Norskie

I don't have a dog in this fight any more, but I am interested in knowing why Subaru Japan, Canada and the US provide different guidelines. I wonder if Japan's recommendations come from shorter drives? Or Canada's recommendations are due to colder temperatures? And in that vein, SoA had to make a blanket statement for the US, where there's both city and country driving, and temperature extremes, that covered the bulk of typical usage? Maybe there isn't a technical/rational decision for it (i.e. political or financial), My current vehicle has a ZF8 transmission which isn't without it's own controversy. It's used by 10+ major manufacturers which (to my knowledge) claim it has "lifetime" fluid, yet ZF suggests 80-100k OCI's. Go figure.

Of the ~10 cars I've owned, many with > 100k, I've never had to replace a wheel bearings except on that Outback. Subaru's wheel bearing failure rate is above the norm (and your old Fiat isn't the norm, either). Throwout bearings should last the life of the clutch, i.e. 100-150k, not 5-30k.

Isn't that covered by your 5/60 drivetrain warranty ? As it was explained to me: ETA - Engine-Transmission-Axles. Subaru replaced all of ours - free - on our 2005 OBXT at around 100k in 2013 or so. We did NOT have an extended warranty, so any warranties were expired by 60k. When they replaced them they said they had a bad batch and were replacing them with better units. Annoyingly, two of the 'new' bearings only lasted 5k miles (covered by subaru) and another only lasted about 60k (not covered by subaru). I really would have thought they'd figured it out by 2015. Or maybe not, WRX's are known to go through throwout bearings pretty quickly at least up through 2017.

Heavy car with a weak motor? Does it do this consistently? Have you driven other models? Any dash lights?

Yeah, they don't sell them if they don't make money, and like most things at a dealership they have lots of negotiating room. We've had a couple cars with extended warranties; we definitely benefited from that on our Audi's. We skipped the extended warranty on our Outback and that was a good call, because the things that did fail after the powertrain warranty that would have been covered (wheel bearings) Subaru paid for anyway. On our BMW we didn't get an extended warranty and barely broke even paying for repairs ourself. Why a car with low miles (64k) required that many repairs is beyond me ... Good call. Maintenance items like that list are rarely covered. Also, Subaru's are easy to work on, there may be a number of independent shops that can do the work for a lot less than the dealership. Head over the Outback forums. There is a lot more traffic there, as more Outbacks than Legacies are sold. It has been enough of an issue to give Subaru a black eye and for them respond with warranty extensions. Other manufacturers have also been having CVT issues, some with much greater frequency than Subaru (i.e. Nissan). I wouldn't put much trust in that post. Chemical cleaning can help if performed regularly but in the BMW and Subaru communities we haven't really seen anything that does better than a good walnut blast. Of course something that always go wrong but they're not really "opening" the engine. They're removing the intake manifold. On my BMW it took me about a day to do the job (carbon cleaning) and on my WRX it's even simpler, the intake manifold doesn't even need to be disconnected (it can be tipped to the side). We're not cracking the crankcase or even removing the valve covers. Engines with turbos are built stronger to take the stresses. Lower compression ratios, multilayer head gaskets, stronger head studs, stronger connecting rods, oil passages etc. For example, the FA20DIT used in the WRX comes stock with about 250 ft/lbs torque but can handle up to 340 ft/lbs reliably. The BMW N55 has 300 ft/lbs stock, but can handle twice that. They have bigger cooling systems and often stronger transmissions and drivelines than their non-turbo counterparts.

DI isn't an issue. It's a maintenance item that costs a couple hundred bucks a couple times in the life of a Subaru (vs. every 2-3 oil changes on high end Audi's, for example). You'll get 50k miles of warning before lack of carbon cleaning makes a DI car unreliable. Turbo's are generally not that big of a deal to replace either - they also cost a couple hundred bucks and is easy to access on the EJ and FA's .. arguably it would take less time to swap the turbo than to change plugs on our boxers. Compare that with pulling axles etc. like on the BMW N55's (or two turbos on their N54 or V8's). The problem with Subaru turbo's is that when they go, they also tend to introduce bearing material into the rest of the rest of engine, so that a replaced turbo is often followed up with a new engine shortly after. But the problem with the CVT failures (regardless of frequency of failure) is that they generally require a new CVT for $6k+ (or a used one for $3k+) and the cost of professional labor, or at least access to a lift. There aren't repair / rebuild procedures available to us ... heck Subaru can't even tell us how and when to change the fluid. On a car with 150k or more, needing a new transmission is going to be the death-knell, assuming the car also needs all the other things a high-mileage Subaru needs ... struts, bearings, an axle or two, etc. That's why the CVT issues have gotten so much attention and given Subaru a black eye ... especially when they have a long tradition of very reliable manual transmissions and reasonably reliable automatics. We've owned high-mileage cars in the past, one of which was a Subaru Outback XT. But at 175k it was becoming unreliable ... not the motor or turbo, but all the other crap ... parking brakes cables, rear diff whine, constantly dealing the brakes, a sensor here, a window-switch or wiring harness there, the annual wheel bearing replacement, etc. It was easy and inexpensive to repair when something wore out, but it was constant, and what we needed more than a cheap fun and capable car was a reliable one, that I could trust to ferry my wife (and sometimes child) safely 100 miles a day across wintery Minnesota farm roads. Sure, I could get the Outback to 300k miles economically, but not reliably. That's why we now have a low-mileage 2017 Legacy, and when the CVT warranty runs out in a couple years, if these have been failing as frequently as the 205-2016 units, we'll be shopping for another car.

You're lucky! We're on our fourth Subaru ... two made in Japan (16 WRX, 17 BRZ) and two in the US (05 Outback, 17 Legacy). The ones made in Japan are of markedly better build than those from the US. The BRZ is the best built car we've ever owned, the Legacy the worst of the Subaru's (but better than the Audi's, BMW, Pontiac, Chevrolet and Plymouth).

The other aspect related to 'quality' is that things like head unit issues continue to ding the manufacturers. The more complex the vehicles are, the more things can go wrong, and that affects the perception and measurement of quality. Despite having a reputation for head gaskets and rust, previous decades of Subaru's were known for being durable. Yet the reason most people bought them was due to offering unique features that other manufacturers didn't ... AWD, turbo, manual transmissions. That's no longer a niche that Subaru plays in; most other manufacturers offer AWD and turbo's, and Subaru stopped offering Outbacks and Legacy's wiht manual transmissions (heck, can't even get an Impreza with a clutch and heated seats). There remains very little reason to stick with Subaru unless you've fallen for their "green" or "love" marketing campaign ("Love - it's what makes a Subaru a Subaru" ... no thanks, give me reliability, capability and economy please!). That's why we'll probably not make Subaru our next car. There's no compelling reason that makes Subaru better than most of it's competitors, at least to my eyes. On the other hand, Subaru is making a killing so it seems their to appeal to the masses is working. I drove a Mazda CX-5 before I bought our Legacy. It was a very nice SUV, handled better than any other SUV I've driven and it wasn't that much more expensive than the Legacy and had a good build 'feel' to it. But it was gutless (more gutless than the Legacy) and I didn't like the high COG. Now they offer it with a turbo, I'd look at it again. The Buick TourX looks promising, left-over new models are going for ~ $23k. But like that crazy girlfriend, I miss my 535ix more than any other car I've owned and it's faults (reliability) seem to fade from my memory over time.

The title to this thread ("Korean cars are the most reliable") is not a valid conclusion from this JD Powers survey. This survey measures how "perfect" the cars are when coming off the manufacturing line, and has more to do with quality control than quality of the engineering that goes into making a car 'reliable'. Even JD Powers 'long term reliability' survey's only extend through the first three years of ownership, hardly what many of us would consider "long term".

My advice: Stop reading these forums or you'll think your car will fall apart in 13 days. It's not actually that bad. Over on the Audi/BMW/Nasioc forums you'd think every single car is a ticking time bomb with a bazillion hidden problems. Our much simpler and less-stressed Legacies suffer mostly from wheel bearings, and those are serviceable. The only real achilles heel your Subaru has is the CVT. Until Subaru can tell us how to make it live as long as the rest of the car, I would not recommend owning one outside of a warranty (Subaru or aftermarket).

We have crummy roads in MN but certainly not bad enough to wreck bearings. Rims, tires and struts get ruined before bearings do ... unless the bearing was marginal in the first place. The Subaru SA told us that Subaru "bought a bad batch" of bearings, which is why they replaced them for free at 95k (35k after warranty expired) when one started to make noise. They must have botched something because they had to replace half the new ones again within 10k (again they covered it) but when a couple THOSE went 40k later they didn't want to pay.

Many battery maintainers have a desulfate mode which does that.

I would suspect oil seeping past the piston rings into the cylinders, where it pools and then burns on start. The PCV valve thing would be an easy thing to check, but a faulty PCV wouldn't push oil into the cylinder when the engine isn't running. I don't think our boxer motors, with horizontal valves, would be prone to valve guide leaks leading to this. On upright engines oil stays pooled in the heads and then leaks down; our engines are more likely to drain back to the crankcase. Inspection by borescope after sitting overnight should be able to confirm that there is oil pooling in the cylinders. There-after dry vs. wet compression tests would indicate ring health, and leakdown test would indicate how much is passing the rings. If you do you have stuck rings, something like a BG44K engine flush could help free them up. EDIT: In the past Subaru boxers were prone to piston slap. Is there a light rattle that goes away once the engine warms up?

That's not how I would interpret it. The main deficiency from Subaru is a lack of any maintenance guidelines, or even repair procedures short of complete CVT replacement. That's the main reason I'm not going to own our CVT Legacy outside of warranty, and why I have no incentive to perform any service on the CVT.

Our 2005 Outback XT went through a quart every 1500 miles or so after 130k. Our other subies (2016 and 2017) do not burn oil. But our 2017 Legacy 2.5i seems to vary in how much oil drains to the pain ... even after hours of sitting on the level, some nights it's near the middle, some near the top. I can't say that I've heard of the H6 commonly having oil consumption issues; but a friend with a Tribeca (3.0 H6) did. Turned out to be a cracked head.

What are they rating? Consumer satisfaction? Frequency or cost of repairs? Over how long of a period? More details makes the information usefull.

Here's the subaru experiences of my friends and family: 1995? Legacy wagon, ~260k: Original timing belt broke. Not worth fixing (was used to haul goats in the trunk). I'm not counting this as a failure. 2001 Outback 160k: Couple head gaskets. Sold. 2002 Outback 180k: Couple head gaskets. Sold. 2004 STI 40K: No problems. Stolen (yay NJ!) 2005 Outback XT 175k: Burnt valves (140k), six wheel bearings, burns oil, three axles, hatch wiring, transmission quill damaged, multiple valve cover gaskets. Sold. Missed. Would have been scrapped if I didn't pull the head and fix the valves myself. 2007 Outback, 100k: No issues. 2008? Forester 120k: Sold while on it's third transmission (4EAT) 2010? Impreza 120k: no problems. 2011? Impreza 80K: Motor ate itself. Used motor installed, sold. 2012? Tribeca 130k: Cracked head. Sold to mechanic to pay for pulling the head. 2013 WRX 36K: No problems. Sold. 2014? Forester, 80k: Significant oil consumption. 2014? Forester, 55k: Oil consumption; 1 qt/500 miles. Sold. 2016 WRX 31k: Battery. No problems not caused by crash that totaled it, but overall quality 'feel' is 'cheap' (i.e. crappy shifter, noisy, cheap materials, etc). 2017 BRZ 20k: No problems. This seems the best quality Subaru we have ever had or driven. 2017 Legacy 26k: Battery. Hood not aligned correctly. Three trips to shop to fix (warranty). So, out of seventeen Subarus, eight experienced significant mechanical issues prematurely. The general consensus among friends and family is to not own a Subaru unless it is under warranty. Most of our family drives Kia, Honda, Hyundai, Ford, and none have experienced the sort of major malfunctions we've seen with Subaru's. In a year or two we'll replace the Legacy with a Kia Stinger, when they start to come off lease. I mentioned BMW. I've owned one, a beautiful 2010 535ix 6MT. Before I bought it with 48k on it, it had new injectors, steering angle sensor, a couple oil leaks fixed, airbag replaced, some other things I don't remember. I had it 16k and in that time I replaced injectors again, 2x valve cover gaskets, walnut blast, cracked valve cover, worn control arm bushings, bad batter (a huge mofo), leaking headlight, one turbo was starting to smoke, oil pan gasket leak, oil filter housing leak, oil cooler leak, and other things I don't remember. I did a lot of pre-emptive work, like moving electronics out of the trunk, external PCV system, aluminum charge pipe, etc. and it wasn't enough. This was the only car we've owned that has left us on the side of the road (no, both our Audi's did too). This car checked every single box for me, and it was a joy to drive. But with problems like this at 64k? That's unacceptable. We replaced it with the boring Legacy; the monthly payments on the Legacy are less than the costs to maintain and repair the BMW. I may yet buy another BMW, to replace the 2016 WRX. Other than exploding cooling systems, older BMWs with their venerable inline 6, no turbo, and a manual transmissions are somewhat reliable, durable, and easy to work on. There aren't many AWD+MT+Sedan/Wagon on the market. We just need a winter beater for our BRZ to get around town in the snow, and the 2016 WRX is a bit too much $$ to have tied up in a rarely driven car. Yup.

2018 is too new to establish reliability ratings. If any manufacturer creates a car that need significant repairs within a year of building it, well, that's terrible. "Initial build quality" would be a better label for this. Even JD Powers "long term reliability ratings" only covers the first three years. Again, not what I would consider a long enough period to establish 'long term reliability'. How trouble-free a car is from 75k -> 150k is (in my opinion) the correct range to validate reliability, but I don't know if there are studies/reports for that. Thus it remains anecdotal and personal experience. The other issue is that the term 'reliable' is too general. Does it mean "can you trust it to get you to your destination?" or "how often the head unit hiccups" or "your head gasket will go, but just install a new one" vs. "your turbo will blow and take the enough out with it"? Or is it like BMWs water pumps that should be pre-emptively replaced at 75k miles and it needs a walnut blast at 50k" ... is that 'reliability' or 'maintenance' ? It even varies by model ... should the 3.6's be besmirched by the EJ255/257's? My rambling point here is that defining 'reliability' in itself is challenging so it remains a nebulous concept. QUOTE=Brisvegas;5894167].. but by the same token I'm yet to be convinced that Subaru's are scraping the bottom of the barrel in regards to reliability. No, that would be Audi, BMW and VW. Well, they top the charts in initial build quality but then require significant expensive repairs as you get closer to 100k. My anecdotal evidence puts it somewhere under Toyota/Honda, which isnt' bad, considering Subaru's drivetrains are more complex (in general). QUOTE=Brisvegas;5894167]Finally, you mention in your post that you are concerned about "the silence" from certain people in regards to your comments on Subaru unreliability .... could I dare to suggest that the "silent ones" are the silent majority who have few complaints about their cars I'm usually silent. I just don't bother to post about things that don't interest me much. Our 2005 Outback required a lot more attention in later years so I was pretty active on Nasioc and the outback forums. Our 2017 BRZ hasn't hiccuped even once so I don't bother with BRZ forums, but my 2016 WRX has it's issues so I'm more active on Nasioc. So far no issues on our 2017 Legacy, so I'm sort of quiet here too. But these cars are basically new, with less than 30k miles on them, and under warranty, so not much to write/read about.

Our next car will be a replacement for our 2016 WRX, and it'll probably be a high mileage Honda, basically a reliable winter beater (Pilot, manual Accord, etc). Wife entertains putting snow tires on her BRZ but that's just stupid in MN. Yet I might just let her make her own mistakes. Ideally, the car that will replace our 2017 Legacy will be a Kia Stinger GT2. Realistically it might a turbo CX-5 or maybe a Buick Regal TourX, depends on how much money we have saved when the Legacy gets close to the end of it's warranty.

Take it to Subaru. If you don't have any of the keys, you'll need a new BIU ECU in addition to new keys. Here in the US that would be about $1500 for the ECU and ~ $300 per key. On my 2016 WRX I was down to one working key, and that's what Subaru told me.

I have a vague recollection of it being the new lower radiator hose dripping on the heat shield, due to using a worm-gear hose clamp instead of the proper spring-loaded clamp.

Our 2005 Outback had a coolant leak at one point, couldn't find it but I could smell it. It was dripping on exhaust so burned off and only leaked when running, Quite annoying, until I repaired it. NAPA (and others) sell coolant test kits which detect hydrocarbons, I would suggest that you get one of those and check yourself. That will confirm or eliminate something internal, like a head gasket. But since you can smell something, I'd suggest it's actually an external leak.

I don't understand. Can you elaborate? Four doors, comfy back seat, trunk, can fit a typical American family. Just like my Legacy, just a LOT faster.