Consumer Reports Mag

[mikec03]

The CR April mag. is their auto issue, and it is not kind to subaru.  In particular, it lists the 2008 Outback as one of the "worst used cars."   I know of a lot of problems with subarus, but I don't know what happened in 2008 specifically to be worthy of special mention.

Any ideas?

CR has greatly improved their auto issue.  It used to be completely worthless in my opinion.  But now it at least lists the last 8 years in their "reliability" section [instead of 5].   

[GeneralDisorder]

Who knows really. The 05/06 Legacy turbo models were worse. Guess they don't go back that far. There's no real difference between 8 and 7.... and 9 got an updated engine but internally it's essentially the same so not really sure. We honestly don't see many problems with them except the turbo models which need extremely careful maintenance and attention and eventually internal upgrades to be happy past 100k.

[idosubaru]

14 hours ago, mikec03 said:

The CR April mag. is their auto issue, and it is not kind to subaru.  In particular, it lists the 2008 Outback as one of the "worst used cars."   I know of a lot of problems with subarus, but I don't know what happened in 2008 specifically to be worthy of special mention.

Any ideas?

CR has greatly improved their auto issue.  It used to be completely worthless in my opinion.  But now it at least lists the last 8 years in their "reliability" section [instead of 5].   

For automotive purposes CR has some very limited usefulness for the mechanically blind as a rough starting point.   This is so common on auto forums "why is brand XYZ, something something something" on CR?"  The auto market is too complicated to fit into nice, repeatable, one size fits all reviews.

I wouldn't give it more than a cursory toilet glance, maybe, if i'm bored, for cars.  Cars don't just get purchased and sit like an appliance and sit in nominal, conditioned, environments, and cars have higher expectations than appliances.  They're subject to much more diverse markets, demanding and increasingly mechanically unfamiliar consumers, environments, expectations and bias and latent inaccuracy is going to be the norm. 

Whatever mechanisms they use to gather data is always limiting.  They have a tough job to do that doesn't translate well to all markets, automotive being one of them.  They're data aggregaters, not mechanically astute reliability experts.  

I've seen the same two different models with essentially the same mechanical components have wildly differing rankings when it's the same !()%*%)(! parts except body panels.   I just show my wife and chuckle.  But they've got a tough job, so i get it. 

Ive seen german cars get ranked high in certain categories that you'd have to have the IQ of a watermelon to rely on.  German cars would get ranked as "Fewest winter and rust issues" around here if you looked at the data. Because they're awesome winter cars?  Hell no.  Because they're packed away and never used in the winter or the very few people that slash salt with them throw gobs of money at them, buy new ones every 3 years anyway, or have jobs/routines where they can avoid driving in snow/salt.  And on and on and on - this happens all the times in numerous ways. 

and people are anecdotal and increasingly mechanically unfamiliar - when combined with other market principles, this creates inaccuracy as well.  

if a company sees huge growth -where that growth comes from impacts reviews.  if they're trying to buy cheaper when the economy is down - then they're moving from higher tiered cars to lower tiered cars and bringing high catered expectations with them.  if they're moving "up" because the economy is up - then they're easily wowed....or alternately they could be easily annoyed with high expectations of paying higher prices for cars.  

if a germa car company gets hit hard on numbers - they'd likely retain all their fanboy diehards and have great reviews even if people are fleeing for the lives for some reasons.

some of those are illustrations more than fact and latent with their own inaccuracy and bias - but they still make a point. 

Relying on consumer reports for anything meaningful is like trying to rebuild an engine with a screwdriver.  Like CR, Screw drivers are excellent tools, but they're very limiting and low grade if you want real work/data.  If you've never used a screwdriver it might be a good starting place.  Otherwise, don't waste your time except for cursory, uninformed data to compare against wider trends. 

[CNY_Dave]

I know the oil-leaking head gaskets on our '06 2.5 are crap. Did they fix that by '08?

[GeneralDisorder]

No - the 633 gaskets were used till 10. The few EJ25's made after 10 use the same 770 gasket as the turbo models. But this was only Legacy platforms in 11, and 12 models IIRC. None of the Forester or Impreza models got the 770 gasket because they switched to the FB25 starting in 11. Those have worse problems with insufficient ring tension leading to massive oil consumption which, ironically enough, requires an even more invasive job than replacing the head gaskets. The dealership solution is to replace the entire short block. 

Honestly the best used Subaru from that vintage that you can buy would be a manual (6 speed) transmission 2011 or 2012 Legacy platform. Comes with the proven EJ and factory 770's, and no early CVT problems. I can't think of any down sides to an 11/12 Legacy/Outback 6MT car. Except possibly the random 8-14 rod bearing failures that we have seen. Usually this is turbo models though...... The turbo Legacy GT have some interesting one-off parts and the maintenance work on those is expensive and time consuming with the front mount turbo. You don't want to know what goes into doing the timing belt and water pump on one of those. It's a beast of a job. I would own one, but then I'm not a typical Subaru owner either......

GD

Edited August 8, 2018 by GeneralDisorder

[Rooster2]

I bought an 08 about 4 months ago. Everything seems to work fine in my car. I don't trust CR to be all that accurate. I had an 84 VW, that CR did not like much at all. I drove it from new to its death in 2006. Mechanically, mine was bullet proof. Suspension finally rusted apart. At 260 K miles, ran great. Original clutch felt good as new. So much for their poor report.

[brus brother]

08 OB auto

wheel bearing at 95k

changed leaking HG at timing interval 105K miles

an occasional p0420