Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Bit OT but I think the Subarus with head gasket issues are 6-cylinders? Ours is the 2.2 L 4-banger, which is less powerful but I think is more reliable than the early 6-cylinder boxers.
FWIW ours has 245K miles, and while we are not the original owners and it may have even received a rebuilt engine at some point, so far no real problems, just replacing half-shafts and that sort of thing.
I think to get into the cars with the 2.2 you are looking at early 90s so they are more than 10 years old, but, remember cars can't count so won't necessarily be more troublesome than a newer model.
No, it was mostly the 2.5L 4-cylinders that were affected, though it affected some of the 2.2's as well. The 2.2L was used in some models (namely the base Impreza) up through the 2001 model year.
OK, which 2.2s are affected? (wondering about my own Legacy).
IIRC the 2.2 as installed in the Legacy anyway is a "non-interferance" engine, will spin free if the cam belt breaks (the driver is now definitely on foot, but the only complication to the repair is the towing) while most if not all 6-cylinder Subes are interferance - right?
For the 2.2s, the head gasket problems affect MYs 1999 through 2001. However, the 2.2s were only affected by the cylinder head redesign, and the failure rate isn't as high as for the 2.5s with the faulty head gasket material.
All Subaru 4-cylinders from 1997 through the present are interference engines. The 6-cylinders are interference from MY 2001 to present, but they use a chain so it's not much of an issue.
I previously owned an E39 (BMW 540iA)... and it sure was a great car. BMW is my personal favourite brand and the E39 one of the nicest designs they made.
But it was not *cheap* to maintain, and the purchase price would definitely exceed the one of ...say... an Acura RL.
I said the 528i...specifically didn't say the 540 because it is a V8 and the maintenance costs are higher than the 6 cyl 528i...and when I was car shopping, the 528is cost less than Acura RLs (in the US at least).
For the 2.2s, the head gasket problems affect MYs 1999 through 2001. However, the 2.2s were only affected by the cylinder head redesign, and the failure rate isn't as high as for the 2.5s with the faulty head gasket material.
All Subaru 4-cylinders from 1997 through the present are interference engines. The 6-cylinders are interference from MY 2001 to present, but they use a chain so it's not much of an issue.
Ours is a 1992. "Missed it by that much" - Maxwell Smart.
IIRC a colleague has a 96 Legacy Boxer-6, which has a belt and is interference. Maybe we should start our own "This Old Subaru" thread..
"The skirt of the piston has been reshaped and the overall weight has been reduced by approximately 100 grams. Compression ratio has been increased to 9.7 to 1 by reshaping the crown of the piston. This eliminates the clearance that was available between the piston at TDC and the fully opened valve." (my bold)
The Brits have an excellent expression for this sort of thing - "Too clever by half".
But hopefully by the time you break a cam belt, the vaunted 3% (3%!) improvement in fuel economy will have saved you enough to buy at least the parts to fix...
Although, as you noted, the head gaskets will likely fail before then, prompting you to get in there and put in new belts with the new head gaskets..
Thanks, Drover, for motivating me to read up on my old Subes.
Getting back to task at hand, I would say a Legacy *before* 1997 with the 2.2 would be a worthy contender.
It may be "too clever by half" but it's becoming the reality more and more these days as automakers seek higher and higher compression ratios for increased power and better fuel economy, and improvements in fuel delivery are making those higher compression ratios possible. And now with direct injection gasoline engines, fuel misting has become so fine that even turbocharged engines are starting to see compression ratios in the 10:1 range. That's one reason you're starting to see more and more manufacturers move to turbochargers, including GM, Ford and BMW -- now that turbocharged engines can have compression ratios almost as high as normally aspirated engines, there is almost no loss in fuel economy that used to occur with the drop in compression ratios. And I guess the point of this big long ramble is that it's basically impossible to generate today's compression ratios and meet today's emissions standards without an interference design.
And as far as I know, the Suby 4-cylinders run both sets of camshafts on a single belt, not two.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
