Subaru Crew Problems & Solutions

ballistic

didn't have to hang onto the wheel through a turn for precise apex control

This is exactly what I dislike about current lap-and-shoulder arrangements using one continuous length of belt with inertial reels at both ends and a sliding tongue in the middle for the buckle. It's impossible to cinch the lap portion tight enough to hold the driver in position during cornering (or, in my case, to maintain posture). I very much preferred an earlier arrangement where the shoulder portion was on an inertial reel, while the lap portion was on a ratcheting takeup reel, with the buckle tongue permanently affixed in the middle. You drew the belt across to just the lap length you wanted, let it retract a smidge, and a ratchet in the lap reel would lock. The, you clicked the tongue into the buckle and your lap portion was tight and stayed that way. Yet the shoulder portion would give and take as needed, locking up only in a collision. It was the perfect arrangement, much superior to today's.
 
However, your date couldn't sit next to you on those old bench seats in a full size vehicle if belted on the far side of the lane..

Which is hy I cunningly installed belts at every seating position, including the center of the front seat...

troop2shos

on the middle belt. Back then most people would question your sanity on the installation of any belts in a domestic vehicle due to the restricted movement clause...heheh.

Of course, the new belt design is to allow more freedom of movement. I also prefer a manual adjustment short of a 5 pt. harness & quick release. What you could do is obtain a child's car seatbelt adjustment buckle to cinch-up that shoulder strap & limit travel - most auto-x racers use this arrangement...I don't run anymore but have seen it used successfully.

idahodoug

Ballistic,

I agree that we've had too many things forced upon us by a massive government bent on saving the lowest common denominator. But DRLs help everyone see and avoid each other. Lights on a moving vehicle make it more visible to others. Period. Night, day, whatever. Even if ALL cars had them, the benefit accrues when someone notices the car they'd have otherwise pulled in front of. Cars have had brake lights on them for 85+ years and we haven't started ignoring them because they're common.

The center high mount stop light (CHMSL) still works as designed. It's purpose was not a transitional thing to cause people to notice something new and then adapt. It was to allow us to see vehicles in FRONT of the vehicle you're following applying their brakes and allow you to react earlier. They still serve this exact purpose today with undiminished function.

IdahoDoug

dcm61

It was to allow us to see vehicles in FRONT of the vehicle you're following applying their brakes and allow you to react earlier.

Great idea but doesn't work as designed when so many of the vehicles in FRONT of me nowadays are SUV's, minivans or cars with deep tinted glass. You can't see through them!

DaveM

john284

I suspect a bad wheel bearing, but not sure. 01 forester when turn extreme left, has binding and clicking noise from the wheels not sure which, and car seems to fight back unwilling to be turned in such a extreme, figuring it must be one characteristic of all wheel drive because it happened very early like around 30k, now I am wondering if the wheel bearing has long gone bad, and it is worse, turning extreme right is not bothering, only left. Also, with a bad wheel bearing do you get OK local mpg, but not highway mpg?Thanks for input

ballistic

The center high mount stop light (CHMSL) still works as designed.

Based on what actual evidence? Sure, these lights illuminate when people step on the brake. That's not the issue. What proves that they're accomplishing their claimed purpose - which is to actually save lives, not just to satisfy some ivory-tower bureaucrat's notion of a "good idea"? As I asked before, has anyone seen any recent studies that control for all other variables and clearly establish that these lights, by themselves, are actually saving lives in sufficient numbers to warrant the aggregate expense of continuing to install them on each and every one of the millions of new vehicles built every single year? I am unapologetically a cost/benefit person. If insufficient persuasive, objective, current evidence exists, then the requirement to install them should be repealed.

Perhaps you have more faith in the effectiveness of governments than I share. I think everything governments require ought to be challenged and re-justified every so often. If adequate objective justification cannot be developed, then the requirement ought to be dropped. Otherwise, we just keep laying ever-more new requirements on top of old ones, and bloated governments (and their expensive rules) continue to soak up more and more private resources.

kevin111

Personally, I love them. I have seen way too many times where a car is slowing down or stopped with its break lights on (early '80s) and it is tough to tell that they are on because the brightness is very close to the brightness of the normal rear lights.

They also have helped me whe I am in traffic and might not have full-on attention to the cars in front (happens when you are in traffic for 2 hours!). Sort of a wake-up call.

Think seatbelts are great, but if you want to discuss laws to force people to wear them, different story.

gord7

I'm with idahodoug on both DRL's and centre high mount stop lights - any thing that helps to be able to see some of the idiots on the road!

The German practice of side marker lights is also a great idea especially for larger vehicles.

While we are on the subject of lights, when is the US going to realise that red turn signals on the rear are also a problem and make the change to amber as is required in most other places in the world. At least Subaru have kept amber turn signals.

Gordon

ballistic

Comments like "I love" this or that are mildly interesting, but altogether unpersuasive.

There are two kinds of people: Those who are inclined to accept sweeping government mandates without much question, and those who aren't.

I am firmly in the latter camp. While I am in no way anti-government per se, I think every sweeping government mandate ought to be questioned and challenged - and then rejected unless and until it can be justified by clear and convincing evidence that it's truly effective on a cost-benefit basis. No other standard is acceptable. The duty and obligation to cost-justify any requirement imposed by any government ought to always be on those to favor it - not on those who oppose.

lark6

I had my Forester ('00S, 61K miles) in to the dealer for inspection and a few other minor repairs today. The technician discovered that the water pump is beginning to leak and fail and recommended replacement. In addition, he detected seepage at the head gaskets, one of which had been replaced in the mid-30K range. His recommendation there was to use some sort of "Subaru-approved stop leak."

As I have the Subaru Gold extended warranty (7 years, 100K miles) I am not concerned about out-of-pocket costs - at least, not this time. What I am concerned about is the long-term reliability of these components. Although I've searched on other boards I'm having a hard time finding concrete answers; that or else I'm getting lazy.

Anyway, what has been the typical lifespan of water pumps on the Phase I and II EJ25 engines? Further, does anyone besides myself have any experience with head gasket replacement on their Phase IIs and how long they've gone since then?

Finally, can anyone point me to solid information regarding changes in the head and gasket design and materials in the new 2.5T block as used in the Forester XT and WRX STi from the Phase II?

A lot to ask, I know, and if I was less lazy I probably would've found out for myself already. However, with the baby here I find myself thinking about holding onto the '00 longer, rather than replacing it with an XT next year. On the other hand, if the XT's internals are suitably beefier than the Phase II's, then that may be another compelling reason to make the change sooner.

TIA,
Ed

p0926

I use to think DRLs and CHMSLs were both cases of government meddling. However, practical experience and common sense have since lead me to change my opinion on both. Now I don't see how anyone can logically argue that they don't make a vehicle more visible, regardless of light conditions (although the lower the light level the greater the benefit). I do agree though that the proliferation of larger vehicles and tinted windows has reduced the effectiveness of CHMSLs. Also, I find the ones that blink to be highly obnoxious although I’ll admit that they are certainly attention getters.

I also use to follow the philosophy that by not using my headlights except when I felt it necessary, I was saving fuel and extending their life-spans. And while in absolute terms that is unquestionably true, in hindsight, the pennies saved were insignificant. Unfortunately, it took being sideswiped by someone who didn’t have their lights on in the fog for me to rethink my priorities. Now, since I got my Forester with its auto-off headlights, I haven't turned them off in 3 1/2 years. In spite of this, I have yet to replace a bulb and still manage to avg close to 27 mpg. Finally, on the subject of bloated bureaucracies, I certainly don't need the government to waste a couple of million of my tax dollars on some study proving that DRLs and CHMSLs work.

-Frank P.

ballistic

So where, then, is your dividing line between mandates and requirements that a government is permitted to impose, willy-nilly, sometimes seemingly almost on a whim, and those that the government is first required to rigorously prove that their benefits outweigh their costs?

Obviously, my line is in a very different place than yours.

p0926

Hey, at least we live in a country where we can freely debate such issues!

-Frank P.

hypov

<<There are two kinds of people: Those who are inclined to accept sweeping government mandates without much question, and those who aren't.>>

I probably am still the "Those who are inclined to accept sweeping government mandates without much question" kind. Tough to shake off 20 years of brainwashing and living on a short leash ;-)

-Dave

ballistic

Bravo. Seriously. I think it is critically, vitally important to know oneself well enough to know that. Only by knowing where you stand, and where you think you should stand, are you likely to evolve in the direction of placing ever-more value on freedom and liberty, instead of ever-less (as so many do).

kevin111

"Those who are inclined to accept sweeping government mandates without much question"

- I guess I am the contradiction to this since I appreciate the DRLs and CHMSLs on cars, but am against the law requiring people to wear seatbelts (though I do like the law requiring car manufacturers to install them in cars).

ballistic

I'm exactly the opposite. If you listed all automotive safety devices and ranked them according to how effective they actually are, (backed up by real-world statistics, not guesswork), at reducing the incidence of death and injury in comparison to the cost of equipping cars with them (cost-benefit, in other words), I believe seatbelts would rank at or very close to the top of the list. Yet they accomplish absolutely nothing unless occupants use them. That being the case, it is a rare exception to my preference for maximum liberty that impels me to give unequivocal 100% support to the enactment of laws mandating the wearing of seatbelts.

If we lived in a society where no one was able to shift any of the financial burden caused directly by his own stupid, reckless, irresponsible decisions onto others, I would undoubtedly feel differently. But the sad truth is that those who blithely refuse to take the most basic steps to protect themselves, including seatbelt non-users, force the rest of us to heavily subsidize the cost of their folly. Laws mandating the wearing of seatbelts are less about protecting the morons (about whom I couldn't care less) and more about protecting the rest of us from horrifically expensive consequences we had nothing to do with.

That is a bedrock justification for the use of government coercion.

ballistic

I might add that 12 years after marrying my first wife, who steadfastly refused to wear seatbelts despite every logical or emotional argument or pleading that I ever applied, she was decapitated while traveling through the windshield of her car.

She was a law-abiding person. Had mandatory-wear laws been in existence then, she would be alive.

Karen_S

Hmmm...I recall being told the other day that the DRL topic drift was over...but, now it's seat belts?

Let's steer it back to Subaru Problems, please. Can anyone help john284?

snowfairy

I have a 2002 Subaru Forester that spontaneously stalls under varying conditions. On December 6, it did it for the third time. I had been driving the car for about 10 minutes. The temperature was -25F and the car had come out of our unheated garage. I was going about 50mph and tapped on the brakes for a curve, then pressed the gas pedal to accelerate. No response. The car felt like someone was lightly pressing on the brakes. The shut down just after barely crossing the railroad tracks. I tried starting it soon after it quit and it would start but the engine wouldn't hold. After twenty minutes the engine took and it drove all the way back home. The odometer reading that day had about 8375 miles. Last winter it happened twice at around 4700 miles. Took it to the shop and the computer read no error message so they said nothing was wrong with it. I would really like Subaru to buy the car back, unless someone can fix the problem and guarantee that this car is not a lemon. It would be very hard to reproduce the problem because it is so random, and I don't have the time to prove that it is a lemon. I have e-mailed and called Subaru about the problem. No response. I bought this Subaru for the AWD and the reliability associated with the name. Now everytime I go out I wonder if it will break down...Not the sort of ponderance I should have with such a "young" car. Any suggestions? Thanks!

hypov

<<..., but am against the law requiring people to wear seatbelts (though I do like the law requiring car manufacturers to install them in cars).>>

If the against motion on the seatbelt mandate is because it impedes on one's ability to choose, then I think the exercise is going about the wrong way. I would understand if one is against if the law mandates the wearing of seatbelt also requires the National Anthem be sung in doing so.

It's there for a reason and to everyone's benefit.
Just like Subaru's AWD to seatbelts, you can't reap the benefits unless you use them. In the case of Subaru, own one

-Dave

p/s I'm done. Back to our regularly scheduled programs

subaru_team

the Rep. should be calling your for information about the radio. Stay tuned (no pun intended)

Thanks

Patti

crashton6

John

Sounds more like a bad cv joint than a bad wheel bearing to me. Take a look under the front of the car to see if any of the boots are split. If one or more is then that's your problem.

Chuck

samiam_68

I KNEW it was the radio! Subaru should pay people on this board for suggestions on how to diagnose electrical probles

idahodoug

Lark,

I would be a little upset if I had a vehicle covered under an extended warranty I PAID for and the tech suggested repairing a leaking head gasket with a can of something. Refuse this "solution" and have them properly replace the head gasket the old fashioned way.

On requiring the gov't to prove in advance that things are going to save lives, etc. A good theory but one not applicable to real life. There are myriad things (thousands) the government requires be put on cars that help us every day that have never been subjected to advanced study. How could they if the "thing" isn't out there in use? How would we improve things if there had to be data on it in advance of its existence? Must we follow everything up with a study - bloating things exponentially?

It's worth pointing out that there's no way to prove some innovations will save lives without getting them out there. Vehicles are far safer today than 30 years ago and it's because the government mandated them rather than relied upon the mfrs to adopt them. Airbags were panned when they first appeared in the US in the early 70s. The automakers INSISTED that safety wouldn't sell. Twenty years later, Chrysler of all things proved this wrong by being the first to mandate them across all models, and now they're required in every US car sold.

Hey, I'm usually the first to get irritated at the incredible burden the gov't places on us in every conceivable way. But things like CHMSLs and DRLs have a negligible impact on us in terms of inconvenience OR cost. What a rare thing from the gov't!! And they help reduce accidents. If you're curious about statistics on these, do a Google research on it yourself. But if you're the type that bridles under gov't regs/control there are far larger fish to fry like the $800/month or so each of us is paying for housing, feeding and medicated 40 million illegal aliens in the country. Or the billions our gov't carelessly shovels overseas into countries like Zambia, Micronesia, etc.

In the whole scheme of things, a .79 cent lamp in my car's back window that my one day keep some numbnuts from rear ending my family, and the extra .001 MPG loss from powering DRLs don't float my boat.

IdahoDoug

p0926

snowfairy- Yikes! When it's -25F, that's not the time for you to doubt your vehicle's reliability. You said you "have e-mailed and called Subaru" and not gotten a response. That's highly unusual. Whom did you call, was it Subaru's Customer Service at 1-800-SUBARU3? I really don't think it realistic at this point to expect Subaru to buy it back. However, you do need the dealer to take a more proactive approach in finding the problem. If there's another local Subaru dealer you can go to then I would suggest that. However, as I'm sure you're aware, diagnosing a problem when the customer can't replicate it can be a very difficult task. Good luck and keep us posted.

-Frank P.

ballistic

prove in advance that things are going to save lives, etc. A good theory but one not applicable to real life. There are myriad things (thousands) the government requires be put on cars that help us every day that have never been subjected to advanced study.

Exactly - and you have zero concern about that? You and I could not possibly be farther apart. I think it is a huge problem. How to obtain data to establish whether or not a proposed new required gizmo actually produces sufficient benefits to offset its cost? Easy - and almost too obvious to mention. Conduct a limited but rigorous pilot program to obtain the requisite data - before enacting a sweeping mandate to compel its intallation on ten to twenty million vehicles produced each and every year.

Failing to demand that our governments perform reasonable due diligence before layering on ever-more regulations and requirements that, in the aggregate, comprise a substantial burden is to capitulate. You might be ready to do that. I will never be. You and I are on opposite sides of the war zone. Further dialogue is pointless, and there will be no more from me.

lark6

Thanks, Doug. I agree.

Patti: If you're reading this, the car is being serviced by the dealer from whom I bought it - you know who they are. ;-)

Ballistic: Terribly sorry to hear of your loss.

Others: I take it no one has yet to have a water pump fail on a Phase II EJ25 SOHC?

Ed

ballistic

Thanks. It was 25 years ago, but still feels like yesterday. She was an only child, and her parents were devastated.

I still haven't unearthed any of our photos of the '53 DeSoto Firedome overdrive wagon hauling tons of trailers, but one will surface someday.

rsholland

I too am sorry for your loss, even if it was 25 years ago.

Bob

bsvoller

That must have been rough. My sympathies too.

-brianV

snowfairy

I booked an appointment for the car (no name yet, I want to love the car but it won't allow me to! ) for Dec 19. I asked the service guy what he would do to find the problem. They are going to do what they did in January...drive it around hoping the problem surfaces and then take it to the computer to see what it says. I told the service guy that there is a slim chance that he will be able to replicate the problem. He suggested I put some heet into the fuel system in the case that there is some water in the fuel. I told him that I wouldn't know if that would solve the problem because it is so random, and that is what we thought the problem was last winter and it wasn't. I have posted this problem at another site and some people have suggested it is a bad computer chip or computer. I am not akin to car mechanic/computer stuff, I have no idea what it could be.
By the way, it is a manual transmission and when it acts up like this the fuel economy goes way down...to 10-16mpg.
Another thing, the back door has a problem with shutting in the cold weather and one time it didn't get shut right and the battery was drained. We recharged the battery and there were no apparent problems after that, but it didn't get as cold. After the recharge the fuel economy returned to it's "normal" range (20-22, winter, city driving). I don't think the battery drain/recharge fixed the car's problem because it came back!

Frank: I called the 1-800-Subaru3 number on Monday and the guy I talked to said he would forward my concern onto his manager, he asked for my phone number and that was it. I e-mailed Subaru in January and they created a case number for it. I didn't want this problem to go unnoticed. My dad owned a lemon, and I want to make sure I don't so I am being overly cautious. But as for the e-mail I sent on Saturday (dec6), no reply. Thanks!

kevin111

"If the against motion on the seatbelt mandate is because it impedes on one's ability to choose, then I think the exercise is going about the wrong way. I would understand if one is against if the law mandates the wearing of seatbelt also requires the National Anthem be sung in doing so."

- Was this to say that your differ from my opinion or agree with it? I am guessing differ, but not sure. Either way, I respect it. Hey, that is what these boards are for!

BTW, enjoy and appreciate your insight and help on these boards.

p0926

Snowfairy- The dealer driving it around for a few minutes hoping a problem that only occurs a couple of times a year will repeat is odds wise, the equivalent of winning a lottery. I wouldn&#146;t waste my time if that&#146;s all they&#146;re planning to do. However, in the dealer&#146;s defense, trying to trouble shoot a problem which can't be replicated and could be caused by any number of things is extremely difficult.

Regarding the back hatch, mine takes a fair amount of force to shut completely. When in doubt, I just look to see if the cargo light is off. You could probably get it adjusted so it closes with less force but then you may risk it rattling.

-Frank P.

ballistic

Thanks, guys. She had one term left for her bachelor's degree, with a 4.0 GPA. Exceptionally bright gal, except for an irrational blind spot where seatbelts were concerned. She put in an all-nighter cramming for a final, and fell asleep driving home from it. Fortunately, she didn't hit anyone else.

bsvoller

can be adjusted. That's something the dealer can definately do.

I put the Legacy rear hatch handle on our '01 Forester, so that I could pull on it to check if it latched. You have to be willing to drill into the sheet metal though. The new design incorporates a handle, I think.

-brianV

ateixeira

Ed: it's tough to say, because most 2000 models are not yet over 60k miles.

Water pumps are wear-and-tear, many mechanics suggest you change it when you do a timing belt, because they are cheap and the labor is already paid for.

Since most timing belts are scheduled at 60k miles, that would imply they expect water pumps to last only about that long (reliably).

Having said that, we expect more from our Subies and that does seem like an earlier than normal failure.

I would push for a replacement, plus ask for new seals. That's preventative and may benefit you. I'd push for new gaskets, too. You are a VIP Gold customer and want to be treated like so.

Should you trade it in now? Well, let's wait and see how the 2.5T does. Looks good so far, only issue I've heard of is detonation on some early STis. The XT is tuned more conservatively and noone has reported that problem. Most complaints are minor nit-picks if you follow the XT thread (I believe you do).

But....it's still so new. They haven't been out for even a year.

The H6 is proven and seems very reliable. Only thing I saw was the coolant level issue, which turned out to be nothing. That engine seems to be more reliable than the 2.5l, FWIW, and it's been proven for a couple of good years.

So I'd keep yours for now, milk that warranty, which will turn out to be a smart investment in your case. You have roadside assistance, even, and could sell it at 97k miles with 3k miles left on the transferable Gold warranty. By then we'll know more about the 2.5T.

-juice

snowfairy

Frank - I don't want to take it in for them to have them come to the same conclusion either. What else can I do? I can't sell it because I cannot tell a lie. I can't trade it in to get another vehicle because I don't have the money (my financial situation is fine right now, but it is not ready for an upheaval), nor do I want to trade it in for a lower price because of its condition. I am feeling very "stuck". Do I just sit here and go through the "process"? Argh!

ateixeira

Make sure you keep in touch with 800-SUBARU3, open a case number and give them feedback regularly. They'll figure it out.

-juice

snowfairy

Frank - I don't want to take it in for them to have them come to the same conclusion either. What else can I do? I can't sell it because I cannot tell a lie. I can't trade it in to get another vehicle because I don't have the money (my financial situation is fine right now, but it is not ready for an upheaval), nor do I want to trade it in for a lower price because of its condition. I am feeling very "stuck". Do I just sit here and go through the "process"? Argh!

lark6

I suppose I can sit on that fence for the better part of next year. I've hung on to my cars for on average about 6 years and the Forester will begin its 5th year January 18.

I understand that by putting on 15K/year as I have I'm a bit above the mean. Working for a consulting firm and being on the road so much - even if it's back and forth to the airport - is tough on a car. If I were in a different line of work it'd be easier. While I'd like some more performance, in my heart of hearts I know I need durability, cargo hauling capacity and all-weather capability above all.

Guess I'm still closer to the mold of the "traditional" Subaru owner than the new generation. Darned if they haven't made it more interesting, though.

Ed

idahodoug

Actually, we're on the same side of this issue - I'm a dyed in the wool conservative living in the most Republican county in the most Republican state in the US and I own my own business. Ya can't get more down on big gummint than that. I suspect I have been too focused on getting ready for vacation and a couple big decisions as well to properly frame my position on this to you. I'm a statistics freak and a "no waste" nut when it comes to progress.

Also, I specifically wanted to extend my condolences on your loss as well. I'm one of those lucky guys who's married his dream girl and cannot even wrap my brain around such a loss. I know you weren't expecting so many of us to express this, but it demonstrates the depth of this group and I for one respect you for your candor in mentioning it.

Regards,
IdahoDoug

ballistic

...much appreciated, but I'm sure we're testing the host's patience with off-topic meandering.

So: Starting about 1 second after each upshift, and continuing for about 2 more seconds, my XT behaves as if the drive-by-wire throttle is fluttering slightly. Quite noticeable, and not what anyone who strives to drive smoothly would want. I didn't begin to notice it until somewhere around 2500-3000 miles, but it has been consistent since then. Anyone else experiencing this?

subaru_team

one more condolence. I'm very sorry.

Patti

subaru_team

It looks like in January, 2K3, the Rep. really didn't have much to go on since it was so sporatic. Now, as of Tuesday, the Rep. is trying to get information to sort out what is going on and to get you some help. I'm sorry it's taking us a bit. You will hear from someone soon - I'm hoping on Monday - with a plan of action.

Thanks - I'm sorry for the problem.

Patti

subaru_team

We'll get it checked out and be back with you off-line. Sorry.

Patti

subaru_team

but paying folks would get a bit unusual ;-)

Just for the record - I don't know if it is the radio. I'm guessing based on information in the case. I'm sure we'll get to the bottom of it.

Thanks!

Patti

troop2shos

Ballistic, I don't have much experience w/ my XT AT yet since I've only had it a week w/ no issues, but are you getting an rpm surge between shifts as a "hang" or does the rpm's fluctuate erratically up & down? At what throttle position does this occur?
Obviously a trip to the dealer or AutoZone (if OBDII) to read the PCM/ECU for codes may be in order to see if the accelerator board or other sensors are the culprit (acts similar to a TPS issue except you would probably see a problem at idle or steady rpms), & not a boost over-run / spike / wastegate condition. As another thought, the A/C clutch, if on, should disengage at WOT then kick in as you get off the throttle...a lot of variables with these engine management systems.
I had the drive by wire module replaced in my '00 Troop under warranty at 23k but it drove fine - CE light came on.
Let us know what you find out but it does sound like it's sensor related.
Regards,

ballistic

I'm not sure my throttle flutter issue would be noticed on an XT-AT; the torque converter would probably mask the effect, even if it was occurring. The A/C isn't on, so compressor cut-in/out isn't it. The sensation is exactly as if, about a second following clutch engagement after an upshift, I am rapidly moving the throttle pedal about a half-inch more/less/more/less/more/less for maybe 1 to 2 seconds until things finally stabilize - yet my foot on the throttle is rock-steady. This may not even be throttle-related, although that's how it feels.

I hope to take the service writer out for a drive when I go in for my 7.5K service, to demonstrate the problem until he feels it. I also have 3 or 4 major rattles that need to be tracked down.

vetmats

I have an '03 Outback that has developed a distinct rattle coming from the right rear panel in the cargo area. It rattles every time I go over a slightly rough road and/or bumps. I've had it into the dealer twice, and he could replicate and hear the rattle, but could not determine the source.

Has anyone else experienced a similar rattle?