Any common issues with a used one in the 10K price range? Can I expect 20 mpg in mixed driving?
Any common issues with a used one in the 10K price range? Can I expect 20 mpg in mixed driving?
Some recent GRM sagas:
Both are generally tales of woe involving Head Gaskets or general unreliability of the 2.5L engine. In years past I flipped two salvage Subarus. Neither was really trouble and neither had HG issues. But for the HG it seems to be a story of not if it will need a HG but when.
In my opinion, the cars are not luxurious but generally spartan. Simultaneously, they get poor mpg or generally the mpg of something much larger. The big redeeming quality is the awd system. So, it you really don't need the awd system look for something else or even something larger that will deliver the same mpg.
Not sure on MPG, but I'd be wary of buying one for my wife. Two (2! It has happened twice in my family!) of my male cousins bought a Forester XT for their female significant other. Both of those women, shortly after the purchase of the Forester, came out of the closet and left my cousins, for a woman. So I guess the stereotype is true?
Is the Subaru XT the one that is a turbo 2.0L, generally the boxy WRX?
XT has the 2.5 turbo motor. I believe you can swap over a lot of the WRX/STI suspension bits over to the Forester. Mileage is not typically their strong suit, especially if you're taking advantage of the boost.
What generation? My 2004 XT gets around 15-16 in town and low 20s on the highway, I could probably do better but it has a turbo so I might as well use it.
To be fair, we did run ours out of oil, but i had grown to hate it prior to that. We were getting 21 mixed use and 24 pure highway, 2010 X with 130k at time of death.
I'm constantly cruising the classifieds for Subarus, and I see a lot more turbo cars being dumped with engine faults than NA cars. I'm sure there are many factors (people attempting tunes, cranking up the boost, turbo cars being flogged harder etc. etc) but it's hard to escape the conclusion that the turbo engines are more blow-uppy. I think the NA engines are pretty solid with proper care. With one change of headgaskets and comprehensive timing belt service including idlers, 200K is not uncommon. MPGs in any version are nothing to write home to Grandma about. Very solid crash test results for the '09 and up generation.
Yeah, but...
2007 and 2008 had emission air valves that rusts and fails so you have to basically reprogram the ECU to ignore those codes if you have emission testing.
bmw88rider said:2007 and 2008 had emission air valves that rusts and fails so you have to basically reprogram the ECU to ignore those codes if you have emission testing.
Or fix it properly, I guess.
Most of the OMG HEADGASKET issues are overblown and don't apply to the DOHC engine anyway.
Wife has 2017, we bought it new. No problems whatsoever so far.
I absolutely hate it but she loves it, which is fine because it's not my car.
In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :
Pretty much after they fail once, it's a complete mess to get them not to fail again. I replaced them twice at $600 each time with OEM parts and this was all before 120K mile. After the first set failed, The second set came way too soon after that for my taste.
It was a poorly engineered fix to meet a changing emissions standard and keep the EJ motors there knowing there was a refresh coming.
Foresters are basically outbacks with a bigger, heavier body. More strain on the mechanicals. The vintage makes a difference on which issues it might have. But rust, and HG are pretty common. Axle bearings, sunroof issues, transmissions are also on the list.
My brother has had two foresters both purchased new both NA cars both have had head gasket failures both were fights with the dealer. The first one was not fixed under waranty and instead traded it in on a new one. He needed a car now and was going to need it for a month or more due to work so trading it in was better for him and the dealer actually gave him very good money on the trade in. The second one had the short block replaced due to the head gaskets at 50k miles. The car left him stranded in northern Maine. 5k later the service department said the head gaskets had failed again an external leak this time and presented him with a big quote to fix it as it was just out of waranty. The car was only three years old. He took the quote and walked in to the owners office at the dealer and I guess things got a little heated (ya bad pun there). The solution was for the dealer to poor a ton of stop leak in it and then steam clean the engine and engine bay and drive across the street to the Toyota dealer and trade it in on a new RAV4.
So.....
1. Na cars are just as bad as turbo cars.
2. Just get a RAV4 or a CRV to start with.
My sister had one, NA. It needed head gaskets at a very low mileage. It was out of warranty due to time but fairly low mileage, Subaru did a 50% good will repair on it. It was a tin can and I hated driving it. Like all Subarus the build quality was shockingly bad.
In reply to Pete. (l33t FS) :
I just found mention elsewhere that the hg issues don't apply to the forester xt.
that's good news
They are one of those cars that look awesome on paper, the mods make them look cool, and the uniqueness makes them a popular vehicle considering you could get them with a turbski and a 5 speed, there are nice WRX and STI bits that bolt on, and if you are lucky some flatbrim brapbrapbrap bro already modded it and took a huge hit.
But....
They ride like a Conestoga wagon
The interior makes a Hyundai feel luxurious and well fitted
The engine and drivelines are fragile
They get horrendous mileage and require premium gas
Significant lack of modern creature comforts, if you like DDing a mid 90s GM product you would be quite thrilled.
And of course because they have the 2.5 turbo engine and minimal safety or security features, they are high theft targets.
When the best marketing available is "buy it because its a Subaru", thats enough trouble.
You'll need to log in to post.
