Ciper and friends help

totech · Post by **totech** » Tue Dec 17, 2002 1:54 am

Well,

I was towed into the dealer again today, would not start on the 91 Wagon, mechanic muttered something about temperature sensor. It was cold overnight, cranks lots... But that is not the question.

He offered me a 96 Outback wagon, also high miles in trade, $2800 difference. The car is rough, will need TLC, but also does my 91.

I can see over $2000 of impending repairs to the 91, and probably $1000 of repairs needed to the 96 Outback.

Why, would I want to keep the 91?

It is in pretty good shape - minimal rust (rare here) Manual, 100,000Kms on the 2.2, tight and uses no oil. Needs a transmission though, front axle boots, and struts, swaybars etc...

The interior is a little rough too, previous owner had a big dog, and well....

The 96 is really dirty inside, needs a good cleaning too - and is an Auto - Drivers seat is worn.

So - I really prefer the style of the 91, but aftermarket body parts are very hard to find.

And the whole value thing, I can put $3000 into the 91, and if someone smacks into me on the highway, the insurance will give me $500.

So - what does everyone think?

Why do we prefer the BF?

ciper · Post by **ciper** » Tue Dec 17, 2002 2:35 am

First Id say that 100,000 KM on the car is nothing. I bought my BC AND NF with more than DOUBLE that mileage....

Is the outback the 2.5l engine that everyone has trouble with? Id rather have a stable 2.2 than a powerful 2.5 that blows HG and cracks blocks.

In the Insurance side you are right, sort of sucks. Ive been thinking about checking with the insurance where you state the value. Someone I know has an old firebird with this type of insurance. I wouldnt think it too bad for 7k of coverage.

totech · Post by **totech** » Tue Dec 17, 2002 2:39 am

Ciper,

My whole car has 180,000 miles. Yes the OB has the troublesome 2.5

totech · Post by **totech** » Tue Dec 17, 2002 2:47 am

And...

Does the 2.2 have the troublesome headgaskets?

Every now and then I get a whiff of coolant, and the temp guage is just above 1/2 way.

I am also paranoid..

entirelyturbo · Post by **entirelyturbo** » Tue Dec 17, 2002 8:52 am

I'm surprised yours has been that troublesome. My car has never left me anywhere, for any reason. Even when my clutch gave out at exactly 110k miles (if that isn't planned obsolescence, I don't know what is

), it still got me home and to the mechanic the next day.
We have one of Subaru's best engines. The 2.2 is durable, reasonably powerful, and easy to work on. 100,000km is about 62,000 miles, and that isn't even broken in! As for the OB, that is the 2.5 DOHC (correct me if I'm wrong, guys), which wasn't a great idea, plus you said it's in bad shape, too. Stick with your BF, it's still got plenty of life in it!

ciper · Post by **ciper** » Tue Dec 17, 2002 7:42 pm

totech: ? You said

minimal rust (rare here) Manual, 100,000Kms on the 2.2, tight and uses no oil.

Either way, I have only heard of ONE headgasket problem on a 2.2l. Ive heard of more engines hitting 300k and still running so that should give an idea. I recently almost bought a 5 speed BF with 212k miles on the clock

edit: Read this 6 page thread http://forums.nasioc.com/forums/showthr ... did=184026

whitemr2 · Post by **whitemr2** » Tue Dec 17, 2002 9:27 pm

A high mileage auto tranny that hasn't been well cared for? I'd avoid it at all costs. From what I've seen, the 4EAT auto tranny is delicate and not exactly reliable. If it hasn't been very well cared for (regular oil and filter changes, driven nicely etc), then you could be facing a $3-4k repair charge to rebuild it soon (or about $2k to convert to a manual tranny).

entirelyturbo · Post by **entirelyturbo** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 6:20 am

I agree. As a matter of fact, I don't ever plan on having an auto...in any car. My grandfather's Accord auto went out, my friend's 300ZX Turbo auto went out, and the Sienna van at work just had its auto go out about 3 weeks ago. So any autotranny that hasn't been babied is not to be trusted, and with Subaru's manual tranny reputation being below par, I definitely would stay away from an Subaru auto!

LegacyT · Post by **LegacyT** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 12:24 pm

Our 93 Green Legacy has ~350 000 Kms right now and the 4EAT tranny is just peachy

.

Mark,

totech · Post by **totech** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 3:32 pm

Well,

I have heard enough, I had a 90 BF with an auto, with a problem in second gear. So I know enough about the auto.

The Outback with 330,000Kms is not for me - since I looked at it, I have seen hundreds on the streets here, there are also lots of bc/bf's here in Toronto, mine has the least rust of all.

I prefer the character of the BF, and the reliability of the 2.2.

There will be lots of questions as I restore this car to new condition, so bear with me.

Suspension first, the rear sway bar clunk is driving me crazy.

entirelyturbo · Post by **entirelyturbo** » Wed Dec 18, 2002 7:37 pm

LegacyT wrote:Our 93 Green Legacy has ~350 000 Kms right now and the 4EAT tranny is just peachy .

Mark,

You change your ATF and flush it out like you're supposed to...

I read in the paper the other day that most Americans completely ignore routine maintenance except engine oil, I know it's sad

...

The Outback has some 204,600 abusive mileage on it...yeah, stay away from it...

legacycentral bbs

A forum for 89-94 BC-BF(BJ) Legacy Owners and Fans

Ciper and friends help

Ciper and friends help