# RE: All wheel drive question



## firefighterjake (Aug 8, 2014)

Doing some research on a vehicle purchase for my wife's car. Currently she has a 2003 Subaru Legacy Outback sedan with 124,000 miles that I will be inheriting (and the 2003 Honda Accord with 191,600+ miles will be sold).

I think we've narrowed the prospective list down to a few contenders: Subaru Outback, Subaru Crosstrek, Mazda CX-5 and Nissan Rogue. No test drives yet. I personally suspect she is leaning towards the Subarus.

Question 1: Subaru says their all wheel drive system is superior. Anyone have real life experience to back them up or refute? Would the Mazda or Nissan AWD system be worse in snow/rain?

Question 2: Anyone have any personal experience with the cars in our list?


----------



## heat seeker (Aug 8, 2014)

No personal experience with any on your list, but in general: look for limited slip differential(s), traction control that applies the brake on a slipping wheel, how the 4 wheel is engaged. (Manual or automatic engagement.) I doubt a locking diff is available on these models.


----------



## bsruther (Aug 8, 2014)

My wife has a 2012 Outback. We haven't driven anything newer to compare it to, but I can say that it handles good and does well at cornering, seems to really grip the road The wife says that it handles well in the snow. 

If we had it to do over again we probably would have bought a Hyundai and maybe not had to pay $1000 for a broken sunroof at 38,000 miles among other things.


----------



## Ashful (Aug 8, 2014)

With some of the vehicles on your list, you should give serious consideration to a Volvo V50 AWD.  Can be had in standard fare or the T5 R-Design, with a 2.5L turbo that runs about as fast as a ***** date.  We've owned one a few years now, and have been very happy with it.


----------



## Michael Golden (Aug 8, 2014)

Wife got a 2014 suburu outback before last winter. I have to say I wasn't pumped about the wagon, but she insisted. After driving it last winter they don't lie about there all wheel drive system being great. We have a driveway where you can enter by coming up the road and making a wide steep turn or come down the road and have a running start. Well, we got a couple decent snows and I insisted on trying out the all wheel drive by making the up hill turn into the drive and that dang thing never thought about getting stuck with the stock tires, it did spin but never once thought I was stuck. I tried that with my work truck a gmc 1500 and it didn't have a chance. My in laws have an all time 4x4 jeep and it couldn't make the turn coming up the hill. Also wanted to mention that driving on the interstate in sloppy and slick roads it handle  great. All in all the wife was right and I think there will always be a suburu in the stable.


----------



## BrotherBart (Aug 8, 2014)

firefighterjake said:


> Anyone have any personal experience with the cars in our list?



Drove my neighbor's Subaru Outback to the grocery store today. It was dry and sunny out but it didn't break or get stuck or anything.


----------



## Mt Bob (Aug 10, 2014)

Get the outback.Subby has been building active awd longer than anyone,audi system better,but their cars are not worth the price.Subby will ride better and cause less problems than other ones.


----------



## jharkin (Aug 10, 2014)

Subarus AWD system is VERY good.  Ive been on long drives in the snow with my buddy in his 04 WRX and that thing is unstoppable, especially with snow tires. And it had open front (and possiblycenter) diff.   Modern ones will all have brake based traction control simulating having a full set of limited slips.

When Subaru says its better than other systems they do have somewhat of a point, as their system is a true full time AWD system with a center diff that splits power 50/50 front to rear (like Audi quattro).  Some other AWD systems today are only pseudo-AWD, one prime example is the Honda "4 wheel drive" in our Pilot.  In that system the engine is mounted transverse like a FWD and it even has a regular FWD transaxle.  To make it 4 or all wheel what they do is add a transfer case to the FWD trans that sends power to the rear. In the rear rather than a diff it has a pair of electronic clutch packs that can lock to varying degrees sending a limited amount of torque to the rear wheels.

This Honda system is limited in that even at full "lock" its never completely solid, and at speeds above 20mph it disconnects altogether leaving you in FWD. In practice its a good aid to help get you going on a snowy hill, but its useless offroad compared to a true 4WD in that if one of the rear tires is on ice or completely off the ground the clutches cant lock up hard enough to spin the side with grip.

Whats even more interesting is that Honda calls their pseudo system a 4WD (which I gues it is in the sense its part time only?)  and puts it in the Ridgeline truck that tries to market against other pickups with_ real_ transfer case 4WD like the Frontier, Tacoma, etc.


----------



## Grisu (Aug 10, 2014)

We are driving a 98 Outback for about 9 years by now although it will soon be time to part ways. The Outback has been a good car in the winter although I have very little to compare it to. Nevertheless, never got stuck, handled well on mountain roads, and has been very reliable. My only gripes are the not so great fuel economy and the engine can be sluggish on steep grades or the interstate.

My wife got a new Impreza hatchback last year and she really likes it. I am also driving it occasionally and it is nothing fancy but does its job. Handling in the snow is really good and the fuel economy is quite a bit better than the old Outback. Cargo space is surprisingly good for a small car; we managed to load a whole Costco shopping trip in the trunk a few times. Unless your wife is carrying around loads of stuff regularly I would take it into consideration. Its about 5K less than the outback and gets slightly better mileage.


----------



## ewdudley (Aug 10, 2014)

Subaru handling is just fine.  Easy, predictable, plenty of under-steer, tracks nicely even if you let-off sliding-in hot.  Not in the same league with my thirty year old Audi, but probably neither your wife nor mine can tell the difference let alone take advantage of it.

In my experience what Subaru lacks is a front cowling system that is compatible with driving in real-world snow and/or slush.  The whole assembly is made of 'space-age materials' that are no more substantial than a Clorox bottle.  A buddy of mine just got back from a weekend in Vermont and reports that I shouldn't feel unlucky: 70% of the Subarus he saw were missing some piece of plastic or another from the lower-right.


----------



## firefighterjake (Aug 10, 2014)

jharkin said:


> Subarus AWD system is VERY good.  Ive been on long drives in the snow with my buddy in his 04 WRX and that thing is unstoppable, especially with snow tires. And it had open front (and possiblycenter) diff.   Modern ones will all have brake based traction control simulating having a full set of limited slips.
> 
> When Subaru says its better than other systems they do have somewhat of a point, as their system is a true full time AWD system with a center diff that splits power 50/50 front to rear (like Audi quattro).  Some other AWD systems today are only pseudo-AWD, one prime example is the Honda "4 wheel drive" in our Pilot.  In that system the engine is mounted transverse like a FWD and it even has a regular FWD transaxle.  To make it 4 or all wheel what they do is add a transfer case to the FWD trans that sends power to the rear. In the rear rather than a diff it has a pair of electronic clutch packs that can lock to varying degrees sending a limited amount of torque to the rear wheels.
> 
> ...



Do you notice any issues in the snow or bad weather with the Honda . . . I mean to say . . . does the AWD still work well or is it not really all that useful?


----------



## scjotulman (Aug 10, 2014)

I need to make the same decision.  Planning on a new car in November or December.  I have always driven Volkswagon diesels.  My wife likes the Subarus,  she drives a Forester now. I am thinking about the the Outback I like the all wheel drive and ground clearance. If Subaru made a US diesel Outback it would be a no brainer.  We don't get much snow in SC but when we do the Forester does great.


----------



## Ashful (Aug 10, 2014)

ewdudley said:


> The whole assembly is made of 'space-age materials' that are no more substantial than a Clorox bottle.


..as in, from the early 1970's?


----------



## jharkin (Aug 10, 2014)

firefighterjake said:


> Do you notice any issues in the snow or bad weather with the Honda . . . I mean to say . . . does the AWD still work well or is it not really all that useful?



It drives just fine on plowed but slippery roads - never had the need to take it out befomre the plows.  The Honda system is more than enough to get you started from a stop on slick conditions... then its up to your tires whether you are going to stop again safely 

Where the Subaru shines... is it could keep going in 4-6 inches of unplowed powder.


----------



## Corey (Aug 10, 2014)

My .02 - Tires will make a world of difference.  Even the 'best' AWD is going to skid into the ditch on crappy tires, and even a mediocre AWD is going to handle like a snowcat on good tires.  I would probably buy the car based on features, price and other factors you want, then get a good set of tires to top it off.


----------



## Jags (Aug 11, 2014)

jharkin said:


> Where the Subaru shines... is it could keep going in 4-6 inches of unplowed powder.



Hmmm...not trying to be a smarty pants (really)... but if my vehicles couldn't push through 6" of snow pretty easily, I would be getting a different vehicle.


----------



## Utilitrack (Aug 11, 2014)

My Ford Edge has been a great car since 2010, 100K miles to date with nothing but regular maintenance and tires. The vehicle with the Mastercraft Courser tires is a tank in good old fashioned Maine winters and nor'easters!


----------



## Ashful (Aug 11, 2014)

Jags said:


> Hmmm...not trying to be a smarty pants (really)... but if my vehicles couldn't push through 6" of snow pretty easily, I would be getting a different vehicle.


We had a fun trip home from an ER visit with an infant in 2010, late on a Sunday night when the snow was coming so hard and fast that the plow truck drivers were pulled off the road from 10pm - 5am, so they could rest up and get ready for the next day's rush.  I was in my Dodge 1500 Ram 4x4, and my wife following in her Volvo V50 AWD.  I think the snow on the roads was 6" everywhere, with drifts to 18" in the intersections.  There were a few big hill climbs (my house was only a few miles but 400 feet elevation up, from the hospital), and the snow in a few of the intersections was deeper than her headlights, but that Volvo just plowed thru.  She didn't get stuck until she hit the hard pack left by the plow trucks, at the end of my driveway, and the car got hung up on the belly with all four wheels off the ground.

I haven't driven a Subaru AWD since the 1990's, but I'm definitely sold on Volvo's AWD.  This is the fourth AWD vehicle we've owned (Jeep Grand Cherokee Laredo, Jaguar X-Type, Audi Quattro, Volvo V50), and I think the Volvo is at least on par with the Audi.  I hated driving the Jeep and Jag.


----------



## Jags (Aug 11, 2014)

Joful said:


> I hated driving the Jeep and Jag.



Not all grand cherokees are created equal.  There are at least 3 different drive configurations that I know of.


----------



## jharkin (Aug 11, 2014)

And now not all Subarus are equal either.  The newest Legacy I heard now has some sort of lesser... not completely full time 50/50 torque AWD system to get to 30+ mpg EPA ratings.  The outbacks should still be the traditional setup.


To jags point.. I have no idea if my pilot could drive up a hil in 6 inches of snow... It might actually do fine? I just never have had reason to test it on unplowed roads.  I have been in rides in a subaru down unploughed dirt fire roads through a half a foot or more  and it just keeps going.


----------



## Ashful (Aug 11, 2014)

Jags said:


> Not all grand cherokees are created equal.  There are at least 3 different drive configurations that I know of.


Definitely, and neither are their suspensions.  My primary hatred of that Cherokee has much more to do with dangerously soft suspension for it's tall ride height and narrow wheel base, than the drive configuration.  I do remember liking the transfer case selector on that car though, with what seemed like almost a dozen selections (RWD high, 4wd high, AWD high, 4wd low, AWD low, etc..  In fact, I seem to recall there may have even been FWD selections on that transfer case, but that was 5 cars ago... a distant memory.


----------



## NE WOOD BURNER (Aug 11, 2014)

I have a 2009 Subaru forester with 49000 miles for sale. 4 snows on car and a set of new all seasons go with it.


----------



## scjotulman (Aug 11, 2014)

A few years ago we got 6 to 7 inches of snow in South Carolina we got out in my wife's Forester before the snow got packed down (we don't have snow plows here) well we have only 1 snow plow here but it's in the Ripley's Believe it or Not Museum. We went up some steep hills and even stopped halfway up then started back up them. No problems at all. I was impressed.


----------



## firefighterjake (Aug 11, 2014)

So any folks have experience with Mazda's CX-5 or Nissan's Rogue? Personally I suspect my wife is leaning more towards the Subaru Crosstrek at this point simply because she has had a good experience with her Outback Legacy.


----------



## NE WOOD BURNER (Aug 11, 2014)

I bought they forester  for my girl so that she would have AWD for our hills very steep and unmaintained at the times of travel. It had new all seasons and it was and is awful for stopping. The ABS just locks up and will slide out of control. Most I know with subarus are pulling out the abs fuse so they can run all seasons. I chose to put 4 winter tires on it. much safer! still My girl would rather drive the VW GTI with studded snows as it is better in the bad weather and snow. So the forester is for sale with low miles.


----------



## Grisu (Aug 11, 2014)

NE WOOD BURNER said:


> I bought they forester  for my girl so that she would have AWD for our hills very steep and unmaintained at the times of travel. It had new all seasons and it was and is awful for stopping. The ABS just locks up and will slide out of control. Most I know with subarus are pulling out the abs fuse so they can run all seasons. I chose to put 4 winter tires on it. much safer! still My girl would rather drive the VW GTI with studded snows as it is better in the bad weather and snow. So the forester is for sale with low miles.



We had the Nokian WR on ours which are rated "all-weather" and handle really well in snow and ice. Unfortunately, they are loosing their thread really quickly and I probably would not put them on again. For stopping, I am insisting on driving manual. That saved my skin already a few times.


----------



## Pdesjr (Aug 12, 2014)

I'm a car mechanic and my wife drives a Subaru Outback. Great car . My sister in law has a Nissan Rogue and is on her 3rd transmission. Not very reliable.I drive a Jeep Wrangler and my wifes Subaru is great in the snow . We go to Vermont on a regular basis and have never gotten stuck with the Outback.


----------



## begreen (Aug 12, 2014)

jharkin said:


> And now not all Subarus are equal either.  The newest Legacy I heard now has some sort of lesser... not completely full time 50/50 torque AWD system to get to 30+ mpg EPA ratings.  The outbacks should still be the traditional setup.
> 
> 
> To jags point.. I have no idea if my pilot could drive up a hil in 6 inches of snow... It might actually do fine? I just never have had reason to test it on unplowed roads.  I have been in rides in a subaru down unploughed dirt fire roads through a half a foot or more  and it just keeps going.



When I had the Legacy it was so much fun that I would look for unplowed parking lots just to play in.


----------



## NE WOOD BURNER (Aug 13, 2014)

Grisu said:


> For stopping, I am insisting on driving manual. That saved my skin already a few times.


Agree with a standard! Especially with a Subaru.
I have rebuilt many a Subaru! They do have a following that has brand loyalty.
They do however have a high cost of ownership with the many cats on the exhaust and multiple o2 sensors. The boxer engine has had a continuous head gasket issue since the mid 80's. enough for many to join in on a class action lawsuit against Subaru. If you are a DIY these costs are minimal but takes time to repair head gaskets correctly. If you purchase I highly recommend fluid checks at every fuel up. and make sure you have a temp gauge and shut off at first sign of temperature rise and tow in. this saves much machine time on heads and waiting time if head is cracked. Stop by a machine shop and ask questions about the heads. very educational.
My experience is that the front wheel drive GTI(6 speed manual w/studded snows)is more popular to drive in my household with 70000 miles on a 2011 and only 49000 on the 2009 Subaru automatic. and of course the golf R is awd but more money and horsepower.
IMHO and experience and the VW is better on fuel!


----------



## semipro (Aug 13, 2014)

NE WOOD BURNER said:


> ... The boxer engine has had a continuous head gasket issue since the mid 80's. enough for many to join in on a class action lawsuit against Subaru. If you are a DIY these costs are minimal but takes time to repair head gaskets correctly. If you purchase I highly recommend fluid checks at every fuel up. and make sure you have a temp gauge and shut off at first sign of temperature rise and tow in. this saves much machine time on heads and waiting time if head is cracked. Stop by a machine shop and ask questions about the heads. very educational.


Does re-torquing the head bolts help prevent head gasket problems on these? I know it did on some aluminum head engines. 
Maybe they've gone to the newer stress-yield head bolts and you can't re-torque.


----------



## firefighterjake (Aug 13, 2014)

NE WOOD BURNER said:


> Agree with a standard! Especially with a Subaru.
> I have rebuilt many a Subaru! They do have a following that has brand loyalty.
> They do however have a high cost of ownership with the many cats on the exhaust and multiple o2 sensors. The boxer engine has had a continuous head gasket issue since the mid 80's. enough for many to join in on a class action lawsuit against Subaru. If you are a DIY these costs are minimal but takes time to repair head gaskets correctly. If you purchase I highly recommend fluid checks at every fuel up. and make sure you have a temp gauge and shut off at first sign of temperature rise and tow in. this saves much machine time on heads and waiting time if head is cracked. Stop by a machine shop and ask questions about the heads. very educational.
> My experience is that the front wheel drive GTI(6 speed manual w/studded snows)is more popular to drive in my household with 70000 miles on a 2011 and only 49000 on the 2009 Subaru automatic. and of course the golf R is awd but more money and horsepower.
> IMHO and experience and the VW is better on fuel!



My wife's current Outback Legacy is an automatic . . . and honestly it has been fantastic in the snow.

No issues with the cats or O2 sensors (unlike my Accord . . . but at 191K or so I can live with the check engine light being on). Like most other folks with the 2.5 liter engine we did have to have the head gasket changed out when we started having issues at around 115K. Fortunately, a local guy who pretty much only works on Subarus was able to do this (and change out the timing belt (or was it the chain?), water pump, etc. at the same time at a decent price. Supposedly Subaru re-designed the 2.5 liter engine a couple years back . . . although I still wouldn't be surprised to see future issues with the head gasket since for many years they've been tweaking the head gasket and coming up with "solutions" that folks optimistically think will fix the problem . . . only to see the head gasket issue appear down the road . ..  then again . . . perhaps with a whole new engine? Other than the head gasket and the usual wear and tear items -- brakes, oil changes, etc. it has been pretty reliable . . . although like most Subarus it does use some oil so I have to keep an eye on that item.

Oh yeah, I did have one recent issue . . . temp spiked a few times. Brought it to one mechanic who said he couldn't find the problem, but suggested it could be a bad head gasket or cracked head. Brought it to the guy who did the head gasket who found a pin hole leak in the radiator and changed out the thermostat . . . but still had the problem . . . at which point he said it could be a cracked head head. Spoke to the mechanic here at the station who did a bit of research for me though and found a TSB from Subaru that suggested replacing the radiator cap and shortening (and beveling) the coolant overflow tube after flushing the overflow reservoir. For $13 I bought a new cap, spent 10 minutes flushing the reservoir and cutting the tube . . . so far, so good.


----------



## Adios Pantalones (Aug 13, 2014)

The wife and I have owned 4 different models of Subaru between us (Outback, Legacy, Forester, and even an ugly Baja)- all fantastic in snow, never a head gasket, exhaust, converter or other issue mentioned. Almost 100K on my Forester (with which I pull an enclosed loaded trailer on occasion) and what it needs most is for me to tighten up the rattly heat shield. That's it.

Next car will likely be another Subie


----------



## jharkin (Aug 13, 2014)

Multiple cats and 02 sensors are a fact of life on all new vehicles.  the Tacoma I just bought has 4 cats and at least as many 02s.... and that engine is a ~ 10 year old design.


----------



## firefighterjake (Aug 13, 2014)

Adios Pantalones said:


> The wife and I have owned 4 different models of Subaru between us (Outback, Legacy, Forester, and even an ugly Baja)- all fantastic in snow, never a head gasket, exhaust, converter or other issue mentioned. Almost 100K on my Forester (with which I pull an enclosed loaded trailer on occasion) and what it needs most is for me to tighten up the rattly heat shield. That's it.
> 
> Next car will likely be another Subie



Did any of those have the 2.5 liter engine . . . honestly, they are notorious for head gaskets going at something north of 100,000 miles . . . seems as though other engines such as the 2.0 liters tend to fare a bit better.

Baja huh . . . I always wondered how bought those things . . . better question . . . what possessed you to do so? 

Ah yes, the rattling heat shield . . . had one of those . . . all rusted . . . read some forum debate on how important it is . . . in the end I pulled it off . . . no issues . . . but then again my wife is also not in the habit of driving her car in the middle of dry hay fields so I think we're safe.


----------



## NE WOOD BURNER (Aug 13, 2014)

Sold a car to a guy who just started a machine shop last year. He is funding his start up costs through the local Subaru dealer doing warranty work.
He said its a 60/40 chance of getting a bad one.
I was interested as I have worked on hundreds of subarus pre 93. I was surprised how they are trying to keep their roots by holding onto the under powered boxer engine that was such a proven performer, in this day and age where speeds are higher and emission related add ons and fuel quality have increased temps on this weak link of the boxer design.
so I would recommend if a Subaru is the one that fits your needs that you consider extended warranty and make sure if you finance that your finance term is within in your warranty period.
The higher stance and good approach and departures angles are helpful through that pre spring early mud season if your on a dirt road.


----------



## begreen (Aug 13, 2014)

firefighterjake said:


> Did any of those have the 2.5 liter engine . . . honestly, they are notorious for head gaskets going at something north of 100,000 miles . . . seems as though other engines such as the 2.0 liters tend to fare a bit better.



I've read that this issue is related to the coolant. Newer Subarus are quite particular about their antifreeze. If the system is flushed when the timing belt is replaced and regular antifreeze is put in problems often seem to follow. Only Subaru antifreeze is recommended.


----------



## BrotherBart (Aug 13, 2014)

Glad to see this thread. While my neighbor is on vacation he left his Outback with me. Drove it a couple of times and kinda like it. But this thread has me thinking Hyundai again.

At least it would maintain my record of never owning anything not built between LA and Atlanta (Well except for that V-8 Triumph Tr-8 that I scrapped.). The Hyundai plant's in Alabama.


----------



## Ashful (Aug 13, 2014)

begreen said:


> I've read that this issue is related to the coolant... Only Subaru antifreeze is recommended.


I'd really like to see the reasoning on that.  Do they have a galvanic problem in their design, or some other reason?


----------



## BrotherBart (Aug 13, 2014)

Yeah I would like to see the answer to that myself. Ethylene glycol is well, ethylene glycol. And Subie's is green like everybody else's. Which is kinda a clue.


----------



## Grisu (Aug 13, 2014)

Maybe that answers it: http://allwheeldriveauto.com/subaru-head-gaskets-problems-explained-part-ii/
I just learned some stuff about ours cars I was not aware of either...


----------



## begreen (Aug 13, 2014)

Joful said:


> I'd really like to see the reasoning on that.  Do they have a galvanic problem in their design, or some other reason?


I'll see if I can dig it up. Had to do with aluminum heads if I recall correctly.


----------



## begreen (Aug 13, 2014)

Grisu said:


> Maybe that answers it: http://allwheeldriveauto.com/subaru-head-gaskets-problems-explained-part-ii/
> I just learned some stuff about ours cars I was not aware of either...


That is a very thorough explanation. Nice to see they are a Seattle shop. Subarus are very popular out here.


----------



## NE WOOD BURNER (Aug 13, 2014)

"Proper maintenance costs more, and that’s just not popular, as a result the market place just doesn’t allow for it."
This is the reason that the Subaru has a higher cost of ownership. Remember all those diagnostic tests are an added expense.
I agree that all new cars and trucks have very poor recommended service intervals. In New England the service interval is 3000 miles. I agree with a non dealer, non lube center maintenance technician.
The Subaru is a price point car that has extended service intervals that have no relationship to the design and engineering of a boxer engine. The boxer design was an air cooled engine that has seen many retrofits and redesigns to keep it in the game.
BMW motorcycles have realized this and have a strong inline engine line to compete.
This article is a great explanation of many aspects of maintenance and marketing.


----------



## TradEddie (Aug 14, 2014)

> When I had the Legacy it was so much fun that I would look for unplowed parking lots just to play in.



Me too. I can't say enough good things about driving a Subaru in the snow. I did once almost get stuck playing about in a hilly parking lot, the snow was up to the headlamps, and I could barely open the door, but all it took to get me free was a little scooping of snow from the rear tires, and away I went again. More pertinent to this forum, I've used my Subaru to drag logs out of the woods.

I did find it (2.5L) to be sluggish, and even our last Outback (2008?) developed the head gasket problem at 100K, and had several smaller issues, together with a growing family meant we were without a Subaru for the first time in 16 years. When the snow falls, I do miss it.

TE


----------



## RustyShackleford (Aug 15, 2014)

begreen said:


> When I had the Legacy it was so much fun that I would look for unplowed parking lots just to play in.


With my Outback (the one before this one, it hasn't really snowed since), I liked to get on an icy road and slam on the brakes.   Nothing happened, except the car stopped.  Of course that's the anti-lock brakes more than the AWD.

I don't know if it's really better than other AWD systems, since I haven't driven any others.   But I've certainly heard a lot of anecdotal evidence that it's the case (including in this thread).   Years ago I saw a display at the Subaru dealership to support their claim, basically little scale models of the various systems.   The Subaru one was totally symmetric, looking like it'd been designed that way from the ground up.   Most if not all ot the others looked like they were originally 2WD and a "wart" had been added to allow drive to the other two wheels.

I had a 1997 Ouback to well over 100K miles and my 2006 is pushing about 90K, and I've never had head gasket problems.   However, I am pretty meticulous about maintenance, including using Subaru brand anti-freeze (though people at legacygt.com swear it's no different).


----------



## gpcollen1 (Aug 15, 2014)

While the systems are something to consider, the tires mean just as much.  Most of the stock tires stink in bad weather.  If buying brand new, get them to put soem legit tires on that vehicle!!  I have seen dozens of Subarus get stuck trying to drive up the hill right next to the service/dealer.

We have a Pilot and it is great in bad weather.  I have some great tires on it.  Sure it is not true all wheel, especially over 20 MPH but only extreme driving needs that anyway.  The guys that are usually off the road in the woods are those with 4WD who think you can do anything you want with 4WD...


----------



## Ashful (Aug 15, 2014)

RustyShackleford said:


> I don't know if it's really better than other AWD systems, since I haven't driven any others.   But I've certainly heard a lot of anecdotal evidence that it's the case (including in this thread).


Maybe.  I suspect very few Subaru owners have had a lot of opportunity to test out the AWD systems of Mercedes and Audi in variable bad weather conditions, so it's very difficult to find direct comparisons from people having a lot of experience with multiple different brands of similar vintage.  Over the last five years, I've owned an Audi Quattro, a Mercedes M-Class with 4MATIC AWD, and a Volvo V50 2.5T AWD, and I think they're all very good.  Possibly better than Subaru, but who can compare?  I haven't driven a Subaru since I was a teenager, and was not impressed, but we're talking antique AWD technology there.  I am sure they have improved significantly, since.


----------



## firefighterjake (Aug 15, 2014)

gpcollen1 said:


> While the systems are something to consider, the tires mean just as much.  Most of the stock tires stink in bad weather.  If buying brand new, get them to put soem legit tires on that vehicle!!  I have seen dozens of Subarus get stuck trying to drive up the hill right next to the service/dealer. *Agree 100% . . . whatever vehicle she gets I plan to get some spare rims and buy some decent snow tires for the winter.*
> 
> We have a Pilot and it is great in bad weather.  I have some great tires on it.  Sure it is not true all wheel, especially over 20 MPH but only extreme driving needs that anyway.  The guys that are usually off the road in the woods are those with 4WD who think you can do anything you want with 4WD... I* guess this is the part that confuses me . . . so a vehicle like the Pilot is just 2WD once it goes over a set speed . . . this would worry me since to me it seems as though part of the appeal of AWD is always having it ready to engage if you're driving along at 45 or 50 mph on your way to work and hit a slick spot while driving in "marginal" weather when the temps are hovering around 32 degrees F . . . or you're driving along after a snow storm and are driving under the speed limit (say 45 mph), but over the limit at which the AWD engages.*)


----------



## heat seeker (Aug 15, 2014)

Be aware that some cars, like my Ford, have tire pressure devices attached to the rims. Aftermarket rims don't have them, and you'll get tire pressure warnings constantly. A friend of ours bought a Saab and had the same problem. A piece of tape over the light "cured" it until the summer rims went back on the car.


----------



## NE WOOD BURNER (Aug 15, 2014)

When you buy a new car in New England you should negotiate the extra wheels and tires and now the TPMS also. unless you buy VW or Porsch no Sensors in the wheels, if you buy the right model. If not Tirerack.com


----------



## Treacherous (Aug 21, 2014)

I picked up a '15 Mazda CX-5 AWD GT w/tech about a month ago.  I love the driving dynamics of this vehicle.  I saw enough videos and reports on forums that it should do fine in the snow.  Engine has a timing chain as well so that helps in the long term maintenance costs.

30+ MPG for an AWD CUV on the highway isn't too shabby either.  I put a class 3 hitch on it.  It is way overkill but it will tow 2K pounds.

I know this is a mud video but does show it can do more than asphalt.




5 Star on safety all around including the new small overlap test.



It may not be the best AWD vehicle but during the non-snow periods it drives like an AWD Miata.  It gives my Infiniti G35x a run for the money in the corners.


----------



## Mt Bob (Aug 21, 2014)

Like!


----------



## jharkin (Aug 22, 2014)

begreen said:


> I'll see if I can dig it up. Had to do with aluminum heads if I recall correctly.



I thought that all cars with aluminum heads and aluminum engines are particular about anti-freeze.  The other issues is that the ultra long life blends now put into a lot of cars at the factory are very specialized and not always interchangeable.

Honda's long life AF is blue... and every Honda mechanic Ive spoken to warns to never use anything else.  Toyota's long life mix was red and now they have a pink one and also they dont recommend using anything else.

BMW also makes a blue AF, which Ive read is not interchangeable with blue Honda.

And then there was the GM Dex-cool (orange)  debacle.. which was also implicated in head gasket failures when used to its 100k rated life.


Its been a long time since I saw a new car that actually came with old fashioned Prestone Green AF from the factory.  Times have changed, there are many different mixes of AF now.......


----------



## jharkin (Aug 22, 2014)

heat seeker said:


> Be aware that some cars, like my Ford, have tire pressure devices attached to the rims. Aftermarket rims don't have them, and you'll get tire pressure warnings constantly. A friend of ours bought a Saab and had the same problem. A piece of tape over the light "cured" it until the summer rims went back on the car.



Those are called TPMS sensors. They have been a NHTSA mandated safety feature on all new vehicles sold since 2008. There are a couple ways the sensors work but the most common is integrated into the valve stem. These are obvious as instead of a rubber valve you will see a metal unit that screws in.







Most tire shops can transfer the factory sensors to current production aftermarket rims made to take them, or install aftermarket sensors (i believe there are even ones that work with old style rubber stems)  and program them to the vehicle.

http://blog.tirerack.com/blog/selec...ure-monitoring-systems-on-after-market-wheels


----------



## RustyShackleford (Aug 22, 2014)

jharkin said:


> Those are called TPMS sensors.


My girlfriend's new (a couple years back) Mazda had some sort of tire-pressure sensing system.   One day while checking my tires (I don't have 'em), I decided to check hers too.  They were about 5psi low, but apparently the sensors were not warning of low pressure.    So I have the impression they'll warn of gross under-inflation for people that are kind of clueless about cars (avoiding sexist remarks  but not that helpful for those of us who like to keep within a psi of so of optimal inflation for handling, tire wear, economy, etc.


----------



## jharkin (Aug 22, 2014)

RustyShackleford said:


> My girlfriend's new (a couple years back) Mazda had some sort of tire-pressure sensing system.   One day while checking my tires (I don't have 'em), I decided to check hers too.  They were about 5psi low, but apparently the sensors were not warning of low pressure.    So I have the impression they'll warn of gross under-inflation for people that are kind of clueless about cars (avoiding sexist remarks  but not that helpful for those of us who like to keep within a psi of so of optimal inflation for handling, tire wear, economy, etc.




They are a safety device and I believe the idea of the rule was to warn people if their tires where low enough to have a potential blowout (supposedly it came about as one of the reactions to the Firestone blowout problems in the 90s).   I believe they have to be something like 25% or 10psi low to trigger.


----------



## heat seeker (Aug 22, 2014)

jharkin said:


> Most tire shops can transfer the factory sensors to current production aftermarket rims made to take them, or install aftermarket sensors (i believe there are even ones that work with old style rubber stems)  and program them to the vehicle.
> 
> http://blog.tirerack.com/blog/selec...ure-monitoring-systems-on-after-market-wheels



Good to know - thanks!


----------



## TradEddie (Aug 25, 2014)

On the subject of TPMS, some cars will automatically disable 4WD/AWD functionality if TPMS detects a fault. Something to remember if you do the "tape fix". One of my previous cars flashed the cruise and AWD lamps when the TPMS light was on, this was to indicate that those functions were disabled. Not sure if it was the Subaru or not.

Subarus are great in mud, I once towed an Econoline Van uphill out of a muddy grass field, but what impressed me most was the lack of fresh skid marks under the Subaru tires, a testament to how quickly the system reacts to slipping tires. That was with the amazing factory Michelin tires on my 1998 Outback, but the factory Pirellis on the newer model were abysmal, I doubt it would have been so easy with those.

TE


----------



## bobdog2o02 (Aug 25, 2014)

I have had many subarus, i like that they are easy to work on.  a set of metric sockets and box wrenches and your set....  I have done timing belts, trans swaps and valve train work.  I also have a '96 Jeep XJ Cherokee, give me a subaru for bad weather any day, also for twisty roads.  The center of gravity for a subaru sits just above the axle line.  Boxer engines sit sooooo low in the car.  you would not regret a subie.


----------



## bobdog2o02 (Aug 25, 2014)

The subaru "System" is a viscous differential.  seamless not mechanical/ non electrical engagement.  its a true all time all wheel drive system.  Also subaru uses many distribuition percentages.  Most subarus are 60/40 or 70/30 biased to the front end to reduce oversteer in slick weather.


----------



## TradEddie (Aug 25, 2014)

bobdog2o02 said:


> The subaru "System" is a viscous differential.  seamless not mechanical/ non electrical engagement.  its a true all time all wheel drive system.  Also subaru uses many distribuition percentages.  Most subarus are 60/40 or 70/30 biased to the front end to reduce oversteer in slick weather.



I believe that is generally only true for manual transmission Subarus. For automatic transmissions, the front/rear distribution is (usually) a computer controlled clutch. There are so many variations of AWD even within Subaru models, that it's hard to get a simple answer for any given model/year behind all the semi-tech sales pitches. See below for a non simple but still incomplete answer:

http://www.cnet.com/news/not-every-subaru-all-wheel-drive-system-is-created-equal/

On my 1998 Outback, I could feel the central clutch sending more power to the rear wheels when I hit the gas exiting a bend, it was almost like a slight gear change, but with the sudden sensation of switching to the feel of a RWD car. I could not feel this on my later Outback, but I could not find out if this was because the shift was now more subtle, or no longer programmed. 

TE


----------



## bobdog2o02 (Aug 25, 2014)

TradEddie said:


> I believe that is generally only true for manual transmission Subarus. For automatic transmissions, the front/rear distribution is (usually) a computer controlled clutch. There are so many variations of AWD even within Subaru models, that it's hard to get a simple answer for any given model/year behind all the semi-tech sales pitches. See below for a non simple but still incomplete answer:
> 
> http://www.cnet.com/news/not-every-subaru-all-wheel-drive-system-is-created-equal/
> 
> ...



Not to make this a pissing contest but for the past 20years , i believe, this is the basic configuration.  Note item 9 " Viscous Coupling".  The reason you feel more power added to the rear is the slipping front tires are turing the shaft from the front and "Drag" the coupling attached to the rear.  The car is always dragging the rear tires until there is front tire spin intitiating the Viscous action and turning the rear wheels.  It works like two dinner plates in the sink water. try to turn just one when theyre stuck together.

Subaru simply changes the distance between the plates in the coupling or changes the oil weight to change the AWD ratio.


----------



## bobdog2o02 (Aug 25, 2014)

also in your cnet thread, the subaru cvt trans has only been avaiable for two model years now and the STI variable diff is NOT common as there are far more base model foresters and outbacks running around than STI race spec cars.


----------



## TradEddie (Aug 25, 2014)

Like most pissing contests, we're both a little right, but everything I have ever seen on Subaru's website and literature indicates that the viscous coupling center diff is only used with manual transmissions (since demise of the SVX anyway). Some auto transmissions do use viscous rear diff.

http://www.subaru-global.com/tec_awd.html


----------



## bobdog2o02 (Aug 25, 2014)

TradEddie said:


> Like most pissing contests, we're both a little right, but everything I have ever seen on Subaru's website and literature indicates that the viscous coupling center diff is only used with manual transmissions (since demise of the SVX anyway). Some auto transmissions do use viscous rear diff.
> 
> http://www.subaru-global.com/tec_awd.html



If you read a little closer in the 4spd auto it says ets electronically controlled but the it is modulating a viscous diff with a servo.


----------



## firefighterjake (Aug 25, 2014)

Soooo . . . Subaru AWD is better than others . . . or is the general consensus that in the real world driving on slippery, snow or ice covered roads just about any AWD will work fine and not be noticeable vs. Subaru?

And of course . . . seems like most everyone agrees that Snow Tires trump All Seasons.


----------



## firefighterjake (Aug 25, 2014)

Personally I suspect my wife is leaning towards the XV Crosstrek from Subaru . . . although I think it would be nice to try the Mazda CX-5 and Nissan Rogue.


----------



## TradEddie (Aug 25, 2014)

bobdog2o02 said:


> If you read a little closer in the 4spd auto it says ets electronically controlled but the it is modulating a viscous diff with a servo.


We'll have to agree to disagree, there may well still be a viscous coupling which acts without computer control, but my original point remains that most, if not all recent (late 90's onward) automatic transmission Subarus have an active (computer-controlled) component to the center differential, but more importantly, that there are very perceptible differences in how or when that computer control functions in different model years. In my case, a 1998 vs 2005 2.5i auto Outback. I can't say which worked better, just that I could feel it happening on the 1998 model, not on the 2005. My suspicion, given that everything but the radio on the 2005 model was crappier, is that later models used a simpler, cheaper system, however it may well have been a more refined system where the change in torque distribution was more gradual.

If you think the cnet article was complex, take a look at this one: http://www.awdwiki.com/en/subaru

TE


----------



## Ashful (Aug 25, 2014)

firefighterjake said:


> Soooo . . . Subaru AWD is better than others . . . or is the general consensus that in the real world driving on slippery, snow or ice covered roads just about any AWD will work fine and not be noticeable vs. Subaru?


I stick by my statement.  Give me an Audi Quattro over a Subaru, any day.

Just sell the Audi before the warranty runs out!


----------



## TradEddie (Aug 26, 2014)

Joful said:


> I stick by my statement.  Give me an Audi Quattro over a Subaru, any day.
> 
> Just sell the Audi before the warranty runs out!



Agreed for sure on the second point, or at least before 90,000 miles, but the entry level AWD A3 is $34K, A4 is $37k you can buy two regular Imprezas for that. The only fair comparison of Subaru to an A3 or A4 would be the WRX STI.

TE


----------



## bobdog2o02 (Aug 26, 2014)

... An A4 is comparable to a wrx.  An S4 is comparable to an STI.......


----------



## TradEddie (Aug 26, 2014)

But for anyone older than 25, the Audis look 100 times better than any WRX. A few years ago there was a limited edition non-ricer stealth WRX STI, I was very tempted but I didn't bite. In fact all Subarus are ugly, except the base Impreza sedan.

TE


----------



## bobdog2o02 (Aug 26, 2014)

Says you.....


----------



## TradEddie (Aug 26, 2014)

IMHO


----------



## bobdog2o02 (Aug 26, 2014)

I have bought all my subies over 100,000 miles.  Never any major issues as long as regular maintenance occurs.  You even said it, sell the Audi before the warranty runs out.  Most people including the dealers think a subie is just getting broken in at 100,000 miles.


----------



## semipro (Aug 26, 2014)

WRX are very popular with younger drivers. This I know from my 21, 22 year old sons.


----------



## firefighterjake (Aug 26, 2014)

I must confess . . . while my very practical and common-sense wife prefers sensible cars . . . this 44-year-old guy is a bit partial to the STI and BRZ.


----------



## BrotherBart (Aug 26, 2014)

Dodge Hellcat. 707 horsepower. Go for it.


----------



## Ashful (Aug 26, 2014)

bobdog2o02 said:


> Says you.....


No... he is right.



BrotherBart said:


> Dodge Hellcat. 707 horsepower. Go for it.


How is it in the snow?


----------



## BrotherBart (Aug 26, 2014)

Joful said:


> How is it in the snow?



Don't know. But the 1970 model I had with p/track was great on snow and sleet. Drove 229 miles on it one night in West Texas.

Da red thing could probably burn away any snow.


----------



## jharkin (Aug 26, 2014)

bobdog2o02 said:


> ... An A4 is comparable to a wrx.  An S4 is comparable to an STI.......



I believe Eddie was talking price comparison, not performnace.

On the track my money is on the STi beating an S4.


----------



## Ashful (Aug 26, 2014)

jharkin said:


> On the track my money is on the STi beating an S4.


The STi is a fun car for the kids, but as a card-carrying adult, I'll take the S4.


----------



## bobdog2o02 (Aug 26, 2014)

Joful said:


> The STi is a fun car for the kids, but as a card-carrying adult, I'll take the S4.



I make most decisions on price/performance.  When car and driver says the STI is the best bang for the buck, and can crush any given euro sports sedan, that's where I go.  Don't care how it looks as long as it makes my heart beat harder.


----------



## jharkin (Aug 26, 2014)

I have to say I'm with Joful though, an STi while fun if your a a 20yo track rat is painful to live with. As in back pain  

The Audi's are just painful on the wallet.... So long as you dealer gives good loaners for all those unscheduled shop visits


----------



## That's Right (Aug 26, 2014)

Had to jump in on this one. Been driving a wrx for the past 10 years. Best car I have ever owned. Yes I've had others during but always kept this one around. BEST car hands down in the snow up to 18"or so.  I am outgrowing it but just can't sell it.  Drove a couple audis and they are nice but just not ready to trust the reliability out of warranty. Just my .02


----------



## Treacherous (Aug 26, 2014)

Mazda version somehow uses the ABS sensors...it doesn't use valve stem TPMS sensors.  It is probably less accurate but makes it easier to swap snow tires on and still have TPMS capabilities.




jharkin said:


> Those are called TPMS sensors. They have been a NHTSA mandated safety feature on all new vehicles sold since 2008. There are a couple ways the sensors work but the most common is integrated into the valve stem. These are obvious as instead of a rubber valve you will see a metal unit that screws in.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Treacherous (Aug 26, 2014)

CX-5 doesn't use a CVT but has kind of a hybrid between a standard automatic and a DSG.  Torque converter only works up to 5MPH.  This thing seems extremely easy to work on as well for maintenance items.  13:1 Compression on direct injection motor but only needs regular unleaded as well.


----------



## Ashful (Aug 27, 2014)

Reputations are a funny thing.  It takes only a few years to ruin one, and a generation to earn it back.  Audi's have historically been one of the best European high-mileage cars, although we all know that's not so true in recent years.  I wonder when it changed, and if their reliability has improved in the 10 years since I last purchased a new one.  Either way, it will be a decade or two before they regain any reputation for being a good high-mileage car, if they ever do address some of their apparent issues.

When you have a wife to manages to total a car every third year, on average, keeping a car much beyond the warranty window becomes a non-issue.    She totaled one car only 6 weeks after driving it off the dealer's lot, and that was only 7 weeks after totaling the car that proceeded it.  The aforementioned Audi was the only car that survived her, but the buyer put it into a guardrail within an hour of buying it from us.


----------



## Treacherous (Aug 27, 2014)

Self driving cars might save you some money 

Not advised but interesting... I had one of these as a loaner a few months back.  It will stay in the lane with your hands off wheel.






Joful said:


> When you have a wife to manages to total a car every third year, on average, keeping a car much beyond the warranty window becomes a non-issue.    She totaled one car only 6 weeks after driving it off the dealer's lot, and that was only 7 weeks after totaling the car that proceeded it.  The aforementioned Audi was the only car that survived her, but the buyer put it into a guardrail within an hour of buying it from us.


----------



## jharkin (Aug 27, 2014)

Treacherous said:


> Mazda version somehow uses the ABS sensors...it doesn't use valve stem TPMS sensors.  It is probably less accurate but makes it easier to swap snow tires on and still have TPMS capabilities.



It works on the basis that a tire low on air compresses a bit, reducing the radius between the center and the contact patch and thus has to turn faster than the other wheels at the same vehicle speed.  It works quite well, only drawback is in the rare case that all 4 tires where equally low it could not detect it.



Joful said:


> Reputations are a funny thing.  It takes only a few years to ruin one, and a generation to earn it back.  Audi's have historically been one of the best European high-mileage cars, although we all know that's not so true in recent years.  I wonder when it changed, and if their reliability has improved in the 10 years since I last purchased a new one.  Either way, it will be a decade or two before they regain any reputation for being a good high-mileage car, if they ever do address some of their apparent issues.




Audis issues seem to plague German cars in general, and to some extend European cars in general.  Knowing a lot owners of Audis, BMWs and some Benzes Ive seen a couple broad categories of issues:


Cooling systems - notoriously bad on German cars.  My old college roomates 2000 era Audi S4 used to get a new water pump yearly. The Mike Miller special maintenance schedule for BMWs calls for replacing the entire cooling system (pump, tstat and hoses) every 90k.


Reason?  Im not sure, maybe they all buy from the same bad suppliers.  One friend of mine suggested that there are tight environmental rules in Germany that require them to use a lot of recycled plastic and rubber in these systems where the Japanese would use aluminum and new materials.
Electronics!  Modern euro luxury cars have way too many computers and they tend to be problematic.  BMWs eat batteries because they have so many CPU draws even with the car off.  But they also have to have problems with basic electronics that dont effect other makes - especially coil packs and injectors.  One of my close friend is an Audi fanatic and has owned a string of 3 or 4 A6s in a row over the last 20 years, and has admitted to me that every one of them has stranded him at least once for a coil or injector.

Reason-  I cant say for sure but since they all have these issues my suspicion is that Bosch and Continental QC is not as good as Denso.

To a lesser extent, they also tend to over engineer things that could be done much simpler.  Perfect example is VANOS and i-vtec. They both to basically the same thing, but one system is much simpler in implementation and has basically a zero failure rate.



Bottom line, I think I've stated this before. If you make an S4 or an M3 with the electronics and cooling system sourced from a Japanese supplier I would be the first in line to buy it.  maybe we will finally get such a car in this talked of BMW-Toyota joint venture for a hybrid sportscar.


Because yeah,  my practical side drives Japanese to avoid the frustrations, but my car guy  soul would love to be riding in an Audi............


----------



## brian89gp (Aug 27, 2014)

Joful said:


> When you have a wife to manages to total a car every third year, on average, keeping a car much beyond the warranty window becomes a non-issue.   She totaled one car only 6 weeks after driving it off the dealer's lot, and that was only 7 weeks after totaling the car that proceeded it. The aforementioned Audi was the only car that survived her, but the buyer put it into a guardrail within an hour of buying it from us.



Is hiring a chauffeur for your wife any cheaper?


----------



## RustyShackleford (Aug 27, 2014)

> BMWs eat batteries because they have so many CPU draws even with the car off.


I was trying to help a friend with a Mercedes that similarly the battery would go dead if she let the car sit for a week or two.   Major problem, as she travels a lot.   She drives a Hyundai now.   Her boyfriend, who is multi-millionaire, drives ... Subaru.


----------



## TradEddie (Aug 27, 2014)

bobdog2o02 said:


> I have bought all my subies over 100,000 miles.  Never any major issues as long as regular maintenance occurs.  You even said it, sell the Audi before the warranty runs out.  Most people including the dealers think a subie is just getting broken in at 100,000 miles.


I used to be one of those, my first Outback got to 150,000 miles with one tire change, not a single repair needed other than scheduled service. My second one didn't get past 10k before its first of several warranty visits, the factory tires lasted 25K, the A/C never worked right, damaged drivetrain boots, CV joint problems. Learning that I had a head gasket leak at 100K was simply the last straw, I dumped that lemon.
I still love Subarus. Some of those issues were related to it being the first run of a new model, some may have been bad luck, and even the head gasket may have been contributed to by two separate failures of a repair shop to perform requested oil changes. That 7500 mile interval may have been pushing the limit, but twice I may have gone to 15,000 thinking the oil had been changed...

TE


----------



## bobdog2o02 (Aug 27, 2014)

The CV's and head gaskets were hallmark issues for Subaru.  If it is a consolation the head gasket failures are typically oil leaks on the return from the valve cover to the oil pan.  CV's. There is no hope in sight for Subaru on this issue.


----------



## Treacherous (Aug 27, 2014)

I had cross shopped a Subaru Forester but after seeing a 255 page thread on subaruforester.org on oil consumption issues I decided to not even consider.   I understand this can happen to all cars but 255 pages is fairly eye opening.

*Subaru sued over vehicles' oil burning*
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/cars/2014/07/18/subaru-oil-burner-lawsuit/12859865/


----------



## Mt Bob (Aug 27, 2014)

A true automobile viscous coupling has no electronic control.A non clutch torque convertor is a viscous coupling.Front to rear split usually done by applying a clutch pack.This is what most mfg. went to many years ago,although many tried viscous couplings successfully(pre 82 jeep quadratrac,some audis,astros pre 2000,etc).


----------



## Ashful (Aug 27, 2014)

jharkin said:


> Audis issues seem to plague German cars in general, and to some extend European cars in general.  Knowing a lot owners of Audis, BMWs and some Benzes...


Probably fair to throw Audi and BMW into the same bucket there, and I'll continue to buy them anyway, because they're fun and sexy.  They are a pleasure to drive.

I wouldn't be so quick to toss Benz into the Eurotrash bucket, though.  There are not many equals to their level of engineering and quality.  I spend occasional time in Germany (again next week, in fact), and have the opportunity to drive Mercedes we never see in the USA.  Their cars are fantastic.  It's just a shame they're so expensive here.

... and, to get back on-topic, their AWD system (4MATIC) is very capable.


----------



## Treacherous (Aug 27, 2014)

bob bare said:


> A true automobile viscous coupling has no electronic control.A non clutch torque convertor is a viscous coupling.Front to rear split usually done by applying a clutch pack.This is what most mfg. went to many years ago,although many tried viscous couplings successfully(pre 82 jeep quadratrac,some audis,astros pre 2000,etc).



That sounds like the completely mechanical Borg Warner 4404 AWD unit in my old '96 Ford Explorer 5.0L.


----------



## Mt Bob (Aug 28, 2014)

Have to correct myself,older jeep quadratracs were an clutch pak limited slip diff. in the t case,newer ones tried the v-c.Sorry,was tired.


----------



## TradEddie (Aug 28, 2014)

I grew up in Europe where VWs and Audi's were reputed to run until the still-functional engine fell through the rusted out chassis. Here in the US, I bought a VW Passat 1.8T which was toast by 90,000 miles, or at least not worth the frustration of check engine warning happening more frequently than oil changes. I've heard it suggested that if you're looking to buy a VAG car, take a peek at the VIN number, which includes one digit for the country of manufacture. Some models are made in Mexico, others in Brazil, and some are even made in Germany. If you had a choice, which would you buy? 

Back to the Sube/Audi question: The Audi should be better, it's much more expensive, but dollar for dollar, it's hard to beat the Subaru. If I had a limited budget, and needed a fast car that's good in the snow, there's no hesitation in buying a Subaru. If I had an unlimited budget, I'd go for an AWD Infinity Sedan.

TE


----------



## Swedishchef (Aug 28, 2014)

Jake: I have had the chance to drive an A4 Quattro, a Volvo XC70 (obviously AWD) and multiple subarus (1996 legacy automatic, 1998 legacy manual, 2005 impreza RS and 2010 Forester auto). Personally, I did not enjoy the Volvo AWD system. I felt there was a delay in the system "kicking in". The system is 95/5. http://4x4abc.com/4WD101/volvo.html 

THe Quattro was an amazing AWD system from my point of view (basic, does it work, lets have fun). However, it is expensive. It's an expensive car. NOt all models have AWD. Subaru's AWD system, IMHO, are just as good and half the price. Depending on the model, it can be 50/50, 60/40, etc. BUt it's great. Especially in the older models. I am not a big fan of electronically controlled AWD systems. I would rather a mechanical one.

Either vehicles are great. The crosstrek simply replaced the old outback sport. I dont overly like the feel of the CVT transmission on the ROgue (drove one). BUt that's just me.

I live in Quebec, we get lots of snow. Subarus+nokian tires = tanks.  I enjoy looking at a company that support AWD 100% and I don't "see" the extra cost the AWD: it's part of the price. I don't like the idea of wanting a Toyota Sienna AWD but having to add $7000 to the base model price to get through our winters with a little less stress.

Let us know what you end up buying!

Andrew


----------



## Treacherous (Aug 28, 2014)

It seems tires and ground clearance are the deciding factor when the snow gets deep.  You are only going to plow the snow so far up on the front.  My RWD biased ATTESA E-TS system on my Infiniti has never left me stuck anywhere but I don't usually try to push it when it comes to deep snow.


----------



## Swedishchef (Aug 28, 2014)

Come to Quebec and I will show you what real snow looks like  When the plow can't keep up because you're getting 2-3 inches/hr, sometimes you don't have a choice but have to drive in 4-7 inches. Good tires make a HUGE difference. Ground clearance too.


----------



## Treacherous (Aug 28, 2014)

Swedishchef said:


> Come to Quebec and I will show you what real snow looks like  When the plow can't keep up because you're getting 2-3 inches/hr, sometimes you don't have a choice but have to drive in 4-7 inches. Good tires make a HUGE difference. Ground clearance too.



Only 4-7 inches 

I live in an area that holds the world record for snowfall.


----------



## BrotherBart (Aug 28, 2014)

Swedishchef said:


> Come to Quebec and I will show you what real snow looks like  When the plow can't keep up because you're getting 2-3 inches/hr, sometimes you don't have a choice but have to drive in 4-7 inches. Good tires make a HUGE difference. Ground clearance too.




http://www.atlasvanlines.com/


----------



## Ashful (Aug 28, 2014)

BrotherBart said:


> http://www.atlasvanlines.com/


  Took me a second... at first I thought, "they don't have AWD vans?"


----------



## Swedishchef (Aug 29, 2014)

530cm cm total snowfall last winter. Gotta love it. AWD is very convenient. I never have a single worry. I keep watching cars spin, slide, etc. (and yes BB, I am moving within 2-6 months lol)

A


----------



## Swedishchef (Aug 29, 2014)

Treacherous said:


> Only 4-7 inches
> 
> I live in an area that holds the world record for snowfall.


Do you live on mount baker? 
63% of vehicles registered on the road where I live are pickup trucks. 21% of the population doesn't work so there isn't more than 40% of them that are contractors and really need 4WD large vehicles


----------



## Treacherous (Aug 29, 2014)

Swedishchef said:


> Do you live on mount baker?
> 63% of vehicles registered on the road where I live are pickup trucks. 21% of the population doesn't work so there isn't more than 40% of them that are contractors and really need 4WD large vehicles




No... not there.  I do have a place though in the central cascades (around 3500 feet) that is snowbound from around late November through March (accessible only by snow machine).  We do get similar snow rates to what you have at times.   Fortunately we don't have to deal with the lowland snow very often on the west side since as often is the case many can't drive in it.


----------



## TradEddie (Aug 29, 2014)

Ground clearance is one place that AWD has an advantage over 4WD (for equivalent tire size at least). 4WD typically have a larger rear differential that you have to drag/push through the snow, while AWDs are usually much smaller. Of course a VW bus has them all beaten for clearance, but not so good in the snow.
My outback drove through an unplowed lot with snow up to the headlights, I only got stuck (temporarily) when I started to play around. I'm sure many AWD cars could do the same, but some people seem to think you need some huge truck, massive engine and tire thread deep enough to plant flowers in. You don't. If the snow is at your headlights, you shouldn't be on the roads.

I remember vividly leaving a restaurant one night when a sudden drop in temperature caused the roads to be unexpectedly covered with black ice. I was driving my Passat FWD, with brand new tires, but I could hardly keep it on the road at 10mph, the steering wheel was almost useless, any tap of the gas and the traction control kicked in, cars were spinning everywhere. My wife was driving the Outback, just a few minutes behind me. By the time I got home, my stomach was in knots from the drive, and I waited anxiously for her to arrive. Ten or fifteen long minutes later, she drives in asking "What's going on? Why is everybody driving so slowly, with their hazards lights on?". Oblivious! That's one problem with all of these AWD/4WD, you have great acceleration traction, but you don't get any cues that your brakes aren't going to work. SUVs rear-ending cars are a common sight around here each snow day, the cars are driving carefully, braking gradually, the SUVs aren't. 

TE


----------



## jharkin (Aug 29, 2014)

I dont know if all AWDs have differentials that much smaller than FWDs, and even if they did you are only talking at most 1 or maybe 2 inches extra clearance vs. say a Ford 9 inch rear end (that would have a depth of ~ 5 inches from the axle centerline).

What AWDs do have is typically 4 wheel independent suspension, vs. the solid axles in te rear of your typical 4x4 truck, so the diff sits up a bit higher.

Either way I don see that as much of an issue... The diff hanging down is not going to make a major difference in snow driving, it will just drag a trench in the snow.  The snow plowing up against the front bumper is what will finally stop you.  In that deep snow situation your typical 4x4 pickup with 12 inches clearance is going to go a bit further than an outback with 8 inches.


----------



## TradEddie (Aug 29, 2014)

Perhaps it's the solid axle as much as the diff, and maybe it wouldn't make a difference in snow, but the ground clearance of an F150 is only 8.8", - that's only 0.1" more than an Outback despite a vastly larger tire. The rest of the truck may be 12" above the road, but the lowest point is what'll find the rock or stump.

Anyway, the best off road vehicle ever is any rental sedan from Las Vegas airport....

TE


----------



## firefighterjake (Aug 29, 2014)

TradEddie said:


> Perhaps it's the solid axle as much as the diff, and maybe it wouldn't make a difference in snow, but the ground clearance of an F150 is only 8.8", - that's only 0.1" more than an Outback despite a vastly larger tire. The rest of the truck may be 12" above the road, but the lowest point is what'll find the rock or stump.
> 
> *Anyway, the best off road vehicle ever is any rental sedan from Las Vegas airport*....
> 
> TE



Yeah, about that . . . you may not want to drive the Ford Focus from Thrifty Rental. Let's just say that some roads in Death Valley are not exactly baby bottom smooth.


----------



## brian89gp (Aug 29, 2014)

TradEddie said:


> Perhaps it's the solid axle as much as the diff, and maybe it wouldn't make a difference in snow, but the ground clearance of an F150 is only 8.8", - that's only 0.1" more than an Outback despite a vastly larger tire. The rest of the truck may be 12" above the road, but the lowest point is what'll find the rock or stump.



Until the rear axel or diff on my truck hit some hard packed snow it plows through it just fine.  Agreed that an independent suspension with the differential up higher would obviously do better then a solid axle, I don't think that a solid axle has as much trouble getting caught up in snow as it does offroad or in mud.


----------



## bholler (Aug 29, 2014)

Are you guys really still talking about this?  lol  Get good tires and any awd 4wd or even front wd can work really well in the snow.  I used to take my front wheel drive eclipse anywhere in the snow i just had to stop occasionally and clean the snow out of the front intake


----------



## BrotherBart (Aug 31, 2014)




----------



## bobdog2o02 (Aug 31, 2014)

are those the factory wheels?


----------



## BrotherBart (Aug 31, 2014)

Dealer installed option.


----------



## Treacherous (Aug 31, 2014)

I've seen the ones like those used on ATV's & UTV's where wheel is replaced but this is interesting leaving the wheel on.


----------



## jharkin (Aug 31, 2014)

TradEddie said:


> Perhaps it's the solid axle as much as the diff, and maybe it wouldn't make a difference in snow, but the ground clearance of an F150 is only 8.8", - that's only 0.1" more than an Outback despite a vastly larger tire. The rest of the truck may be 12" above the road, but the lowest point is what'll find the rock or stump.
> 
> Anyway, the best off road vehicle ever is any rental sedan from Las Vegas airport....
> 
> TE




True.... my point being just like you said, the publish ground clearance is really critical only for offroading where there is a danger of hanging the diff up on a rock.. In the snow its the clearance to the axle that matters.


----------



## firefighterjake (Aug 31, 2014)

Update . . . may be looking much sooner than planned. Thought I had fixed the cooling issue (or rather over heating/radiator issue) that I had a few weeks back when the mechanic at work discovered a TSB on a radiator cap change and flushing the coolant reservoir. Had two weeks of no issues . . . until last night . . . when my wife called me around 10 p.m. to say the car's temp suddenly spiked and then the engine died. To add even more angst there was something going on at a nearby bank involving several police cruisers.

To make a long story short . . . managed to get the car going and drove home . . . temp was spiking . . . car died a few times. Managed to get it back home though. Thinking a new radiator cap might not be the fix this time around. Guess it's time to really get motivated to start looking.


----------



## Treacherous (Aug 31, 2014)

Sucks to have a car going south on you like this but it sounds like you already started your homework on new car.  Get whatever makes you & the wife happy.


----------



## Ashful (Aug 31, 2014)

Sorry to hear that, Jake!  I assume you're talking about your 2003 Subaru... and you're thinking of buying another Subaru?  It seems your Honda has almost twice the mileage, and half the problems.


----------



## Treacherous (Aug 31, 2014)

Did Subaru have head gasket issues during those years?


----------



## Swedishchef (Sep 1, 2014)

Is the thermostat stuck? Sorry to hear that jake...when you start having issues and lose confidence in your wheels it sucks.

Keep us posted,

Andrew


----------



## firefighterjake (Sep 1, 2014)

Joful said:


> Sorry to hear that, Jake!  I assume you're talking about your 2003 Subaru... and you're thinking of buying another Subaru?  It seems your Honda has almost twice the mileage, and half the problems.



The other night as I was babying the car to get it home I was a bit snarky (I'm not fun when I'm tired) and said something about Subaru's reliability, but my wife pointed out that it has been good up until recently . . . still . . . I agree . . . seems like 120K is not a lot of mileage for major repair issues to crop up . . . but maybe that's just me.


----------



## firefighterjake (Sep 1, 2014)

Treacherous said:


> Did Subaru have head gasket issues during those years?



Yes . . . replaced a few months ago.


----------



## firefighterjake (Sep 1, 2014)

Swedishchef said:


> Is the thermostat stuck? Sorry to hear that jake...when you start having issues and lose confidence in your wheels it sucks.
> 
> Keep us posted,
> 
> Andrew



One of the mechanics recently changed out the thermostat . . . so I'm thinking that isn't it. Going to have to take a closer look today I guess and see if I can rule out some things.

And yes . . . the worse part of this is that I thought the car was doing well and was reliable . . . very happy that I didn't end up going camping for this long holiday weekend.


----------



## Grisu (Sep 1, 2014)

firefighterjake said:


> Yes . . . replaced a few months ago.



After reading that article about Subaru's head gasket problems I linked to earlier I am wondering if that job was done well. It looks like a lot of care has to be taken in order to not give problems later.


----------



## bobdog2o02 (Sep 1, 2014)

I would go back on the dealer, if a little stray rtv  was to find its way into a thermostat.....  was the work done at a dealer?  The subaru thermostat is a fickle thing, only reliable one is the oe part.   also have you metered the temp sensor yet? if that was going bad it could cause these issues.......


----------



## firefighterjake (Sep 1, 2014)

Done by a local guy who works almost exclusively with Subarus . . . not an official Subaru shop, but on the flip side he has done a lot of head gaskets.

Bob . . . I think checking the thermostat is the next thing to check . . . I've noticed the upper radiator hose is wicked hot but the radiator itself is normal ambient temp. Five minutes after driving I've got an overheating situation.


----------



## firefighterjake (Sep 1, 2014)

Been checking for possible signs of a head gasket leak/cracked head . . . haven't noticed anything yet (oil/anti-freeze mix, lots of bubbles in the overflow, etc. and I did a block test a few weeks back before changing out the radiator cap.)


----------



## jharkin (Sep 1, 2014)

Well if its not the head gasket gone bad, its either the TStat, or a bad water pump.....

So seems like you are on the right track checking the stat next.


----------



## bobdog2o02 (Sep 1, 2014)

i would bet on the stat, especially if it wasnt an OE part.  Pain in the ass to get to, i make a routine of timing belt, tensioner and pulleys, stat, and water pump all at the same time.  It saves alot of labor in the long run.


----------



## Swedishchef (Sep 1, 2014)

I got my timing belt changed 2 years ago and didn't bother getting anything else changed. I have never replaced my head gasket or anything else other than a bushing, distributor cap and 2 link kit. My impreza has 105 000 miles on it.

Personally I don't change parts unless I have to. Otherwise it never ends.

Keep us posted Jake, has to be the pump or the stat.

Andrew


----------



## branchburner (Sep 1, 2014)

Joful said:


> It seems your Honda has almost twice the mileage, and half the problems.



In my experience, that's a pretty good rule of thumb when stacking Honda up against other makes. I used to say that about Toyota, but not so much anymore.


----------



## Treacherous (Sep 1, 2014)

branchburner said:


> In my experience, that's a pretty good rule of thumb when stacking Honda up against other makes. I used to say that about Toyota, but not so much anymore.



You don't generally get the latest and greatest with Honda but they are generally very reliable and often high on the most stolen lists 

Every time I see a Ridgeline I think of 2005 all over again.

Edit:  I should say their mainstream brand as they have decent tech in their Acura line.


----------



## firefighterjake (Sep 1, 2014)

I'm now second guessing myself since the mechanic replaced both the water pump and thermostat ... the water pump when he did the head gasket a few months back and the thermostat just a few weeks ago. I am perplexed ... after replacing the radiator cap and flushing the coolant reservoir everything seemed to be working fine and then wham ...


----------



## Treacherous (Sep 1, 2014)

I was looking around some of the Subaru forums.  Do you think replacement head gasket could have gone bad again?  A few mentioned the exhaust getting into coolant and causing air pockets that would thus cause an overheat condition.

A block leak detector test would need to be done to see if that was the case though.


----------



## NE WOOD BURNER (Sep 1, 2014)

I would think that it is air bound. did you put a 15psi cap on it? it may have had a lower psi cap.
Also the thermostat should be OEM in Subaru or you just never know.


----------



## JTRock (Sep 1, 2014)

I am a Sales Manager for a Honda dealer and will say Subaru is a real good vehicle. Anytime I get cross shopped it's usually Forester vs the Crv though. Anyone looking at Subaru is definetly not comparing the Ridgeline or Pilot


----------



## Swedishchef (Sep 1, 2014)

firefighterjake said:


> I'm now second guessing myself since the mechanic replaced both the water pump and thermostat ... the water pump when he did the head gasket a few months back and the thermostat just a few weeks ago. I am perplexed ... after replacing the radiator cap and flushing the coolant reservoir everything seemed to be working fine and then wham ...


A car that overheats can only be a few things and we've mentioned them all. Unless a gremlin now lives in the engine, it has to be one of them. This is perplexing me...


----------



## firefighterjake (Sep 2, 2014)

NE WOOD BURNER said:


> I would think that it is air bound. did you put a 15psi cap on it? it may have had a lower psi cap.
> Also the thermostat should be OEM in Subaru or you just never know.



I replaced the cap with the one the guy at the parts counter at Subaru gave me . . . well after I gave him some money . . . it wasn't free.


----------



## firefighterjake (Sep 2, 2014)

I've pretty much resolved at this point to talk to the mechanic at work who solved my original problem without even turning a wrench or laying eyes on the car . . . see what he says . . . if it's too much of an expense or hassle I may just dump this car at auction even though it has much fewer miles on it than the Honda.


----------



## NE WOOD BURNER (Sep 2, 2014)

If its not rotted then its worth repairing, but the right way to do head gaskets in a Subaru was outlined in a previous comment on this thread.


----------



## firefighterjake (Sep 2, 2014)

NE WOOD BURNER said:


> If its not rotted then its worth repairing, but the right way to do head gaskets in a Subaru was outlined in a previous comment on this thread.



Hehheh . . . we're up to six pages. Which is the right way?


----------



## NE WOOD BURNER (Sep 2, 2014)

pulling the engine


----------



## velvetfoot (Sep 2, 2014)

VWs have pretty low ground clearance.
I have studs on both our fwd cars, but I'm thinking of switching out my studded tires for non-studded winter tires because of the noise: hideous.


----------



## NE WOOD BURNER (Sep 2, 2014)

http://allwheeldriveauto.com/subaru-head-gaskets-problems-explained-part-ii/


----------



## firefighterjake (Sep 2, 2014)

NE WOOD BURNER said:


> pulling the engine



Ah . . . thanks. Pretty sure the mechanic did that when he changed out the head gasket.


----------



## NE WOOD BURNER (Sep 2, 2014)

I would share that link with your mechanic. lots of good info there. I used to tow subarus off the road in the 90's redo headgasket jobs all the time. Not the best job to have done at a flat rate shop its best done by an independent jobber with the right knowledge applied.


----------



## semipro (Sep 2, 2014)

Swedishchef said:


> A car that overheats can only be a few things and we've mentioned them all. Unless a gremlin now lives in the engine, it has to be one of them.


I worked as an auto mechanic for 15 years and can recall other things that caused overheating such as an obstruction somewhere, a defective water pump where the impeller spins on the shaft, collapsed lower radiator hoses, thermostats installed backwards, bad cooling fan switches; even excessively lean burning engines.


----------



## Swedishchef (Sep 2, 2014)

But I think we mentioned all of those already, didn't we? I am sure we did..7 pages later.


----------



## semipro (Sep 2, 2014)

Swedishchef said:


> But I think we mentioned all of those already, didn't we? I am sure we did..7 pages later.


I thought I was keeping up with this thread pretty well -- maybe not. 
I don't recall seeing any on the things I listed being mentioned elsewhere.  Someone mentioned a bad water pump but usually they usually fail through leaking not a spinning impeller.  I saw a hot upper radiator hose mentioned but not a collapsed lower hose ,and so on. 
In any case, I love a good mystery and hope to hear what the problem turns out to be.


----------



## NE WOOD BURNER (Sep 2, 2014)

A clogged Cat will cause troubles. This too is mentioned in the link provided.


----------



## bobdog2o02 (Sep 2, 2014)

The bad cat is VERY common on Subaru's....  I've heard of jumping the rear O2 sensor with a certain resistor for troubleshooting this issue.....


----------



## semipro (Sep 2, 2014)

bobdog2o02 said:


> The bad cat is VERY common on Subaru's....  I've heard of jumping the rear O2 sensor with a certain resistor for troubleshooting this issue.....


Never heard that before. O2 sensors produce a low voltage so this surprises me.


----------



## firefighterjake (Sep 3, 2014)

New question . . . in looking at Mazda I see they have a 0% APR for 60 months option.

Now I realize that this is typically only for folks with really good credit . . . and fortunately we would undoubtedly qualify.

However, there were a few questions.

It states that the amount of down payment and other factors may affect qualification . . . would this mean they would want more or less money as a down payment . . . do you think?

And here is the real million dollar question that has stymied me . . . "60 months at $16.67 per month per $1,000 financed with $0 down. What does this mean exactly? Does it mean I would pay $16.67 every month on top of the usual payment . . . or $16.67 for every $1,000 I financed every month? Math is not my forte . . . so treat me as if you were dealing with a simpleton. In fact, let's use a relatively simple example -- let's say the car's purchase price is $25,000 and I put down $5,000 down as a down payment (although truthfully I usually put more down). So I would need a loan for $20,000 . . . what additional money would I be paying every month on top of the repayment amount? Maybe I'm just completely confused, but it seems like what the car company is saying is that there is no interest charge . . . but you'll still be paying a hefty chunk of money every month as an additional charge.


----------



## jharkin (Sep 3, 2014)

firefighterjake said:


> New question . . . in looking at Mazda I see they have a 0% APR for 60 months option.
> 
> Now I realize that this is typically only for folks with really good credit . . . and fortunately we would undoubtedly qualify.
> 
> ...



Yes, they probably will want 20% or even 30% down.   Too many people these days put little or nothing down on new cars, and even roll in debt from underwater trades. (" _We will pay off your trade no matter how much you owe! Come on down! _  yea right...    )




firefighterjake said:


> And here is the real million dollar question that has stymied me . . . "*60 months at $16.67 per month per $1,000 financed with $0 down.* What does this mean exactly? Does it mean I would pay $16.67 every month on top of the usual payment . . . or $16.67 for every $1,000 I financed every month? Math is not my forte . . . so treat me as if you were dealing with a simpleton. In fact, let's use a relatively simple example -- let's say the car's purchase price is $25,000 and I put down $5,000 down as a down payment (although truthfully I usually put more down). So I would need a loan for $20,000 . . . what additional money would I be paying every month on top of the repayment amount? Maybe I'm just completely confused, but it seems like what the car company is saying is that there is no interest charge . . . but you'll still be paying a hefty chunk of money every month as an additional charge.




When you see language like this in a financing ad, it literally means what it says.  For every $1000 you finance the monthly payment (total of principle, interest, fees) will be $16.67.

$1000 / 60 months = $16.67 per month.

So yes this really is zero percent. If you finance 20k it would be 20 x $16.67/month = $333.33 /month  for 60 months.

Sometimes lenders will sneak in fees above and beyond the simple interest rate and the xx per month per 1000 financed wont add up to the number you got if you plug it into a financial calculator.  I believe the rules require then to put that statement in so that cant hide stuff like that.

If you go with other finance optiosn and need to check the numbers here is a simple auto loan calculator you can use: http://www.dinkytown.net/java/AutoLoan.html
Or if they make you choose between zero interest or a cash rebate use this to check the numbers: http://www.dinkytown.net/java/AutoRebate.html


Zero percent financing, if legit, is the one time I wouldn't bother to put much down and finance as much as you can for as long as you can. Just leave the money in mutual funds and make it work for you.

Question to ask is are they making the profit back somewhere else in the deal?  Zero is not the going rate everywhere right now... when I bought my truck the best Toyota would offer was 2.5% and we have 800+ credit.  I managed to score 1.6% through a credit union but had to fight for a rate extension as even they have bumped rates into the 2s.


Suggest you get a truecar price report on the car you are looking at so you know they are not sneaking the finance cost into the deal someplace else.  And make sure to not let them sell you extras like dealer warranties either.


----------



## firefighterjake (Sep 3, 2014)

jharkin said:


> . . .
> 
> 
> When you see language like this in a financing ad, it literally means what it says.  For every $1000 you finance the monthly payment (total of principle, interest, fees) will be $16.67.
> ...



So if I'm reading what you wrote correctly . . . on my hypothetical loan . . . and it really is just hypothetical . . . I would be paying $333.33 each month in addition to paying off the principal loan amount? 

If this is the case, suddenly the 0% APR coupled with the $16.67 each month doesn't sound like a very good deal at all.


----------



## jharkin (Sep 3, 2014)

firefighterjake said:


> So if I'm reading what you wrote correctly . . . on my hypothetical loan . . . and it really is just hypothetical . . . I would be paying $333.33 each month in addition to paying off the principal loan amount?
> 
> If this is the case, suddenly the 0% APR coupled with the $16.67 each month doesn't sound like a very good deal at all.




No no thats the total payment* including *principle repayment.  the deal you where offered really is zero interest zero fees.  Whenever a finance add quotes $ per month per 1000 financed its the all in amount.


Give you another example. Say the loan had a 5% APR.  Using a loan calculator I get a figure of $18.87 per month for 60 months per $1000 financed.  Thats the same $16.67 of principle repayment and approx $2 of interest.


Lets say you saw an ad that offered 5% APR and then also stated $20 per month for 60 months per $1000 financed.  Using the math above we know the principle + interest amount should only be 18.87 so we know this one snuck some undisclosed fees in.


----------



## firefighterjake (Sep 3, 2014)

jharkin said:


> No no thats the total payment* including *principle repayment.  the deal you where offered really is zero interest zero fees.  Whenever a finance add quotes $ per month per 1000 financed its the all in amount.
> 
> 
> Give you another example. Say the loan had a 5% APR.  Using a loan calculator I get a figure of $18.87 per month for 60 months per $1000 financed.  Thats the same $16.67 of principle repayment and approx $2 of interest.
> ...



OK . . . I think I get it now. Then 0% offers are truly good even with the $16.67 per $1,000 per month mentioned . . . I mean to say paying an extra $333 in the case of the hypothetical numbers I threw out really is a pittance compared vs. paying on a loan with an interest rate.

As you mentioned though . . . the real question is who qualifies for that 0% and if there are any other fees tacked on or not. Thanks for explaining things.


----------



## firefighterjake (Sep 3, 2014)

Now an update on the Subaru . . . spoke at length with the mechanic at work who suggested that I use an IR thermo to see what the radiator and radiator hoses look like.

This morning started the car up cold after filling up with water (mostly since it keeps puking out whatever I put in it). Within 2-3 miles it was starting to climb above normal and within 3-4 miles it was spiking in the red zone. 

Used the IR thermo: upper radiator hose was in the 170s, lower radiator hose was in the 80s, radiator cap was in the 180s and the entire radiator (scanned top to bottom and side to side from the front) showed temps in the 70s. Based on this the mechanic suggested I undo the radiator hoses and run a hose through to see if the incoming flow closely matches the outgoing flow or if it seems constricted in any way as he has suggested it may be a plugged radiator.


----------



## semipro (Sep 3, 2014)

firefighterjake said:


> Now an update on the Subaru . . . spoke at length with the mechanic at work who suggested that I use an IR thermo to see what the radiator and radiator hoses look like.
> 
> This morning started the car up cold after filling up with water (mostly since it keeps puking out whatever I put in it). Within 2-3 miles it was starting to climb above normal and within 3-4 miles it was spiking in the red zone.
> 
> Used the IR thermo: upper radiator hose was in the 170s, lower radiator hose was in the 80s, radiator cap was in the 180s and the entire radiator (scanned top to bottom and side to side from the front) showed temps in the 70s. Based on this the mechanic suggested I undo the radiator hoses and run a hose through to see if the incoming flow closely matches the outgoing flow or if it seems constricted in any way as he has suggested it may be a plugged radiator.


Definitely sounds like poor flow.  Little else would cause it to overheat that quickly. 
So obstruction, bad thermostat, or water pump not actually moving water.


----------



## jharkin (Sep 3, 2014)

firefighterjake said:


> OK . . . I think I get it now. Then 0% offers are truly good even with the $16.67 per $1,000 per month mentioned . . . I mean to say paying an extra $333 in the case of the hypothetical numbers I threw out really is a pittance compared vs. paying on a loan with an interest rate.
> 
> As you mentioned though . . . the real question is who qualifies for that 0% and if there are any other fees tacked on or not. Thanks for explaining things.




Just to make sure we are on the same page - the $333 figure I tossed out is what the total monthly payment would be for a 20,000 loan at 0% for 60 months. $333 a month above and beyond  the principle would be enormous on a 20k note.

Otherwise, you got it.  The $ per month per 1k financed statement  they have to put in there is your way of validating that the APR quoted is legit and they aren't sneaking any fees in anywhere.

I looked at the MazdaUSA site and I see the 0% offer you mentioned on the 2,5, 6, CX.  It looks completely legit and its coming direct from the manufacturer so you should not have to worry its a trick from the dealer that they will make up elsewhere.


What I would watch out for, if its a less than honest dealer, is for them to try the old negotiate on monthly payment tactic and inflate the sales price to take advantage of that 0% rate and still show a low payment.  You know the drill Im sure - research, negotiate a fair price first and then talk financing.


----------



## firefighterjake (Sep 3, 2014)

jharkin said:


> Just to make sure we are on the same page - the $333 figure I tossed out is what the total monthly payment would be for a 20,000 loan at 0% for 60 months. $333 a month above and beyond  the principle would be enormous on a 20k note.
> 
> Otherwise, you got it.  The $ per month per 1k financed statement  they have to put in there is your way of validating that the APR quoted is legit and they aren't sneaking any fees in anywhere.
> 
> ...



Yup . . . price first after I know what the invoice price is (approximately) and then negotiate with that number in mind, bearing in mind that they may recoup any loss in invoice price with any holdback as well as future service visits. Financing is figured in separately . . . well actually I go in with a good financing rate pre-approval in hand . . . but wait to see if they can beat the rate as they sometimes can and do . . . which may be the case of Mazda.

Right now . . . without having even test driven any cars . . . I am looking heavily at Mazda as the CX-5 gets very good reviews (and great safety ratings) along with the 0% APR . . . and Subaru because my wife still loves her Subaru and she qualifies for the 2% discount off the invoice with her affiliation with the ASPCA. In the end it may come down to the test drive and which manufacturer offers the best deal.


----------



## jharkin (Sep 3, 2014)

Definately run the Truecar price report on the model you want and bring that.  I did a lot of research and bought/read the Consumer Reports new car buying guide for this year before buying the truck (tossed it out  or id have offered to mail it to 'ya for the cost of postage) and learned that these days dealers make a hefty profit even selling at invoice...  There are a lot more factory to dealer incentives beyond just the holdback.

On some cars you can even buy under invoice and they still make out well.

Good luck Jake!


----------



## Treacherous (Sep 3, 2014)

The CX-5 is a really nice handling vehicle.  Take it out on the highway and push into the corners.  It is one of the better handling mini CUVs IMO.... some have found road noise higher than some competitors but mine is fairly quiet.  I have a fully decked '15 CX-5 Grand Touring AWD with the OEM 19's.

We were going to purchase outright but Mazda had the same 0% deal back in July so paid half and financed the rest for 5 years but will just pay off in 2 or so.   All paperwork clearly shows 0% and we got a great deal IMO.  Our credit is like 825 but I think they will give the deal to anyone over 725. I used the Consumer Reports #s and they even gave us the dealer holdback that was around $500.  You should be shooting for $2000-$2500 off of MSRP.

I'm happy with mileage.  We took fully loaded inside and a bunch of stuff on rear carrier on 250 mile roundtrip to cabin labor day weekend.  Between stop and go traffic, going over mountain pass and then 80 MPH back we got 28MPG.  Flat road cruise control you can probably push it up to 32 MPG if you keep your foot out of the pedal.  I'd recommend getting a model with the 2.5L versus the 2.0L.

EDIT:  Like jharken says they probably still made money on us but I didn't feel taken so all is well.

I usually do my own maintenance and it seems to be an incredibly easy vehicle to work on.  It also uses a timing chain in the motor.


----------



## firefighterjake (Sep 3, 2014)

jharkin said:


> Definately run the Truecar price report on the model you want and bring that.  I did a lot of research and bought/read the Consumer Reports new car buying guide for this year before buying the truck (tossed it out  or id have offered to mail it to 'ya for the cost of postage) and learned that these days dealers make a hefty profit even selling at invoice...  There are a lot more factory to dealer incentives beyond just the holdback.
> 
> On some cars you can even buy under invoice and they still make out well.
> 
> Good luck Jake!



True car ... nada ... KBB ... consumer reports and a few other sources as well to give me an idea of prices for invoices and other info. And yeah ... I figure the dealership is still making a profit when they sell at invoice with incentives and holdback, but I have no issue with that ... they're not a non profit and still need to make money ... I don't  necessarily want to pay top dollar is all.
So far with two quotes from Subaru they were both below invoice ...


----------



## firefighterjake (Sep 3, 2014)

Treacherous said:


> The CX-5 is a really nice handling vehicle.  Take it out on the highway and push into the corners.  It is one of the better handling mini CUVs IMO.... some have found road noise higher than some competitors but mine is fairly quiet.  I have a fully decked '15 CX-5 Grand Touring AWD with the OEM 19's.
> 
> We were going to purchase outright but Mazda had the same 0% deal back in July so paid half and financed the rest for 5 years but will just pay off in 2 or so.   All paperwork clearly shows 0% and we got a great deal IMO.  Our credit is like 825 but I think they will give the deal to anyone over 725. I used the Consumer Reports #s and they even gave us the dealer holdback that was around $500.  You should be shooting for $2000-$2500 off of MSRP.
> 
> ...



Good to know about the zero financing ... and yeah ... the handling, gas mileage and safety of the cx 5 was one reason I wanted to take a closer look at the Mazda ...with the larger engine.


----------



## firefighterjake (Sep 6, 2014)

Been soliciting "bids" for the aforementioned Rogue, CX-5 and Subaru. 

Sadly, only one Mazda dealership in all of Maine seems to be carrying the type of CX-5 I am looking at -- the base model with AWD (the few dealerships that carry the base model . . . and there are only a few . . . all seem to have just FWD). In addition that one dealership has shot me a figure that is only $750 or so off MSRP (not that I go by the MSRP . . . I actually use the invoice as my starting point).

In comparison two Nissan dealers are offering much better equipped Rogues at the same price point and have knocked over $2,000 off the MSRP . . . and the Subaru dealerships have had a 2-4% discount off the invoice ($1,300-$2,000 off MSRP).

Now I only have to get my wife into the dealerships to test drive them . . . I tell ya . . . this wife of mine hates to spend money almost as much as she hates shopping for cars. Now me, on the other hand . . . well, this is pure, unadulterated joy in doing the research, negotiating, etc.


----------



## Retired Guy (Sep 13, 2014)

We have had Jeep Grand Cherokees with full time 4WD since 1999. Jeeps kept getting smaller and we switched to a Honda Pilot with AWD because we needed more space. Last winter was tough for ice and snow around here and I never felt the Honda wasn't up to the task.


----------



## firefighterjake (Sep 29, 2014)

Thought I would give an update . . .

I've tried a few things now . . . even resorting to the infamous magical mechanic in a can (i.e. Bar's Leak for head gasket failures). Thought I caught a break for a bit as the car was starting to run right, blew heat, temp was great . . . and then two or three miles down the road I lost the heat and the Subaru started overheating . . . d'oh.

Learned a few things along the way . . . such as the fact that using that ol' trick of blowing heat and removing the thermostat . . . doesn't work so well on this car as the thermostat has an o-ring . . . watched a whole lot of stuff pour out after re-installing the radiator hose without the thermostat . . . d'oh.

In any case, I'm throwing in the proverbial towel. I really think it may be the head gasket or cracked head . . . but honestly at this point I don't really want to throw any more money at the car so I took some pics and posted an ad on Uncle Henrys and Craigslist. I put up a figure thinking it would be good for the condition of the car . . . perhaps too good . . . I had four or five serious inquiries within the first half hour or so . . . and not a single one asking me if I would take $300 and guns or a 1985 Skidoo in trade.

Hopefully the ol' Subaru will soon find a new home and an owner who can fix 'er up and keep it on the road. 

In the meantime it looks like my wife cannot resist the siren's song of the Subaru as she has pretty much said she will like a Subaru . . . of some sort (I personally liked the Mazda CX-5, but I'm not the one driving this car most of the time.) She tried the XV and it was OK -- I found it to be a bit cheap feeling in terms of fit and finish (at least the underside of the hood is now being painted and not just primed) and there was a wicked twitch to the steering wheel.

The Outback is a bit pricey for our blood . . . she has expressed some interest however in looking at the new Legacy. Trying one of these out this afternoon . . . possibly.


----------



## Retired Guy (Sep 29, 2014)

If we didn't need the room, there would be a Forester in the garage.


----------



## NE WOOD BURNER (Sep 29, 2014)

I have a 2009 forester for sale with 55,000 miles black auto 4 snows on car and 4 new all seasons go with it.


----------



## Treacherous (Sep 29, 2014)

If going Subaru you might want to go with '15 or later.  These reported ring issues and oil consumption lawsuits would make me nervous if you planned to keep the car long term.  I have no idea how well the (high compression 13:1 on regular unleaded) Mazda SkyActiv motors are going to be over 100K miles.    My fingers are crossed for no oil consumption but time will tell.


----------



## Ashful (Sep 29, 2014)

Retired Guy said:


> If we didn't need the room, there would be a Forester in the garage.


He really doesn't look like he'd take up that much space...


----------



## firefighterjake (Sep 30, 2014)

New update . . .

Sold the 2003 Subaru Legacy Outback in record time. I mean within the first half hour I had several offers . . . all unseen . . . and none of those crazy "will you trade my 1976 mobile home for it" type of offers. First guy up offered the full amount in cash.

He stopped by last night . . . literally took 5 minutes looking at the engine and frame . . . and said he would take it for the full amount. Thinking I could have got a bit more, but then again I might have had to deal with the whack jobs as well . . . in the end . . . I was happy with the price and he was happy . . . so all is good.

Test drove a 2015 Legacy and my wife (and I) liked it . . . CVT was nice . . . pick up was decent . . . much more comfortable a ride (plus vs. the buckboard ride) from the old to new Legacy . . . quieter as well. Soliciting bids today . . . financing is already in place . . . may be coming home today with a new ride for my wife.


----------



## Swedishchef (Sep 30, 2014)

Congratulations Jake! You'll enjoy the new Legacy, they are nice machines. Like you said, the CVT is nice, it's quiet and a smooth ride. Did you get one with Eyesight? If so, let me know how it works. I am not a fan of a vehicle driving itself but more and more companies are installing safety features to "help" drivers.

Subaru is the fastest growing car company in the Western world (% sales). They sold more Legacy models in August than Mazda sold Mazda 6s. They have 33 consecutive months of year-over-year growth. Heck, 5 years ago they had 200 000 sales in the US and this year they are forecasting 500 000 which will be more than VW USA. It's a growing company, can't be all that bad.

Andrew


----------



## NE WOOD BURNER (Sep 30, 2014)

firefighterjake said:


> Test drove a 2015 Legacy and my wife (and I) liked it . . . CVT was nice


I would steer clear of a CVT-IMHO
extended warranty coverage would be advisable also.
"Fluid film" under coating and it won't rot out so fast.
negotiate extra set of steel wheels and snow tires. if you can't get them cheap enough call tirerack and put the price on the financing. save a ton not switching tires every year.


----------



## firefighterjake (Oct 1, 2014)

It's a done deal . . . did a whole lot of e-mailing and calling yesterday afternoon and around 5 p.m. I came up with a very good deal . . . that actually got a bit better.

Had one dealer willing to go to 3.3% below invoice . . . then another dealer matched the price and then had to call back to say the color combination we liked had been sold . . . called back 10 minutes later to offer 4.5% below invoice (a little over $1,000 off invoice). Gave the first dealer a chance to match it, but it didn't happen. 

Test drove the other Legacy . . . liked it enough so my wife came up and we did the paperwork. I had pre-approval for 2.39% financing for 60 months (Subaru had 1.9% for up to 48 months but I like having a little more of a lower monthly payment in case another vehicle craps out). Got to financing and they offered up 1.84% for 60 months.

While going through the process we also faced another dilemna . . . the Legacy my wife liked . . . became available when the customer who was trying to lease it left after getting in a huff over the price. My wife who is usually very decisive hemmed and hawed . . . in the end she chose the silver colored Legacy with the better discount over the black car . . . also because she figured it will show the dirt more.

We did end up with an extended warranty purchase . . . something I rarely if ever do . . . it was through Subaru and the price was right -- about $900 . . . figured we would try it out this one time . . . new model year and a lot of newer tech . . . really buying peace of mind here for 8 years.

No EyeSight . . . although that tech is pretty interesting . . . just a little too expensive for my tastes still. I'm not too worried about the CVT -- Subaru has been using CVT for some time now on and off . . . and I found it to be quite smooth. A lot of folks much smarter than me have also commented on how this CVT is quite refined (of course time may tell.)

Model didn't have a lot of extra options, but truthfully it already came with quite a bit and there were only a few options that really interested my wife. Came with fog lights and a rear bumper applique, but they agreed to put on a remote car starter which my wife really wanted. Only other thing that interested her a bit was the body side molding.

We will most likely get some snow tires . . . last time around I bought a set of used alloy rims . . . this time around I may go with a local company that sells the tires quite cheaply and offers free mounting/dismounting of the tires. Only other planned addition is a set of all season floor mats.


----------



## NE WOOD BURNER (Oct 1, 2014)

firefighterjake said:


> A lot of folks much smarter than me have also commented on how this CVT is quite refined (of course time may tell.)


Good luck with this. send some feed back in a few years.

My snowmobile has a CVT-LOL


----------



## NE WOOD BURNER (Oct 1, 2014)

FYI-http://www.planetsubaru.com/lineartronic-continuously-variable-transmission.htm


----------



## Ashful (Oct 1, 2014)

Great deal, Jake!


----------



## Retired Guy (Oct 1, 2014)

Congrats Jake.


----------



## Swedishchef (Oct 1, 2014)

Congrats buddy! You are happy and that is what counts.

Andrew


----------



## firefighterjake (Jan 4, 2015)

It's alive . . . although I'm not really sure how old a thread has to be to qualify as a "zombie thread."

Thought I would give a couple of updates.

First off . . . wow . . . love my wife's Legacy. I realize there is a huge difference between a 2003 and 2015 model of a vehicle, but this is really a night and day difference. I think perhaps the best thing I can say about her new car is that I often forget it's AWD. What I mean to say is that her old car was slow, felt heavy and did not get the best gas mileage -- but was a tank in the snow. Her new car on the other hand to me feels relatively zippy and more like an Accord or similar family sedans that I have been in or recently drove . . . and it is getting great gas mileage with a 29-30 mpg. No issues so far . . . but she has also only had it since late September and it has less than 3,000 miles on it.

New update . . . my plan to keep driving my Honda Accord may or may not be thwarted though. I'm now at 198,400 or so miles. Yesterday while in western Maine I put it in gear (it's a manual) and I heard a small popping sound and then nothing . . . could not move at all in any gear. Managed to get it off the road and after a long wait and many calls (and dead cell phones) ended up renting a U-haul car dolly and having a friend come rescue us (us being a friend and I who were in Brighton geocaching.) Now I still haven't checked with my mechanic, but a few folks who have heard about my predicament ventured it could be the clutch or something in that vicinity which they said may be pricey -- not so much in the part, but in the labor to access it. If this is the case I'll be back to making the same decision as before -- keep the car and pay for the repair or start looking for another vehicle.


----------



## bobdog2o02 (Jan 4, 2015)

Keep and fix it.  A clutch job should run about $1,000 and as long as the car has been reliable its money well spent


----------



## Swedishchef (Jan 4, 2015)

I love cars...and hate them for reasons like this. lol.

Glad to see your wife is happy with her Subaru. And glad to see you like it as well. As stated before, I am part of the Subaru cult.

What year is the Accord?

Andrew


----------



## bobdog2o02 (Jan 4, 2015)

Subie cult is right.  I love that kool aid.


----------



## firefighterjake (Jan 5, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> I love cars...and hate them for reasons like this. lol.
> 
> Glad to see your wife is happy with her Subaru. And glad to see you like it as well. As stated before, I am part of the Subaru cult.
> 
> ...



2003.

I must confess ... if I opt to sell the Honda I will be taking a hard look at either the wrx or brz.


----------



## spirilis (Jan 5, 2015)

Bought a '08 Forester brand new 7 years ago, 158K on the odometer and many winters with zero problems getting around 

Fwiw I changed O2 sensors recently on a whim... dealer said it's not usually a routine replacement but I insisted.  Holy hell the engine runs like brand new after!  I always recall 105K for a replacement interval in older cars I had.


----------



## velvetfoot (Jan 5, 2015)

Broken clutch cable?


----------



## Ashful (Jan 5, 2015)

velvetfoot said:


> Broken clutch cable?


Geez, haven't seen a cable clutch in decades.  But on that note, and considering the probable vintage of your clutch hydraulics, can you move the stick thru the gears with engine running?


----------



## velvetfoot (Jan 5, 2015)

Joful said:


> Geez, haven't seen a cable clutch in decades.


Actually, me neither.  Maybe I was thinking of the shifter cable, like you seem to be alluding to.


----------



## firefighterjake (Jan 5, 2015)

Joful said:


> Geez, haven't seen a cable clutch in decades.  But on that note, and considering the probable vintage of your clutch hydraulics, can you move the stick thru the gears with engine running?



Yes . . . I haven't tried doing this without the clutch pedal depressed though.

Mechanic at work also suggested rowing through the gears with the engine not running to see if that does anything.


----------



## firefighterjake (Jan 5, 2015)

The car starts fine.

With the clutch pedal depressed . . . everything sounds normal.

With the clutch pedal in its normal position and the car in neutral and running I can hear a rhythmic clunk/grinding sound . . . it's actually kind of soothing to listen to it clunking away.


----------



## spirilis (Jan 5, 2015)

firefighterjake said:


> The car starts fine.
> 
> With the clutch pedal depressed . . . everything sounds normal.
> 
> With the clutch pedal in its normal position and the car in neutral and running I can hear a rhythmic clunk/grinding sound . . . it's actually kind of soothing to listen to it clunking away.


Toasted throwout bearing and/or clutch fork?

Side vent - I actually had to replace the clutch in my Subaru last winter, not because the clutch wore out but because the throwout bearing wore out and was chattering the clutch pedal (along with a rhythmic high-pitched metal grinding/machining sound) when lifting the pedal under <10F temps.  It got really bad so I took it in, some $1200 later .... new clutch.
The speculative theory as to why this happened is that I never got the clutch hydraulic fluid changed, but since it's just brake fluid, it will absorb water over time and with sub-10F temps, likely froze (and expanded as water likes to do when it freezes), causing the clutch slave cylinder to hold the clutch fork just slightly applied against the throwout bearing over time, wearing it out.  Moral of the story: CHANGE YOUR CLUTCH FLUID!  Every time you have the brakes bled.


----------



## Ashful (Jan 5, 2015)

velvetfoot said:


> Actually, me neither.  Maybe I was thinking of the shifter cable, like you seem to be alluding to.


I was trying to determine if the described "pop" was a hydraulic cylinder losing it's seal, or a plastic hydraulic line failing.  Since he can run it thru gears with the engine running, it's obviously not a hydraulic clutch issue.  I agree it's an internal issue, pilot bearing, throwout bearing, etc.  Almost doesn't matter what the exact cause is, since the repair is the same for any of those components.

If you do a clutch rebuild, do be sure they actually swap out your pilot bearing.  I had a truck with a roller type pilot bearing, and had a broken shoulder at the time my clutch failed.  I had to take it to a mechanic, who swapped the clutch, but apparently didn't feel like pulling the old pilot bearing.  It failed a year later, forcing me to take the whole damn thing apart again.  I didn't even know how it had failed so quickly, until I noticed the pilot bearing in the truck was still OEM, and a different style than would have been supplied with the new clutch kit he installed.


----------



## RustyShackleford (Jan 6, 2015)

spirilis said:


> Moral of the story: CHANGE YOUR CLUTCH FLUID!  Every time you have the brakes bled.


I've never done it, with no problems in a variety of long-lived Subarus, but hey, why not, as long as you're doing the brakes anyhow, and especially if you install Speedbleeders.   I assume there's a bleed valve on the slave cylinder somewhere ?


----------



## brian89gp (Jan 6, 2015)

Clutch depressed = normal sounds
clutch in normal position in neutral = clunking
clutch in normal position in gear = ?????what sound????

Sounds like something on the clutch disk/transmission/cv shaft side of things is broken.  If you can depress the clutch and things get quiet that usually means the throw out bearing, pressure plate, hydraulics, etc are working fine.


----------



## peakbagger (Jan 6, 2015)

A new option for AWDs is the new Honda HRV - based on a Fit chassis with a civic engine. Basically a baby CRV. Typical Honda start out with a nice small car and then upsize it every time the update it and then fill int he slot with a smaller version. If you park the original CRV next to the current CRV the difference in size is startling.


----------



## Dr.Faustus (Jan 6, 2015)

go with the subaru. I have an 08 legacy and a 10 audi a6. The audi is better in the snow than the subaru and is way more fun to drive *when* the blasted car actually starts and works properly which is hardly ever. Def not worth the money. 
The subaru is my daily driver, has enough power but not too much, a pretty good comfort and amenity level, and remote start. It was decent in snow. Then i put dedicated snow tires on and it turned into a beast. its only shortcoming is that if the snow is higher than the underside of the car and not even that always stops it!.
I consistently find that both of my cars drive better on unplowed untraveled roads then they do after the plows come and people drive on the stuff and pack it down. Still get impressive performance tho.


----------



## Ashful (Jan 6, 2015)

Dr.Faustus said:


> go with the subaru. I have an 08 legacy and a 10 audi a6. The audi is better in the snow than the subaru and is way more fun to drive *when* the blasted car actually starts and works properly which is hardly ever. Def not worth the money.


I disagree.  Two of my favorite cars of all time are our two past Audi's.  Enormous fun to drive, at any cost.  We never had a major failure of any Audi, and I have a coworker who has six of them of various vintage with similar experience, but we did have several minor annoyances.

It's a shame all the BMW yuppie pricks seem to be buying Audi lately... gives the brand a bad name!


----------



## firefighterjake (Jan 7, 2015)

brian89gp said:


> Clutch depressed = normal sounds
> clutch in normal position in neutral = clunking
> clutch in normal position in gear = ?????what sound????
> 
> Sounds like something on the clutch disk/transmission/cv shaft side of things is broken.  If you can depress the clutch and things get quiet that usually means the throw out bearing, pressure plate, hydraulics, etc are working fine.



Clutch in normal position in gear = clunking

Interesting that you mention this . . . when I spoke to my regular mechanic he suggested that there is a possibility of the CV being broken. He suggested I jack up the car and look underneath while someone puts it into gear (obviously being very careful and not being underneath the car) to see if I might see anything out of kilter.

With the temps just being so mind-numbingly cold and it being dark by the time I get home . ..  I haven't had the will power to go outside and do this yet . . . maybe on Saturday . . . if it warms up.


----------



## brian89gp (Jan 7, 2015)

My money is on a CV shaft, a broken one would be fairly easy to notice.  Most transmission problems you would either be hard to get it into gear, it would not clunk (spun gear on shaft), or there would still be noise with the clutch depressed.

With the car turned off, jack up both front wheels and put the car in gear.  With an open differential with the engine side bound (in gear), if you turn one wheel one way the other one will rotate the opposite direction.  If it doesn't, broken CV (likely) or broken differential (unlikely)

Put one of the front tires back on the ground and try to turn the wheel again.  If its the transmission you should be able to feel the binding and the clunking in the wheel while turning it and should be somewhat stiff (you are turning the transmission through the differential gears).  Plus you will be able to hear the gears turning in the transmission especially if you rock the wheel back/forth.


----------



## firefighterjake (Jan 7, 2015)

Thanks Brian89gp . . . will most definitely take your advice.


----------



## firefighterjake (Jan 7, 2015)

Update . . . with pics. 

Trudged out in the cold, dark and snow (just a few passing flurries really).

First . . . started the car. Confirmed it was still making the clunking/grinding noise with it in gear. Also tried shifting without using the clutch . . . went right into gear without any grinding . . . car still didn't move. There seemed to be a bit less clunking/grinding when I depressed the clutch. Clunking continued with the car in neutral.

Jacked up the driver's side. Everything seemed normal to this mechanically inept idiot. Tugged on the CV axle and looked at the CV boot. All seemed OK . . . but what do I know. Tire turned without any effort. Put a jackstand under this side.

Jacked up the passenger's side. At first everything seemed the same as the other side, but I noticed that when I tugged on the CV axle there seemed to be a bit more play and it was clunking up against the . . . . well I'm not really sure what it was . . . but it was clunking up against another component there unlike the driver's side. 

I then gingerly got into the car and put it into gear. Clunking continued . . . seemed a bit louder . . . not excessively, but a bit. However, when I put the car in neutral the clunking now was gone. 

Got out and looked underneath and discovered the following scene . . . is this an officially broken CV axle? And if so . . . does this mean I am excessively lucky since the cost shouldn't be very expensive?

Two pics of the passenger side CV axle/boot . . . one from the driver's side.


----------



## festerw (Jan 7, 2015)

Looks pretty broken to me lol.  You should be able to get a new shaft for around $50, usually aren't too difficult to replace.


----------



## Swedishchef (Jan 7, 2015)

Yup... a 6 inch seperation is certainly broken in my eyes...


----------



## brian89gp (Jan 7, 2015)

Looks to be some sort of torque absorbing section in the CV shaft, probably efforts to reduce the shock on the transmission if I had to guess.  Engineered weak spot to save other parts.

CV shafts are easy to fix.  Axle spindle nut on the wheel side of the bearing,  (sometimes depending on car) remove front wheel bearing, pop out of transmission, put new one in.  Any auto parts store will have the tool rentals that you need.  Do a quick google and I'm sure you'll find a picture tutorial on some forum of how to do it.

Be damn glad that didn't go out while you were at highway speeds.....


----------



## bobdog2o02 (Jan 7, 2015)

Yup, broken CV.  Looks like some rust induced material loss too.  $300 at a garage should have you set to go.


----------



## bobdog2o02 (Jan 7, 2015)

Fwiw itf it were mine I would replace both sides just for good measure.

Also, CV joints are the achiles heel of Subaru's.  They usually wear out at the pivoting "joint".


----------



## Dr.Faustus (Jan 10, 2015)

Treacherous said:


> I've seen the ones like those used on ATV's & UTV's where wheel is replaced but this is interesting leaving the wheel on.





looking at the way this works, wouldnt the truck now how to be in reverse to go forward? if a forward spinning tire is sitting on a belt like that, the belt should actually propelling the truck backwards. no?


----------



## firefighterjake (Jan 10, 2015)

I should be getting the Accord back today. That said ... I suspect at some point in the next few years ... or months ... I will need to start looking for a replacement ... thinking that this next one may be a bit sporty as I think I'm due for my mid life crisis.


----------



## Swedishchef (Jan 10, 2015)

WRX


----------



## firefighterjake (Jan 10, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> WRX



That's one car I would strongly consider .... I really do like the 2015 -- seems a little less boy racer and more mature while still keeping a high fun factor.

Also have eyeballed the 350\370z, Civic Si and Accord coupe along with the Brz/Frs.


----------



## Ashful (Jan 10, 2015)

Dr.Faustus said:


> looking at the way this works, wouldnt the truck now how to be in reverse to go forward? if a forward spinning tire is sitting on a belt like that, the belt should actually propelling the truck backwards. no?


One roller between tire and belt would serve as a reversing gear.


----------



## Swedishchef (Jan 10, 2015)

firefighterjake said:


> That's one car I would strongly consider .... I really do like the 2015 -- seems a little less boy racer and more mature while still keeping a high fun factor.
> 
> Also have eyeballed the 350\370z, Civic Si and Accord coupe along with the Brz/Frs.


You live in Maine - get an AWD 
I like the fact that they brought out the automatic WRX again. I used to live in a town where a stop sign could be found every 200 feet. My manual car was not fun!


----------



## firefighterjake (Jan 10, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> You live in Maine - get an AWD
> I like the fact that they brought out the automatic WRX again. I used to live in a town where a stop sign could be found every 200 feet. My manual car was not fun!



Hmmm ... a practical car being bought for an impractical reason ... it may be a good selling point to convince my wife for the "need" of the WRX.  Whatever car I get will be a standard ... not alot of stop and go traffic for my commute and I enjoy working the extra pedal.


----------



## Swedishchef (Jan 10, 2015)

Haha.

I also enjoy another pedal. However, when I want to have fun on a snowed in closed circuit track, the drifting is much easier with 2 pedals than with 3. Any rally car driver rarely uses the clutch while dirfting, it's all gas. And the cars I have right now aren't sporty enough to deserve a 3rd pedal


----------



## TradEddie (Jan 16, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> . Any rally car driver rarely uses the clutch while dirfting, it's all gas.



They may rarely use that clutch, but they never use an automatic transmission. An automatic WRX would be an abomination!

TE


----------



## Swedishchef (Jan 16, 2015)

I know I know..but they make them. And my wife doesn't drive standard so I can sell the idea with less resistance!


----------



## Treacherous (Jan 16, 2015)

Joful said:


> I disagree.  Two of my favorite cars of all time are our two past Audi's.  Enormous fun to drive, at any cost.  We never had a major failure of any Audi, and I have a coworker who has six of them of various vintage with similar experience, but we did have several minor annoyances.



I am in no way disputing how they handle the elements....

After watching my boss who only buys Audis have to replace an AT on each one and electrical gremlins I would never touch one myself.  They are probably good lease cars though.  I would certainly never own one without a warranty.  IIRC he had one not under warranty and transmission rebuild was $6K.


----------



## Treacherous (Jan 16, 2015)

TradEddie said:


> They may rarely use that clutch, but they never use an automatic transmission. An automatic WRX would be an abomination!
> 
> TE



Were the 2002 WRX manual transmissions weak or did I have an overly abusive co-worker?  He broke 3 of them.


----------



## Ashful (Jan 16, 2015)

Treacherous said:


> I am in no way disputing how they handle the elements....
> 
> After watching my boss who only buys Audis have to replace an AT on each one and electrical gremlins I would never touch one myself.  They are probably good lease cars though.  I would certainly never own one without a warranty.  IIRC he had one not under warranty and transmission rebuild was $6K.


I think you named the problem:  automatic transmission.  Unfortunately, Audi won't offer their wagons with AWD and manual trans, anymore, so we actually switched over to Volvo on our last purchase.  The V50 doesn't handle as nice as the A4, but it is much faster than Audi's two engine options.


----------



## CrufflerJJ (Feb 8, 2015)

Treacherous said:


> Were the 2002 WRX manual transmissions weak or did I have an overly abusive co-worker?  He broke 3 of them.



I don't know about 2002, but I drove my 2003 WRX for about 230K miles, and had the original clutch in it when I sold the car.  I suspect that your co-worker was doing "clutch drops" from 4000-5000 RPM.  Not good.

As to Subarus in general...

We're a Subie family. Our first was a 1999 Outback, now with about 200K miles on it. We kept it as a "backup" car about 5 years ago, and that was a good decision. It runs just fine.

I got a 2003 WRX wagon, and drove it until I had about 230K miles on it, at which time it was sold to a college student. I still miss my turbo!

My wife got a gently used 2007 Outback, and drove it until it was totaled late last year by another driver turning into her path.

My WRX was replaced by a 2013 Forester.

My wife's 2007 Outback was replaced recently by a 2010 Forester.

All our Subies do well in the snow, but I will say that the stock tires tend to SUCK. My WRX came with Bridgestone RE92's, and they were crap even on wet pavement. My Forester has Bridgestone tires on it, and they are marginal (to be polite) on snow. I ran Kumho or Hankook all season tires on my WRX (and had a set of Dunlop winter tires on spare rims). I'll wait till my current tires get more wear on them, and will replace them with better tires.

In terms of Subaru quality, they seem to make good cars EXCEPT for the engine head gaskets. The 1999 Outback had a head gasket failure at about 5 years & 90,000 miles, costing us ~$2500 in repairs. My 2003 WRX had a leaking head gasket when I sold it. It had been questionable (leaking oil onto the exhaust manifold) for the last 100K miles of use. My wife's 2007 Outback head gasket failed at about 90K miles, WARPING one of the heads so much that it couldn't be milled flat. Of course, after $3500 in engine work, the car was totaled a few months later.

I wrote a letter to Tom Doll, President/COO of Subaru, grumbling about spending $$$$$$ on head gasket failures.

Never got a response

Love...feel the Subaru "love"....apparently, Subaru is getting a bit big for its britches and doesn't feel the need to respond to a multi-vehicle customer of 15+ years.

Subaru has changed the engine & head gasket designs multiple times...maybe they'll eventually get it right. We still like our Subies, despite having to save $$$ for the inevitable head gasket failures.


----------



## spirilis (Feb 8, 2015)

CrufflerJJ said:


> I don't know about 2002, but I drove my 2003 WRX for about 230K miles, and had the original clutch in it when I sold the car.  I suspect that your co-worker was doing "clutch drops" from 4000-5000 RPM.  Not good.
> 
> As to Subarus in general...
> 
> ...


I'd heard the head gasket issues stopped after 06 or so.  My 08 has been solid so far.  I did read about rapid piston ring wear from '11-'13 or so though.


----------



## bobdog2o02 (Feb 8, 2015)

spirilis said:


> I'd heard the head gasket issues stopped after 06 or so.  My 08 has been solid so far.  I did read about rapid piston ring wear from '11-'13 or so though.



Head gaskets are known issue until at the change over in '11, its a trade for ring wear I suppose.


----------



## bobdog2o02 (Feb 8, 2015)

The new subies might soon look like old old hondas with the black spot at the tailpipe.


----------



## Charlotte987 (Feb 10, 2015)

Subaru forester here, second year with all wheel drive. Had a Jeep cherokee before this, loved the Jeep although it really had a truck body and its turning radius is not so good. You really have to think when your driving the Jeep, and make allowances for ice, snow, bad weather, ruts, all of it, you really feel the road, and do I turn on the four wheel drive on not? I don't have to consider so much when I'm driving the Subaru, it compensates automatically, which is amazing, I've never slipped or skidded with this car, the awd takes over and I don't have to concern myself so much with the driving conditions unless they are really bad. The Subaru has that funny little boxer engine which has less power/acceleration than I was used to with the Jeep but I don't really need it so much, except on the hills. The gas savings have been great, and fewer trips to the gas station to fill up are a bonus.

I researched this car for months before I bought the 2010 Forester, drove the new Jeeps, and various others. I had certain criteria, low on gas, it had to be comfortable enough for my husband to drive, as my husband's over six feet. It had to have heated seats and a remote starter, which it does. It's turned out well, and I've seen many older Subaru's on the road, some older that ten years old, that was another reason, they seem to last, and they seem to be good value.


----------



## Swedishchef (Feb 11, 2015)

I also have a 2010 Forester..they're great! Except when your son turns on a dome light without you noticing...a dome light on for 26 hours in -25 temperature makes for a very unhappy battery!!

WHere in Northern Quebec do you live? kuujjuaq?

Andrew


----------



## CrufflerJJ (Feb 11, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> I also have a 2010 Forester..they're great! Except when your son turns on a dome light without you noticing...a dome light on for 26 hours in -25 temperature makes for a very unhappy battery!!



If the dome light being left on is a continuing issue, you can always replace the stock dome light bulb with a LED lamp, which should draw less current.  Before it was totaled, I replaced the dome lamp in my wife's 2007 Outback with a LED version.  This was done due to the Sylvania "long life" bulbs burning out too frequently.  The LED lamp gave a nice bright light.


----------



## RustyShackleford (Feb 11, 2015)

CrufflerJJ said:


> If the dome light being left on is a continuing issue, you can always replace the stock dome light bulb with a LED lamp, which should draw less current.


Hurray for replacing your lights with LEDs !   I replaced my dome light, maps lights, and puddle lights (along lower edge of doors) with LED bulbs from superbrightleds.com.  They use so little juice I can leave 'em burning for days - very useful since I car camp a lot.

Also, I did a mod where when you turn on your dome light, the map lights come on too; very useful if you have the sunroof, because the dome light is way to far to the rear to be much use in the front seat.   Details at legacygt.com


----------



## Swedishchef (Feb 11, 2015)

CrufflerJJ said:


> If the dome light being left on is a continuing issue, you can always replace the stock dome light bulb with a LED lamp, which should draw less current.  Before it was totaled, I replaced the dome lamp in my wife's 2007 Outback with a LED version.  This was done due to the Sylvania "long life" bulbs burning out too frequently.  The LED lamp gave a nice bright light.


It was my son who turned on the light without me noticing


----------



## Ashful (Feb 11, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> It was my son who turned on the light without me noticing


Yeah, but did he have his boots on?


----------



## Swedishchef (Feb 11, 2015)

LOL...yeah. BUt maybe not his seat belt (we were stopped in the driveway)


----------



## sportbikerider78 (Feb 16, 2015)

My parents just got a 2015 outback.  They love it.  Had to wait 9 wks for it!  Very high demand right now, but it is worth buying new.  The used 2014's were fetching almost the same price.  That is just stupid to buy used to save $1000.


----------



## Swedishchef (Feb 16, 2015)

sportbikerider78 said:


> My parents just got a 2015 outback.  They love it.  Had to wait 9 wks for it!  Very high demand right now, but it is worth buying new.  The used 2014's were fetching almost the same price.  That is just stupid to buy used to save $1000.


Subaru has the highest residual value in their class. It's great when you own one.. I think it's 46% (+_2%) after 5 years.

Andrew


----------



## RustyShackleford (Feb 16, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> Subaru has the highest residual value in their class. It's great when you own one.. I think it's 46% (+_2%) after 5 years.


A couple of other interesting Subaru factoids:

1. During the main year of the Great Recession (2008), it was the only car company whose sales increased (http://content.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1871101,00.html).
2. It has, by far, the highest percentage of buyers who pay cash for their car.


----------



## Swedishchef (Feb 16, 2015)

RustyShackleford said:


> 1. During the main year of the Great Recession (2008), it was the only car company whose sales increased (http://content.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,1871101,00.html).
> 2. It has, by far, the highest percentage of buyers who pay cash for their car.



My replies to your points:
1- I was aware of that...in fact, year over year their sales have increased 20%-30% for the past 6 years. Last year, SUbaru of America outsold Mazda and VW in the US.
2- That certainly is NOT me. lol. I keep buying Subarus..they always knock off 1% interest and some times 2%. So my financing rates are normally 0.5% to 1.5%. Why pay cash? 

Andrew


----------



## RustyShackleford (Feb 16, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> 1- I was aware of that...in fact, year over year their sales have increased 20%-30% for the past 6 years.


They're really good cars; I haven't driven anything else since Reagan's first term.   I believe no other car offers as good a combination of handling and the ability to handle poor road conditions. They're also really reliable.  Despite all the whining about oil leaks and head gaskets, I haven't had either problem in all that time; FWIW, I am meticulous about preventive maintenance.

They do/did have two weak spots.   Gas mileage - I guess that's the price you pay for full-time AWD, and supposedly it's gotten better in recent years.  Clutch - I used to get 70-80K miles on a clutch; but that too seems to be improving, as my 2006 has over 90K miles with no signs of slippage.


> 2- That certainly is NOT me. lol. I keep buying Subarus..they always knock off 1% interest and some times 2%. So my financing rates are normally 0.5% to 1.5%. Why pay cash?


Last time I bought a new one, interest rates aren't were they are now (at least in the bond markets, and loan rates tend to correlate).

But that was 1997.   The last one I bought, I bought a low-mileage used 2006 in 2008.   The reason was because I wanted manual transmission, sunroof, and non-turbo, and that combination was no longer available in a new model.


----------



## Swedishchef (Feb 16, 2015)

All I have drive in my 18 years as a driver were Subarus. No gasket issues or oil leaks ( now I am jinxed....lol). 

Yes the gas mileage is an issue...but until recently the impreza had the 2.5 L engine with 170hp. It weighs 550 lbs more than other cars in its class..how could you get better mileage than a civic? 

A friend of mine has a 2013 outback. He gets 7L/100km. With my 2010 Forester I can get 7.6

A


----------



## ewdudley (Feb 16, 2015)

RustyShackleford said:


> I believe no other car offers as good a combination of handling and the ability to handle poor road conditions.


That is of course not counting a well-tuned Chevette with a bag of sand  over the rear wheels.

In the 'all wheel drive space' as they call it, Subaru certainly has competitive offerings across the whole spectrum of performance, but to claim that 'no other car' can share the category is flat ridiculous.


----------



## bobdog2o02 (Feb 16, 2015)

ewdudley said:


> That is of course not counting a well-tuned Chevette with a bag of sand  over the rear wheels.
> 
> In the 'all wheel drive space' as they call it, Subaru certainly has competitive offerings across the whole spectrum of performance, but to claim that 'no other car' can share the category is flat ridiculous.



If you add value/cost its completely true, the only awd system i see as almost as good is the quatro from audi but the pricing is far from competitive to the subies.


----------



## Swedishchef (Feb 16, 2015)

ewdudley said:


> but to claim that 'no other car' can share the category is flat ridiculous.


I can understand your point. But us Subaru cult members will never admit to that 

Andrew


----------



## bobdog2o02 (Feb 16, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> I can understand your point. But us Subaru cult members will never admit to that
> 
> Andrew



Yup, I got stock in the Subaru Kool-Aid.


----------



## Ashful (Feb 16, 2015)

bobdog2o02 said:


> If you add value/cost its completely true, the only awd system i see as almost as good is the quatro from audi but the pricing is far from competitive to the subies.


We've had AWD cars from Jaguar, Audi (multiple), Volvo, and Mercedes (multiple) in the last ten years.  The Subies give good value in AWD, but let's not pretend there's anyone here who wouldn't trade theirs for an Audi Quattro or Mercedes 4-Matic, if the opportunity presented itself.


----------



## CrufflerJJ (Feb 16, 2015)

Joful said:


> We've had AWD cars from Jaguar, Audi (multiple), Volvo, and Mercedes (multiple) in the last ten years.  The Subies give good value in AWD, but let's not pretend there's anyone here who wouldn't trade theirs for an Audi Quattro or Mercedes 4-Matic, if the opportunity presented itself.



No thanks re: trading Subies for Audi/Benz.  Repair parts are more reasonably priced for Subaru, plus I can do the basic repair stuff myself (don't need to re-learn any maker-specific idiosyncrasies).


----------



## RustyShackleford (Feb 16, 2015)

CrufflerJJ said:


> No thanks re: trading Subies for Audi/Benz.


I'd do the trade.    Then sell the Kraut-mobile, buy another Sube, and pocket the change.


----------



## CrufflerJJ (Feb 16, 2015)

RustyShackleford said:


> I'd do the trade.    Then sell the Kraut-mobile, buy another Sube, and pocket the change.



Good idea!


----------



## RustyShackleford (Feb 16, 2015)

ewdudley said:


> ... to claim that 'no other car' can share the category is flat ridiculous.


I agree completely.   Which is why I made no such claim.


----------



## bobdog2o02 (Feb 16, 2015)

Nope, no euro trash for me, I service my FIL's M3.  Garbage, designed to not be serviceable except the dealer.  I love my subies, wouldn't trade for anything, period.


----------



## Ashful (Feb 17, 2015)

RustyShackleford said:


> I'd do the trade.    Then sell the Kraut-mobile, buy another Sube, and pocket the change.


Not a bad plan!


----------



## Ashful (Feb 17, 2015)

bobdog2o02 said:


> Nope, no euro trash for me, I service my FIL's M3.  Garbage, designed to not be serviceable except the dealer.  I love my subies, wouldn't trade for anything, period.


Lol... You are in a very small minority, calling one of the most desired cars of all time "Euro trash."


----------



## sportbikerider78 (Feb 17, 2015)

ewdudley said:


> That is of course not counting a well-tuned Chevette with a bag of sand  over the rear wheels.
> 
> In the 'all wheel drive space' as they call it, Subaru certainly has competitive offerings across the whole spectrum of performance, but to claim that 'no other car' can share the category is flat ridiculous.



I don't even own a Subaru but i'd have to say, you'd be hard pressed to find one with similar reliability and value.  The Audis are the next in like and they are a disaster,,which is why the resale value plummets after the warranty expires.


----------



## Ashful (Feb 17, 2015)

sportbikerider78 said:


> I don't even own a Subaru but i'd have to say, you'd be hard pressed to find one with similar reliability and value.  The Audis are the next in like and they are a disaster,,which is why the resale value plummets after the warranty expires.


We owned a 2002 S6 and a 2006 A3, and they were both fantastic cars.  Much more fun than any Subaru I've ever driven (yes... I've driven the Impreza WRX STi kids junk), and much more nicely outfitted.  They're not marketed at the folks looking to get 12 years and 200,000 miles out of a car.  Different market, different buyer.  We resold each before the warranty expired, which is the same I'd do with a Subie, anyway... so why not buy the more enjoyable car to drive?


----------



## ewdudley (Feb 17, 2015)

sportbikerider78 said:


> I don't even own a Subaru but i'd have to say, you'd be hard pressed to find one with similar reliability and value.  The Audis are the next in like and they are a disaster,,which is why the resale value plummets after the warranty expires.


Put a quarter million miles on a an '86 4000csq and another quarter million miles on a '90 90 20v, so I must admit I know nothing firsthand about resale value.  But as for reliability, neither vehicle required anything beyond normal expendable stuff.

The original claim was "no other car offers as good a combination of handling and the ability to handle poor road conditions", and having driven the Audis and the wife's Subaru extensively here in Syracuse, in actual poor road conditions, I can tell you authoritatively that such claims are made only by persons who know little of handling or of poor road conditions.


----------



## Swedishchef (Feb 17, 2015)

Joful said:


> Subie, anyway... so why not buy the more enjoyable car to drive


Because I don't earn enough to spend $50 000++ on a car 

And btw, the STi isn't "kids junk". LOL. IT was designed after the most world renown WRC car that subaru built in the 1990s and 2000s. We can't control who buys em, even if it is all kids. LOL.

The WRX is a nice car..for $35 000 (CAD), you can't get many cars with 265+ Hp and AWD...other than a Chrysler 200 AWD.

A


----------



## Swedishchef (Feb 17, 2015)

ewdudley said:


> I can tell you authoritatively that such claims are made only by persons who know little of handling or of poor road conditions.


I totally agree..but my bank account doesn't.
:D

Andrew


----------



## firefighterjake (Feb 17, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> Because I don't earn enough to spend $50 000++ on a car
> 
> And btw, the STi isn't "kids junk". LOL. IT was designed after the most world renown WRC car that subaru built in the 1990s and 2000s. We can't control who buys em, even if it is all kids. LOL.
> 
> ...



Always liked the look and specs of the WRX and STI . . . never cared much for the over the top rear spoiler and hood scoop . . . even if they are functional . . . or moderately functional.

As a 44 year old I must confess I kinda like the look of the 2015 WRX simply because it has a more grown up look about it . . . although I really, really liked the concept car sketches that they first revealed.


----------



## ewdudley (Feb 17, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> I totally agree..but my bank account doesn't.
> :D


Just to be clear, I'm only arguing that the Audi is a better combination of handling and limited traction capabilities, not that the best car is the best choice.  The quattros have just been getting heavier and heavier, more and more powerful, and ever more expensive and luxurious.  If I was spending a lot of time on the Autobahn it might be worthwhile, but this last time around we went with the Impreza, which makes a lot more sense if all you're trying to do is get to work alive and running through a salt bath four months out of the year.

In '84 you could get a 4000s quattro four door sedan that weighed 2450 pounds with a one electric window on the driver's door and cranks on the other three windows and the moon roof.  Manual locking diffs in the rear and in the center, air-conditoining, and an FM radio.  115 HP and it would run 115-120 mph all day long. (I think the only real differences between it and a VW was two more drive wheels, one more cylinder, and forged connecting rods.) 

I doubt they make anything that tips the scales at less then 3400 pounds any more.  (My '61 Catalina was 'only' 3700 pounds!)


----------



## Swedishchef (Feb 17, 2015)

firefighterjake said:


> I kinda like the look of the 2015 WRX simply because it has a more grown up look about it .


+1000000


----------



## ewdudley (Feb 17, 2015)

firefighterjake said:


> I must confess I kinda like the look of the 2015 WRX simply because it has a more grown up look about it


Especially after they took away the the Forrester sleepers that were lighter and more powerful than a WRX at the time.


----------



## RustyShackleford (Feb 17, 2015)

ewdudley said:


> The original claim was "no other car offers as good a combination of handling and the ability to handle poor road conditions", and having driven the Audis and the wife's Subaru extensively here in Syracuse, in actual poor road conditions, I can tell you authoritatively that such claims are made only by persons who know little of handling or of poor road conditions.


I'm sure you're right.


----------



## Ashful (Feb 17, 2015)

Well, I guess we can all agree that AWD is where it's at.  Subaru, Audi, Mercedes, BMW and Volvo all have pretty good AWD systems, Subaru being the entry price level, with some very impressive performance.

We actually abandoned Audi on our last purchase, having intended to buy an A4 wagon with AWD, mostly because they would not offer their most powerful engine combo with a manual transmission in that chassis.  However, I did notice that Audi's pricing has skipped up noticably, with no matching improvement in their spec's or warranty.  Likely reflecting the swarms of douche-bag yuppies that have suddenly decided BMW is "out" and Audi is "in", right now.

We went with Volvo, which is not nearly as nice to drive as the BMW or Audi, but is fast as a ***** date in a straight line.  It's also probably the only one truly rivaling Mercedes on safety, and by that I don't just mean designing to pass a few BS safety tests, but truly focusing their entire design process on safety.

Good thing... the reason I've owned so many Euro sports sedans and wagons over the last 15 years is that my wife tends to roll one over or otherwise total it every 2 - 3 years.  Last year she hit the house with the Volvo.


----------



## CrufflerJJ (Feb 17, 2015)

Joful said:


> ...snip...
> 
> We went with Volvo, which is not nearly as nice to drive as the BMW or Audi, but is fast as a ***** date in a straight line.  It's also probably the only one truly rivaling Mercedes on safety, and by that I don't just mean designing to pass a few BS safety tests, but truly focusing their entire design process on safety.
> 
> Good thing... the reason I've owned so many Euro sports sedans and wagons over the last 15 years is that my wife tends to roll one over or otherwise total it every 2 - 3 years.  Last year she hit the house with the Volvo.


 
Even though I classify myself as a "Subie person", I'd still rate the European cars higher on rollover protection & quality of their drivers' seats.  I attribute this to lousy US safety standards.  For roof crush resistance (as in the case of a rollover), US safety standards require that a vehicle's roof withstand a STATIC load (carefully & gently applied).  Imagine gently placing a heavy weight onto a sturdy flat sheet of something perched on a car's roof.  Contrast this with the European safety standard test, which requires that the vehicle be accelerated towards a ramp, which flips/tumbles the vehicle.

US built + Japanese built vehicles also suck at driver's seat-back collapse.  If you have a driver sitting in the driver's seat, and the vehicle is struck from the rear at a decent speed, the driver's seat back can collapse.  Even if a seat belt is in use, the driver can be ejected from the seat.  I've seen this with both US and Japanese built vehicles.

Having run as a volunteer paramedic for 19+ years, before doing the ICU-RN thing, I've seen what happens to cars in wrecks.  Lower US safety standards can put US drivers at risk.  NOTE that my comments are based on what I saw until I stopped running medic (about 6 years ago).  IF US safety standards have increased in the meantime (which I sort of doubt), then my points might be moot.


----------



## Swedishchef (Feb 18, 2015)

CrufflerJJ said:


> rate the European cars higher on rollover protection & quality of their drivers' seats


+1!


----------



## Swedishchef (Feb 18, 2015)

Joful said:


> Last year she hit the house with the Volvo


I remember that...ouch.



Joful said:


> We went with Volvo, which is not nearly as nice to drive as the BMW or Audi, but is fast as a ***** date in a straight line. It's also probably the only one truly rivaling Mercedes on safety, and by that I don't just mean designing to pass a few BS safety tests, but truly focusing their entire design process on safety.


My father is a Volvo maniac. I had the chance to drive his S70T5 in high school. Great car!  I must say they are more comfortable and safer than a Japanese or NA car. But his XC70 was a lemon (and it happens with all cars). Before 80000 KMs he had replaced 3 wheel bearings, the front passenger coil spring, ABS control module and a few other little things.

I do remember this Volvo USA commercial quite well!


I appreciate how Volvo has roll bars in each car (should be standard). I remember when I was 19 coming upon a woman who was struck on the side in her S70 (she had cut off a car who had the right to go straight) and the car flipped onto the roof. She had an open sunroof and long hair. Her hair had to be cut to get her out: her hair hung out the roof was the car was flipping and got pinned under the car! She was scared but no physical injuries whatsoever.

Andrew


----------



## jharkin (Feb 18, 2015)

re the comment up above about STi's being kids toys....

Ive had the chance to ride in and drive WRX's (work buddy), a heavily modded STi  and an S4 (post-college roomate) - all early 2000s vintage. Also an M3 of similar vintage but that is not relevant (RWD).

I would say that of all of them the STi was probably the most beastly in terms of power, feel was so so... handling I cant honestly say as I'm not reckless enough to push any of these vehicles to their performance limit on a public road- I'd like to stay out of jail thank you.

OTOH the STi was the least comfortable of them to live with, by far.. And in terms of creature comforts and interior design the Subies felt about 2 decades behind the Audi.  So as an adult I would probably choose the Audi, if not for the fact its owner tended to drive a dealer loaner about as often as his S4!

I think Joful said it above... the Germans market these cars more toward the 3 year lease crowd... and if I was one of them Id buy an Audi in a heartbeat.  I tend to drive my cars 10-15 years though and unless something is changed I'm still nervous rolling the dice past warranty on a German make.


----------



## jharkin (Feb 18, 2015)

Other thought... when we start talking about Volvos and safety and people who say they wouldn't trust anything but....  I have to wonder again, how they heck did any of us make it out of the 70's alive?

Sure I can believe that Volvos are safer... but I would think that even the cheapest car today with its stability control, traction control, 87 airbags and crumple zones  and cameras and so forth is safer than anything on the planet just 10 years ago.    Some of the things they are doing now, like brakes and steering with a mind of their own, i think are getting excessive.  We have so many gizmos and aids now people dont actually learn how to drive appropriate to the conditions anymore - just gun it and trust the gizmos to keep you out of the ditch.  I think that is dangerous thinking.


----------



## thinkxingu (Feb 18, 2015)

Just gotta throw my two cents out there.  The female teachers at my school love Subaru: Three Outbacks, five Forresters, and one Impreza. I've been disappointed by the fit and finish of each one of them.  Thin and light doors, airy interior, road and engine noise, etc.  There is no doubt that they are a value (AWD, a sunroof, and solid reliability for $25K!) but don't come close to any of the marques.  Not close in AWD system (Quattro vs. "Symmetrical"? Please...), not close in comfort, not close in ride or fit and finish quality, etc.  They're great VALUES.

Pisses me off that they keep winning the Mount Washington Auto Road Race, though!


----------



## Ashful (Feb 18, 2015)

jharkin said:


> Other thought... when we start talking about Volvos and safety and people who say they wouldn't trust anything but....  I have to wonder again, how they heck did any of us make it out of the 70's alive?


The ones that weren't in high speed collisions survived... many of those who were did not.

Most of the safety devices to which we have become accustomed today were first engineered and implemented by Volvo and Mercedes.  They have been the leaders on safety innovation for three decades, or more.  This is a big part of the cost of these vehicles, long-range R&D is very expensive.


----------



## Swedishchef (Feb 18, 2015)

jharkin said:


> creature comforts and interior design the Subies felt about 2 decades behind the Audi


+1 but... Let's not forget that every perk has a price


----------



## firefighterjake (Feb 18, 2015)

Interior design (I don't get too awfully upset with whether there is soft touch materials or what the radio knobs look like -- heck I could even live with Subaru's baby poo brown interior colors on their dashes) . . . electronic doodads (I still use a flip phone -- and have no idea of what the number is so having a bazillion ways to listen to music, connect to the internet or insure I am in a climate controlled environment that would rival the space station is not crucial) . . . what the Jones' are driving (never been a big fan of trying to impress folks with what I drive) . . . I honestly care nothing for these things.

What I value the most . . . reliability, safety and to a degree performance (i.e. if I am buying an econobox for the fuel economy and low price I don't expect it to have a super 0-60 time, but if I am buying  a pick up the tow and payload ratings are important.)

Based on my limited experience . . . since I am not one of those folks who is buying a new car every other year . . . I have found that in general the Japanese branded vehicles tend to meet my own particular needs . . . my needs . . . and wants . . . needs and wants that other folks may not share and that's fine . . . nothing wrong with folks needing or wanting other things in a vehicle.


----------



## firefighterjake (Feb 18, 2015)

Can't remember if I mentioned this or not since this thread has just kept going and going . . . 

In another month or two (or three) I am planning on replacing the vaunted 2003 Accord. So far the 2015 WRX looks to be like a contender (but I do want to test drive one -- the local dealer said I could go up and down the road, but no real test drive . . . so it looks like a trip to southern Maine might be in order.

I also test drove the Toybaru -- Scion FR-S/Subaru BRZ. Liked it, but it wasn't a gushing love affair.

Ruled out the Nissan 350Z (2007 used) . . . surprised me a bit since I've liked the look . . . but once inside I found the visibility bad, clutch pedal reminded me of my wife's hardbody Nissan pick up that she owned back in the late 90s and it was wicked cramped.

I also want to test out a Honda Civic Si . . . not a huge fan of the look, but I cannot deny that Honda has been good to me. 

My safe (but boring) vehicle may be a 4-cylinder Honda Accord coupe . . . again . . . this Accord really has been good to me . . . but I was thinking I would like to have my mid-life crisis now rather than later.


----------



## sportbikerider78 (Feb 18, 2015)

Joful said:


> We owned a 2002 S6 and a 2006 A3, and they were both fantastic cars.  Much more fun than any Subaru I've ever driven (yes... I've driven the Impreza WRX STi kids junk), and much more nicely outfitted.  They're not marketed at the folks looking to get 12 years and 200,000 miles out of a car.  Different market, different buyer.  We resold each before the warranty expired, which is the same I'd do with a Subie, anyway... so why not buy the more enjoyable car to drive?



And the resale is just horrible,, especially on anything above the A4.  I have talked with many people who love their Audi's but despise the reliability and huge repair bills.

There are lots of fun to drive cars, that have big issues.

It is ridiculous to compare an Imprezza with an Audi.  They aren't in the same class, for the same purpose, or for the same market.  I love my Acura, but I'm not going to compare it to a Ford Focus.


----------



## Swedishchef (Feb 18, 2015)

firefighterjake said:


> nothing wrong with folks needing or wanting other things in a vehicle.


You're wrong! Everyone MUST want what I want 

Andrew


----------



## CrufflerJJ (Feb 18, 2015)

firefighterjake said:


> Can't remember if I mentioned this or not since this thread has just kept going and going . . .
> 
> In another month or two (or three) I am planning on replacing the vaunted 2003 Accord. So far the 2015 WRX looks to be like a contender (but I do want to test drive one -- the local dealer said I could go up and down the road, but no real test drive . . . so it looks like a trip to southern Maine might be in order.
> 
> ...



Sounds like your Accord has done well by you.  In a couple years, as our son (now 16) goes to college, we'll probably get him a "starter car" to use for driving to & from school.  I've often thought about a used Honda Accord. 

I had a 2003 WRX wagon, and liked it a lot.  When you test drive the WRX, please make sure to try it out in an area with twisty-turny roads.  Lots of fun!  While it has Subaru's all wheel drive, the ground clearance is somewhat limited.  Check that out if you drive in deep snow.


----------



## Swedishchef (Feb 18, 2015)

firefighterjake said:


> Can't remember if I mentioned this or not since this thread has just kept going and going . . .
> 
> In another month or two (or three) I am planning on replacing the vaunted 2003 Accord. So far the 2015 WRX looks to be like a contender (but I do want to test drive one -- the local dealer said I could go up and down the road, but no real test drive . . . so it looks like a trip to southern Maine might be in order.
> 
> ...



Jake, an Accord Coupe may suit your needs/wants. Especially if you get the EX-L model with the 3.5L 278 Hp engine! 

Andrew


----------



## firefighterjake (Feb 18, 2015)

CrufflerJJ said:


> Sounds like your Accord has done well by you.  In a couple years, as our son (now 16) goes to college, we'll probably get him a "starter car" to use for driving to & from school.  I've often thought about a used Honda Accord.
> 
> I had a 2003 WRX wagon, and liked it a lot.  When you test drive the WRX, please make sure to try it out in an area with twisty-turny roads.  Lots of fun!  While it has Subaru's all wheel drive, the ground clearance is somewhat limited.  Check that out if you drive in deep snow.



Well hey then . . . do I have a car for you.   Just shy of 200,000 miles . . . only driven by a little old lady on Sundays when she went to church.  This car also has the infamous exploding airbags so the lucky buyer may get lucky, have it explode and only get slightly maimed.


----------



## firefighterjake (Feb 18, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> Jake, an Accord Coupe may suit your needs/wants. Especially if you get the EX-L model with the 3.5L 278 Hp engine!
> 
> Andrew



I like the specs on that . . . but not the price . . . it would be significantly more to step up to the V-6 . . . and since I really want another manual . . . that limits my options with the Accord line up.


----------



## CrufflerJJ (Feb 18, 2015)

firefighterjake said:


> Well hey then . . . do I have a car for you.   Just shy of 200,000 miles . . . only driven by a little old lady on Sundays when she went to church.  This car also has the infamous exploding airbags so the lucky buyer may get lucky, have it explode and only get slightly maimed.



Well if you could store it for me for a couple years, then deliver it to OH, I might be willing to take that deathtrap off your hands.


----------



## jharkin (Feb 18, 2015)

Joful said:


> Most of the safety devices to which we have become accustomed today were first engineered and implemented by Volvo and Mercedes.  They have been the leaders on safety innovation for three decades, or more.  This is a big part of the cost of these vehicles, long-range R&D is very expensive.



Oh I'm well aware of that... Im just saying that so much of this safety tech has tricled down to even the cheapest vehicles, I think its a bit much to claim that if you dont shell out fr a volve you are driving a deathrap on wheels.





firefighterjake said:


> Interior design (I don't get too awfully upset with whether there is soft touch materials or what the radio knobs look like -- heck I could even live with Subaru's baby poo brown interior colors on their dashes) . . . electronic doodads (I still use a flip phone -- and have no idea of what the number is so having a bazillion ways to listen to music, connect to the internet or insure I am in a climate controlled environment that would rival the space station is not crucial) . . . what the Jones' are driving (never been a big fan of trying to impress folks with what I drive) . . . I honestly care nothing for these things.



I like a well designed interior...  When I was looking at sedans I looked at many makes and for a while considered a  328i or A4, and would have jumped  if I thought I could get  the 15 years/ 200k trouble free I have from my Hondas....

But then as fate would have it I ended up buying the Truck and now Im the one driving around the 80s interior... and I dont miss all that stuff as much as I though I would... but man o man was I happy about 4low and the locking diff when I went down the dirt road in 18inhces of unplowed snow a couple weeks ago


----------



## jharkin (Feb 18, 2015)

firefighterjake said:


> I like the specs on that . . . but not the price . . . it would be significantly more to step up to the V-6 . . . and since I really want another manual . . . that limits my options with the Accord line up.



The Accord couple is the hot rod of the Honda lineup... Its your only option to get that V6 with a manual - not to mention you only loose 2mpg highway or so vs. the 4.  It would win a drag race against a 328i...


I gotta say Jake thats some eclectic mix of cars you are cross shopping.


----------



## Ashful (Feb 18, 2015)

sportbikerider78 said:


> It is ridiculous to compare an Imprezza with an Audi.  They aren't in the same class, for the same purpose, or for the same market.  I love my Acura, but I'm not going to compare it to a Ford Focus.


The Impreza WRX pricing is exactly matched to my Audi A3 pricing, almost dollar for dollar, at each package level.  That is the case today, and was also the case in 2006, when I bought the A3.

The S6... not so much.



jharkin said:


> Oh I'm well aware of that... Im just saying that so much of this safety tech has tricled down to even the cheapest vehicles, I think its a bit much to claim that if you dont shell out fr a volve you are driving a deathrap on wheels.


Very true!  I don't think I claimed that, tho.  



firefighterjake said:


> Can't remember if I mentioned this or not since this thread has just kept going and going . . .


Hotter than the religion of politics... or the politics of religion.


----------



## Swedishchef (Feb 18, 2015)

Jake, another option for you, if Subaru is a contender, is the Legacy 3.6R. Nice size sedan like the Accord but 10 Hp less than a WRX. 

Or I could picture you in a Mini Cooper S.

ANdrew


----------



## firefighterjake (Feb 19, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> Jake, another option for you, if Subaru is a contender, is the Legacy 3.6R. Nice size sedan like the Accord but 10 Hp less than a WRX.
> 
> Or I could picture you in a Mini Cooper S.
> 
> ANdrew



Definitely NOT a Mini Cooper ... not really my thing, not so sure about their reliability and there are no local dealers.

The Legacy is OK ... I prefer coupes though ... obviously the Wrx is a sedan ... that would be a "compromise" ... not a bad compromise as this would be a practical impractical car for me with the awd and ease of entry for those very few times I have passengers ... my ideal car honestly would be the Wrx engine and turbo in the Brz .... but I don't think that will happen.


----------



## ewdudley (Feb 19, 2015)

firefighterjake said:


> Definitely NOT a Mini Cooper ... not really my thing, not so sure about their reliability and there are no local dealers.


(I guess the Mini belongs in this thread, it is after all fore-wheel drive.)

Friend ended up in a ditch with his, which set off the air bags and also triggered an explosive device in the battery cable to disconnect the fat wire from the rest of the car, since the battery is somewhere way back on the right.  Entire battery cable assembly from engine compartment to rear or the car had to be replaced, plus had to flat-bed the car 150 miles one way to an echelon of service authorized to reset the air-bag system.  But he remains very enthusiastic about driving and owning the car.


----------



## Ashful (Feb 19, 2015)

I drove a friend's new Mini Cooper S in 2006, I think.  Quality was not impressive, but it was a hell of a lot of fun.


----------



## Swedishchef (Feb 19, 2015)

Joful said:


> I drove a friend's new Mini Cooper S in 2006, I think.  Quality was not impressive, but it was a hell of a lot of fun.


Well in the movie the Italian job, they were driving them down staircases!!


----------



## Ashful (Feb 19, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> Well in the movie the Italian job, they were driving them down staircases!!


Yeah... I couldn't convince him to let me do that.


----------



## RustyShackleford (Feb 21, 2015)

Joful said:


> Well, I guess we can all agree that AWD is where it's at.  Subaru, Audi, Mercedes, BMW and Volvo all have pretty good AWD systems, Subaru being the entry price level, with some very impressive performance.


Well, maybe not THAT impressive:


----------



## Swedishchef (Feb 21, 2015)

I wont comment on that picture  Glad to see she's OK and no airbags went off.

ANdrew


----------



## semipro (Feb 21, 2015)

RustyShackleford said:


> Well, maybe not THAT impressive:


Depends on whether the driver wanted to be on top of that quardrail or not.


----------



## Swedishchef (Feb 21, 2015)

I'll bet she saw a major collision oncoming and was able to get her Outback to JUMP straight up and to the side to avoid it. Like a grasshopper. It's a new option on the OUtbacks. SPRING mode.

A


----------



## BrotherBart (Feb 21, 2015)




----------



## semipro (Feb 21, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> I'll bet she saw a major collision oncoming and was able to get her Outback to JUMP straight up and to the side to avoid it. Like a grasshopper. It's a new option on the OUtbacks. SPRING mode.A


The Mach 5 could do that.


----------



## firefighterjake (Mar 1, 2015)

I think I am in love.

Test drove a used 2015 WRX (repo) the other day . . . figured it would at the very least give me an idea of whether I would even like the WRX.

I have test driven and drove many cars . . . this is the first car I can honestly say that I had a stupid looking grin on my face as I drove. I really, really liked the drive.

Test drove a Civic Si afterwards and while it was a Honda . . . the ride was . . . m'eh . . . it's a Honda, but just didn't do a whole lot for me.

Also test drove a FRS . . . definitely had more of a sport car like ride . . . low, felt every crack in the tar . . . it seemed like it could be a fun car . . . but the WRX seemed like it could be fun . . . and sort of practical.

Gotta do some number crunching now.


----------



## Swedishchef (Mar 1, 2015)

firefighterjake said:


> FRS . . . definitely had more of a sport car like ride . . . low, felt every crack in the tar


They are very low indeed...and a profile of like 5 so that you feel a pile of ant poop on the road.

Andrew


----------



## firefighterjake (Mar 5, 2015)

Well I've done some number crunching and now I've a decision to make . . . I'm not sure which way to go here.

The repo WRX by the way ended up being sold the day after I test drove it. A bit disappointing at first . . . but I always figure things happen for a reason -- for all I know the previous owner never properly broke it in and it could blow up in a spectacular fireball two weeks from now. 

In any case, it looks like I'm going to go new . . . a base model WRX. I've already secured pre-financing at a decent rate (but hopefully the dealer may do better with their own offer.)

So here's my problem . . . 

I sent out requests to the various dealers here in Maine asking for their best price on a base model WRX with as few (if any) options along with the OTD price . . . and whether the car is in stock or needs to be ordered.

Not surprisingly, most dealers came back to say the car would need to be ordered. A few said that they have a car coming later this month or may be able to make a "folder swap" (sounds like a dealer swap to me?)

Prices seemed decent . . . based on the numbers from True Car, Edmunds, etc. most were below invoice on the price ($24,799-$25,499) and it became obvious that some used other fees to pad the OTD price but the figures still seem decent enough ($26,636-$27,242) and well within what I want to pay.

Which in your opinion is the better deal here?

Dealer A: Best overall price and OTD price at $26,636 who as an added bonus thinks they can make a "folder swap" and have a car in by the end of the month.

Dealer B (Well B and C really): Second and third lowest prices (about $200 more than the lowest OTD price) and as an added bonus I have worked with these dealers before as they are local dealers. The car would have to be ordered with a 8-12 week wait time . . . but good things come to those who wait, right?

Dealer C: Asking $345 more than the best price (Dealer A) and are unwilling to budge on the price, but they counter by saying that the $26,981 OTD price also includes a life time warranty on the car (offered through a third party, maintenance must be done and documented -- but does not need to be done at this dealership. No deductible if the work is done at this dealership (2 hours from my home) or $100 per component if the work is done at another Subaru dealer.). Car would have to be ordered with a 8-12 week wait.


I do like a good deal . . . and if Dealer A was able to get a car in that much sooner so much the better. I am willing to wait for a vehicle, but at the same time who wouldn't want to be driving a new car that much sooner?

On the other hand, the two local dealers have treated me decently in the past, I will most likely have any warranty work (if necessary) done at one of these places and I suspect might be willing to go a little bit lower on the price . . . but the flip side would be a bit more of a wait.

And then there is that one dealer with a tantalizing lifetime, unlimited mile warranty. Having had my wife's 2003 Legacy Outback develop the infamous head gasket issue I am always a bit leery of laying out a whole lot of money and having the car have a major issue . . . but I also question as to how useful that third party warranty would be if push came to shove.

Your thoughts on any of this?


----------



## Clarkbug (Mar 5, 2015)

Option D.  Go to the honda dealer and drive an Accord Sport with the 6 speed.  

And forget the lifetime warranty, they get to be hard to keep up with.  I say that only from them wanting every receipt and mileage sticker for everything.  

That said, I like the wrx, but lime the looks of the widebody hatch better.


----------



## Swedishchef (Mar 5, 2015)

Any possibilities of Dealer D: finding a demo with 10 000 miles on it and knocking $4000 off the price?

If not, go with your gut. Buy it from the friendliest more reliable dealer. $300 is like splitting a hair when it comes to financing $30K.

Or come to Canada and use your 20% exchange rate in your favor :D

Andrew


----------



## firefighterjake (Mar 5, 2015)

Clarkbug said:


> Option D.  Go to the honda dealer and drive an Accord Sport with the 6 speed.
> 
> And forget the lifetime warranty, they get to be hard to keep up with.  I say that only from them wanting every receipt and mileage sticker for everything.
> 
> That said, I like the wrx, but lime the looks of the widebody hatch better.



Meh . . . I like my current 4 cylinder Accord . . . and thought some about the V-6 . . . but I'm too cheap to spring for the extra coin and the budget would have been more a long the lines of the 4 cylinder . . . plus I thought they looked like they've bulked up a little bit since the early 2000s.


----------



## firefighterjake (Mar 5, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> Any possibilities of Dealer D: finding a demo with 10 000 miles on it and knocking $4000 off the price?
> 
> If not, go with your gut. Buy it from the friendliest more reliable dealer. $300 is like splitting a hair when it comes to financing $30K.
> 
> ...



Hmmm . . . I may have to look into that. My Honda Foreman in fact is Canadian . . . bought that back in the early 2000s when the exchange rate was favorable. I know not too long ago we had a lot of Canadians coming down to buy used cars . . . but I was told they couldn't buy new cars and cross the border with them. Like I said . . . I may have to check into this.


----------



## firefighterjake (Mar 5, 2015)

firefighterjake said:


> Hmmm . . . I may have to look into that. My Honda Foreman in fact is Canadian . . . bought that back in the early 2000s when the exchange rate was favorable. I know not too long ago we had a lot of Canadians coming down to buy used cars . . . but I was told they couldn't buy new cars and cross the border with them. Like I said . . . I may have to check into this.



And that idea is out . . . looks like Canadians end up paying quite a bit more for these cars . . . or at least Subarus . . . even if the exchange rate held at 20% I don't believe it would make it worth the trip over the border.


----------



## thinkxingu (Mar 5, 2015)

I'd actually make the decision based on color--that's often a make-or-break decision for me.


----------



## jharkin (Mar 6, 2015)

firefighterjake said:


> Meh . . . I like my current 4 cylinder Accord . . . and thought some about the V-6 . . . but I'm too cheap to spring for the extra coin and the budget would have been more a long the lines of the 4 cylinder . . . plus I thought they looked like they've bulked up a little bit since the early 2000s.




The Accord Sport is a 4 cylinder... I love Hondas but this "sport" edition is a joke... really nothing sporty about it other than a looks package - you get a whopping 4 more horsepower than the base model and a slightly stiffer ride... but that's it.  No v6 option,, they force you into expensive 18inch wheels and you get none of the nice interior upgrades, no sunroof, no option for leather, nothing.


----------



## Swedishchef (Mar 6, 2015)

firefighterjake said:


> but I was told they couldn't buy new cars and cross the border with them.


We certainly can..and when the dollar is at par, we do. Especially if you buy an outback or a legacy. Why? 2 reasons: 1- the prices are MUCH cheaper down in the US 2- since these models are made in the USA, Good ol NAFTA save us paying duty on them. But there is a shortage on Subarus so they stopped selling new ones...

There's a Subaru dealer in New Hampshire  (Subaru of Keene) that had one salesman dedicated to Canadian clients. Provided the warranty work was done at a Canadian subaru dealer, you keep the bill and send it to SUbaru USA, they send you a cheque...

Just wait a few weeks, our dollar is about to drop another 5-6 cents! lol

Andrew


----------



## ewdudley (Mar 6, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> We certainly can..and when the dollar is at par, we do. Especially if you buy an outback or a legacy. Why? 2 reasons: 1- the prices are MUCH cheaper down in the US 2- since these models are made in the USA, Good ol NAFTA save us paying duty on them. But there is a shortage on Subarus so they stopped selling new ones...
> 
> There's a Subaru dealer in New Hampshire  (Subaru of Keene) that had one salesman dedicated to Canadian clients. Provided the warranty work was done at a Canadian subaru dealer, you keep the bill and send it to SUbaru USA, they send you a cheque...
> 
> ...


Come and get it, the Forester you've been looking for: 2005 5spd turbo, 85k mi., driven gently and put away dry, in very nice shape. Talk to Jef 122 Plum St, Syracuse, NY 13204 (315) 478-1103. Better hurry before I change my mind. $9k.


----------



## Swedishchef (Mar 6, 2015)

lol. No thanks..already have a 2005 Impreza and a 2010 Forester.


----------



## CrufflerJJ (Mar 6, 2015)

I wouldn't go with the spiffy lifetime warranty.  If you have to tow your vehicle 2 hours for them to do the work, that's no good.  The $100 per component deductible is also fishy.  So if you have a belt tensioning pulley blow up (as I did), you've got the pulley itself, the timing belt cover, the timing belt,...  at $100 per "component"??  No thanks.

See if your friendly local dealer can get it any sooner than 8-12 weeks, even if it costs you the $300.  If Dealer A is only an hour or so away, go with them.  That way, you get your WRX nice & fast.

Speaking of which, do you have a decent radar/laser detector?  If not, you might need one.


----------



## Swedishchef (Mar 6, 2015)

CrufflerJJ said:


> do you have a decent radar/laser detector? If not, you might need one


Just don't take it into NB Jake or the local Mounties may not approve of it  (they are illegal in Canada).

Personally I like a lifetime warranty idea. I would need to read the fine print properly..... BUt that's just me. I also like fixed rate mortgages, lots of house insurance and a spare set of underwear in my carry on when I fly just in case my luggage doesn't make it.

Andrew


----------



## Ashful (Mar 6, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> ...a spare set of underwear in my carry on when I fly just in case my luggage doesn't make it.


The days of your luggage traveling on a separate plane are (mostly) long-gone, thanks to post-911 security concerns.  So, depending on the reason your luggage doesn't make it, you may or may not need that spare set of underwear.


----------



## firefighterjake (Mar 7, 2015)

No radar detector ... I Ave some thing better ... a sticker ... it has got me out of a few tickets over the years. In truth, besides that sticker ... my exemplary driving record has helped as well I think.


----------



## thinkxingu (Mar 7, 2015)

Passed a brandy new blacked-out WRX on the highway yesterday and it was doing that little bounce thing that "tweaked" Civics do. Paint looked beautiful, but it screamed Fast and Furious to me.


----------



## Swedishchef (Mar 7, 2015)

Joful said:


> The days of your luggage traveling on a separate plane are (mostly) long-gone, thanks to post-911 security concerns.  So, depending on the reason your luggage doesn't make it, you may or may not need that spare set of underwear.


In Canada, on domestic flights, they often remove luggage from a plane in order to balance the weight distribution better. I have only lost luggage once out of about 35 flights. But friends of mine have had bad luck.....


----------



## Treacherous (Mar 7, 2015)

What does it cost to replace the turbo on Subarus from the last 5 years or so?  Turbos are one item I steer clear of when I think of the long haul years out and high mileage on a gas engine anyway.   I know they are far more reliable than 20 or so years ago but IMO it doesn't do the engine any favors for longevity.  Obviously for power output they do their job well.


----------



## CrufflerJJ (Mar 7, 2015)

Treacherous said:


> What does it cost to replace the turbo on Subarus from the last 5 years or so?  Turbos are one item I steer clear of when I think of the long haul years out and high mileage on a gas engine anyway.   I know they are far more reliable than 20 or so years ago but IMO it doesn't do the engine any favors for longevity.  Obviously for power output they do their job well.



Turbo cost I dunno.  I've not read any tales of turbo failure on Subies.  That's apparently not a common failure.  My WRX ran 230K+ miles before I sold it.


----------



## Ashful (Mar 7, 2015)

Short of kids who abuse their cars, I've not seen a failed turbo since I helped a friend repair his ca.1995 (1990'ish Volvo).  It has been a very long time since I have seen a turbo failure, but then again, I don't know anyone trying to get 200k miles out of a turbo car!


----------



## jharkin (Mar 7, 2015)

One of my work buddies has an '04 WRX that he bought brand new.  He is in a Subaru club and goes to track meets and has that thing modified with a Cobb stage 2 or 3 system with ECU tune, higher boost and a full aftermarket turbo back exhaust.  Basically its been running with a tune at least 50hp more than stock since about hte second year he owned.

He probably has close to 200k on it now, if not more and the turbo is fine. 

Rest of the car, not so much.  He just had to replace his entire brake system. Hard lines rotted out and failed.  Its been a long time since I heard of that, but he is a hardcore skier so this thing sees more than average road salt punishment all winter I guess?


----------



## firefighterjake (Mar 7, 2015)

Ringland issues and banjo belt issues were problematic for some models . . . haven't really heard much about the turbos though.


----------



## CrufflerJJ (Mar 7, 2015)

jharkin said:


> One of my work buddies has an '04 WRX that he bought brand new.  He is in a Subaru club and goes to track meets and has that thing modified with a Cobb stage 2 or 3 system with ECU tune, higher boost and a full aftermarket turbo back exhaust.  Basically its been running with a tune at least 50hp more than stock since about hte second year he owned.
> 
> He probably has close to 200k on it now, if not more and the turbo is fine.
> 
> Rest of the car, not so much.  He just had to replace his entire brake system. Hard lines rotted out and failed.  Its been a long time since I heard of that, but he is a hardcore skier so this thing sees more than average road salt punishment all winter I guess?



Subaru keeps having recalls on brake lines rusting out.  We've got notices on our 2003/2007/2013 Subies (& maybe the 2010 that my wife has, but I can't remember).


----------



## Clarkbug (Mar 8, 2015)

Some of the turbos have a filter located on the banjo bolt for the oil line.  If this isnt checked and oil changes kept up on, this filter could plug and stave the turbo.  If maintained well, I dont know that they have a higher than normal failure rate.


----------



## CaptSpiff (Mar 13, 2015)

All this car talk made me think about my favorite MotorWeek episode of 4-wheel'in on the snow. Watching it is a fun way to waste 20 minutes on the computer. 

This is from the mid 1990's, before Iceland grew up and became responsible. I hate responsible.


----------



## Swedishchef (Mar 13, 2015)

So Jake, what's it gonna be?

Andrew


----------



## firefighterjake (Mar 14, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> So Jake, what's it gonna be?
> 
> Andrew



Funny you should ask . . . yesterday (Friday) I went to a "local" dealer and plunked down a $500 deposit on a dark gray base model WRX with zero options. Price was only $56 more than the best offer I had from a place in southern Maine. Figured since I knew the salesman and was buying local it might possibly be a better thing over time (and I know this salesman has gone to bat for other folks since a co-worker that bought a second hand Forester had an issue with a visor and the salesman took care of his issue.) While I know all dealers have to honor warranty work I also know from a mechanic who used to work at a couple of dealerships that if things are busy, dealerships tend to give a little more preference to folks who have bought the car from them.

Now the waiting begins . . . 8-14 weeks . . . there is a possibility it may come earlier . . . but I'm not holding my breath. That said . . . I really am pretty excited . . . I have liked lusted after a WRX ever since I first saw a write up on them years ago.

Also, interestingly enough, my Honda Accord rolled over the 200,000 mile mark yesterday.


----------



## Swedishchef (Mar 14, 2015)

That's great news Jake. COngratulations!! They are nice cars. Lots of people mock them due to the fact that younger crows are driving them now. But the fact is, $ for $ there isn't much out there with those specs.

I drove a 2002 WRX back in 2006. It was an automatic! When you hit the gas, you got knocked into the back of your seat and it took off



firefighterjake said:


> WRX with zero options


The base model is still fairly well equipped!

Andrew


----------



## CrufflerJJ (Mar 14, 2015)

Congrats on your upcoming WRX!


----------



## Ashful (Mar 14, 2015)

Jake's going thru a mid-life crisis.  He'll be headed to Miami Beach for Spring Break, next.


----------



## CrufflerJJ (Mar 15, 2015)

Before heading to Miami Beach, he's swapping out his Jotul for a spiffy new electric fireplace that he got at Lowes.


----------



## firefighterjake (Mar 15, 2015)

Joful said:


> Jake's going thru a mid-life crisis.  He'll be headed to Miami Beach for Spring Break, next.



Hehheh ... that's what I've been telling my wife ... this is my mid life crisis ... figure it's cheaper than getting a girlfriend.

The nice thing ... the car I chose is kinda practical ... awd and at a reasonable cost.


----------



## Swedishchef (Mar 15, 2015)

firefighterjake said:


> figure it's cheaper than getting a girlfriend


That depends on several factors.....lol


----------



## CaptSpiff (Mar 16, 2015)

firefighterjake said:


> Hehheh ... figure it's cheaper than getting a girlfriend.





Swedishchef said:


> That depends on several factors.....lol



Nope. No matter how you cut it, cars are always cheaper than girlfriends. And they come with an Operating Manual !


----------



## Swedishchef (Mar 16, 2015)

CaptSpiff said:


> No matter how you cut it, cars are always cheaper than girlfriends.


LOL...not for my buddy; he married a surgeon! And she wants him to stay at home with the kids.

Andrew


----------



## Ashful (Mar 16, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> LOL...not for my buddy; he married a surgeon! And she wants him to stay at home with the kids.


Does she at least allow him to pick out his own kitchen apron?


----------



## Swedishchef (Mar 16, 2015)

Yeah.he is becoming a chef! No joke!


----------



## CaptSpiff (Mar 17, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> Yeah.he is becoming a chef! No joke!



Perhaps proof that food is not just a way to a Man's heart ???

Dang,... gotta add that to the manual,... hmmm,... page 6472....


----------



## Swedishchef (Mar 17, 2015)

Jake, any update for the ETA  of your new wheels?


----------



## sportbikerider78 (Mar 17, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> LOL...not for my buddy; he married a surgeon! And she wants him to stay at home with the kids.
> 
> Andrew



Nothing unmanly about taking care of your offspring.  Especially if your wife is out earning the kinda cash a surgeon pulls down.


----------



## firefighterjake (Mar 17, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> Jake, any update for the ETA  of your new wheels?



Wow . . . this is the second time you've posed a question like this . . . and coincidentally enough . . . I have/had just found out some news or had made a decision that day or the day before.

So yes . . . dropped off some paperwork yesterday and the salesman said they were able to successfully lobby their rep for some "discretionary purchases" or something like that. The long and short of it is . . . "my" car will be in port on April 15th as they took a car that was already built vs. having to wait to have it built. The original estimated arrival date of late May or early June has now moved up to May . . . possibly even late April.


----------



## jharkin (Mar 17, 2015)

Awesome news Jake...   the waiting is the worst part, I remember last summer when I ordered my Tacoma they told me 6-8 weeks. It ended up taking 8 weeks to the day and I got "the call" as we where driving back from our New Hampshire vacation week.  The moment we pulled into the driveway I helped the wife unpack the kids and drove straight to the dealer.. grinning all the way.


----------



## Swedishchef (Mar 17, 2015)

From Japan to Jake's door. Gotta love it.


----------



## firefighterjake (Mar 17, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> From Japan to Jake's door. Gotta love it.



Hai.


----------



## OhioBurner© (Mar 20, 2015)

Hadn't looked at this thread before (and only read the last few pages) but I may be in the market too, possibly for a Subie. Have been looking for the most fuel efficient AWD SUVs and the Forester seems to be the highest MPG one out there (thats bigger than just a car), and low on cost too. I'd like something bigger but the Forester seems to be about the minimum size I'd like. I'm all for utility and don't care for bells n whistles or flashy looks. I just think its time to give up my ol '99 F150 for something more fuel efficient. I drive quite a ways to work, splitting up those miles between my F150 and the even bigger V10. Last time I crunched numbers though it really wasn't worth it just to save MPG, but then again my truck is getting up there in age so reliability might be a concern.


----------



## Ashful (Mar 21, 2015)

Wife did a bunch of off-roading across our soggy lawn yesterday.  I had removed the plow markers from the driveway, and despite having lived here 3.5 years, she somehow thought it was about 30 feet from where it really is.

Happy to say the AWD V50 T5 just went right thru, as it if were on asphalt.  Not looking forward to seeing the lawn damage, when this 5" of fresh snow melts.  That area of the lawn was so soggy I could barely walk on it three days ago.


----------



## jharkin (Mar 21, 2015)




----------



## Swedishchef (Mar 21, 2015)

I have runway lights on my driveway to guide my wife/family/friends. It seems when people come here they don't know how to park..My driveway is a simple T, enabling you to turn around in the yard without backing onto the road.

Better you than me Joful 

Andrew


----------



## CrufflerJJ (Apr 6, 2015)

Well, Jake.....do you have it yet?


----------



## firefighterjake (Apr 6, 2015)

CrufflerJJ said:


> Well, Jake.....do you have it yet?



Arrives in port on the 15th ... after that it will be another 7-10 days.

Still trying to decide if I want the short throw shifter or the standard shifter.


----------



## CrufflerJJ (Apr 6, 2015)

I had the short throw on my WRX.  The only time I tried the regular shifter was when I test drove a different WRX.  Short throw made shifting nice & crisp.


----------



## Swedishchef (Apr 14, 2015)

firefighterjake said:


> Arrives in port on the 15th ... after that it will be another 7-10 days.


You must be getting antsy! 

Tick tock tick tock!

Andrew


----------



## firefighterjake (Apr 15, 2015)

Swedishchef said:


> You must be getting antsy!
> 
> Tick tock tick tock!
> 
> Andrew



You know it ... I've been reading a lot ... probably too much since I start reading about various issues and then start second guessing myself ... but you know how internet sites "amplify" the issues so what may only occur in a few cars suddenly seems like it is a major issue.

I've also started on my wish list ... winter tires will be high on that list. I'm waffling on the mud flaps.


----------



## Ambient (Apr 15, 2015)

CaptSpiff said:


> Nope. No matter how you cut it, cars are always cheaper than girlfriends. And they come with an Operating Manual !


I understand it's much cheaper and easier to move on to something new, when the bearings start squealing


----------



## Swedishchef (Apr 15, 2015)

firefighterjake said:


> You know it ... I've been reading a lot ... probably too much since I start reading about various issues and then start second guessing myself ... but you know how internet sites "amplify" the issues so what may only occur in a few cars suddenly seems like it is a major issue.
> 
> I've also started on my wish list ... winter tires will be high on that list. I'm waffling on the mud flaps.


Just remember this: you have a full warranty. Don't fret.

I try not to read too much on the internet about things like this...why? because happy people don't take the time to post happy comments...they are too busy driving around all the time enjoying their new cars...lol. The frustrated people post like mad when their cars are in for repairs as they have nothing better to do.    Human nature is to complain but not to be happy. It takes 10 times more energy to be pissed off than it does to smile.

That's my Gandhi saying for the day. lol

Andrew

PS. Mud flaps are nice...avoids chipping the under side of the car. And a quick suggestion since your car is new, get a lifetime warranty oil/under carriage treatment...it'll cost about $300. I did it with my 2005 impreza and still have NO rust underneath whatsoever.


----------



## firefighterjake (Apr 15, 2015)

Currently I am leaning towards mud flaps . . . just don't like most of them that stick way, way out rally car style . . . that and the two makes I've seen are quite expensive -- Rally Armor and RokBloxz.


----------



## firefighterjake (Apr 24, 2015)

You're disappointing me SwedishChef . . . figured you would be asking by now. 

Picked up my new Subaru WRX yesterday . . . ordered mid-March, actually was ready for pick up on Wednesday.

First impressions from driving it home and then to work today . . . wow-zers . . . I'm loving turbo! Gobs of power from a mere 4 cylinder. Was pretty happy with my Accord's pick up and go . . . this one is on a whole new plain. Kinda weird to have a four door sedan -- my past few cars were always coupes.

Radio and speakers . . . meh . . . OK . . . at first I thought they were horrible . . . turned out it was set to the factory settings. Sounded worse than the speakers in my 1981 Chevy Malibu.

Arm rest extension . . . I need one . . . existing arm rest is way, way too low to be at all useful. I loved my sliding arm rest from the Accord and now I'm not quite sure where to put my right arm when I'm not shifting.

Thinking about trying to tone down the "chrome" bling on this car by removing some of the nameplates (i.e. "Subaru", "WRX" "AWD", etc.).


----------



## Ambient (Apr 24, 2015)

congrats! good luck with it!

Too many bling mobiles nowadays


----------



## CrufflerJJ (Apr 24, 2015)

Congrats on your new Rex!

Yes, the armrest extension is a good thing to have. 

My factory audio system (despite the 6CD changer stereo) was a bit sucky.  Adding the factory subwoofer (which mounts under your seat) really improved the sound quality.  You can get Subie factory parts from a number of online merchants, and save $$$ in the process.

If you change your own oil, don't forget to pick up a dozen or so crush washers (for the oil pan drain plug).  OEM oil filters are available by the box of a dozen on eBay, and they sometimes come with the washers.

Yes, the turbo is FUN.  Gas mileage will vary tremendously, depending on how much of a leadfoot you are.  With my 2003 WRX, mileage dropped for the first 3 months as the engine got broken in, then it rose up.

Have fun with your new car.


----------



## CrufflerJJ (Apr 24, 2015)

If you remove all the blingy badges from your Rex, you could just add this one:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/like/271841690641?lpid=82&chn=ps


----------



## Ashful (Apr 24, 2015)

firefighterjake said:


> ...now I'm not quite sure where to put my right arm when I'm not shifting.


On the steering wheel.


----------



## maple1 (Apr 24, 2015)

That doesn't sound comfortable at all....


----------



## peakbagger (Apr 24, 2015)

Just strip all the important bits out and install in this http://www.factoryfive.com/kits/project-818/ (the running gear is typically salvaged from a WRX).


----------



## Swedishchef (Apr 24, 2015)

Congrats Jake! I was actually waiting to hear some sort of YAHOOO from your direction 

It is an impressive car that can haul. I am glad you like it...

Subaru are not known for nice stereos or fancy insides.....not yet anyways. Maybe in 5 years. lol

Andrew


----------



## Ashful (Apr 25, 2015)

maple1 said:


> That doesn't sound comfortable at all....


He's a sports sedan driver now.  This ain't no Corolla.  Two hands on the wheel, 9- and 3-o'clock!


----------



## jharkin (Apr 25, 2015)

Ashful said:


> He's a sports sedan driver now.  This ain't no Corolla.  Two hands on the wheel, 9- and 3-o'clock!



Exactly.  If he doesn't need both hands he is not even close to using that cars capability.


----------



## Swedishchef (Apr 25, 2015)

jharkin said:


> Exactly.  If he doesn't need both hands he is not even close to using that cars capability.


Woa woa woa! Let's not forget Jake will be driving it on public roads 

Andrew


----------



## firefighterjake (Apr 25, 2015)

Ashful said:


> He's a sports sedan driver now.  This ain't no Corolla.  Two hands on the wheel, 9- and 3-o'clock!



Gotta shift sometimes though.


----------



## CrufflerJJ (Apr 25, 2015)

Once the engine is nicely broken in, I think you'll find yourself thoroughly enjoying 2nd/3rd gears, especially in twisty-turny roads.  My 2003 WRX 5 speed transmission would go up to 60MPH in 2nd gear.  Lotsa torque, nice throttle response if you kept it above 3000 RPM.


----------



## RustyShackleford (May 5, 2015)

Congrats !!



CrufflerJJ said:


> If you change your own oil, don't forget to pick up a dozen or so crush washers (for the oil pan drain plug)


I stopped using those and use a magnetic after-market one now (that would capture any metal shavings in the oil).


> OEM oil filters are available by the box of a dozen on eBay, and they sometimes come with the washers.


Folks on the legacygt.com forum (the best for Subaru, I think) say the newer blue OEM filters are no better than the name brands (at least the better ones), and that the old black ones were the schizzle.    I dunno.  I do know that the black ones are like $100+ for 9 of them when I checked (your comment got me all excited).   I have a few blackies left, not sure what I'll do after that.


----------

