The Dude

I replaced my 1999 L Forester with a 2006 X model in Janurary. I have 14,000 miles on the car, and so far, no complaints. The Forester is the best handling small SUV on the market. Other manufacturers are giving the Subaru some real competition. Even the Suzuki Grand Vitara has been greatly improved. BTW, WATCH the cover over the spare wheel well. It is pretty weak. I made the mistake of placing some fairly heavy objects over the wheel well cover. The cover bent, and the foam support under the cover deformed badly. I carried the exact same load in my 99 Forester with no problems. I will be repalcing the cover with a piece of plywood when I carry sonmething heavy in the future. Not a huge deal, but a bit of a PITA.

It's your car, and your call, but I would do it. The same model Subarus are rated for much higher tow limits in Europe. The 4EAT AT, I believe, is the same one used in Subaru's highest output vehicles. The engine and tranny should be able to handle it. My worries: Mountains- if you're towing in mountainous regions all bets are off. High temperatures- high temperature might put a strain on your AT. Stopping. My major worry. Subaru specs trailer brakes for loads over 1,000 lbs. I've towed 1,500 lbs in my 2.5L Forester (with one passenger) from South Carolina to Key West and back (1,500 miles). It's flat most of the way. Braking was managable, but trailer brakes may have been better. No problems, no overheating, and no sweat. I would want trailer brakes for a 2,500 lbs load. A blown tranny, although probably unlikely, can be fixed with money, a rear-ended car is a whole different problem. I've been to So. California, traffic really sucks.

You are asking very good questions. Unfortunately, Subaru of America is the only entity that can answer most of them. I have been on this board since 1999. I owned a 1999 Forester, and I recently replaced that car with a 2006 Forester. My responses are based on my perceptions of board activity. The 1999-2002 external head gasket problem did not appear to be that big of a deal. Relatively few Subaru owners reported external head gasket failures. I didn't even bother putting the stop leak in my 1999 Forester. Let's deal with 2.5L SOHC engines from 2003 to the present. Do these engines suffer from a higher head gasket failure rate than say, Toyotas or Nissans? I have no way of being certain, but I would say probably not. So, yes, there are late model year Subarus with head gasket failures. The same is true of every car manufacturer. However, I seriously doubt that Subaru's current head gasket failure rate is significantly greater than any other comparable manufacuturer's. Overall, Subarus tend to be pretty tough and dependable cars.

The SOHC 2.5L is an overbored, open deck engine. But I say go ahead and turbocharge that puppy. It should provide you with at least several hours of truly exhilarating driving.

I haven't timed it, but my NA 2006 Forester AT seems pretty quick to me. Unless you plan on running it on a track, the Forester seems to have all the highway speed and acceleration that you need.

One other thought. I took the pointless splash guard off my 99 Forester. Did the world end? Did my car disintergrate? No, there was no discernable difference, at all. I only wish that I had removed the senseless piece of plastic that first day that I bought the car. At least my 2006 Forester has cute little doors in the splash guard to facillitate oil and filter changes. But the first problem I have with the splash guard on the '06, OFF IT COMES. Hey, it's car, it's supposed to get dirty.

You may be right. Trailcarnage, IF there is a band adjustment screw, it is on the left side of the transaxle, it looks like on the upper portion of the unit. There is a large locknut on the adjusting screw. You might take a quick look for it, just to make sure.

I believe the band on the 4EAT is adjustable. The procedure is detailed in the Haynes Subaru Legacy Manual.

Hopefully, the guy who owned the car before you used anti-seize on the spark plug threads before he installed them. If he didn't, believe me, you'll know.

Don't forget the rear diff, and the transfer case. The steel gears in both these units are lubricated by being turned through a pool of oil that comes about halfway up in their housings. So, if the car is stored ,and not moved, for extended period of time the upper portions of the gears can rust. Sometimes, they can rust solid!!!! You're proabaly looking at more than seven months for this to happen, but you might want to keep it mind.

I meant to type "SOHC" in my previous post. The 99 Forester had the SOHC Phase II engine, which had hydralic lifters. Interestingly, my '06 Forester has the 2.5 SOHC engine with variable timing which does have solid lifters.

Good question. I kept my 99 Forester to 200,000 miles, and sold it. I never installed the "stop leak" and the engine never leaked. Few 99 DOHC engines actually developed an external leak, and I thought the factory "stop leak" (oatmeal) had the potential to cause more problems that it solved. Suburu extended the warranty on the 99 SOHC against external head gasket leaks to only 100,000 miles. Installing the "stop leak" now won't get you squat from Subaru and has the real potential to clog your radiator. Very few SOHC owners have posted stating that their cars have suffered external head gasket failures. I would say that your odds of never having an external head gasket failure, even without the "stop leak" , are excellent. BTW, I bought a new 06 Forester to replace the 99. The devil you know over the devil you don't know.

Maintaining a high mileage vehicle involves constantly reworking the calculus of ownership expense. I know, I drove my 99 Forester to 200,000, and virtually everything, including the entire supension, entire exhaust system, altenator, wheel bearings, AT, AC, and three CV axles where all the orginals. I think I replaced the windshield wiper blades a couple of times. But at some point something had to go. My main worry was the AT. I think the engine could have done 300,000 miles without even breaking a sweat. But that AT could have been pretty expensive to rebuild or replace. And once the AT is broken, it becomes very difficult to sell your car. So if you drive the car until the AT goes, you're left with the choice of an expensive repair to make it fully saleable, or take it on the chin trying to sell a car that isn't in driveable condition. I decided the way to maximize the money from the car was to sell it before anything broke. I put the money into a new Forester, although I could have used the money to buy a lower mileage used Subaru. I need dependable transportation. And the reliability curve of even a Subaru takes a major dip after 200,000 miles.

I would suspect something related to the fuel pump. Not necessarily the fuel pump its self, but a component controlling the fuel pump. There is a pressure sensor in the fuel tank, your car "knows" when the gas cap has been removed. That's why you'll get a CEL if you don't tighten the gas cap all the way. It only happens when you refuel, my money is on that sensor or related components. Another possibility could be that the loss of tank pressure is causing an intermittent failure in your fuel pump, the check valve, maybe. Anyway, what error code did the dealer pull? That too, would be an excellent place to start.

I'm just spit balling here, I've never repaired a rusted out gas tank. But even commom sanding paper can cause sparks. How about "wet sanding" with a waterproof sandpaper or emery paper. That might add an extra margin of safety. I would guess that you'll have to drain the tank absolutely dry, or at least below the level of the leak. I don't think you'll get a good bond with the JB weld if the leak is "active".

The TCU, along with the ECU, controls the duty solenoid in the AT. The anti-lock sensors on each wheel provide rotational data for the control units. AFAIK, all manufacturers of AWD AT cars have tire matching restrictions. Take the good along with the bad, right?

4WD does not have a center differential, AWD does. When you take a turn the front wheels travel further than the rear wheels. Without a center differential, the tires have "scrub off' the difference. That's why 4WD is not used for "normal" dry roadway driving conditions, it should be engaged ONLY when it is needed, and only for as long as it is needed.

I would suspect too much curent is being drawn by the fans for the ignition system to operate properly. Measure the voltage across the battery terminals before and after the cooling fans come on, see a difference? If so, the problem may not be the fans. It could be the altenator/voltage regulator, or a failing battery. Idling is when the output of the altenator is at it's lowest, so any weakeness in the electrical system often first becomes apparent at idle.

Were the rear bearings replaced with the Legacy type tapered bearings instead of the cheap and crappy caged ball bearings used in the Forester? Because if some pico-cephalic put the same type caged bearings in, you may be looking at rear bearing replacement part deux.

Actually, you probably could use a 9V battery. The moment when you first touch the battery to the speaker wires should make some sound out of the speakers. But a 9V battery is DC voltage, ONLY the touching of the battery to the wires will make a sound. Keeping the battery on the speaker wires will do nothing except maybe damage your speakers. But using a 9V battery isn't the best idea, anyway. I wouldn't do it. You have a 96. Does your car have removable speaker grills, my 99 Forester did. If so, it's real easy to pop the grills. So, pop the grills and check the color of the speaker wires. While you're in there, make sure the wires are connected to the back of the speakers.

Access a DVM (digital volt meter) and measure the resistance across the pair of wires leading to the left speaker. Do the same for the speaker wires leading to the right speaker. In both cases you should read between 5 and 25 ohms (assuming you have 8 or 16 ohm speakers). A very high or "open" reading means that you have a break in the wiring or a bad speaker. Also use the DVM to measure the resistance between wires leading to each speaker and ground on car's chassis. It should read "open" or extremely high. The most likely problem is a break in the speaker wire.

It is pretty small. In fact, I'll have to be real careful because the oil filter for my 06 Forester and my 15 hp John Deere garden tractor are identical in size. I had hoped otherwise, but I guess O6 may be the first year for "variable" timing in the 2.5L engine. The change in cam position is done with oil pressure, and the engine has solid lifters, again. It's a little disconcerting, I knew the 99 2.5L engine pretty well, and there's quite a bit on the 06 engine that I don't even recognise. One bad thing about Subaru, they have a well established history as using their customers as unpaid, and uninformed, beta testers. Subaru will throw some half baked component, or engineering change, out in the market, and let their customers do the field testing, at their own expense. Can anyone say "continuous variable transmission"? Anyway, if this the first year for variable timing that may not be a good thing. But I have to say, I just averaged 28+mpg for a tank of mostly suburban driving, not too bad. Bosch makes a filter for the new 06 2.5L engine. It's a premuim filter, I used Bosch on my 99 Forester to 200,000 miles with good results.

In most ways I like my 06 Forester even better than my 99 Forester. But not for oil and filter changes. The oil filter on the 06 is SURROUNDED by the exhaust pipes. A socket type oil filter tool is needed because the clearance is so damn tight. Futher, the 2006 2.5L NA engine uses a filter with a much smaller diameter than the oil filter used on the 99 engine. I wonder what other surprises are in store for me with my new 06? I'm actually getting about 3 mpg more with 06 over the 99, so there's at least one good surprise, anyway.