Subaru engine reliability?

[threeputtpar]

Originally Posted By: Tegger
Originally Posted By: supton
How hard is it to import into Canada?

Provided the vehicle is 15 model years old or older, it may be imported into Canada without any duties, and without safety/emissions restrictions or modifications. I just don't know who I'd use to help me find something GOOD.

We currently have two cars: my Integra, and my wife's '99 Tercel. I need cargo capacity, and our cargo car -- the Integra -- needs to be replaced.

The new car we're buying is ultimately intended for my wife, even though we're buying it partially for its cargo capacity. I would drive the new one for a couple of years, then hand it over to her and we'd replace the Tercel with something that would become MY "new" car.

When I buy MY "new" car, I intend it to be an older one, just like you suggest. I just need to find somebody to help me locate and purchase a vehicle from far away. I must be nuts, because my ideal car is an '81-'82 Corolla SR-5 Liftback.


Well, since nobody has suggested it yet - how about a lightly used Crown Vic?

But seriously, if you're looking for a used Rav-4 or CR-V, I'd rule out the Rav depending on how "used" you're looking at.

A coworker at my last job has a 2007 with the 4-cyl and auto trans. One morning while making the mail run she had me come out to the lot and hop in the car so she could have me diagnose a problem. It would buck and jump when trying to move from a stop.

I did some Google-fu and found that they were well known for trans and TCU problems that came on suddenly and killed the trans. This happened to her in the matter of 24 hours. Fortunately, her's was just new enough to be covered by the unpublished extended warranty and it was replaced at no charge. The local dealer had it fixed in a day, mainly because they always kept 2-3 transmissions and computers in stock at all times.

See, it's not just Honda that can screw up an auto transmission!

 

[SF0059]

Ah, Subaru, the red-headed stepchild of the Asian brands. I bought a 2006 Forester from my mother-in-law with just shy of 100k on it. One owner, always stealer maintained. I had a love/hate relationship with that beast. The AWD was great and it was super practical with fairly good mpgs. But it rode like a buckboard and felt like it was cobbled together by students at a Japanese technical college.

Then stuff started to go wrong. Burning a quart of oil every 1k. Head gaskets. Alternator. Leaking headlight housings resulting in 6 burnt bulbs. Misfires. Appearing and disappearing CELs. AC compressor. Motor mounts. Rear differential. Wheel bearing. Leaking windows. Rust. Alignment issues.

I always maintained it well as did my MIL, but stuff started breaking as fast as I could fix it. Got tired of throwing money at it and finally traded it in for the Odyssey with 148k on it.

My family has had a few Subarus. This was the newest and by far the worst. Was it a lemon? Maybe. However, it left a bad taste in my mouth. Don't think I'll consider another one.

If I was in the market for a CUV I would go back to Mazda (have owned 3, excellent cars) and get a CX-5. Test drove them and fell in love. I also test drove the Equinox, CR-V and RAV-4... not nearly as impressive from a driver's perspective.

 

[gofast182]

Originally Posted By: Tegger
Thanks to all who contributed.

What it now looks like is that Subaru revised the head gasket for the '08 model year, which coincides with Consumer Reports' ratings suddenly changing to "excellent" for '08-and-up for the "Engine Major" category. So the head gasket is probably not a deal-breaker for us. But, thanks to this thread, I have become aware of an oil-consumption problem that extends to the 2014 model year. And that's not welcome news at all.

We're going to test-drive the RAV-4, CR-V, and the Forester, and see where it goes from there.


I'm not saying CR is wrong but consider anything '08+ probably isn't up in the core mileage area for those failures to show up yet.

 

[Cujet]

It seems to me that any horizontally opposed engine is going to consume more oil. As the oil will not drain off the cylinders.

 

[sopususer]

Originally Posted By: Tegger
Thanks to all who contributed.
We're going to test-drive the RAV-4, CR-V, and the Forester, and see where it goes from there.


One more thing to consider with these three choices. Subaru seems to be tops in safety right now with excellent scores on the new small overlap tests.

Subaru iihs small overlap results

By comparison the Rav 4:

Toyota iihs small overlap results

And the CRV which was better than the Toyota, but nowhere near the Subaru.

Honda iihs small overlap results

 

[FutureDoc]

Originally Posted By: sopususer
Originally Posted By: Tegger
Thanks to all who contributed.
We're going to test-drive the RAV-4, CR-V, and the Forester, and see where it goes from there.


One more thing to consider with these three choices. Subaru seems to be tops in safety right now with excellent scores on the new small overlap tests.

Subaru iihs small overlap results

By comparison the Rav 4:

Toyota iihs small overlap results

And the CRV which was better than the Toyota, but nowhere near the Subaru.

Honda iihs small overlap results


You would think that after getting pantsed for low off-set score on the Prius and Camry, they would have fixed the Rav4... worse, after being pantsed for the Rav4, Camry, and Prius, the would have made darn-sure that the Corolla was fixed... nope. That just ticks me off.

 

[JTK]

Tegger, is it a brand-new Forester you're after? The timing chain equipped FB series engine has been available for a few years now on the Forester, but there's no real long term data available in regards to HG issues on the FB's given their relative newness. Same goes with the Aisin built CVT automatics Subaru has been using since 2010.

They're a good, safe car for the money and command ridiculously high used prices in my area due to their popularity. I own a 2012 Legacy 2.5i, CVT. I like the vehicle, but certainly don't love it. It's my work commuter that often hauls my 4 kids around too.

 

[glock19]

Originally Posted By: JTK
Tegger, is it a brand-new Forester you're after? The timing chain equipped FB series engine has been available for a few years now on the Forester, but there's no real long term data available in regards to HG issues on the FB's given their relative newness. Same goes with the Aisin built CVT automatics Subaru has been using since 2010.

They're a good, safe car for the money and command ridiculously high used prices in my area due to their popularity. I own a 2012 Legacy 2.5i, CVT. I like the vehicle, but certainly don't love it. It's my work commuter that often hauls my 4 kids around too.


I like my Legacy, I think new tires would make me love it. The Bridgeestones are way too loud and I'm guessing they'll be lousy in the snow.

 

[JTK]

Originally Posted By: glock19

I like my Legacy, I think new tires would make me love it. The Bridgeestones are way too loud and I'm guessing they'll be lousy in the snow.


Lousy in the snow is putting it mildly. They're HORRIBLE. I recently put a set of Craigslist Firestone Winterforce snows on my Leggy for the winter. Problem is, they're about 5x louder than the lousy factory Turdanzas I had on it. I had the tire shop toss them when they mount/ballanced the new snows for me.

My main complaint with my 2012 Legacy is it's always wandered at highway speeds since new. Tires wear perfectly and I always attributed it to the factory tires. It continues with the basically new Winterforce tires.

 

[glock19]

Originally Posted By: JTK
My main complaint with my 2012 Legacy is it's always wandered at highway speeds since new. Tires wear perfectly and I always attributed it to the factory tires. It continues with the basically new Winterforce tires.


That's funny, one of the things I love about my Legacy is how straight it tracks. Although, I came from a 4th gen 4Runner which are known to wander.

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: JTK
My main complaint with my 2012 Legacy is it's always wandered at highway speeds since new. Tires wear perfectly and I always attributed it to the factory tires. It continues with the basically new Winterforce tires.


If the tires are wearing perfectly, it sounds like it may not have quite enough toe-in on the front. Most vehicles will specify just a little bit of toe-in in the front, which helps with straight-line tracking at the expense of tire wear, which usually manifests itself as a little bit of feathering on the outer edges.

If your tires don't feather even just a little bit, it sounds like your toe is too neutral in the front. It's probably very much in spec, but the allowable range is usually quite wide. For example, both of our cars allow -0.08" to +0.08" of toe in the front. A car toe'd at -0.08" will drive completely differently than one toe'd at +0.08", but both would still be "in spec".

 

[JTK]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd

If your tires don't feather even just a little bit, it sounds like your toe is too neutral in the front...


Thanks Jason. Good info. This could be my situation. If I ever get it into the dealer, I'll have them check it. I dunno of any reputable alignment places given I haven't had one checked/performed in over 20yrs!

 

[Tegger]

Originally Posted By: sopususer
Subaru seems to be tops in safety right now

Not important in the slightest.

I don't want bombs scattered all over the car.
I don't want tree trunks for pillars.
I don't want the computer to do my braking for me.
I don't want the car to weigh an extra thousand pounds just for the microscopic chance I might smack into somebody just-so and hard enough to kill me.

 

[Tegger]

Originally Posted By: JTK
Tegger, is it a brand-new Forester you're after?

Brand-new.

Originally Posted By: JTK
The timing chain equipped FB series engine has been available for a few years now on the Forester, but there's no real long term data available in regards to HG issues on the FB's given their relative newness. Same goes with the Aisin built CVT automatics Subaru has been using since 2010.

CR says both have been very good down to '08. But I have to say that the red-studded Honda and Toyota results make an impression on me that the white-and-black pocked Forester results don't.

Unless we wake up lazy, we're headed out tomorrow to look at cars. Why can't our butler do this for us? If we had one...

 

[FutureDoc]

Originally Posted By: Tegger
Originally Posted By: sopususer
Subaru seems to be tops in safety right now

Not important in the slightest.

I don't want bombs scattered all over the car.
I don't want tree trunks for pillars.
I don't want the computer to do my braking for me.
I don't want the car to weigh an extra thousand pounds just for the microscopic chance I might smack into somebody just-so and hard enough to kill me.


Sorry, all cars now have bombs
Most have tree-trunks for pillars (save Toyota... and that is why my father got the Camry over the Legacy)
Most new cars have the computer break for you now
Since 1978 cars have added an average 800lbs

And in the US at least, we are now below 36,000ish highway fatalities per year and rock songs talk about youtube rather than "Oh where, oh where can my baby be?" Plus it is more of a issue that some drunk texting 14 year old runs that redlight and smacks into you... that I worry about.

Still, the best car company "gluing" cars together seems to be Subaru right now... now if they could only afford a designer but they are paying the engineers better. The HG was an older design issue which many Subbie folks consider "regular maintenance". Sure the 2003 Camry did not have the issue, Accords were losing trannies, and the Subbies were figuring out HG issues... then again, the "new camry" in CR was listed below the Legacy, the Forester was tops in the Small SUV category.

I really like CR for that stats, they are about as good as it gets compared to other NA "reliability" surveys. But with all surveys, I do believe there is a good amount of survey bias happening with Toyota and Honda as well with the US makes.

 

[JungleJim]

We currently own a Honda (1997 CRV 305,000 miles) and a Toyota (2009 RAV 80,000 mi). Both purchased new. But I am well aware that both brands have had their issues. The gen 1 Pilot had transmission issues. Toyota had a Head Gasket Special Service Campaign on early 90's 4Runners because the HG became a huge issue. Most 4Runner owners just replaced the HG, then called their 4Runner "bulletproof".

Oh, how I hate the term "bulletproof"!!!!!

My point is.....even though Honda and Toyota have had their share of reliability issues over the years, many people still see them as reliable. If you can replace the HG on a Subaru, then get another 150,000 miles out of it, why would that not also quality as being reliable?

We really like the 2015 Outback. That might be our next purchase. I like it so much better than the 2015 CRV or 2015 RAV (Toyota really blew an opportunity when they redesigned the RAV).

For me, it boils down to how quickly the company reacts to issues. Toyota not only is slow to react, their first reaction is to deny a problem even exists. Toyota has become too big. Honda is still of a size that can react to issues, and so is Subaru.

 

[Vuflanovsky]

I think the definition of the word "reliable" has become increasingly subjective...especially where these surveys are concerned. "Reliability" to me is the vehicle won't leave me stranded at any point prior to having 100K miles on it. "Reliability" to the surveys can indicate everything from problems with window regulators to misaligned seats. The most "reliable" cars may not be the ones that will never leave you stranded as most cars won't these days...but some highly rated vehicles might have their water pumps go out at 95K miles instead of 140K miles, etc.

For all of Toyotas bad press and intransigence, I still see them as the most "reliable" make over 100K miles but that's just my personal experience having had Hondas also...I think Subaru makes great vehicles but they'll always be tainted by my buddies '71 Subaru which had the stick shift come off in his hand shifting into 3rd gear. Some pictures never leave your mind...

 

[jeepman3071]

Originally Posted By: Vuflanovsky
I think the definition of the word "reliable" has become increasingly subjective...especially where these surveys are concerned. "Reliability" to me is the vehicle won't leave me stranded at any point prior to having 100K miles on it. "Reliability" to the surveys can indicate everything from problems with window regulators to misaligned seats. The most "reliable" cars may not be the ones that will never leave you stranded as most cars won't these days...but some highly rated vehicles might have their water pumps go out at 95K miles instead of 140K miles, etc.

For all of Toyotas bad press and intransigence, I still see them as the most "reliable" make over 100K miles but that's just my personal experience having had Hondas also...I think Subaru makes great vehicles but they'll always be tainted by my buddies '71 Subaru which had the stick shift come off in his hand shifting into 3rd gear. Some pictures never leave your mind...


I agree with this completely.

I don't trust reliability surveys at all, because of the misinformation that seems to plague them. Not many people will go out of their way to report that their vehicle is functioning correctly, but many [censored] off people will complain if something goes wrong. I've also seen many complaints on these surveys that were related to maintenance stuff. I saw a complaint on one survey about how a Honda's engine died going down the road one day, and that the car was junk after 160k miles. Reading further into the review suggested that the timing belt had never been replaced, and the person thought they could just buy a Honda and drive it without maintaining it. I read another review about how a Grand Cherokee was "an electronic nightmare" because the rear wiper stopped working.

If I'm looking to buy a vehicle I read into the vehicle specific forums about common problems with that vehicle, and compare those experiences to other vehicles in a similar category. I think too many people buy cars these days based on what is advertised about the vehicle, or what other people say. They don't use common sense or read further into it before purchasing.

My friend's sister bought a Subaru Impreza because she read it is AWD and can go anywhere in bad weather conditions. A week after owning it she spun out and hit a guard rail. She didn't realize that even an AWD vehicle needs good tires on it (hers were bald), and that having AWD doesn't mean you can speed around corners in the snow.

 

[97tbird]

Hmmm... I have also been thinking of a Subaru Impreza/WRX (hatch or sedan) from 2002 - 2004 era, to use as a 3rd car/beater; (NOT STi)
Those things will have 100k or more miles, generally, with my price and year range.

I am assuming those years were the PROBLEM years with HG failure?
(I am also assuming that this particular model has the engine that was prone to it?)

Which year is the cut-off, where it is safe from HG failures? Is it really 2008 as mentioned in one post?
(I, for some reason, thought they fixed the HG issues earlier)

My other choice would be a Mazda Protege-5 hatch from the same era (2002 - 20-5 or so), but The Subie has AWD...which I SOMETIMES wish I had, on a beater. (work in health care, so essential staff, must go to work on snow days)...
IDK if the risk of the HG thing cancels out the benefit of the HG problems...

 

[97tbird]

^ *last sentence: meant to say :
"IDK if the risk of the HG thing cancels out the benefit of having AWD"