Are Subaru engines made of glass?

[GSCJR]

Allow me to introduce you to the Mazda 1.8L V6:
https://www.roadandtrack.com/car-cu...ber-when-mazda-went-crazy-small-with-a-18-v6/

I remember working on these back in the day as an apprentice circa 1995. One in particular had an engine failure due to an overheating condition because it had been sabotaged. I don't remember all the exact details, but at the time, Mazda didn't offer a complete engine replacement, and I'm not sure if that's a dedicated Mazda thing, but the estimate was ludicrous.

@wheelman, I'm currently driving my first ever Subaru after the previous owner gave up on it when the CVT failed @ 260k Kms, details here . I've driven it with a used CVT for a over a year now (15 mos) with no surprises, just maintenance and currently at 270k Kms. It doesn't leak or burn coolant/oil and the A/C is the only thing that doesn't work, but I don't care.

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

You had to pick a very small V6 to make your argument. The existence of a 2.5L V6 is just silly.

Obviously it wasn’t that silly. Ford made and sold millions of them.

 

[Jimmy_Russells]

Why not? A boxer engine has twice as many head gaskets as an inline engine.

But they’re each half the size

 

[Elkins45]

Obviously it wasn’t that silly. Ford made and sold millions of them.

Just because Ford made and sold millions of something doesn’t make them good ideas. How many of those dual clutch automatics did they make?

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

Just because Ford made and sold millions of something doesn’t make them good ideas. How many of those dual clutch automatics did they make?

There’s a significant difference between a poor idea and poor execution. How many of those dual clutch automatics has the VAG made?

 

[Thermo1223]

You had to pick a very small V6 to make your argument. The existence of a 2.5L V6 is just silly.

Picking a larger displacement V6 invalidates your argument because of course a larger displacement is capable of more power. This is tit for tat, now you are back pedalling. Try again...

 

[Thermo1223]

Just because Ford made and sold millions of something doesn’t make them good ideas. How many of those dual clutch automatics did they make?

Yes is does...be wrong and accept it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Duratec_V6_engine

The Duratec 25 was on the Ward's 10 Best Engines list for 1995 and 1996, and the SVT version made the list for 1998 and 1999.

 

[John105]

I work near their HQ, and employees get co cars. They all drive like they stole them. They can be identified by their NJ mfg plates. When I see them I try to back off, their insurance > my insurance

 

[Elkins45]

Picking a larger displacement V6 invalidates your argument because of course a larger displacement is capable of more power. This is tit for tat, now you are back pedalling. Try again...

 

[Elkins45]

Yes is does...be wrong and accept it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Duratec_V6_engine

But I’m not wrong. Just because it was well-executed doesn’t mean it was necessary. A good 2.5L I4 like the Camry engine would serve just as well and be less complex.

 

[Thermo1223]

But I’m not wrong. Just because it was well-executed doesn’t mean it was necessary. A good 2.5L I4 like the Camry engine would serve just as well and be less complex.

Jebus, a slower buzzy higher revving 4 cylinder in a bigger car vs. a faster, smoother and better powerband equipped V6. Having anything more than 250HP is probably not necessary on the road today but you can get whatever you want. If you can't accept that you are in fact wrong, o well.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

Why not? A boxer engine has twice as many head gaskets as an inline engine.

It's the cylinder count, sealing surface proximity and nextly, oil and water jacket port position that matter here in the failure mode. Not how many separate gaskets are utilised.
One could even argue that since there is one less siamesed bore intersection and a shorter deck that individual gaskets would be BETTER. Ford are blowing gaskets in their inline four ecoboost due to engine architecture and gasket design.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

Poor Elkins getting piled on. The 4 banger of the same size can and should be be more efficient, but dang, that 2.5 V6 was a stellar engine. I had one in a Contour with a stick. One of the best engines I have experience in over 50 years of car ownership and over 750,000 miles on the road.

 

[Ausfahrt]

I don't think so. I inherited my wife's Crosstrek a couple of years ago when we bought her new Rav4 and I've been abusing the Subaru ever since.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

delete duplicate post

 

[ARCOgraphite]

I don't think so. I inherited my wife's Crosstrek a couple of years ago when we bought her new Rav4 and I've been abusing the Subaru ever since.

Wow, one of the first Crosstrek. Wife used to drive and Outback Sport before that and just an Impreza Wagon before that.
The old 2.2L engine with a solid cam was FHI's best engine. More VW than VW is now.

Thumbs up for the clothesline! Now how do you keep your log cabin from rotting to the ground like mine is?



Swiss ingenuity?

 

[Ausfahrt]

Thumbs up for the clothesline! Now how do you keep your log cabin from rotting to the ground like mine is?



Swiss ingenuity?

You can see in the photos that I have made some repairs around the door. More are needed and annual maintenance is just one of the things that come with living in a log home.

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

But I’m not wrong. Just because it was well-executed doesn’t mean it was necessary. A good 2.5L I4 like the Camry engine would serve just as well and be less complex.

It’s simple, and you keep shifting the target because “necessary” is a totally subjective, irrelevant metric. The vast majority of V6s will always have better NVH characteristics than I4s, and smoother power delivery from power pulses every 60* vs 90*.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

It’s simple, and you keep shifting the target because “necessary” is a totally subjective, irrelevant metric. The vast majority of V6s will always have better NVH characteristics than I4s, and smoother power delivery from power pulses every 60* vs 90*.

This is not to refute what you stated, Subie, just something I have thought about often as a young engineer and mechanic.

In a 4, each cyl is firing 10x per second at a low 1200 "lugging" rpm. So that is 40 hits per second for the engine. That can translate to the open E-string on a Electric Bass guitar. So not a "put - put" like your lawn mower starting up.

I have never liked that, on 4 bangers, ALL 4 pistons are at either top dead center or bottom center or "locked" when each cyl. fires. Conversely with a 6 cylinder, the pistons are all in high velocity "motion" when each cylinderfires. Now, vibration comes from cyl balance (equal force per cyl) and primary and secondary balance and forces including the connecting rod mass direction and velocity changes encountered in the cycling of the engine.

I loved my carbureted GM 2.8 v6 in my old short box S10, and then, that Porsche and Cosworth(!) designed Ford Duratec v6 in my old Contour with a stick shift. 170 HP was very good power from a 2.5L in the Ninties. That engine really needed a home in a special lightweight Mustang or the imported Merkur XR4 - paired with a close ratio 5 speed.

 

[Al]

This is not to refute what you stated, Subie, just something I have thought about often as a young engineer and mechanic.

In a 4, each cyl is firing 10x per second at a low 1200 "lugging" rpm. So that is 40 hits per second for the engine. That can translate to the open E-string on a Electric Bass guitar. So not a "put - put" like your lawn mower starting up.

I have never liked that, on 4 bangers, ALL 4 pistons are at either top dead center or bottom center or "locked" when each cyl. fires. Conversely with a 6 cylinder, the pistons are all in high velocity "motion" when each cylinderfires. Now, vibration comes from cyl balance (equal force per cyl) and primary and secondary balance and forces including the connecting rod mass direction and velocity changes encountered in the cycling of the engine.

I loved my carbureted GM 2.8 v6 in my old short box S10, and then, that Porsche and Cosworth(!) designed Ford Duratec v6 in my old Contour with a stick shift. 170 HP was very good power from a 2.5L in the Ninties. That engine really needed a home in a special lightweight Mustang or the imported Merkur XR4 - paired with a close ratio 5 speed.

You have to remember Subaru has been in this game for a half century+. They have the mechanics of this (including harmonic balancer) figured out. The engine is a marvel. I have redlined my last three out of the gate and none consumed any oil.

They do/did have problems with these pesky HGs though..lol.