You people worry way too much about oil!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: DavidZ28
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Subies seem to be pretty hard to kill.
Probably a good thing for many of the granola crunchers who seem to favor them.


Granola cruncher... never heard that one before, but I like it!!!


Except for the very high performance models like the STI, which said "granola crunchers" probably HATE for not being "green" enough.
lol.gif
 
I believe the proper spec for these is Hemp oil, 4W20 if I'm not mistaken...

I'll admit to having a bias again Subaru for this whole gig when I was last car shopping; I just wanted a car, not a lifestyle! Still, it was practical considerations as to why I ended up with a Freestyle instead of a Tribeca or a Forester. If I could cram all of my gear into a Legacy wagon though, it would be a strong contender for my next car. Hemp oil requirements aside.
 
Originally Posted By: JOD
I believe the proper spec for these is Hemp oil, 4W20 if I'm not mistaken...

I'll admit to having a bias again Subaru for this whole gig when I was last car shopping; I just wanted a car, not a lifestyle! Still, it was practical considerations as to why I ended up with a Freestyle instead of a Tribeca or a Forester. If I could cram all of my gear into a Legacy wagon though, it would be a strong contender for my next car. Hemp oil requirements aside.


The Forester will seat four big folks comfortably, and carry all of their gear.
If they really over-pack, there's always the roof rack.
Plus, a Forester will get you through conditions a Freestyle can't.
 
Originally Posted By: dailydriver
If I had to haul a fair amount of gear, I would REALLY HAUL IT (if you know what I mean), with a Caddy CTS-V Wagon!!
thumbsup2.gif



Any turbo Subie will easily keep up with the Caddy, and they can go places from which the Caddy would have to be winched out.
 
Originally Posted By: dailydriver
Originally Posted By: DavidZ28
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Subies seem to be pretty hard to kill.
Probably a good thing for many of the granola crunchers who seem to favor them.


Granola cruncher... never heard that one before, but I like it!!!


Except for the very high performance models like the STI, which said "granola crunchers" probably HATE for not being "green" enough.
lol.gif



Noy really.
The WRX and its STI brother are for granola cruncher performance guys.
The others buy V-8 Mustangs of various vintages with various engines.
 
The Forester will seat four big folks comfortably, and carry all of their gear.
If they really over-pack, there's always the roof rack.
Plus, a Forester will get you through conditions a Freestyle can't. [/quote]

So far I haven't had any problems with any conditions in my Freestyle. We had several feet of snow this year and the 3 zone ac is great for vacations down South. I fit 6 adults and luggage confortably. The roofrack is the length of the roof so I use a rooftop carrier (bubble, 18 cu. ') and a rooftop rack bag good for another 10 cu. ', sorry but the Subie cant come close to that. For short trips I can fit 7 passengers.
 
Originally Posted By: fdcg27

The Forester will seat four big folks comfortably, and carry all of their gear.
If they really over-pack, there's always the roof rack.
Plus, a Forester will get you through conditions a Freestyle can't.


Problem is, what I needed was vehicle which had the capacity to fit 4 people, 4 bikes and some gear inside, then 4 bikes and some wheels on the top--and squeeze in a slightly-annoyed dog. The Forester wasn't really close to meeting that requirement for me. The Tribeca was close, but the sloping rear end killed it, as did the fuel economy. I could stick 4 bikes on top, 4 on a hitch rack, but then accessing the rear becomes a pain.

The Forester's a great vehicle, but the cargo configuration just didn't work as well for me. No doubt is has better offroad capabilities, but if I'm traveling offroad, I'm just driving to the trailhead to get on my mountainbike. 2 wheels just have an easier time than 3 once the going gets really rough! The FS is pretty reasonable offroad though compared to most passenger car wagons. It's served me well.

All that said, I'm now on the lookout for a cheap Gen 2 Legacy Wagon with a MT to save some wear and tear on the FS, when I'm not carpooling with a bunch of people and animals. If I can find one for cheap in "project" condition, I'll probably go for it.
 
This story sort of reminds me of a used Tempo I bought years ago. It had 220k on it when I bought it, and the previous owner used it for 10 years, and changed the oil once a year, making constant highway trips between Virginia and Pennsylvania. They also used Fram filters.

That car was surprisingly nice for being a daily driver. I was younger then and beat on it relentlessly, including burning a pair of front tires for the 4th of July in 2003. The car would still cruise at 120 mph @ 4k rpm, and I used to do it pretty regularly. If I drove it @ 75 mph average, I was cracking 51.2 mpg on the highway.

I replaced the rear main seal, oil pan gasket, clutch, and transmission, as the previous owner had tried to do some clutchless shifting, which nuked the trans. It was also low on oil, which likely didn't help matters. The alternator was the original, although it had a newer fuel pump

I flipped that car April 2, 2004 @ 70 mph, end over end. The passenger side B pillar was pushed in 20" at the bottom, and ripped the passenger seat out of the floor. The passenger and I both swam away (landed upside down, underwater, facing the direction we'd come from). I have a scar on my right ring finger from the console shattering, and a piece flying at my finger.

When I took that engine apart, the bearings had no appreciable wear. The rings were worn, but no ridge in the cylinders, with excellent cross-hatching still visible. The timing chain had stretched so much that the tensioner (a leaf-spring design) cracked, yet it still ran just fine.

I ended up sourcing the fuel pump, power steering rack (which had survived a snapped tie rod...not on the threaded area) wheels (one of which hit a tree stump, but was fine), brakes, suspension, and transmission. They've gone into a '90 Escort that I rebuild, and also beat the [censored] out of. The steering rack has about 300k miles on it, and finally developed some play. The passenger side tie-rod is an original. The fuel pump is strong. Wheels are still fine. Brakes finally wore out.

Granted, this is only one car, but I would gladly stick a 2.3L HSC engine in the category of very reliable. I'm not the only one who's had this type of experience.

I'm really surprised engines are able to take the abuse thrown at them without breaking more often. I always maintain a good OCI on my cars, keep them clean, and drive them regularly, usually with a lighter foot now, although it's fun to rev them up from time to time.
 
You're right.
You can get five in a Forester, but if you want to carry seven, two would have to settle for the roof rack.
I did at one point consider the Freestyle as a replacement fro the Aerostar.
Plenty roomy and useful.
 
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Originally Posted By: dailydriver
If I had to haul a fair amount of gear, I would REALLY HAUL IT (if you know what I mean), with a Caddy CTS-V Wagon!!
thumbsup2.gif



Any turbo Subie will easily keep up with the Caddy, and they can go places from which the Caddy would have to be winched out.


^^^Most definitely NOT, stock for stock, as far as even staying within sight, let alone "keeping up with".
31.gif


But I will give you the boonie superiority, and raise you handling/cornering on smooth, dry roads (for the Scooby 'crossovers'/non-WRX wagons, at least).
wink.gif
 
Yeah, if all roads were either dragstrips or billiard table smooth fast road courses, the Caddy would leave the Subies far behind.
Alas, real roads have bumps, even in the middle of corners, and here the Caddy wouldn't do so well.
Also, standing start performance is not the same as midrange on a real road.
Here, the turbo Subies shine.
Not so sure about the Caddy, which does have very impressive straight line standing start performance, and which could probably get around a fast road course faster than a turbo Subaru.
On a tight course, like Mid Ohio, or a real road?
I'd probably rather be driving the Subaru.
 
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Yeah, if all roads were either dragstrips or billiard table smooth fast road courses, the Caddy would leave the Subies far behind.
Alas, real roads have bumps, even in the middle of corners, and here the Caddy wouldn't do so well.
Also, standing start performance is not the same as midrange on a real road.


When I said "smooth, dry roads" I was implying almost ANY paved, tarmac, NOT dirt/gravel road.
wink.gif


The Caddy's IRS should have NO PROBLEMS whatsoever with mid-corner/apex bumps, especially with the stock adaptive suspension (YES, it would be a different story if the owner modded it with Moton/Penske/etc. reservoir coil overs or such, and the race was on bombed-out Manhattan roads.)

So you believe ALL of that 550+ lb. ft. of torque drops off as soon as the Caddy hits "midrange"?!?
crackmeup2.gif
That's RICH!
I guess you also believe NO Scoobies anywhere have ANY turbo lag as well?
lol.gif
 
Originally Posted By: dailydriver
If I had to haul a fair amount of gear, I would REALLY HAUL IT (if you know what I mean), with a Caddy CTS-V Wagon!!
thumbsup2.gif



I certainly hear ya... Go CTS -V wagon...
 
You are not allowed to talk about American cars like that here. It must've been a fluke. Only Subarus, Hondas and Toyotas are considered REAL cars here... Don't think for a minute that a Cadillac or Lincoln could EVER compare. Thats like a guy comparing his VW gti to a Caddi sports sedan because it had similar acceleration and skidpad numbers... so does a go-kart... still can't compare.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top