But I have gone over to the dark side, I bought a new Legacy because it is the only car my wife, who has limited range of motion in her right leg, can get in and out of easily. It has larger doors and they are hinged a little further forward than any other cars or trucks out there.
sorry, bud. if it's any consolation, i have been driving a 4wd corolla wagon for 2 years now and really like it...but still miss tercels too. there is just something "je ne sais quoi" about them.
how long have you had the legacy for? is it one of the wagons? i thought about getting one way back when, solely because they looked pretty sporty for a wagon.
It snowed 10" in Corvallis last time I was there and the Tercel was a champ... Room mate's forester also made it no problem, but was not nearly as fun.
Mattel wrote:Are Corolla 4wd's and Subaru's what we drive when we age? I think even Tom is looking for one now?
I admit, one like EDS AWD posted would be tempting - but totally foolish. I'm not about to sell Goldie and the POS Dodge/Mitsu p'up still works, even though the chassis is Swiss cheese. Besides, I drive less than 4K miles per year since retiring, so 3 real cars (as opposed to a toy like a Spridget or MGA) would be insurance-foolish.
But - if/when the p'up breaks in half...
Tom M.
T4WD augury?
"Oh, do not ask, 'What is it?' Let us go and make our visit." T.S. Eliot - "The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock"
"Now and then we had a hope that, if we lived and were good, God would permit us to be pirates." Mark Twain
I went surfing around the Subaru forms when considering one, another newbie asked what to watch out for, head gaskets or what? and the first post by long time forum member was "it is a Subaru, it WILL have head gasket problems".
One way to make it a little more durable is to use Subaru antifreeze, or the Subaru coolant additive, and just expect to have to pull your engine every 40k to 50k miles to replace the head gaskets. I do not understand this problem, all of the car makers have all aluminum engines, honda had them from the beginning, and none have this kind of corrosion problem at the head gasket. Seems something is really faulty about the design if they can not fix it, and worse, no easy way to replace the head gaskets (there are two, and you have to pull the engine to get the heads off).
Good luck with your subaru. I do not know why they have such a good reputation for being reliable, good marketing perhaps?
I think the subaru head gasket issue reputation was for the 2.5 engine a generation back. My best mate and his wife had that issue with their 2007 outback. There again, this mate fried the head gasket on his all-trac corolla and recently took me away camping in that subaru when, we were getting fuel 400kms away from home I noticed his two front tyres were down to the ply!. so, not the best track record for maintenance!
I think maintained well Subarus will last almost as well as toyotas and hondas. But I believe that the subarus don't stand for oil change neglect. (I read somewhere it might be something to do with the flat four engines oil drainage at standstill which makes sense to me). I've done a lot of kms in pre 2006 foresters and have been really happy with their capabilities off road and reliability.
Previous: 83 Tercel SR5 4wd, 84 Tercel SR5 4wd
88 Corolla 4wd Wagon 5speed, All power options, Fact Sunroof, Diff Lock, 14" SX Alloys, Hankook Tyres, 4afe, King Springs, Upgraded Headlights, Full Synth oils, Tow Bar, 210,000kms
Just bought the Legacy (sedan) in December, just passed the 1000 mile mark. I'm getting about 27.5 mpg right now but I only have two tankfuls of gas to base that on. I know about Subaru's history with head gaskets. Even worse, this engine has a timing chain instead of a timing belt. You might ask why that is worse, its because they chose to use a timing chain from an Audi which is a single row chain instead of a double row.
And to top it all off, it has a CVT transmission, another reliability question mark. But it all comes down to accessibility. Since I don't drive it all that much since retiring, I'm hoping to get at least 10 years before the problems arise. Got 17 out of our Honda Accord and it is still going strong. I'd of kept it if my wife could get in and out of it.
i think it was highlander who bought a subaru wagon. he was really happy it had a timing chain but i didn't understand why. it sounds like you would be happy if yours had a double row chain too, so why is that? i like timing belts because they're easier to replace. the timing chain on my wife's 22re was a pain in the ass to replace.
I have owned cars with both chains and belts, belts are way better. all of the earlier overhead camshaft cars used chains, the problem is as all the pivots wear the chain gets effectively longer (most people say it "stretches", if that were true the chains would to way too weak-but the effect is the same, the loop gets larger), enough wear on the chain pivots eventually it breaks. One of the problems with the chain is that being metal, as it warms up it changes length, so it has to have a hydraulic tensioner run off the oil pressure. this is another device that can wear out, and not put good tension on the chain, particular when the engine wears and the nominal oil pressure goes down due to worn bearings and oil pump. it all comes down to keeping the oil clean, if you stretch the change interval (like most people do) the dirty oil will hasten the wear on the chain and the hydraulic tensioner over the long term. Another problem than can occur is if the chain gets too worn (too long) the hydraulic tensioner will reach the end of its travel. This allows the chain to slap around (making the infamous rattling noise, particularly on start up), and it can beat and cut away metal on the front of the engine, head and chain cover putting metal particles in the engine. and if the chain should fail, it will cause a lot of damage at the parts chew themselves up. Not pretty, and often does fatal damage to the front of the engine and even the camshaft.
I have seen all these things on the early nissan L series engines that had high miles on them. The early Nissans/Datsuns were so reliable there was a habit to not do necessary maintenance. The chain kit usually came with a new tentioner and new upper and lower sprockets, plus the chain, since they all wore out too. All those metal parts were very costly to replace. sometimes a new timing chain kit cost as much as all the other new parts you use during an engine rebuild.
On those engines the chain might last about 100k miles, which was much longer than the early belts. Most modern belts will last 90k plus miles, so there is not much advantage in belt vs. chain life. If the oil was change regularly and the car was not reved up high on start-up, the chain might last 200k miles, but that was about it.
the belt is quieter, lighter, easier and much cheaper to replace. I love the timing belts. In recent years the auto makers have been going back to the chains for several reasons I suspect, 1) it is more compact so it fits in the transverse install easier on most modern fwd cars, 2) it allows more precise control of the cam and allows a tiny bit more control over emissions and fuel economy. Neither is worth it my opinion.
Modern timing chains are constantly lubricated by the oil pump. I have two vehicles with double row chains, the saturn has about 268k miles on it, the Nissan Pick Up has 187k. Double row chains hardly ever break unless the vehicle is allowed to sit around for a year or two, then without the lubrication, the chains starts to rust and when the vehicle is finally started, the chain breaks. My daughters Corolla has a timing chain also, it has over 180k on it but I'm not sure its a double row, but I think it is.
I'm not sure that single row chains will be as reliable or as durable as the double row chains. My son has a Nissan Sentra Spec-V 2.5 liter engine with a single row chain. He plans on replacing it at 100k miles.
Chains and belts both have their places.
The T4 is so easy to change that it only makes sense to have a belt.
I am really glad my TV has a chain (which I have replaced, by the way, due to all the reasons Petros stated)
That said, replacing the chain at 270K beats the crap out of doing a belt every 100K or so.
If you've ever own a porsche 928, you'll wish it had a chain.
When I heard the 928 needed a belt adjustment every 35,000KM (4-5hrs labour) and replacement at 70,000KM (6-8 hrs labour)
By the way it is also an interference engine, so if it does break, 32 new valves, new heads, sometimes new piston and rods……… endless mess.
It very quickly stopped being my favourite Porsche, 6 months in the service department was enough to cure me of any porsche desire I may have ever had.
In my mind, a belt has no place on an interference engine.
Petros, to answer your question about why manufacturers are going back to chains, it's simply due to bad press. People got fed up with the early belts that only lasted 4 years or 60k miles. Since most new car buyers at the time were keeping their cars for 6 to 7 years, that became a liability. Some manufacturers switched to chains, some others switched to a longer lasting rubber compound in the belts giving them a 7 year life span.
Now new car buyers are keeping their cars an average of 11 years, so more manufacturers are going with chains. They could use a silicone rubber in the belts and they would probably last 30 years or more, but that would make the belt more expensive than a chain, I guess. Its all about the money.
dib, a CVT is a continuously variable transmission. It uses a steel belt between two variable pulleys. It basically goes from a 2:1 under drive to a 1:2 overdrive. It seems like a good idea, but they haven't yet established a good reliability record. You step on the gas, the tach rises to 2k and stays there as the speedometer rises to 60 mph. Then you back off the gas and the tach drops to about 1800 rpm for cruising.
The lady next door had an Altima with one. Nissan was an early adopter of these. She went through three of them under warrantee, when the warrantee ran out, she traded.
