Page 1 of 1
EJ22 Crank vs EJ22T Crank
Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 6:17 pm
by Splinter
Are these identical?
Posted: Tue Sep 26, 2006 7:38 pm
by Matt Monson
They have different part numbers in the parts manual, but I have never seen anyone who was able to tell me the actual differences between them. I will be watching this thread to see if anyone has anything definitive...
the crank and rods are the same
Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 7:19 pm
by def09
The current replacement part numbers for the crank and rods are the same for all 90-94 Legacy turbo or non-turbo. Crank 12200AA150 and the rods 12100AA240 (each)
Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 10:59 pm
by Matt Monson
please cite your source...
Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 4:31 pm
by Legacy777
He's correct. If you type in the old part #'s to one of the online subaru catalogues, they supercede to the numbers he posted.
Posted: Tue May 08, 2007 7:20 pm
by Matt Monson
My point is that it still really leaves the question unanswered. The fact that they now spec the newer Ej22 crank as the service part for both the older cars still doesn't tell us if there was a difference in the early turbo crank. Just because a part is safe to use as a replacement does not mean that it is as good as the original part. I personally think that it probably is just as strong since early Ej18's used identical cranks to early Ej20 STi engines. For the sake of Splinter's original question, I think it still remains unanswered...
Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 6:36 am
by Blackbart
isn't this the same case with the rods?
Were the original 22t rods different than what they are replacing them with?
Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 8:52 am
by Splinter
Thats what my suspicion is... same with the oil pumps...
Subaru built the engine tough because of the homogolation requirements, but the requirements arent there for replacement parts, and since the engine doesnt actually need to be that tough to pump out the wimpy 160hp stock output, they can replace them safely with weaker parts.
That is NOT fact, its only my own personal speculation.
Posted: Wed May 09, 2007 9:35 pm
by evolutionmovement
I think they'd be the same for ease of manufacturing logistics, q/a, etc. I can't tell them apart to look at them. I also wouldn't doubt there was an original different part number with a jacked up price for the turbo to make more money off anyone that needed it and now that they're old, not worth much, and salvage parts are readily available, they don't bother with the two part numbers/prices. This would be easier with warehousing.