fishbone Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 Yeah, it would be nice to have some headgaskets that actually lasted the life of the engine... That was arguably a predominant problem up to ... what? 2002? 2004? I see your headgasket problem and raise you one Toyota recall for valve readjustment due to failures. Which is recent, as in, 2010 and ongoing afaik. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I Donated thefultonhow Posted January 19, 2011 I Donated Share Posted January 19, 2011 That was arguably a predominant problem up to ... what? 2002? 2004? I see your headgasket problem and raise you one Toyota recall for valve readjustment due to failures. Which is recent, as in, 2010 and ongoing afaik. Yeah, it was a problem until Subaru started REQUIRING you to use their own expensive coolant with their proprietary coolant conditioner. AFAIK, Toyota does not do that. The valve adjustment recall is much the same as the bearing failure recall on 08/09 EJ255 cars. The headgasket issue is much more akin to crank walk on DSMs -- a problem that manifests later in the car's life, when the warranty is no longer in effect, and that won't cause sudden catastrophic failure but may cause gradual catastrophic failure. In other words, it doesn't cost Subaru a thing and the owners of the cars are left holding the bag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishbone Posted January 19, 2011 Share Posted January 19, 2011 The additive, as much as it is debated, is preventive maintenance, not a band-aid fix. My car, and many others in the area, are not using this additive and have not had issues. So basically we just argued Subaru is no worse or better than Toyota. If we go by JD Power studies, Toyota does better. But, again, I don't think anyone here has the delta on strictly the reliability of the motor, such as another poster simply and bluntly stated reliability goes to Toyota. The bearing failure did not affect the NA flat 4, which was what the opie was comparing. The NA flat 4 is pretty stout and bullet proof from what I know. So to not derail this conversation into something so broad that it would be endless and senseless, the two motors, Toyota's I4 and Subie's flat-4, seem to be doing great in terms of reliability. Also, comparing them on paper is very short-sighted imho as far as performance. Performance cannot be judged separate from other factors such as gearing and drivetrain in general. Even in terms of mpg, the Forester did the best in a recent MT article comparing it to the bunch and likes of RAV-4, CR-V, etc. It tows the most, has the best awd, cheapest (iirc), most hauling room inside, does pretty dang good! You would dismiss all these advantages simply because on paper the H4 falls short of Toyota's I4 by a few measly horses? What is 179 to 173 horses? That's almost like ricer talk, really. Also, SOA is not churning out more power out of the H6 because it would start cannibalizing sales into their turbocharged H4s Nissan/Infiniti does the same thing with their VQ35 engine. They have different HP ratings out of the same motor depending on implementation. Pretty much every manufacturer is doing the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
05LGTLtd Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 Also, SOA is not churning out more power out of the H6 because it would start cannibalizing sales into their turbocharged H4s Nissan/Infiniti does the same thing with their VQ35 engine. They have different HP ratings out of the same motor depending on implementation. Pretty much every manufacturer is doing the same thing. Or in the case of the forester xt, when it starts showing up the wrx, subaru takes away the manual and only offers it in the automatic transmission now. All I need now is a hill holder and a center passing light... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishbone Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 I own an automatic, but to me taking away the option is almost like selling out. I suppose they know it better in terms of sales, so if the MT has minuscule volume, it would make sense. Nissan has gone the way of appliance that much more now that they have taken away the MT option from so many of their lineup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vr4Legacy Posted January 21, 2011 Share Posted January 21, 2011 one of the reasons I have remained so loyal to Subaru is the fact that they do offer a MT in a mid size sedan. I understand the argument for an auto, but it is nice to have the option. It offers economy on the low end, and performance on the high end. But if consumers aren't buying, they aren't going to make it... supply and demand at it's finest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dspecbl Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 This entire thread is absolutely hilarious. I own currently own a 2006 Toyota Tacoma and had a 1998 Toyota Tacoma. Yes the interior is not as well put together on the newer truck as it was on the old truck, but the mechanics of the new truck are far better than the old one. Both truck were/are modded quite heavily and the old one was a PITA to tune for power and then when I decided to take it off of the street and put it where it belonged, all I did was break drivetrain components. The new one will take the abuse and ask for more. I also have a 2008 spec.B and I love the interior of the car, but it really could use some help in the interior noise department. Toyota has that figured out. The camry is not supposed to be a legacy so you can't compare them. The interior feel of the legacy is about the same as my 1998 e36 328i BMW. Which has a blue book value of $4200.00 and has way more personality. But you can't beat the performance of the spec.B! Also I work in the parts department of a Toyota-Subaru dealership so I see both of them all day everyday. As far as taking care of the customer, Toyota is on the top there. And I hate to spoil it for everyone, but just cause you have a Symmetrical AWD sticker doesn't mean anything. If you have a automatic Subaru it is 80-20 and 60-40 in an extreme situation depending on what the traction control is doing. And if you have a manual transmission it can be as extreme as 90-10 going down the freeway and is only 50-50 in the extreme situations or if you have the traction control turned off. And by the end of the year, Toyota with own 49% of Subaru. And the FT86, they can't decide what it is going to be, it may be a Scion TC-S first, then a Toyota FT86, and then the Subaru FT86 and the only one that will have a turbo will be the Subaru badged one, because that will be the real "performance" one, but all of them will have the boxer motor. Is it wrong for Toyota to want to have a niche "performance" line of cars? They have Lexus, which is the niche "luxury" line of cars. And remember, it is all internet hear-say. The ones making the decisions are not on the internet talking about the decisions. They are sitting in there multi-million dollars houses, licking whip cream off of the asses of beautiful women! LOL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishbone Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 And I hate to spoil it for everyone, but just cause you have a Symmetrical AWD sticker doesn't mean anything. If you have a automatic Subaru it is 80-20 and 60-40 in an extreme situation depending on what the traction control is doing. And if you have a manual transmission it can be as extreme as 90-10 going down the freeway and is only 50-50 in the extreme situations or if you have the traction control turned off. LOL Well, I hate to spoil it for you but you have that functionality wrong. The AT under normal conditions has a 45f/55r bias on the 5EAT and will vary that traction constantly depending on driving conditions. It is an active awd system. Similarly, the MT is 50/50 under normal conditions but will transfer traction front/back as needed. By contrast, it is a reactive awd system. If you were trying to point out that "symmetrical" is not valid because of these biases, then you should know that's not what the word stands for. It means that if you were to cut a Subaru in half front to back, the left and right side are a mirror of each other. Subaru is the only car that is built this way. Perhaps you should familiarize yourself some more with the system before judging it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dspecbl Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 I am not judging it, I love it! I was just referring to what the Subaru Tech and Service writer had told me. I will do my own research from here on out, and will research this and if you are correct(I am sure you are, I have read alot of your posts), I will have a hay day telling the tech and service writer that they are wrong. Thank you for pointing it out to me. Not sure if you could tell from my first post, but I have been a much longer fan of Toyota than I have of Subaru. I am new to the Subaru world. I come from the Toyota Off-Road world and know alot more about rock crawling and wheeling than I do about Subaru's. After I bought my Bimmer, I never thought I would own another car that wasn't German, but the Subi sucked me in. I look forward to researching this and telling the mechanic that he is a tard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishbone Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 Read here http://www.subaru.com/engineering/all-wheel-drive/why-is-symmetrical-awd-better.html See the third benefit, "Efficient Design". Clear illustrations of what they mean by symmetrical. Here is another link http://www.drive.subaru.com/Win09/Win09_ItsWhatMakes.htm Symmetrical because the engine is mounted longitudinal and it is not a RWD or FWD system adapted to AWD. Print those out and go show them why they are wrong Symmetrical was never in reference to traction biases, so there is no conspiracy regarding the badge. It is, in fact, accurate. An awd system would not be very efficient if it was rigidly split 50/50 fore-aft (front-back). IIRC, Subaru uses 3 different types of awd systems: the MT, the 4EAT and the 5EAT. I'm inclined to say the STi's awd is separate simply based on the fact that it is the most advanced, with Torsen diffs front and rear plus an adjustable center diff. The AT awd systems are active, the MT are reactive. The AT constantly varies torque bias based on conditions (active, does not wait for slip), the MT will vary it if there is slip detected (reactive). On the 5EAT the exact split is 44.3% front, 55.7% rear at a standstill or under normal conditions. LE: I often confuse 44.3/55.7 with 44.7/55.3 so let's just call it 45/55 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rxl1972 Posted January 22, 2011 Share Posted January 22, 2011 Either way, it provides awesome traction no matter what the road condition. Having lived in Vermont for 12 years and owning a Subaru for the last 2, I can safely say that it performs the same in snow, rain and dry pavement. I never got stuck in my driveway at all. I could not say the same for my 98 grand am or 05 equinox awd. I will say that it was fun to hit the twisty, winding roads throughout Vermont with my Legacy!! ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I Donated thefultonhow Posted January 23, 2011 I Donated Share Posted January 23, 2011 Technically, Audi and BMW (and Mercedes?) have symmetrical AWD systems, and most of the truck-based SUVs with AWD rather than 4WD are symmetrical. Most crossovers and Japanese/American/Swedish cars with AWD at this point are adapted from FWD, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ebondragon87 Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 After 20 years, they're retiring that engine & using the FB type, which is supposedly direct injected. Will they get rid of the boxer engine in general? Not any time soon. After all, it isn't a rotary. I just replaced one of the new FB serires (142 miles on it and it had severe rod knock), unfortunetly it is not direct injection and thank goodness its not a rotary. =) I had hopes they would be making turbo FB series motors but right now it is designed just for fuel economy and quicker low end torque. Yeah, it was a problem until Subaru started REQUIRING you to use their own expensive coolant with their proprietary coolant conditioner. The coolant and conditioner solve nothing. But.... There is a world of dishonesty surrounding the whole headgasket thing caused by shitty techs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishbone Posted January 23, 2011 Share Posted January 23, 2011 Technically, Audi and BMW (and Mercedes?) have symmetrical AWD systems, and most of the truck-based SUVs with AWD rather than 4WD are symmetrical. Most crossovers and Japanese/American/Swedish cars with AWD at this point are adapted from FWD, though. They all have equal-length driveshafts? How is the power coupled fore/aft? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I Donated thefultonhow Posted January 24, 2011 I Donated Share Posted January 24, 2011 They all have equal-length driveshafts? How is the power coupled fore/aft? Audi, at the very least, has the same setup -- front and center diffs (Torsen) integrated into longitudinal transaxle, rear diff, with equal length halfshafts at all four corners. (The A3 actually has a sucky Haldex transverse system, but all the other Audis use a longitudinal setup.) I'm actually not sure on BMW, but was thinking it would be a similar setup, since they are longitudinal too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DOHCEJ22E1 Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 I just replaced one of the new FB serires (142 miles on it and it had severe rod knock), unfortunetly it is not direct injection and thank goodness its not a rotary. =) I had hopes they would be making turbo FB series motors but right now it is designed just for fuel economy and quicker low end torque. 142 miles on it!? Seriously, haven't they learned from 08-09?! LOL! There will definitely be a turbo FB. It's inevitable. Still, that doesn't give me a lot of hope for future Subarus... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stoke Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 Toyota vs Subaru (6 cylinders): 2GR-FE. 275hp@6200rpm & 257ft-lbs@4700rpm. (runs on 87 so I suspect that this is direct injected.) Lexus versions have 300+hp. EZ36D. 256hp@6000rpm & 244ft-lbs@4400rpm. Runs on 91 octane. It's obvious to see that the Toyota is a monster here. Hard to say who wins on reliability as I haven't found anything to be screwy with either engine. FYI, the EZ36 is tuned to run on 87, not 91. The engine itself is also detuned to protect the 5AT-- it has a great deal more power potential, but one of the downsides of an AWD system is greater wear on gearboxes. On top of that, comparison of peak power and torque numbers is meaningless anyway. Notice the EZ makes its power and torque peaks 200-300rpm lower than the 2GR, which is an indication that they deliver output in different ways. Every engine's power and torque curves are different and are built to suit the needs of the cars they're in. Unless you're considering the shape of the torque curves, the curb weights and the relative demands of each vehicle, it's not so simple to just say one engine is "better" than the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishbone Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 If anything, FHI ought to look at Mitsubishi turbos and learn from them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sideways the Seven Posted January 24, 2011 Share Posted January 24, 2011 ...(The A3 actually has a sucky Haldex transverse system, but all the other Audis use a longitudinal setup.)I'm actually not sure on BMW, but was thinking it would be a similar setup, since they are longitudinal too. You forgot the Audi TT. Also, neither BMW's x-drive nor Mercedes' 4MATIC are the symmetrical AWD type. They are both reactive AWD systems based on RWD drivetrains. -Brandon 2007 Chevrolet Suburban LT3 1981 Chevrolet C10 LWB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red beast Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 do you realize that sucking the oil out of the ground, storing it, putting it on a big ship to america, offloading into storage tanks, refining it, storing it, and sending it as gas through pipeline system, to local storage, and then to be delivered by truck to a gas station is just as stupid? btw- what was that "stuff" that BP spilled in the Gulf of Mexico? and buying a $24,000 mid-sized hybrid hatchback that gets 51 mpg city sure beats a $22,500 awd drive car that get 19mpg city (subaru outback sport). is the price of gas going down?...no and don't compare a corola to a prius. it's apples and oranges. two different classes http://www.gifsoup.com/view/40272/penguin-slap-o.gif I believe what he is pointing out is that the process of mining, refining, transporting, and manufacturing the batteries is pretty destructive environmentally. I find it terribly amusing to think of all the heavy equipment used to mine nickel for example spewing untreated diesel exhaust into the air in order to remove thousands of tons of overburden. Then all the fossil fuels and emissions expended in moving the raw ore to a refinery/smelter, then all the fuel used to transport nickel to a battery manufacturer, then the battery to the automaker, then on to you the consumer. Not to mention the chemical processes used to extract the nickel from the ore, and the energy used to process the metal itself. All so some dip shit Prius driver who has no concept of a supply chain can drive around smugly convinced he is saving the environment, because he's never seen a nickel mine. Then there are the Prius drivers that are convinced that a Prius will save them money in operating costs, which is also bullshit. Considering the price premium of a Prius over say a Corolla which gets pretty good mileage too. How much gas will that price difference buy you? Next up in the douche bag pompous assholes will be the plug in hybrid drivers who will contribute to all the nickel or lithium mining emissions and side affects, but will also be plugging in their cars to charge up the batteries convinced they are saving the world. Except for the fact that roughly 50-55% of US electricity is generated from coal fired power plants. Oh well at least you are sending your money to Campbell county Wyoming in that case instead of the middle east...... but you're still burning a fossil fuel. You will also be contributing to my continued prosperity in the low sulfur coal hauling business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penguin Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 ^ You still use that gasoline, so your Prius is still consuming the stuff. Your car just happens to also use a lot of materials that have to be mined through not so environmentally friendly methods too. Furthermore, compared to hard rock mining for minerals and hauling ore; oil drilling, pumping, and shipping is super cheap from an energy standpoint. Most oil and gas is shipped via pipeline, you can't do that with rocks. I will continue to compare a Prius to a Corolla as both are front wheel drive shit boxes that are insufferable to drive, but do get good mileage. One of them manages this with far less complexity and far less money spent. You can delude yourself into some sort of smug environmental superiority if you must in order to compensate for driving a car that kills your soul and turns you into a lemming. Whatever helps you sleep at night. As for the price of fuel rising, well frankly it helps my industry immensely since it drives overland freight movement to the rails (where it belongs anyway) and away from trucks. Guess I better up my 401K even more and make sure to buy more company stock since Berkshire Hathaway owns both a RR to haul all that freight, and utilities to supply all that electricity for all the plug in hybrid drivers. Hooray! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ssbtech Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scooter Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 Just thought this was interesting, while you are on the subject: http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110114/OEM05/110119826/1186 Seek first to understand, then to be understood. In other words: SEARCH before you post! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sideways the Seven Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 TDI > Corolla and Prius IMO. -Brandon 2007 Chevrolet Suburban LT3 1981 Chevrolet C10 LWB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rxl1972 Posted January 25, 2011 Share Posted January 25, 2011 I would buy another Subaru red beast. Mine is currently getting 24 -26 mpg. Yes, that's not great, but I'm happy with it. I also only fill up my tank every 12-14 days as well. And my 06 wagon is low slung & sexy looking. Does Toyota have anything to fit that category? I think not.... Thank you penguin, very nicely put!! :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.