Switching from Honda to Subaru

The days of my '94 Accord may be numbered and I've started looking for its eventual replacement. This car served me well for almost 300K and would look for another Honda except for one thing: this time I want a

4WD/AWD sedan. Honda does not have one in sedan, so I am looking into a Subaru Legacy. Any former Accord owners out there who could compare the two brands and models for long term reliability, quality and maintenance cost? I am also looking for lesser road noise than I am used to in my Accord. Is Legacy a quiet car?

Thanks for any feedback, JR

Reply to
Cameo
Loading thread data ...

The Crosstour. With AWD you're looking at about $33,700.

For an ACCORD?!?!?!?!

(They're kind ugly, in a cool way...or is that cool in an ugly way...?)

Reply to
Hachiroku

I don't consider Crosstour a sedan. It's more like a crossover. Besides, it's too expensive, too.

How about just plain ugly?

Reply to
Cameo

Have in mind that the addition of AWD alone is going to reduce a cars reliability, increase maintenance costs, reduce fuel efficiency, and maybe even reduce quietness a tiny bit.

Subaru is somewhat of a "lesser" marque than Honda, in terms of reliability. Most likely you will not make it to 200k without some engine work. Generally, speaking, Subaru cars are higher maintenance than a typical Honda or Toyota.

If you are aware of these facts, then you will enjoy a positive experience of owning a Subaru- cars that have a great AWD system, nice handling in any model, torquey engines, great safety record., and many other attributes.

Basia

Reply to
abjjkst

AWD does add complexity to the power train, steering and brakes, but many Subaru models of the last five to ten years have won awards for their reliability. Subaru Motor Corporation certainly builds the most reliable AWD vehicles, and nowadays among the best cars.

That used to be true. Tisn't so true with the last five years or so -- the Toyota acceleration problems were neither one-off nor a fluke, unfortunately, and Honda also no longer holds the same reputation for reliability that it did ten years ago. Apparently leaders at both companies got onto the "maximize profits" bandwagon and forgot to tend to the basics. :/

I agree. I've owned and driven Subarus for a quarter century now, having owned five of them in that time. After you've become accustomed to AWD, you'll probably never want to be without it again. At least, I wouldn't want to be without it.

Reply to
Catherine Jefferson

What do you mean by becoming accustomed to AWD? The only difference I expect from the drive experience is better traction in winter or slippery conditions. Would the drive feel different even when the conditions are just fine for a 2WD? Frankly, my main reason for looking at Subaru is the winter driving. My Accord is not much help there even with snow tires.

Reply to
Cameo

Quietness is mostly affected by road noise and I don't see how an AWD makes that louder than a 2WD. As to the cost of maintenance, I expect it to be somewhat higher than Honda's, but hopefully not significantly so.

Not making 200K without some engine work is pretty bad news. What about rusting tendency? One thing I like about my Honda is that I don't see any rusting on it after all these years. And we do have planty of wet driving here in the Puget Sound area.

Finally some good news, Basia! ;-) (Isn't that a Polish nickname by any chance?)

Reply to
Cameo

At the time I got my first Subaru, I lived in Seattle, Washington. As they say there, it rains only twice a year in Seattle -- January through June, and July through December. Seattle itself rarely gets heavy snowfalls, but the winter after I got there it had a week-long freeze that resulted in a local lake (Green Lake) freezing over for the third time in recorded history. It is also close to ski slopes in the Cascades, and I learned to drive in snow along Highway 2 (Steven's pass) and the North Cascades Highway.

Believe me, having 4WD (this was before the switch to AWD) made a *huge* difference in the driving experience because I was suddenly not slipping around the road when it was wet or icy. :-)

Reply to
Catherine Jefferson

For all practical purposes you are right.

You are correct.

By engine work I meant the real possibility of head gasket failure (a fairly prevalent and known problem in older engines, that Subaru seemingly has not resolved completely). If you think about buying brand new, then maybe you could avoid this issue altogether as the 2010 Legacy, and Outback, and the

2011 Foresters, have new and completely re-designed engines.

Haven't seen them rusting any more than other cars here in the Sierras. I am in Reno, Nevada.

Yes it is, I am Polish too.

Basia

Reply to
abjjkst

One thing that might be different is tire rotation. I have an Impreza. I didn't rotate the tires at the recommended time. It wasn't long before I needed new tires. The tire guys said tires need to be rotated on schedule. I opted for the lazy man's solution to not rotate them at all.

Reply to
Dean Hoffman

I can't see switching from a Honda to a Subaru thats like asking for problems. :(

Reply to
Airport Shuttle

Yeah. I've found that most of my Subarus make a bit more engine noise than the Hondas that I've driven (*lovely* cars, some of them), but not enough to matter when you factor in road noise when you're going over maybe 20 mph/35 kmh.

Exactly. You want to avoid buying a 1997 through 1999 year model Legacy Outback or 1998 through mid-year 1999 year model Forester. Those had

2.5 l dual overhead cam engines with truly serious head gasket problems. On the other hand, the Legacy and Outback Sport models of those years had a 2.2 liter engine that is one of the best Subaru ever made -- if you get a chance to get one of them, it would be a very good car.

The original dual overhead cam engines in the Legacy Outback and Forester models were replaced starting in mid-year 1999 (for the Forester) and in 2000 (for the Outback) with a single overhead cam engine that has some head gasket issues, but not too bad. This engine model was in use through I believe 2004 before they replaced it with

*another* model that was supposed to have fixed the head gasket issue completely, but you should check on that.

How do I know these things? My mother owns one of the 1998 Outbacks. She's an older woman and doesn't drive a great deal, and her local Subaru dealer is *good*, so they've managed through meticulous maintenance and some other measures to prevent the problem so far. The head gaskets on that car will eventually have to be replaced, though.

In addition, my husband and I own a late-year 1999 Forester with the second type of engine. We finally had to have the head gasket replaced in the past month. The car made it for eleven years and over 100K miles before any symptoms showed, however, and probably would have been okay for another ten to twenty K miles. We just don't take chances when it comes to maintenance because we drive off-road and don't want an emergency when we're miles from pavement and AAA.

The Forester probably also would have made it for considerably more miles before it needed fixing (according to our mechanic) if it had not been an extremely low-mileage car when we bought it. It had only 44K miles on it in 2007; the first owners were a multinational who kept it as part of a fleet for their executives, which meant that it spent more time parked in the garage than on the road. Apparently age has as much to do with head gasket failure on these models as mileage, which is unusual.

I also owned one of the 1998 Outback Sport models with the wonderful 2.2 liter engines that I mention above, before we got the Forester. It was at 160K+ miles and had never needed a major repair, although it had the rear wheel bearing failure between 50K and 60K miles that was typical of these cars. It's now gone because of an accident that totaled it. Apparently that's the usual end for these cars because, so far, nothing else seems to kill them. I'm *still* bummed to have lost that car. :(

Small world; so am I. ;)

Subarus had problems with rust in the 1980s, but I haven't heard of any notable troubles with rust on models after 1990 or thereabouts.

I'm not, but one great-grandmother had Polish ancestry and traced her family back to a Polish man and his wife who immigrated to America in the 1840s. 100% mutt here. ;)

Reply to
Catherine Jefferson

I know exactly what you're talking about as I live on the Eastside right off I-90, on a small hill. As much as I like my current Accord, I still find it pretty useless on those snowy or slick days. It's too risky to venture out with it then I hate cabin fever.

That's exactly what I'm looking for.

Reply to
Cameo

Well redesigned engine is great but I also don't like to buy such cars in their first model year as they still can have some bugs in them that are mostly fixed in the 2nd model year.

That's good. How do people there like the TV comedy show "Reno 911"?

Jestem wegrem i jednak wiedzialem. ;-)

Reply to
Cameo

Do AWD cars wear tires faster or more unevenly than 2WD? My current Honda's Michelin tires have more than 60K in them and they still look like having another 20K left in them. They also don't need frequent rotation.

Reply to
Cameo

I did a screeching halt in front of a Honda dealer today. HAD to at least sit in this!

formatting link

Reply to
Hachiroku

The Impreza Outback Sport models from those years, painted in two-tone colors were beautiful cars. I regreted not having bought one. My drive is a 2000 Impreza Coupe, and I love it (light, and fairly powerful, small, but as a coupe feels larger inside, very manouverable, fuel efficient).

Also had the rear bearings replaced, but other than that no problems whatesoever.

Nice! Welcome to Subbie-land everybody, beautiful area, and plenty of Subarus on the Eastern slopes of the Sierras.

:))))) There is far more Polish ancestry in US than people generally realize.

Basia

PS. since you are in Reno, Catherine, if you travel I-80 frequently be careful not to speed around Truckee California. The cops there got themselves new Laser speed detectors, or whatever they're called, and are very active writing tickets. Got one a few weeks ago! Guess I should have bought a Toyota or something that makes you feel you're speeding a lot sooner than a Subaru :))))))

Reply to
abjjkst

The 2011 Legacy will be a 2-nd year production. They've issued several recalls on the car already, so hopefully the bugs were caught and fixed.

You may also want to check out the Suzuki Kizashi, if there are Suzuki dealerships around you. Its a new AWD sedan from Suzuki that is getting very good reviews.

Hey, anything is better than this:

formatting link

"Polak, Wegier, dwa bratanki" says a Polish saying :)))))

Basia

Reply to
abjjkst

The guys at the local tire shop say to rotate the tires religiously at the recommended time. Tire rotation should be done every 7500 miles on my '99. I waited twice that long if memory serves. It didn't take long to screw up the tires after I did rotate them. The lesson I took from this is rotate them on time or not at all. There aren't many Subies around here so I'm not sure how familiar the local tire guys are with them. We use 4WD pickups at work but that's a little different than cars generally running on pave roads. The pickups seem to need tire fairly often too.

Reply to
Dean Hoffman

Interesting question. I currently have a 93 Mitsu Lancer turbo AWD, previously a 93 Mitsu Expo AWD, now a 2005 Imprezza and 98 Forester. These are all manuals and all have essentially the same mechanical 50/50 split AWD system with a central diff and visco unit.

I note the that the front tires wear faster than the rears on both Mitsu and Subaru. I don't rotate the tires, as I like to see what's wearing where.

FWD will always wear the fronts faster than the rears. I feel that AWD wears the fronts less than the FWD equivalent.

SD

Reply to
Stewart DIBBS

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.