Stelcom66

Sorry about posting this here. didn't see a site related forum. Since this morning (5/22) I tried getting on the website a few times, kept getting a message the site refused to connect.

Best of luck on the project. I know it won't be easy but between the both of you hopefully you'll get it done. I'm really re-thinking my manual transmission preference. If that's the only thing that goes on a 4EAT with 266k miles that's not bad at all. If that was a manual transmission I'd guess by now you'd be on the second clutch. I forgot how much it was to replace it in my 2002 Forester, guessing at least $600.

Hello, Good suggestion re: the 'carcomplaints.com' site. I forgot about that one. Several other sites, such as Edmunds, Cars, Vehiclehistory, Surecritic (all .com) and others have a notable amount of positive reviews for the 2011 and newer Foresters with the FB25. Those sites as it's probably known will have general comments, positive or negative. The term 'Reliable', 'Love the car', 'Will stick with Subaru' are somewhat common. So there must be some FB25s that don't consume excessive oil? My theory (or hope) is a 2011 or so Forester with mileage within my budget (~90-120k miles) would have had the shortblock replaced or maybe wasn't prone to excessive oil consumption. The key word is 'maybe' - it's taking a chance. Then again, that's generally the case for any 10 year old or so vehicle. Except for the dealership mentioned in my original post, any 2009-2010 with the EJ25 will very likely be at or over the mileage for the timing belt replacement. I believe due to the design of the FB25 reports of head gasket trouble are far less than the EJ25. My thought is I may need to put oil in it but the cost over time will still be significantly less than a head gasket replacement. Same for the timing chain as long as it holds out, but I've heard they can be prone to a leak around a plastic cover. Thanks for the information and luck. I know there's other choices out there, but Subarus still have an appeal that I can't ignore.

Good question! I'm guessing carbed, because if I recall correctly the horsepower rating was less than 100. Sorry to hear driving has taken a toll. Hopefully you've retired from truck driving - except for the Dodge pickup truck! (I recall a photo) I drove one of my son's Legacy with the 4EAT manual option several years ago, but forgot to try the option! Nothing wrong with just 4 speeds, or older vehicles for that matter. I hear of some strange never heard of before situations with some newer vehicles. On another Subaru site someone said that after a software update overnight - his sunroof switch was backwards, open closed the roof and the close position opened it! I've had Windows updates be detrimental to my computer - now the same can happen with cars I guess. No thanks, I'm glad I don't have to worry about that with my old car and truck.

Sorry to hear about your foot situation. Fortunately, although I'm in my 60s things currently I'm not experiencing anything like that. Kind of ironic that a manual transmission could very well end up being more expensive than an automatic. If I saw a good deal on a manual transmission Forester or Outback, it's still possible I'd go for it. Some, or most don't get the appeal of a manual. On another forum I was questioned how in the world could I like driving a standard shift with all that 'work' and 'banging' the clutch. I don't even think about it - the process is very 'automatic' to me. I'll admit I've had company vehicles for over 10 years, and if I had to commute 5 days a week with a manual transmission that could sway me a bit. At this point it's almost flipping a coin. Encouraging the Subaru 4EAT is 'stupid reliable' - a good summary! While maybe not the most refined, it does the job reliably. The manual option of later 4EATs is a plus IMO, and I believe there's very little, if any fuel economy advantage with the manual. Holy smokes 285k miles on the 89 GL!! Yea talk about the car not owing you anything - that's amazing. I had an '86 GL, similar style. That had the manual lever for 4WD. Also manual transmission. While I believe not typical, that 1.8L(?) engine used or leaked oil. I also have an old 4WD truck used mainly for getting wood for my wood stove, so it doesn't get much use. I also prefer not to drive a truck exclusively, especially now with gas prices - even before the pipeline shutdown. We get a moderate amount of snow here - probably not as much as your area, but enough to justify 4 or AWD. When I travelled to Vermont a few times for work a few years ago, Subarus were a very common sight - and many of them were rusted and looked like heck but ran fine.

Another good case for my next vehicle to be an automatic. Some 'professional' reviewers berate the 4EAT, many find it fine, especially the later ones with the + - manual option. The opinions from other Subaru forum members are mostly positive. Enhancements aren't always for the best - as one forum post stated Subaru didn't upgrade the 4EAT for the sake of upgrading to keep up with others. Sure, there's the CVT. As much as I like it (had one in a company vehicle) there's the reliability concern. Coming from you with the miles you have - a great testimonial for the 4EAT! Noted re: SOHC not DOHC, and 4EAT. Chalk up another one well above 200k miles. My mindset was a manual transmission cost a bit less initially and maybe saves a bit of fuel - that all goes down the drain with a clutch and/or bearing replacement.

And that would be the DOHC I believe. I had the EJ25 DOHC in my '98 Outback. Didn't have it to the point of head gasket trouble, I traded it in for a 2002 Outback because the 1998 exceeded the age allowable on the company's vehicle reimbursement policy at the time. When I traded it in at only 103k miles it did have a noise when the clutch pedal was depressed, I think it was a throwout bearing? Same on my 2002 Forester. With the Forester I did get the clutch replaced. As much as I prefer manual transmissions. I think I'd go for a 4EAT. Over cost may be less than a manual as I've heard the throwout bearing going isn't that unusual.

I hear ya re: the rust belt. I'm on the east coast and all of my (old) vehicles have rust. I had to replace the brake and fuel lines on my '99 Honda Accord. My 2002 Forester was just starting to rust around the typical back wheels area. Wish I still had the Forester. Years ago I had an 86 GL wagon with the manual lever for 4WD. Holy smokes 285k on yours! Those engines (1.8L?) sound like they were like the 2.2Ls which you'll hear about achieving close to 300k miles. Ironically, where the winter weather is more severe in Maine north of Connecticut where I live vehicles tend to do better with rust. I've heard it's due to the less corrosive chemicals Maine uses on the road. I hope you can safely make it to 300k on your Forester.

Yes it was you I was thinking of! Wow, that's great. Proof the EJ25s are capable of great mileage if maintained well.

Nice! What year?

I save the Consumer Reports magazine annual auto review issues. I wonder how reliable their reliability ratings are? Looking at the 2010 Forester and Outback "Engine Major' rating - the Forester has a less than reliable rating, likely from reports of head gasket failures. The Outback has a better than average rating. The Impreza much worse than average - all EJ25 engines. Of course the 2011 Forester's engine rating was much worse than average due to the oil situation. At some point I hope to be in a (used) Subaru again. There are several 2011-13 listed at reasonable prices, but I wonder if a better bet would be an EJ25 model with new head gaskets and timing belt? There is a dealership in the state that promotes that every Subaru they sell has their engines reconditioned with those components. They are priced higher due to that policy, which I think is reasonable. I know there's at least one member here with I believe 265k on an EJ25 Forester. I haven't heard of any FB25s around 200k and above, maybe because the oldest are just 10 years old.

Wow - so you've done it more than once. I guess you lucked out 'only' pulling apart two! I've heard multiple reports of rod bearings going within a year of replacing head gaskets. I respect the work you and others here can do on these engines. All 3 of my sons had Subarus at some point when they were living here, the most I did was oil changes, replaced a belt and a transmission fluid change. I had several Subarus, so I stocked up on PH3593 oil filters. I still have one in the garage, so I should get another Subaru with an EJ25 so it won't go to waste.

It is interesting - along with reasons why it could happen. Best of luck on the major project, separating the halves of the engine. Just wondering - is it because of a thrown rod?

A few I looked at did have accident reports, like the car I have now, Good to know, but I guess more research is in order such as clues and going from there. I keep a record of everything done to my vehicles, including what I do (although that's nothing major).

Sounds like several dollars worth came out! I liked the factory radio in my 2002 Outback, it had a National Weather Service band.

I thought I'd post this in the Off Topic forum - but it does have to do with Subarus. I'll certainly understand if it gets moved. Looking at various online used car websites I came across Carfax. Looked at a few 2009-2010 Foresters and the Carfax report. Only one reported a head gasket replacement - but none reported timing belt replacements on vehicles well past the 105k mile interval. The dealership from the car I have now brought up the Carfax report before I bought it. He seemed honest, noted an accident but no record of a timing belt replacement (non Subaru, should be every 60k miles). I have about 177k now, so I do suspect it was done. Same for the Foresters and EJ25 Outbacks I looked at on the Carfax site. A car dealership manager that's my customer said even if a dealership does a timing belt change, the record may not necessarily be entered in the report. I wonder then if the value of a Carfax report is worth the cost. Probably better than that is documented records and receipts of what's been done.

I think the new Chevy Trailblazer has a 3 cylinder turbo. Congrats on the 2019 Outback. I like the green color they came in. If I won the lottery, I'd definitely consider the latest gen Outback.

A friend of mine had a Justy years ago. Had the manual transmission instead of the CVT. As far as I know the only inline engine Subaru ever made. But to stay unconventional, 3 cylinders. I've heard the threes are coming back into favor.

You're welcome! OMG 289K+ miles, that's incredible! That's a 2.2L for ya - but we do hear of some EJ25s over 250k miles here at times. I know the car was worth more to you but I guess getting $2200 for a '93 is good. Those leather seats are in nice shape, I don't see any cracks. A good color if you're going to get leather IMO, lighter colors do make a difference in the heat I've heard, meaning not as hot as dark colors.

So sorry to hear! I'd love to find that era Legacy wagon with the 2.2L. I had a '92 sedan version of that, same color. The wheel covers were silver though - I assume these were painted. That gold color goes well IMO. Also one of my sons had a '92 he bought from my mom years ago. My youngest had a '95 LS, with the 2.2L. Different body style, I prefer the previous generation like yours. The '95 seemed very (too) low to the ground. Around here if there is one to be found with the 2.2L, which is very rare - the rust is usually significant. I don't see any sign of it on your car. Whether you have it or not it's still yours.

I do believe my truck battery had reached the stage of sulphation - now the power locks won't even work. I hear ya re: the heat in the DFW area - was in Irving a few times years ago for training. An interesting observation to me was the roads were mainly cement - not tar like here in New England. Another reason I miss my old Forester especially this time of year, the cloth heated seats were great. On another forum I've seen a few reports of dead batteries in newer Subarus. A lot of electronic are evidently still in use when not running. It's more prevalent now with them not being driven consistently - or as much as before March/April.

The chart is kind of hard for me to see but if I am reading it correctly, interesting that it shows batteries for the most part lasting longer in colder climates, where I am. I believe the battery in my truck is N/G - it's been slow to start and had to charge it yesterday. The truck started, but wouldn't again. I hope it is the battery and not the charging system. Saw the date - May 2014 so the battery is probably shot. I know this is a Subaru forum but it's good to find a battery reference here that can be applied elsewhere. AAA will tend to get many calls when it's cold - that's why I always assumed cold climates reduced battery life. But I guess there's other factors when it's cold

Yea sorry OP. Interesting tax information with the work arounds though.

Interesting (and somewhat annoying) how taxes are like that. Supposedly my 2 car detached garage was originally built as a shed in the 50s - no doors. The town taxes for some reason are less on a shed versus a garage. Another reason I have older vehicles - much less taxes. Not sure about Australia but in Europe manual transmissions are still quite popular. I thought Subaru would be a hold out and continue offering them on the Outback and Forester, which we know is no longer the case.

Tapes I think were short lived because they're relatively unreliable. Old PBX phone systems would use cassette or DATs Digital Audio Tapes for data and operating system backups and restore.. I know from experience not dependable media. Didn't some cars have hard drives to store music? It was rare and didn't last long as a media option. The next music player I buy likely won't have a CD player, just a slot for an SD card. They're actually relatively inexpensive due to no optical player - and no moving parts. I'll look up that old computer relic.