Has Subaru Peaked?

[richierich]

I think Subaru went through some bad years with the 96-99 DOHC 2.5, but I do not think it is hurting their reputation that much. Here is my reasoning behind it. See it was only by 2001 that we started see major headgasket failures in the DOHC because that is when they started getting some mileage on them, it took quite a while for that to leak to other people, and by that time the 2000 and newer were out and people were buying them and enjoying them. So people for the most part do not say "Do not buy a Subaru", they say do not buy a Subaru that has a 2.5 DOHC. There are way more Subarus in Portland than there were 7 years ago.

 

And unlike the Loyale, the older Legacy are staying on the road longer, and people see that as a good sign. After the ea81, Subaru went through a lot of troubles with the EA82 cars, especially the Turbo models, and then they came out with the Legacy, and people responded by buying them. I think it is the same thing with the new ones. As long as they continue to get better and try to keep up with others technology, Subaru will do ok.

 

Though I would like an inexpensive coupe in the line-up as well.

[jamal]

I see a few inaccuracies there.

 

Mitsubishi - bad trannies/drivetrain - not seen an AWD manual since the mid '90s - and even so, still bad drivetrain - tendency to strip gears on MT boxes used for light-duty applications, and torque converters on automatics

 

Ummm... EVO?

I wouldn't say DSMs had a bad drivetrain. The only major problem was the so called "crankwalk" problem which happened rarely on cars poorly modded to high hp. And when was the last year of the Eclipse GSX? 1999? Hardly "mid 90's." Everywhere else in the world, the EVO has been a competitor to the STi for the last ten years. Also, the two comparisons I've seen done in American car mags have both given the EVO the win.

 

the 3 and 5 both are RWD only cars, BMW does not compete with Subaru anyway as Subaru does not make a luxury car

Both available with MT and AWD. I'd say the 05 LGT competes with both of those cars (although it is much less expensive than a 330xi).

[Scoobaroo]

Here in the rockies, Subies outnumber every other type of vehicle. I think Colorado is thier #1 market.

If one can tolerate a little piston slap, the new 2.5's are as bulletproof as any older subie engine. (They don't seem to leak oil anymore, either.)

Our Outback is a solid car. Impressive, tight unibody construction. I can't imagine it ever rusting in our semi-arid climate.

 

The new Ford 500 AWD is a POS Volvo (Ford-Vo?) crossover platform. It'll never catch on like Outback wagons have. Soccer moms around here are DIEHARD subie fanatics.

 

Peaked? No I don't think so. Depends on what area of the Country you're talking about, though.

[mattocs]

If one can tolerate a little piston slap, the new 2.5's are as bulletproof as any older subie engine. (They don't seem to leak oil anymore, either.)

 

Ehh...time will tell. There are so many EJ22 out there with 250,000+ miles...

 

We have to wait and see if the newer EJ25 will take that much mileage and be as dependable.

[rweddy]

Ehh...time will tell. There are so many EJ22 out there with 250,000+ miles...

 

We have to wait and see if the newer EJ25 will take that much mileage and be as dependable.

I have seen several 96-99 2.5 with over 200k and orginal HG.

[mattocs]

"The most reliable brand overall is now Subaru, which averages eight problems per 100," Consumer Reports said. It noted that Honda Motor Co. Ltd., long a reliability leader, now averaged nine problems per 100."

 

 

Taken right from todays front page of CNN.com about Consumer Reports best cars.

 

http://money.cnn.com/2005/03/04/pf/autos/bc.autos.survey.reut/index.htm?cnn=yes

[SevenSisters]

I just opened the April Issue of CR and was pleased to see that too.

 

CR Quote: "Subaru has shown significant improvement."

 

This addresses many of my concerns over Subaru quality which I believe has suffered since the mid '90s.

 

Of course, in response to reliability questions, a lot of people here have posted that CR is not unbiased and doesn't know what they're talking about, or their neighbor had a Subaru that went thousands of miles without a problem, or only 10% of the 2.5's have head gasket issues, etc.

 

I just hope this trusted publication's large sampling and stringent statistical approach is correct.

 

Gives me cause to finally use one of these :

[Smpol19]

Yup they are only behide Scion, Lexus, and Toyota (all the same) and

Subaru's are many times more fun to drive then any toyota every will be.

 

 

I just opened the April Issue of CR and was pleased to see that too.

 

CR Quote: "Subaru has shown significant improvement."

 

This addresses many of my concerns over Subaru quality which I believe has suffered since the mid '90s.

 

Of course, in response to reliability questions, a lot of people here have posted that CR is not unbiased and doesn't know what they're talking about, or their neighbor had a Subaru that went thousands of miles without a problem, or only 10% of the 2.5's have head gasket issues, etc.

 

I just hope this trusted publication's large sampling and stringent statistical approach is correct.

 

Gives me cause to finally use one of these :

[Balr14]

Most other companies AWD vehicles out-weigh Subarus by a substantial amount and most also cost a good deal more. The AWD vehicles I've owned were all priced at least $10k more than my Forester XT. For that much money, they should have decent AWD systems. But the thing I like the best about my Forester is it weighs 3300 lbs, far less than any other AWD vehicles I've had. When driving conditions are poor, I'd much rather try and stop a 3300 lb vehicle than a 4200 lb one.

[Scottbaru]

also cost a good deal more.

Yep, that's why I bought this Subaru. I've owned awd Misubishis, awd Volkswagens, awd Audis, awd Toyotas, and this is my second Subaru. My first choice this buy was another quattro. A quattro same year, mileage, and condition as this Subaru would be two to three times the price. The quattro would be a lot better car, but I'm a cheapskate with kids in college. I have two quattros in the driveway, a 200 turbo and an A4 turbo. The Subaru pales by comparison, even to the 200 with a quarter-million miles on it. The 200 is still quiet and smooth at 130mph, gets 25mpg at 80mph, shifts, brakes, and corners with smooth confidence. But all the rubber bits in the 200 are getting brittle, and I'm getting nervous about doing my 200 mile commute in it. The Subaru drives like a cheap and honest car, which it is, and it's adequate.

 

Subarus aren't nearly the best awd cars out here, but I think the one I bought is the best for the money, and thats what may keep Subaru going. I'll be back in the market for another car in a couple years, when this car goes to my next new driver. If things go well with this Subaru I'll consider another one. I don't think I'll be buying a used 2.5 with a 10% chance of a headgasket repair.

[Setright]

I normally try to avoid agressive and personal attacks in these boards, but TheDude obviously knows nothing about engines.

 

A leaking injector would be hard pressed to FILL a combustion chamber once the engine is turned off. The fuel pump stops running and the more fuel the injector leaks the less pressure in the fuel rail, and hence the flow of fuel slows. It's a negative feedback cycle.

 

Next up: What on earth makes a boxer engine more susceptible to the consequences of this supposed problem? A straight engine, with vertical cylinders would swallow just as much fuel from a leaking injector. As would an inclined straight engine, or a V-engine.

The injectors are placed so close to the intake valves that you really need to turn the engine upside down in order to avoid fuel leaking into a combustion chamber.

[Patrickjd9]

Maybe they've all peaked. The 5-cylinder awd VW and Audis were some of the finest awd vehicles made, and they lasted well into the 200k mileage with average care. A lot of guys "upgraded" to the newer Audis, only to discover newer Audis were more sophisiticated but less reliable. Awd technologies have improved tremendously, making it cheaper to produce a respectable system, but overall quality seems to have slipped everywhere.

I'm with you. Overall reliability of cars and trucks (especially Japanese and European) appears to have peaked sometime in the 1990s. Too many luxury features, parts costs (especially electronics) and crowded mechanicals that make major repairs uneconomical, and too much power out of too little engine displacement are among the reasons.

[Scottbaru]

A leaking injector would be hard pressed to FILL a combustion chamber once the engine is turned off. The fuel pump stops running and the more fuel the injector leaks the less pressure in the fuel rail, and hence the flow of fuel slows. It's a negative feedback cycle.

I was hoping someone would ask that. I've had leaky injectors before, the little puddle drained out through the piston rings after an hour or so. It was only a problem from 30 to 60 or so minutes after shutdown. Could the sideways cylinder retain fuel that much better? Maybe if the car is parked on a slant so the fuel doesn't drain out the rings? You'd also have to be on the compression stroke when starting. I suppose you only need enough to fill the cylinder at top-dead-center, but that's still a fair amount of gas.

[kz1300]

Hello this is my first post here. glad to meet you all!! just wanted to chime in here I currently drive a 95 legacy l awd 5spd with 248000 miles on it and only 2 clutches and three axles besides normal maint. I went to look at an 05 2.5i 5spd wagon and was told good luck. all of my friends have autos except one and all of them have had the trans go out except the sticks. it seems besides the head gasket problems, the auto trans is the weakest link. I will do head gaskets all week long but I am no tranny guy.

[The Dude]

I normally try to avoid agressive and personal attacks in these boards, but TheDude obviously knows nothing about engines.

 

A leaking injector would be hard pressed to FILL a combustion chamber once the engine is turned off. The fuel pump stops running and the more fuel the injector leaks the less pressure in the fuel rail, and hence the flow of fuel slows. It's a negative feedback cycle.

 

Next up: What on earth makes a boxer engine more susceptible to the consequences of this supposed problem? A straight engine, with vertical cylinders would swallow just as much fuel from a leaking injector. As would an inclined straight engine, or a V-engine.

The injectors are placed so close to the intake valves that you really need to turn the engine upside down in order to avoid fuel leaking into a combustion chamber.

 

Well, Olaf, if you check a posting on this board by "Skytow" on 1-6-05 you'll see where his Subaru engine was hydrolocked by a leaking fuel injector. I said it was RARE. I have read that gravity will help gasoline from a leaky fuel injector drain past the piston rings on a "V" type engine. Obviously, gravity will not help gas drain in a horizontal boxer engine. My calculations show that about 63 mL (2.0 ounces) of gasoline in a cylinder has the potential to hydrolock the engine, that's not a whole lot. I don't stay awake at night worrying about this happening.

And I normally avoid aggressive and personal attacks, as well. But I'm not the one freezing my breezer off for eight months out of the year in some Gulag of a country and paying 18% VAT for that privilege. So, maybe I know a little something about engines, and a few other things too. Have a nice day, ja?

[CABUSA]

They still have the best AWD system on the planet - other companies offer AWD - but their systems are about a decade behind Subaru's - just put them on a slick surface and watch - most do not have an adiquate means of channeling the engine's power and getting out of slippery situations

 

the biggest thing I see is that Subaru has maintained a high quality drive train with reliable transmissions - I have yet to see many (if any) match the overall drivetrain reliability (I have seen many trannies burnt-up) - Subaru is also the only manufacturer offering a manual transmission AWD car right now - rest of the manufacturers make theirs available only as automatics - which are inherently less reliable

 

Ford's 4WD/AWD system uses a chain to connect the front and rear diffs - think how reliable that is

 

BTW - FWD means Front Wheel Drive - that is nothing radical

Subaru has been offering AWD or (Full-Time 4WD (FT4WD) as it was called then) since 1987/1988 on the L-cars - only difference is that the legacy has a LSD center differential and the L-cars have to be locked manually when needed

 

CABSUSA Reply: It is quite correct that Ford uses a chain to link the front and rear drives - it`s on the end of the main gearbox as part of the transfer mechanism which also contains the LSD (limited slip differential) between front and rear axles. This arrangement is common to all European 4WD Fords, including Granada, Sierra, Cosworth Sierra, and Escort Cosworth (the rally car). Note there was never an auto option with this system.

 

This is an internally toothed chain, meaning it is self-correcting for wear. The Ford system was introduced in the 1980`s and is based on the Fergusson system originally developed in the 1960`s for the Jensen FF - a sports coupe with a 6 liter Chrysler V8. Ford downsized it to suit lighter cars.

 

This Ford system of 4WD is completely transparent to the user and included LSD`s in the center and rear differentials from the start. My recollection is that Subaru only got round to this sophistication in the early 1990`s, years after Ford.

 

I don`t know what Ford do in the USA, but here in Europe I can only say I have found their 4WD system almost completely reliable. I had two Ford Sierra wagons, the first has 230,000 miles up and the only repair was a new drive shaft, (transfer gearbox to front axle), at about 200,000. I still keep this one as a source for spares, although Ford still provide these; but if I had a gearbox problem for example, on the later car (only 170,000) it would be nice not to spend megabucks!

 

I also have a Legacy 2.0 liter wagon 1999 bought in 2000 as a Ford replacement; nice car and very reliable except the ignition system. only 69,000 up so far. Hope to goodness the SOHC engine is more reliable than the 2.5 liter! This is a SOA built car - not sure if I would have bought it if I`d known! But it is not as much fun to drive as the Ford - the ventilation/air-con is primeval, the seats are hard and flat, there is nowhere to put any small objects, and the ergonomics fall a long way behind the Ford Sierra (which is now a 13 year old car). I find the steering woolly the brakes very poor , and the engine flat unlesss you rev it hard. Lots of tyre rumble, poor adjustment for seats and steering etc. etc.

 

In fact, as my wife liked the Subaru, it seemed best she kept it, and I continued with the Ford. We use the Subaru for short journeys, towing horses (very useful to have the low ratio gears)- but for anything over 100 miles the Ford is greatly to be preferred for comfort and fast driving.

 

Don`t get me wrong, I am not against Subarus or a fanatic Ford fan - just like the truth to be told!

 

All the best

 

AS

[CABUSA]

Well, Olaf, if you check a posting on this board by "Skytow" on 1-6-05 you'll see where his Subaru engine was hydrolocked by a leaking fuel injector. I said it was RARE. I have read that gravity will help gasoline from a leaky fuel injector drain past the piston rings on a "V" type engine. Obviously, gravity will not help gas drain in a horizontal boxer engine. My calculations show that about 63 mL (2.0 ounces) of gasoline in a cylinder has the potential to hydrolock the engine, that's not a whole lot. I don't stay awake at night worrying about this happening.

And I normally avoid agressive and personal attacks, as well. But I'm not the one freezing my breezer off for eight months out of the year in some Gulag of a country and paying 18% VAT for that privilege. So, maybe I know a little something about engines, and a few other things too. Have a nice day, ja?

 

The only time this ever happened to me was with a VW camper (Type 2 2.0 liter boxer engine) 1979 model. The fuel tank is above the engine in this model, and the float chamber in the carb allowed fuel to run into the inlet manifold. The whole tank then drained past the pistons into the engine sump.

 

Tried to start it by towing - huge clouds smoke, switched of and continued tow to village garage. Clever mech noticed strong smell gas, drained sump, new oil, car like new. Needed a new needle valve, that`s all.

 

Never had it with a V engine; see no reason why it should not with any flat engine though, as you say,, rare.

 

AS

[Setright]

Of course Dude, I forgot that living in a cold climate and paying 25% VAT* excludes the ability to understand engines better than you. What was I thinking??

 

For fuel to leak into the cylinder, the intake valve must be open. In engines such as these, tuned for low-mid range torque and low emissions, that means the piston is on a downward stroke. (The intake valve is shut immediately after BDC.) So, fuel is leaking into a volume much larger than at TDC. A warm volume assuming the engine has been running, and a volume open to the atmosphere through the air filter. Gasoline has tendency to evaporate quite fast under such conditions.

 

Your proposal suggests that in the region of 63ml fuel will be ejected by the already falling pressure in the fuel rail, and it won't leave the engine by diffusion or simple draingage into the sump overnight. My view is that this is theoretical balder dash.

 

 

 

 

*Get your facts straight!

[The Dude]

Of course Dude, I forgot that living in a cold climate and paying 25% VAT* excludes the ability to understand engines better than you. What was I thinking??

 

For fuel to leak into the cylinder, the intake valve must be open. In engines such as these, tuned for low-mid range torque and low emissions, that means the piston is on a downward stroke. (The intake valve is shut immediately after BDC.) So, fuel is leaking into a volume much larger than at TDC. A warm volume assuming the engine has been running, and a volume open to the atmosphere through the air filter. Gasoline has tendency to evaporate quite fast under such conditions.

 

Your proposal suggests that in the region of 63ml fuel will be ejected by the already falling pressure in the fuel rail, and it won't leave the engine by diffusion or simple draingage into the sump overnight. My view is that this is theoretical balder dash.

 

 

 

 

*Get your facts straight!

 

Why are you assuming a warm engine? The electric fuel pump pressurizes the fuel system as soon as the ignition switch is placed in the "on" position. I could site numerous situations that would result in the fuel system being pressurized without the engine being fully warmed, if warmed at all.

How much fuel will be ejected by a pressurized Subaru fuel system? Frankly, I do not know, and I find myself strongly disinclined to go to the bother of actually measuring the output. However, the instuctions given by the Subaru factory for replacing the fuel filter go to some length (disabling the fuel pump, and then running the engine until the fuel supply is exhausted) to insure that the fuel system is fully depressurized. I can only conclude that Subaru is concerned that some significant quantity of gasoline will be ejected from the pressurized fuel system.

 

In any regard, I stand by my assertion that, regardless of the cause, a boxer engine is more likely to experience hydolocking than a "V" type engine. The primary reason being that gravity will help drain fluid from a cylinder in a "V" type engine, while the horizontal boxer engine will necessarily be denied that advantage. If you disagree, fine.

 

25% VAT My heavens. You realize that you Danes were much, much better off being Vikings. 25% VAT, does that at least go to pay for a state provided funeral where they put your body in a long boat and then set it ablaze as it drifts off into the ocean? I hope so.

[Setright]

Okay, a little niggle first: Please don't quote the entire text of previous posts, especially ifit's right above your own. It's a waste of space.

 

In the morning, when I turn my key to "On" I can hear the fuel pump spin like mad and the sound of the fuel filter brimming. Only takes a second or so, but that indicates that the pressure has been lost. That's why people often suggest leaving the car overnight before replacing a fuel filter. Disconnecting the pump is only needed if you must change the filter immediately.

 

Considering the amount of piston slap a cold EJ engine can make, I would suggest that there is plenty of clearance for gasoline to run past the pistons, even if they are lying down.

 

This much feared hydrolocking may happen once in a blue moon, but I cannot agree that a boxer or flat engine is more susceptible.

[Slegacy96]

Your right, I meant Full Time 4wd. And your point about the Ford awd system is well taken. However, it seems like Subaru is resting on its laurels. The reliability has gone down hill with the start of the 2.5L engines. QUOTE]

 

Sorry for jumping in but I just wanted to comment on my Phase I 2.5L engine. Its great! My first problem occured a month ago (at age 9) with 71,000 miles. $400 for a new cam seal. After that so far so good.

 

Flaws: 1996 required 89 octane

1996 didnt offer manual transmission

cracked cylinder head gaskets

 

All of which were remedied, well mostly, as Subaru has progressed into the Phase II.

[medfurd]

I think Subaru has always progressed in a sensible fashion and they continue to move in a good direction. I like the older cars, you still see them around all the time. In "The Truman Show," the dad of the girlfriend drives a Loyale wagon on the beach. That was unrelated but I just saw it. I've always like Subaru body styles. For being slightly down-market Japanese cars, they are built extremely well and are reliable aside from a few setbacks. Parts are typically Japanese-cheap and they're easy to work on. Subaru has pretty much always gone its own way as far as AWD and strong boxer engines. There's never really been an excessively bulky Subaru and they are fun to drive. It is good that they focus on the global market as well. As someone mentioned earlier, most RHD Subarus can be had with low-range boxes, so there is definetely a demand for the supply. The West coast of the US is a huge chunk of their business, though. A showroom floor salesman once told me while I was waiting for my car in service that in Alaska, 6 out of 10 cars are Subarus. Or something, I forget but it was impressive. Perhaps my favorite thing about Subaru is that it is not a vendor company. They design and use most of their own parts and products. It's true that some of the things like T-belts, driveshaft joints, bulbs and other little things come from other companies, but the drivetrain components are all their own. Subaru there's no such thing as a B-W or Getrag tranny in a Subaru. The 80's european cars that I love so much like Volvo and BMW use many similar parts from larger companies, like MacPherson and Bosch, to name some big ones.

 

Someone mentioned that the new Ford 500 uses a crappy Volvo platform. I will not pretend to know anything about Volvo's AWD system b/c I don't, my focus is on 70's to early 90's Volvos. But the chassis itself that the Volvo S40/V50, Mazda 3, and Ford Focus/other Fords all share was designed by Volvo and is very good. Ford uses a lot of Volvo made and designed compenents and Volvo doesn't get it credit. The new SV Focus will be using Volvo's turbo 5 cylinder engine, which is a good one.

 

To answer the original question, I like new Subarus, and I don't think they've peaked. It is possible that they have leveled off though. They are becoming less of what made them unique earlier on. For example, the new LGT is a great car that appeals to many people and will likely sell well, but has nothing very special to differentiate it as a cult classic rally monster. I also wish Subaru would make more engines other than just the EJ20 and EJ25 variants. A 1.8 liter turbo to compete with lower level cars would be cool, and a Turbo H6 (maybe team up with Porche ) would be sweet.

[Martinjmpr]

Two points:

 

Has anyone stopped to consider that maybe what has "changed" hasn't been the quality of the cars, but rather, our expectations?

 

Talking to my dad, he was telling me that he never bought a new car in the 60's that he didn't have to put a new water pump in before 20k miles. (Remember that until about the mid-late 70's car warranties were usually 12 months/12,000 miles.) I vividly remember when a car with 100k was due for a serious overhaul, if not a rebuild of the engine.

 

I think it's unquestionable that overall automotive quality has improved in the past 30 years, but our demands and our assumptions have also changed. So, if we now expect a car to be completely trouble-free for the first 100k miles, we are going to be more critical of even minor glitches.

 

The other thing to consider, when thinking about the apparent "decline" of Subaru in the mid-90's, is that perhaps what happened was not that Subaru went "downhill", but rather that other competing companies started coming up to Subaru's standards, which meant that Subarus, by comparison, no longer towered over them and looked diminished in comparison.

 

Second point, regarding Subaru making an AWD "econobox", depending on how you define the term, they do. My mom and brother were both able to get brand new TS wagons for under $20k, both with automatics.

 

Granted, it's not a $12k Kia or Suzuki, but under $20k is damn good for a sophisticated and feature-filled AWD wagon.

[TheBrian]

$20k is no econobox.

 

$13.6k gets you a FWD Toyota Matrix wagon. Now that's an econobox.

$16.8k for the AWD version with the bells and whistles.

 

 

And if you're fortunate enough to live in Canada, they'll sell you a compact hatchback. That's something Subaru won't do.

[Meeky Moose]

heh you need to drive a celica all trac like mine.. everyone forgets that the celica alltrac was the world rallycar champion in 88 and 89' ... beings it handles like an STI wieghs right at about 3000lbs with me in it, 5-speed, awd, turbo, etc, etc.. i would say its more fun to drive than even an 88' XT6..

i know i can launch it off the line faster than a wrx and not have to worry about blowin my trans out.. (did it this weekend the guy gave me a with the bird attached to it, lol..)

 

the celica alltrac was made up into the late 90's as well, you just have to hunt for them.. its like finding a needle in a hay stack...

 

Yup they are only behide Scion, Lexus, and Toyota (all the same) and

Subaru's are many times more fun to drive then any toyota every will be.