Are Subaru engines made of glass?

OVERKILL said:
Allow me to introduce you to the Mazda 1.8L V6:
www.roadandtrack.com

Remember When Mazda Made a 1.8-Liter V6?

Relive the glory days of the 1.8-liter V6-powered MX-3 in this delightful MotorWeek review from 1992.
www.roadandtrack.com www.roadandtrack.com
Click to expand...
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.
 
Last edited:
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 :ROFLMAO:
 
Thermo1223 said:
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...
Click to expand...
4043EC05-E5E7-4CE1-B61C-88A66C0FA822.gif
 
Elkins45 said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Elkins45 said:
Why not? A boxer engine has twice as many head gaskets as an inline engine.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Last edited:
Ausfahrt said:
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.

IMG_2057-X4.jpg
Click to expand...
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?
 
Last edited:
ARCOgraphite said:
Thumbs up for the clothesline! Now how do you keep your log cabin from rotting to the ground like mine is?



Swiss ingenuity?
Click to expand...
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.
 
Elkins45 said:
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.
Click to expand...
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*.
 
SubieRubyRoo said:
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*.
Click to expand...
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.
 
Last edited:
ARCOgraphite said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

S
  • Locked
Best engine break-in procedure?
2
Replies
36
Views
4K
Slow Car Sport Mode
S
POAT vs IAT coolant: Engine-specific application and differences
2
Replies
22
Views
4K
X15
S
Tuned Accord 2.0T - First Oil Change Choices?
5 6 7
Replies
123
Views
11K
SubieRubyRoo
celicaxx
Are we seeing more oil related failures in modern cars?
3 4 5
Replies
91
Views
17K
dblshock
C
Ford oil specs of WSS-M2C-947B1
2
Replies
21
Views
6K
4WD
Back
Top