost range up a bit in the engines rev range . The higher boost threshold I doubt you'd feel because the high CR and slightly less restrictive cam timing should more than make up for it torque wise .

So to effectively use an EA82t you have to rebuild it (including customising) and track down hard to find parts, as opposed to plopping a low kms EJ in without rebuilding it. Which sounds easier?!

I believe you walk a fine line with the std EA82T EFI system before it runs out of air flow measuring and injector capacity .
Inferior EFI system again....good stuff

I haven't reached it yet but I know its there and its why more efficient turbos etc without necessarily much higher boost pressure is at the heart of the whole package .
What I seek to do is raise my engines volumetric efficiency so that it makes better use of the air and fuel it gets before the fueling and computer/AFM go beyond their limitations .
Their are a few must do's like an adequate fresh fuel pump (VL-T) and possibly a adjustable fuel pressure regulator .
Obviously a low restriction (but not over the top) turbo back exhaust is on the cards to get anywhere near an EJ .

If you are using an early distributor type EA82T (86/86) the ignition system has to bve in good order ie no stuffed vac can diaphragms or dodgy pickups .
None of this crap in an EJ

Nice things like a WAIC are a help provided they work properly .
Strangely this fantastic piece of equipment was designed in the EJ era

If you are going to push the thing hard you need to find ways to reject more heat meaning newish water pump and I reckon the 170/77 deg thermostat is the go .
I don't see a problem with the std RX radiator as long as its a real Japanese one ie Koyo or Calsonic but you may need a booster elec fan which I'd mount on the front pass side . All the manufacturers tell you than these fans move more air in pusher than puller mode .

AWD is more than a luxury with such a car and unfortunately the short locking RX/XT4 version is the lightest - and rarest .

If you get it all right you can have a car that goes a lot better than people expect it to and thats how you catch them out .

You are never going have a world beater in an L Series no matter what you do to it , but as long as its good enough to impress yourself thats all that matters .
When the constabulary pulls you over and finds a std looking (and sounding) engine they've got little on you .
If you drive sensibly it may never happen .

An EJ in an L series can look absolutely 100% stock - no question at all. Just depends how you do it. I'm sure one of the WA boys will testify to how stock my sedan's engine bay looks these days.[/B[

EJ's are better. A L with an EJ is better than one with an EA.

(in my opinion!)

Edit - to be fair, it has to be said....EJ22's from early Libertys (1989 to ~1994) are getting harder to find with low kms. I think it's going to be getting more common now for people to start using non-turbo EJ20's from early Foresters (1997ish and up). There is obviously a slight decrease in power for these motors.

Posted: **Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:06 pm**

You know its funny , I mentioned to Stu Wilkins the other week that I once thought about EJ in L RX . My opinion was that if I really wanted an EJ engine I'd have bought a car with one factory fitted .
His answer was precisely ...

If you want me to give you a run down on the engineering shortcomings of 1st gen EJ22s its no prob .
Firstly theres the small valves/ports and iffy rocker pivots .
Then theres the SOHC valve train with rockers (no rollers) .
Real short exhaust stub pipes that join too close to the heads .
Chamber shape , bit agricultural for their era .
I'm glad someone mentioned that they have a slightly peaky power curve because people who know engines all say they lack poke for a 2.2L four .

EA EFI has good and bad points , first and second series .
First had sequential injection , 2nd was 2 by 2 .
Second had an opticle CAS and it loses little to an EJ22s crank/cam triger .
The rally people got 190 from basic EA82T's so not too snotty for an engine with small ports and prehistoric heads .

Rare bits ? I nailed three turbo Spiders and two L/Vortex AWD gearboxes and it didn't take years to do .
Cams are not really an issue (contacts) and the IHI RHB5 R15 turbine housings are found on all EJ VF10s and VF11s .
Theres even a VF10 and a VF8 lurking not too far away and I reckon the VF10will probably work quite well without looking out of place .

Getting extra juice down its lug hole is no issue when you've played with early EFI systems over the years , the dumber they come the easier they are to trick .

You don't need an EJ to screw up L front end grip and understeer , the factory did it for you .
Putting more weight even further forward must help in your world because it doesn't in the real one .
If weight doesn't worry you I fail to see why you'd go to the trouble of EJ ing an L to start with when its a simple reasonably cheap turn key exercise buying a DR AWD Lib to start with .
Do the sums to effectively have A Lib driveline in an L series , doesn't add up does it .

I see better as in how well everything performs as a package and I'll be real interested to see how mine goes when its finished .

Till then , cheers A .

Posted: **Wed Apr 01, 2009 6:09 am**

discopotato03 wrote: First had sequential injection , 2nd was 2 by 2 .

Im assuming that you are refering to EA82 MPFI/Turbo

I think you will find that both had 4 by 4 batch fire. The EA82 ecu has no input to tell it what cylinder is firing, which makes sequential fire impossible.
If you look at the ECU wiring, there is only one output.

I too find more enjoyment in playing with the crude, poorly designed EA82T. Is a challenge because most people have given up on the old EA82

I agree that if i wanted big HP numbers, EJ turbo is the go, but just for a bit of fun, i prefer the EA.

Posted: **Wed Apr 01, 2009 9:10 am**

Knew I was gonna stir someone up and Disco helped. With Cheap Grief I enjoyed not having to toss a very good radiator to then source one that would fit/work with EJ or find hoses to fit to EJ. Not had to splice in EJ engine wiring to L Series. Not had to stuff with engine mount worries, gearbox mountings or shifting arrangements (not necessary if you use an adaptor to keep L box I know) chase EJ exhaust (happy with the 2.5" that it came with) or engineer cert to keep it legit and insurance approved, tailshaft change ? (is thet needed EJ to Lseries?) or chase a diff at the back to suit the EJ box front diff. But I have not got AWD - yet.Not had to find right fit CV shafts

I am using standard newish clutch and standard gearbox, thinking clutch might save gearbox coz it not got big stubs, a bit like Honda S2000 having a weaknes in clutch to save gearbox

I am wrapped in the result [thoughts though AWD will be future mod) I am near shredding front tyres when I squeeze things. Not having turbo boost up in the dirt may be a handy reason for going NA EJ but CG did really well yesterday

Always wanted a turbo manual since first drive of a TX5 turbo back in 92 and Cordia a few years after.

AndrewT , just how many EA82T's did you break before going EJ?

I am certain if Disco and I got to drive someones EJ20/22 powered L we would both be impressed. The main gist of my post was that I am happy with my result of persevering with EA82T despite my woes.

My 3 plug ECU 3/87 mpfi is not sequential rather batch fire or all four at same time, so just one step above throttle body efi of the Cordia of the same year.

Jonno

Posted: **Wed Apr 01, 2009 4:26 pm**

I'm actually right and wrong at the same time with the early 3 plug systems , brain was thinking 4 dedicated wires from ECU to injectors and yes the early distributor AFAIK has no reference or sync signal to tell the computer when its aproaching no1 to sequence the injectors to the cylinders firing order .

Suparoo the later systems CAS does tell the ecu where the crank is positioned and gives a reference pulse as well l

The disc inside the opticle CAS has two sets of slots ie a very fine series of 360 slots on the outer side and if its like Nissans 4 wider ones on a smaller diameter . The outer ones accutately tell what the cranks (and therefore rods/pistons) positions are , this is the best way of signalling to the ECU rapid accelerations/decelerations of the crankshaft . If there were only 4 outer ones the ECU would have to wait a quarter of a turn of the disc before it got its next update .
The four inner ones tell the ECU exactly which cylinder is the next on its power stroke . This is important because the ECU needs to know which is the first cylinder in sequence at start up .
Emissions wise it wouldn't be good cranking the engine around to no1 all the time at cold start , which is the worst time for an engine emissions wise .

Each row or circle of slots has a photo diode on one side and a light on the other , its the light shining through these slots via the sensors which signals the computer whats where and the transients in crank speed .

The factory wiring diagrams shows three wires (pinouts) to the CAS from the ECU , (7) CAS power , (8) CAS Position Signal , (17) CAS Reference .

They did something a little different injector/ECU wise , they ganged injectors 1 and 2 together and same with 3 and 4 . Obviously four individual wires at the injectors and ECU but join and split again in the body loom .

Who knows why , probably semi sequential was enough to run the engine well enough and meet the emissions requirements of the day .
The dual signal CAS/hotwire AFM/ ECU control of the coils transister make for much more accurate engine control than basic EFI and mechanical/manifold pressure referenced distributor . Early and late 80s thinking and tightening emissions legislation .

As for the development path of the EA82 it goes back a ways .
The 82 is really just a cambox SOHC conversion based on the better 81 heads , and two inlet ports . The 82 heads have the remnants of pushrod holes which take up space that could have been used for larger better breathing ports .
Subaru dropped the ball badly here and missed the opportunity to have much better heads than 82's have . They should have been 4 port with the cam down in the head casting rather than up in a cam box but for their own reasons they did it on the cheap .
Somewhere I have a pic of a gyrocopter EA82 with unique DOHC heads on it and from memory they crank out about 140 flywheel Hp , not really suitable packaging wise for an L Series though . Be interesting with a hair dryer on it .

To each their own , A .

Posted: **Wed Apr 01, 2009 5:20 pm**

discopotato03 wrote:the later systems CAS does tell the ecu where the crank is positioned and gives a reference pulse as well l

they ganged injectors 1 and 2 together and same with 3 and 4 . Obviously four individual wires at the injectors and ECU but join and split again in the body loom .

Yes they are ganged into 2 seperate channels, but even though there are 4 reference pulses, the ECU has no idea when cyl 1 & 2 or 3 & 4 are firing which means that the injectors could fire 180deg out of sequence (this is where the cam angle sensor comes into play on EJ's)

Sequential injection only works up to about 2000 rpm anyway because above this rpm, there isnt enough time to inject sequentially and little point cos of the air speed in the intake runners

You all might think im mad, but i wanna drive an EA82T with a 3sp auto box.
The 3sp in my leone revs to 5k, then drops into 2nd gear and pulles the revs to 3k rather abruptly (maybe my line pressure is too high cos all gear changes are very abrupt)

I rekon the 3sp would be quicker to 100kmh than the 5sp manual

Posted: **Wed Apr 01, 2009 10:39 pm**

I don't. Having gone from the 3 speed auto that did not like to shift to top with foot to floor and weak valve springs to the manual 5 speed with new valve springs fitted to heads I find myself forever reachng for the next gear and it feels like it is much faster to 100 than the auto. Bit unfair on the old auto. Trick one up and you may be right

Posted: **Thu Apr 02, 2009 2:05 pm**

No doesn't work like that , remember distributors turn at cam speed not crank speed which is why in many cases crank angle sensors double as cam angle sensors as well .
On an EJ the cam sensor does the reference pulse where on a later EA the inner sensor does the same thing .
A nifty trick Nissan had on some their CAS units was that those inner four slots were slightly different lengths so the computer knew exactly which piston was rising towards TDC on its compression stroke .
Their earlier ones just had a longer slot for no1 than the other three so the disc had to turn something up to 360 degrees to tell the computer "Im no1 and now you know you can sequence the 1342 firing order (1324 on Sube flat 4) . If for any reason the computer got out of sync it only had to wait a max of one CAS rev which is two crank revs .

For ages now Nissan has been using the dual photo sensor CAS system and they have been in the distributor in the case of SOHC CA18 , FJ20 , S13 SR20 .
Over time some of these engines lost the dizzy cap for dual wasted spark coils (or individual coil on plug - direct fire ignition) but the same type of CAS is still on the gear drive or cam nose . My R33s RB25DET has one on the front of its inlet camshaft , and six individual coils .

Cheers A .

The AUSubaru.com.au Forums

the old EA82T or EJ20/22 debate

the old EA82T or EJ20/22 debate