Last post on Oct 03, 2011 at 1:55 PM
You are in the Subaru Impreza
What is this discussion about?
Subaru Impreza, Sedan, Wagon
#2 of 44 Compared to a Ford
Jan 22, 2007 (6:47 pm)
You'll be happily suprised. Being a long time owner of Subarus (1988 XT6, 1989 XT6, 1992 SVX, 1994 Legacy Turbo, 1996 Impreza L, 1997 Legacy L) I can say they haven't been perfect, however they have never left me anywhere. Also having worked on 100s of WRXs, I can say they are definitely reliable. My 96 Impreza L with the original engine and transmission and 150k miles did over 10,000 track miles which are very hard on the vehicle, and that was an automatic! My 94 Legacy Turbo is my track car and it has over 150k original miles on it.
#3 of 44 I realize I need to be realistic...
Jan 23, 2007 (5:47 am)
I know that every car has it's faults, and I can easily say I've never been stranded in my car either. And I would call my truck reliable, as long as you bring it in for it's yearly $500-1000 problem fixing (It's a 13 year old truck...).
The ford hasn't been all that bad. I just want something with fewer headaches. Something that has tiny issues, not fuel pumps, brakes, or water pumps. My neighbor's brand new Saab 9-3, for example, has been in the shop countless times and it's under a year old, for malfunctioning sun roof, dead radios (3 times!) and other things. Sure, it's under warranty, but I have better things to do with my time than be stuck at a subaru dealership, looking across the street at the honda dealership wondering why i never bought the civic si.
So what kind of issues will i be looking at, if any??? Ford has it's brakes, and oxygen sensors, Dodge has its transmissions, GMC has its electronics... Does subaru have any common problems?
#4 of 44 WRX reliability
Jan 23, 2007 (8:52 am)
I put 40,000 trouble free miles on my 04 WRX wagon before I sold it last year -- other than two minor recalls, it never needed to return to the dealership. Granted, 40,000 miles isn't all that much, but I've had other cars that couldn't stay away from the dealership in their first couple of years. The WRX was a solid, well built car.
Before that, I owned a 2001 Outback that I put 60,000 miles on and, while it was probably my favorite car of any that I've owned, it also needed regular trips to the dealer for repairs under warranty...clutch problems, squeaks and rattles, paint issues, and two bad window regulators. I firmly believe that Subaru's Japanese-built cars (Impreza and Forester) are built better than their US-built mates (Legacy/Outback)...but that's just my impression after owning both. In spite of the little problems that I accrued with my Outback, I would buy another one tomorrow...it sounds silly, but that car fit me perfectly.
#5 of 44 Re: I realize I need to be realistic... [wayland1985]
Jan 23, 2007 (6:06 pm)
Depends on the model and the year.
The EJ25 had head gasket issues up until MY2002 or so.
Forester before 2003 and Imprezas before 2002 ate rear wheel bearings for lunch. Replace them with Legacy wheel bearings and you're fine, plus newer models have been far more robust up until now.
Nothing really stood out a lot on Legacys, besides head gaskets prior to 2002.
Tribeca - so far people complain about easy-to-break fog light covers and rear hatch struts that don't hold up the hatch properly in extreme cold, the latter fixed under warranty and supposedly changed now.
No real major pattern of problems since MY2002, though.
#6 of 44 WRX reliability
Jan 24, 2007 (9:52 am)
I have 106,000 miles on my '02 WRX wagon and have not have any out of pocket expenses other than a vanity mirror cover and routine scheduled maintance. Maybe 4-5 visits for a couple of recalls and minor warranty work, all resolved in a couple of hours, in the last 4.5 years. FWIW, I'm 48 years old and the WRX wagon has been by far the most reliable car I've ever owned. I've never subscribed to manufacturer loyalty before, but at least for now, I wouldn't dream of looking at anything else before at least considering a Subaru. I'm very fortunate to have Dan Dean service my vehicle at Martin Subaru. He's responsive to all my questions and/or concerns and keeps my vehicle running as intended.
#7 of 44 WRX reliability (cont'd)
Jan 24, 2007 (12:19 pm)
hi. 2005 WRX sedan with approx. 31000 miles. no problems. i just do the scheduled maintenance. if this would be your first turbo engine, don't forget to let the car sit idling for 2-3 minutes after hard driving - let the fan do its work, then shut her off.
Jan 24, 2007 (1:51 pm)
In regards to the turbo, would a turbo timer void a factory warranty?
Please, keep your comments coming. The reason I'm asking is because I'm looking to spend wisely. The two biggest cars I'm looking into are the Subaru Impreza WRX limited, and the Honda Civic SI, a now Canadian built beautiful looking car... But does it have the same Honda quality? I'm willing to spend several thousand more for a car that wont cost me thousands down the road. So, again, please keep your comments coming, Subaru Owners!!
#9 of 44 Top three most reliable makers
Jan 25, 2007 (12:10 pm)
Since the early 90s. Toyota, Honda, and Subaru have been rated the top three in regards to reliablility.
The Impreza model in particular, had the fewest customer complaints percentage-wise in various publications.
My March 2001 WRX has 36,000 miles on it, oil changes have been the only expense so far.
Car magazines and the press may deny it, but Japanese-assembled cars have always had better overall quality and longevity than U.S. assembled ones in my experience.
#10 of 44 Re: Turbo timer? [wayland1985]
Jan 27, 2007 (3:52 pm)
I too am considering the Honda Civic Si and the WRX as my next car. I had a 2003 WRX wagon that was totaled in an accident. That WRX had 40,000 trouble-free miles and I really enjoyed it. If Honda didn't offer the Civic Si in 4-door sedan form, I would buy another WRX in a heartbeat. However, I've always been a fan of high-revving Honda engines and the Si sedan package is very tempting. I've testdriven both cars and love each one's uniqueness. Reliability is not an issue with these two cars.
As for the turbo timer, you don't need one. Today's turbocharged engines do not need the extra cool-down period. Subaru published an article to its mechanics explaining how the turbo flat four's design negates the need for a turbo timer.
#11 of 44 Re: WRX Reliability? [wayland1985]
Jan 27, 2007 (11:52 pm)
I have a 2002 automatic WRX with 72000 miles (60 percent highway/40 percent city). Reliability has been outstanding. And it has only gotten better as the model year has advanced. No repairs. A couple of minor recalls in the first two years. Only routine maintenance done per the manual. As peppy as when I drove it out of the showroom the summer of 2001 (02 models came out in spring 2001). No wonder Subaru owners are fiercely loyal to the brand!