99 Legacy 2.2 - leaking Separator Plate

X

X-Eliminator

My 99 Legacy 2.2 sedan 30th Ed. has developed an oil leak. The dealer
tells me it's the "separator plate" on the back of the engine, and it
is necessary to remove the auto trans to fix this problem at a cost of
$900+ (Chicago area).

The dealer mechanic was very helpful and showed me the back of a long
block crate engine in the shop which shows a flat metal plate with 5
or 6 screws that fits against a machined flange and is sealed with
nothing more than black RTV (or Permatex gasket maker) on the back of
the engine and is located to the right & above the crankshaft.

Apparently this leakage is a common problem. The sad thing is that the
only to way to fix this leak is to remove the trans. If I was going to
have the tranny removed, I would probably want the rear main oil seal
replaced as a preventive measure.

Has anyone had this work done before and know the usual & customary
charge for this repair? Having a flat plate sealed by RTV between the
engine and trans sounds like sheer engineering stupidity that results
in nothing more than a boon for the dealerships and repair shops.
Any additional information would be helpful.

Thanks In Advance.
 
X-Eliminator said:
My 99 Legacy 2.2 sedan 30th Ed. has developed an oil leak. The dealer
tells me it's the "separator plate" on the back of the engine, and it
is necessary to remove the auto trans to fix this problem at a cost of
$900+ (Chicago area).

The dealer mechanic was very helpful and showed me the back of a long
block crate engine in the shop which shows a flat metal plate with 5
or 6 screws that fits against a machined flange and is sealed with
nothing more than black RTV (or Permatex gasket maker) on the back of
the engine and is located to the right & above the crankshaft.

Yes, the engine had to be separated from the transmission. However, instead
of removing the transmission, which requires the front axles and propshaft
etc to be removed, which is a major effort, the engine should be removed,
which is actually easier and simpler in my view.

Sequence is as follows:
* drain the coolant and remove the radiator, remove the air filter stuff
* remove the starter and "dogbone" strut.
* remove the A/C compressor if the A/C does not work, otherwise remove the
condenser and compressor and lift them out of the way.
*disconnect the exhausts, transmission bolts and engine mounts
* separate the engine from the trans and lift the engine out

While the engine is out, the separator plate can be fixed, the rear main
seal if needed, and the belt, idlers and water pump can be inspected. While
this CAN be done in the car, it's far easier to do with the engine out.

The downside is that the labour costs will be about the same.

SD
 
My 99 Legacy 2.2 sedan 30th Ed. has developed an oil leak. The dealer
tells me it's the "separator plate" on the back of the engine, and it
is necessary to remove the auto trans to fix this problem at a cost of
$900+ (Chicago area).

The dealer mechanic was very helpful and showed me the back of a long
block crate engine in the shop which shows a flat metal plate with 5
or 6 screws that fits against a machined flange and is sealed with
nothing more than  black RTV (or Permatex gasket maker) on the back of
the engine and is located to the right & above the crankshaft.

Apparently this leakage is a common problem. The sad thing is that the
only to way to fix this leak is to remove the trans. If I was going to
have the tranny removed, I would probably want the rear main oil seal
replaced as a preventive measure.

Has anyone had this work done before and know the usual & customary
charge for this repair? Having a flat plate sealed by RTV between the
engine and trans sounds like sheer engineering stupidity that results
in nothing more than a boon for the dealerships and repair shops.
Any additional information would be helpful.

Thanks In Advance.

I think I have read of this problem before. I have no direct
experience with it, but I don't think it is 'rare'.

One thing, if anyone is gonna tackle this problem, I'd have the
transmission/wet-clutch pack thoroughly tested. Wouldn't want to
discover a bad transmission a week or 2 after spending this kinda time/
money on the flexplate. You other post sounded a little like torque
bind.

just a thought.
 
1 Lucky Texan said:
You other post sounded a little like torque bind.

Do you refer to the post about losing the power after backing up? I am a
different poster :) But after googling what the torque bind is I think that
you might have found my problem. Another symptom this car has is that it
gives me sometimes a way too strong a jolt when I switch to rear from
parking. I don't think it is normal...
 
Do you refer to the post about losing the power after backing up? I am a
different poster :) But after googling what the torque bind is I think that
you might have found my problem. Another symptom this car has is that it
gives me sometimes a way too strong a jolt when I switch to rear from
parking. I don't think it is normal...

sry, my mistake. Yeah, check the other post.
 
Sorry for the coincidence of posting my different 99 Legacy 2.2 post
right next to yours ;-)
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
13,889
Messages
67,365
Members
7,364
Latest member
Cimarron49

Latest Threads

Back
Top