1996-2003 worst problem years to avoid

[bork]

Sorry if this has been asked, I tried a search but didn't find what I was looking for. Is there such a thing as certain models & years to avoid? (in the range of 1996-2003?) I know the HG are an issue with the 2.5s but what about transmissions etc...? Are they all the same or some lemons out there? I was thinking of trying to get a 2.5 cheap & put a 2.2 in it?

[brus brother]

My 2000 legacy had the delayed engagement issue with the AT (transmission replaced under extended warranty) but if you are looking at manual, it's not an issue.

You might want to do a search of Technical Service Bulletins for those years to get an overview of what you might expect.

When you look around at God's creations you might think Him an underachiever, so considering cars are made by man...

[idosubaru]

96-03 4 cylinders are all very similar. I wouldn’t favor any of those years if I was going to put a 2.2 in it. 

im a little confused about your question though.  What is your plan?  You can’t just drop the same 2.2 in a 96 and 2003. 96-98 (and 99 OB or legacy) are phase I and 00-03 (and 99 For or Imp) are Phase II. 

As far as the systems other than the engines:

major systems like brakes and power steering are essentially the same with minor tweaks and no issues.  Front struts are interchangeable between them all.

00-03 have significant rear suspension changes.

99-2001 EJ22s (found in 99 legacies and 99-01 Imprezas) are not as robust as 96-98 EJ22s - they’re more prone to oil leaks/headgaskets than their 96-98 beast older cousin EJ22s.

some 01-03s have H6s which can’t be swapped into 4 cylinder vehicles without full wiring ECU conversion.

99 and sometimes 98 or 2000 automatic have delayed engagement into drive. When first starting in the morning Shift from reverse to drive and wait 3-10 seconds to go. 

test drive them from cold start and see.  If it happens (and wasn’t ignored for 5 years) it’s treatable for less than $10. I wouldn’t avoid 99ish automatics I’d just make sure it doesn’t currently delay for 10 or more seconds from cold (meaning it was ignored for years). 
 

 

[Numbchux]

I much prefer SOHC ('99/00+) 2.5s to the DOHC. They're more common, simpler, and the standard HG failure is an oil leak, not really a big deal.

I know you said -2003, although I'm not sure why, there's no major change on almost any model between 2003 and 2004 (Impreza got different lights...).

2004 and 2005 LEG/OBK could have the EJ259 california engine, mechanically very similar to an EJ251, but completely different electronics, including drive-by-wire. These are not necessarily problematic, but they're rare, which can make things difficult when it comes to diagnosis and parts replacement. I wouldn't turn down the right deal on one, but it would give me pause.

I love the EZ30, I have 4 01-04 H6 Outbacks, including both of our daily drivers right now. By far my favorite Subaru (for a daily, anyway).

[idosubaru]

21 minutes ago, Numbchux said:

I much prefer SOHC ('99/00+) 2.5s to the DOHC. They're more common, simpler, and the standard HG failure is an oil leak, not really a big deal.

I know you said -2003, although I'm not sure why, there's no major change on almost any model between 2003 and 2004 (Impreza got different lights...).

2004 and 2005 LEG/OBK could have the EJ259 california engine, mechanically very similar to an EJ251, but completely different electronics, including drive-by-wire. These are not necessarily problematic, but they're rare, which can make things difficult when it comes to diagnosis and parts replacement. I wouldn't turn down the right deal on one, but it would give me pause.

I love the EZ30, I have 4 01-04 H6 Outbacks, including both of our daily drivers right now. By far my favorite Subaru (for a daily, anyway).

He nailed it on all points - I'd avoid EJ25D's and 259's, the way the EJ25D headgaskets fail are prone to prior historical multiple overheating events missed by owers and mechanics alike.  The later 00+ (and 99 Forester/Imp) 2.5's are much more forgiving.