Subaru - why all the good press?

[bvance554]

I'be never owned a bigger money pit than my '09 Forester. Maybe i got a bad one, idk. I had a MT and apparently that is a weak point. I had to sell it for a loss. I thought it would bring me several hundred thousands of miles of happy driving, but it did not. And yea it burned oil like crazy, but that was the least of my troubles.

 

[MCompact]

I'm seriously thinking about a 2016 WRX STI; not quite as fast as I've hoped, but it's leading the other finalists in my car selection process...

 

[crazyoildude]

they have their problems like most other companies.. We see a lot of subaru engine problems in the last 12 or so years.

 

[glock19]

Subaru's get a bad rap on BITOG. If you listened to what you read hear you would think every Subaru uses more oil than gas and the CVT is going to explode like a nuke.

I'm on my second Subaru and so far they have both been great. I'll keep driving them until I can find an alternative that offers AWD, 5 star crash ratings, over 8 inches of ground clearance, cargo space, averages 28-29 mpg in mixed driving, has bluetooth, backup camera, etc... all for $27K.

Subaru's are the best at anything (gas mileage, cargo space, reliability, looks, power, etc... ) but they're pretty darn everything.

 

[SwampSurvivor]

Originally Posted By: glock19
Subaru's get a bad rap on BITOG. If you listened to what you read hear you would think every Subaru uses more oil than gas and the CVT is going to explode like a nuke.

I'm on my second Subaru and so far they have both been great. I'll keep driving them until I can find an alternative that offers AWD, 5 star crash ratings, over 8 inches of ground clearance, cargo space, averages 28-29 mpg in mixed driving, has bluetooth, backup camera, etc... all for $27K.

Subaru's are the best at anything (gas mileage, cargo space, reliability, looks, power, etc... ) but they're pretty darn everything.


The 2.0L and 2.5L do have a history of oil consumption, but there's no evidence that Subaru's CVTs aren't reliable. In fact, it appears that Subaru's CVT is quite well made. The oil consumption somehow is more linked to manual transmission models too. I like rowing my own but would consider an XV or Forester with CVT.

They are also rated to tow. Not much, but a little.

 

[Bamaro]

I dont understand why Suburu cant get their Eyesite crash avoidance system to work on their black cars.

 

[philipp10]

I owned a 98 Forester. I was not impressed. Terrible gas mileage and IMO, the AWD is a waste. I don't need AWD sucking the gas when the roads are dry 99% of the time. Its just silly. Also it was under-powered, quite the dog. The only part I felt was superior were the body integrity. The doors and body felt very solid. I was getting maybe 20 mpg. Got rid of it for a RAV4 and my gas mileage jumped 50%. Of course the RAV4 was a 2008 so in a decade, things change.

 

[JustinH]

Depends on where you live. There are a ton of them in Western New York and the Northeast.

Down here the only people with subaru's are kids with the turbo WRX's.

Most of the country does not need vehicles like that, front wheel drive is fine.

I had a early 90's legacy wagon, and it had 250k miles on it with very little done to it. The manual 4x4 went out, so I drove it in 2wd for several years before junking it due to rust.

The funny part about that car, was the spare tire was in the engine compartment, and the engine looked like the size of a hamster wheel.

 

[HangFire]

Friends have a problematic FJ year Subaru and so do the grandparents. No real problems. A really good AWD for a reasonable price.

We live in hill country, a few degrees cooler, in Winter when it rains in the city is snows here. Snow and hills makes for interesting times. Lots of folks move out here with performance tire AWD SUV's and the next year you see Winter tires or A/T's on the SUV. It only takes one Winter to make a believer in good tires. Anyway, Subaru is very popular around here, and the owners don't drive like yuppy idiots in the snow. At least, not after the first Winter.

 

[zzyzzx]

The GF's 2002 Forestor was a pretty bad car, and rather expensive for what she got. She traded it on for a like new 2011 Edge that she loves. I had to maintain that POS car and really hated working on it. It drove more like a car 1/2 it's price. Had poor brakes, and was prone to issues.

 

[chrisri]

Subaru is one of the least reliable Japanese vehicles, yet it's one of the best in the same time. Great cars.

 

[SwampSurvivor]

Originally Posted By: chrisri
Subaru is one of the least reliable Japanese vehicles, yet it's one of the best in the same time. Great cars.


They make a very unique product

 

[dlayman]

Originally Posted By: zzyzzx
The GF's 2002 Forestor was a pretty bad car, and rather expensive for what she got. She traded it on for a like new 2011 Edge that she loves. I had to maintain that POS car and really hated working on it. It drove more like a car 1/2 it's price. Had poor brakes, and was prone to issues.


I have an 04 Forester, same generation, I believe. your description is very accurate. It would warp the rotors every 30,000 miles. Was under-powered, pinged unless fed premium, stereo head unit quit under 10k miles, had BY FAR the worst sounding speakers of any car I've owned, and had an annoying habit of jerking every time you let off or pushed on the accelerator. 23 mpg. the only car I've ever owned that I didn't significantly beat the EPA highway estimate. Was glad to trade it straight up for an 05 Civic. The Civic, with snow tires, significantly outperforms the Forester in the winter with its [censored] OEM "B" traction-rated tires, and obtained double the MPG of the Forester (and didn't ping on regular gas), and is still going strong now at nearly 300k with no repairs other than front wheel bearings at 275k.

At the time Subaru had supposedly (again) fixed the head gasket problem, but now I see the continuing pattern of common failures in the 2004 year.

Subaru has a terrible habit of having serious problems engineered into their vehicles (failing wheel bearings, head gaskets, oil burning), and continually claiming its fixed and the same problems continue to crop up again and again each time. Wouldn't touch a Subaru at this point. I'll stick with good snow tires on a FRONT wheel drive car and save myself a LOT of fuel cost (and repair cost most likely).

 

[VNTS]

Originally Posted By: edwardh1
the jd powers people rate them poorly as a new car, and so does consumer reports (in the readers survey for older in use cars).
something must be bad about them- what are their failure or problem areas?


Dont own one, but co-worker had to have engine replaced in his Crosstek, used tons of oil and had to take them to small claims court because Subarua couldnt of cared less. Engine was repalced but he says the rest of the car is junk.

My cousin had an older Outback and loved it until it he about 80K and developed a rod knock, I suspect internal coolant leak she was unaware of. Note she has it serviced and other than the wheel well rust which happed to every Outback in any salt area, she like the car. She traded it in and took the resale hit and will never buy another one. She got a Volvo XC90.

Another co-worked here, young intern was into WRX's and educated me as to all the issues with various Subarus, most seem to have head gasket problems if they get a problem.

 

[dlayman]

Originally Posted By: chrisri
Subaru is one of the least reliable Japanese vehicles, yet it's one of the best in the same time. Great cars.


well, I think you're half-right. Subaru has nurtured a very cult-like following, like "You wouldn't understand, Its a Jeep thing," that will buy them and only them no matter how many problems there are. That doesn't make them great cars.

 

[rjundi]

In my family (in laws etc) we have had about 15 Subaru's that were kept in the 150k-250k range majority with the supposed oil eating/head gasket blowing EJ2.5.

None burned any oil and just my sis in law encounterd head gasket failure on a 2000 Forester at 227k miles however she was done busted AC anyway. She had mechanic put stop leak into it and was given decent trade in in the winter(AC lit up).

I personally have only owned the turbo models with one major issue. (burned valve 180k). My personal experience with Legacy turbo was 150k a pleathora of problems now with 190k.

 

[dlayman]

I didn't keep mine long enough to experience any head gasket problems (about 25k miles), but according to CR reliability data, many Subarus start off with excellent reliability then you see the engines developing more than there fair share of major problems, supposedly after the problems were fixed. That's a much larger sample size than one family, and CR is supposedly biased towards Subaru and Japanese cars in general. My standard now is 250k miles without significant repairs.

 

[chrisri]

Originally Posted By: dlayman
Originally Posted By: chrisri
Subaru is one of the least reliable Japanese vehicles, yet it's one of the best in the same time. Great cars.


well, I think you're half-right. Subaru has nurtured a very cult-like following, like "You wouldn't understand, Its a Jeep thing," that will buy them and only them no matter how many problems there are. That doesn't make them great cars.

I can only speak from my, European stand point. Impreza STI of any generation is considered to be great vehicle over here even though they aren't mega reliable. They are considered to be sub Porsche performance cars for middle income people. Fifteen old STIs are sold for 7-8k€, no other Japanese car can match that this side of NSX. That said Subaru needs to be STI to be worth spending money on it.

 

[Al]

Originally Posted By: slacktide_bitog
Poor gas mileage until the past few years due to mandatory AWD and big engines. 2.4L and AWD can't even get 20 mpg city on a sub-3000 lb car. Also slow because the AWD saps power. At least you can install the fuse to disable AWD (only on the automatic transmission). The AWD runs ALL the time. They should make it only 2WD by default and engage the AWD only when slip is detected.


Pulling the fuse made no sense. There is absolutely no increase in mileage bc the complete drive train always turns even in pretend AWD vehicles like CRV. When the vehicle was new I could easily get 30+ mph on a trip. Around town now I get 24 around town and 28 on a trip.


I have had my 2008 for 145K miles now. Subaru's really only problem has been the EJ engine that was discontinued in 2010. Head gaskets had a 50/50 chance of failing. Rear wheel bearings also failed but it wasn't a big problem.

 

[philipp10]

Originally Posted By: JustinH
Depends on where you live. There are a ton of them in Western New York and the Northeast.

Down here the only people with subaru's are kids with the turbo WRX's.

Most of the country does not need vehicles like that, front wheel drive is fine.

I had a early 90's legacy wagon, and it had 250k miles on it with very little done to it. The manual 4x4 went out, so I drove it in 2wd for several years before junking it due to rust.

The funny part about that car, was the spare tire was in the engine compartment, and the engine looked like the size of a hamster wheel.


Well I live in Minnesota and have gotten by with rear wheel drive pickups so to me, front wheel drive is a dream. I just cannot see the use of AWD except maybe 3-4 days a year, it would be nice. Why can't Subaru make it a FWD with switchable RWD added in?