stuck686 Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 bought stage 2 2005 with 49k miles, now 67k miles. no issues i did have a presale inspection, leakdown/compression and have oil change records from day 1 tho Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boxkita Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 bought stage 2 2005 with 49k miles, now 67k miles. no issues i did have a presale inspection, leakdown/compression and have oil change records from day 1 tho you just jinxed yourself. Better start a rebuild fund. Build my car Boxkita Track days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuck686 Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 i knocked on wood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nouse4aname Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 I guess when I look at that data I see Toyota and Honda consistently being to the shop less frequently then the same year/price point Subi product. While Toyota and Honda might have odd models/years they appear to rank highly. More importantly I see the data conflicted with the predicted information you posted earlier. Also look at the mileage on an 05 TL - http://www.truedelta.com/Acura-TL/problems-5/2005 everything of note is happening around 100K. Engine mountains fail, they're a wear item. No one is for example complaining about fuel line failure like I got at 60K or was a problem for multiple years with Subis. Yeah that's a problem with reliability metrics. No one seems to be able to present the data as some meaningful information of # of repair attempts, nature of repair, and cost of repair into one stat. Currently a bad dome light counts just as much as a blown engine. 2005 was definitely not a good year for Subaru no question about that. But they've made improvements since. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boxkita Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 Yeah that's a problem with reliability metrics. No one seems to be able to present the data as some meaningful information of # of repair attempts, nature of repair, and cost of repair into one stat. 2005 was definitely not a good year for Subaru no question about that. But they've made improvements since. if you think a 2005 is unreliable, I wonder what you'd think about the 2000 models. The average head gasket lasted less than 80k miles, even on a stock motor. Build my car Boxkita Track days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nouse4aname Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 Yeah, those were bad. We almost picked up a 97 Legacy Wagon for the wife several years ago but backed off once uncovering that issue. But cars that old that aren't classics don't really register in the enthusiast space anymore anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rob-2 Posted December 10, 2013 Share Posted December 10, 2013 Yeah that's a problem with reliability metrics. No one seems to be able to present the data as some meaningful information of # of repair attempts, nature of repair, and cost of repair into one stat. Currently a bad dome light counts just as much as a blown engine. 2005 was definitely not a good year for Subaru no question about that. But they've made improvements since. Yeah. I think the fact is to many customers they don't really 'value' the difference. The dome light issue guy will say "I paid 50K for this car I expect the dome light to last more then 100K' The motor failure guy will say "I paid 50k for this car I expect the motor to last more then 100k" Even if the car was 5K and was finished like a 50K car people would still complain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.