Do you think the 06-07 2.5i will have head gasket problems?

[subaruplatt]

I know it might be too soon to tell.

It is with added VVT for 06-07.5. How much of a redesign was it?

We are driving an 06 2.5 Imp Wagon and I was wondering what you guys think I should ultimately expect out of the head gaskets?

[nipper]

Short answer, no.

 

There have been no changes in emission standards in the last few years, so it will be good. When the next set of emission standards kick in, there may be another round (in all manufacturers) of growing pains.

If you are worried about it, take the money for an extended warrenty, and put it in a back account and sit on it. That will cover it IF it needs one in the future (or most of it).

I havent researched the next round of standards yet.

 

 

nipper

[idosubaru]

no.

the last subaru headgasket problem was done away with in mid 2002, that was five years ago. subaru (and many other manufacturers) have had many headaches over this, i don't think they'll neglect the headgasket in the future. japanese companies made QC what it is today, that's why american manufacturers are finally playing catch up...thank you richard deming. based on their operational philosophy in this regard it is unlikely they'll throw "any old" head gasket design into production. and in general, manufacturers headgasket design has finally caught up with other performance enhancements. sure anything can happen...but it is unlikely at best.

[ron917]

My feeling is that the problem has been solved. I haven't seen any reports of a headgasket problem from a 2005 up, and only one from a 2004. I'm actively looking for any stories of HG problems from a 2005+ 2.5L engine, because I'm starting my search for a new car. I got hit with HG problems in my '99 Outback, and I want to be sure those issues are gone before buying a new Subaru.

 

If I can scrape up the bucks, maybe I'll just get a 3.0 H6 so I don't have to worry about it. Looked at an '08 3.0R Beaner in Diamond Gray sitting on a dealer lot today - NICE! but $$$$$

 

The '99 will be going to my 17 year old son - that was the plan when we bought it.

[Reveeen]

maybe I'll just get a 3.0 H6

 

The short service life of the timing chain makes me wonder if the older Subaru cars were built too "good" and Fuji is doing a revenge thing.

[nipper]

maybe I'll just get a 3.0 H6

 

The short service life of the timing chain makes me wonder if the older Subaru cars were built too "good" and Fuji is doing a revenge thing.

 

heheheh

 

Timing chains last from 100-150,000 miles (sometimes more). With the new OBD II and soon to be OBDIII standards (well soon in glacial time), the computer can easily tell you when its stretched out. The only real differnce is that a chain will make a lot of noise before it goes snap.

ALso remeber these are thesame people that beleive in chaining plugs at 36,000 miles. i think reasonably 125-150,000 miles can come out of chain before replacement is due.

 

nipper

[Andyjo]

I haven't had any headgasket problems w/ my 05 2.5T, at 72k, i'll let you know where i hit 150k :-p

[Reveeen]

I think reasonably 125-150,000 miles can come out of chain before replacement is due.

 

How about a fella that does not think, a bicycle type chain, running in a clean, well oiled enviroment, that a 125-150,000 is a "reasonable service life" (unless you are shooting for a 3 year buy/trade cycle), but does "think" that with a tiny bit more QC (quality control), and minimal effort, a service life of 250-300,000 is possible, Saab managed it in a tired old BMC TR7 block.

[nipper]

Except a bicycle chain does not have to deal with ignition pulses, strain of the camshaft, 6500 rpm or higher, -15 to 200 degrees F (or higher), variable and instantly changing loads ...

 

nipper

 

PS: a Bycyle chain has a fairly short life, just very few reach it. On my 10 year old Racer its been through 5 chains, and my motorcycle had a interval of about 12,000 miles on its chain.

[Reveeen]

a Bycyle chain has a fairly short life, just very few reach it. On my 10 year old Racer its been through 5 chains, and my motorcycle had a interval of about 12,000 miles on its chain.

 

Neither application a "clean, well oiled, properly adjusted enviorment". Trading a belt for a chain under these conditions (125-150,000 duty cycle) offers no improvement that I can see. I'm willing to bet that timing chain replacement (with associated "stuff") @ a Subaru dealer would cost at least 4X what you would get 2 belts (with associated "stuff") changed for.

[nipper]

Basically a chain is smaller, but heavier. A timing belt is wider by necessity. A timing chain holds valve timing over long distances better then a belt. A chain has more inertia, a belt is lighter and more responsive.

A belt has to be completely isolated from oils, where as a chain doesnt (making it easier to design). A timing belt is much easier to deal with from a mfg cost point of view then a chain, but desgn wise if length is an issue, a chain is easier to deal with.

 

With the H6 they used a chain because they had a fixed dimension to fit the engine in.

 

There are combinatiuons out there of chain/belts and chain or belts and gears (read shoehorn).

 

The quitest thing to use is a belt where space is not an issue. The best are gears if it meets the distance requirments, and the best where holding dimensions can be critical is a chain.

 

 

These are the standards we go by when we pick which one to use. Gears are still used today, but usually between cams.

 

nipper

[ron917]

So timing chains have a replacement interval? Some manufacturers are touting thier new engines with timing chains that don't need expensive maintenance like a timing belt. The only engines I've owned with a timing chain were pushrod motors, and I've never had to change one. There's no interval for the timing chain on my Pontiac Montana (pushrod 3.4L V6). That's a short chain, I can imagine the one in a Subie H6 is very long.

[hohieu]

There's no interval for the timing chain on my Pontiac Montana (pushrod 3.4L V6). That's a short chain, I can imagine the one in a Subie H6 is very long.

In addition to our forester, we have a '91 cherokee with 199K miles on the odometer, with the original timing chain that's making no noise. It's the tried and true straight six 4.0L so the timing chain is indeed quite short.

 

On some Jeep forums, there are guys with over 300K miles on the original timing chain.

 

The Automatic transmission and all other mechanical components are also flawless.

[nipper]

I've eseen them with no intervals (materials have gotten much better since the 1960's) to as low as 100,000 miles. i remember on a BMW list them calling out 200,000 miles.

 

Now considering most people dont keep their cars past 160,000 (avg is 140,000), its acceptable. I think because we expect our soobies to run untill that big comet kills us all, that we are more picky.

 

And yes the shorter the chain, the longer the life.

 

nipper

[Manarius]

With the H6 they used a chain because they had a fixed dimension to fit the engine in.

Nipper, don't forget that the SVX Engine (EG33 - H6) was totally DOHC with a timing belt. I don't understand why they won't bring that engine back - it could be retuned with today's standards and make a good bit of HP.

[/offtopic]

 

I don't think any Subaru past 2002 is going to have the same HG issues that the 2.5 from 1997 - 2002 has suffered. Subaru is smarter than that.

[idosubaru]

Subaru's timing change interval didn't come about from the expected life of the chain only. that they may be more conservative in supplying the market with their first timing chain vehicle and they're working with dealerships all over the world that have never needed to support chain driven motors...is really no surprise from a corporate point of view.

 

i realize subaru's are not trucks...but with enormous engines, towing and strains far above that of a subaru, there are many trucks on the road with 200,000 and 300,000 miles on the original timing chains. they routinely go hundreds of thousands of miles without any need of timing chain and water pump work, makes them very simple to operate eventhough they still have interference engines. i don't know how transferable this concept is to vehicles. but i wonder how conservative they're being with their interval. is the water pump still require timing chain removal to replace, that's really annoying!

[nipper]

Nipper, don't forget that the SVX Engine (EG33 - H6) was totally DOHC with a timing belt. I don't understand why they won't bring that engine back - it could be retuned with today's standards and make a good bit of HP.

[/offtopic]

 

I don't think any Subaru past 2002 is going to have the same HG issues that the 2.5 from 1997 - 2002 has suffered. Subaru is smarter than that.

 

They thought about it, but the engine was too long to fit in the space under the hood. They wanted an 6 cylinder that would not require major redesign (and new crash testing) of the car.

 

nipper

[DerFahrer]

First off, if it's a 2.5i, I'm 99% sure it doesn't have variable valve timing. I'll double-check, but as best I know, only turbo ones have AVCS.

 

Second, I would personally say that any EJ251 (or 1999 EJ253) is susceptible to the external headgasket leak, and the EJ251 went through 2004.

 

We had a member here, female, I can't remember her username, but she called her 03 Forester "Blu" and it blew headgaskets.

[Slegacy96]

No.

[Slegacy96]

First off, if it's a 2.5i, I'm 99% sure it doesn't have variable valve timing. I'll double-check, but as best I know, only turbo ones have AVCS.

 

They all have i-active valve lift. This resulted in hp increasing from 165 to 173.

[86BRATMAN]

Stating in 06 they all got the AVCS system. At least on the 4 cyl variants. I don't keep up with the H6 stats

[idosubaru]

Second, I would personally say that any EJ251 (or 1999 EJ253) is susceptible to the external headgasket leak, and the EJ251 went through 2004.

there's significant real world evidence that points to mid-2002 being a "cutoff" for the 2.5 headgasket issues. that they still occur after that doesn't necessarily mean anything, it could be anecdotal. i haven't seen or heard of any headgasket issue trends after mid-2002. trends being the operative word in that last sentence. speaking to those submerged in the industry, with contacts to dealerships, service departments and data suggests that mid-2002 is a valid "cut off" for the headgasket issue frequently talked about. coming from a valid source is fairly convicting, but comparing that to real world evidence and it starts to support what was already being said in this forum and others quite awhile ago.

 

i wonder if anyone knows when Subaru started installing the "new" headgasket design in production vehicles?

[Manarius]

subyluvr2212 works at a Subaru Dealership, he would know

[subaruplatt]

Thanks I'm cruising flat and steady, (37/33.5psi rm. temp)

 

Most mellow ride by far.

Not going to worry, will wait till I get there.http:grin:

[Slegacy96]

Stating in 06 they all got the AVCS system. At least on the 4 cyl variants. I don't keep up with the H6 stats

 

The 3.0L has it. Went from 212 hp to 250 under their previous system of hp rating.