Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
The Code is P00011 Camshaft Sensor Timing Advance . Advance auto and Auto zone has a free scan. Had it fixed one year later it is back.
How many miles are on the car? There's no mention of thermostat or water pump yet, or even the possibility of an air bubble in the block some where, so it seems there's still some checking to do.
Btw. Double checked my coolant again, somewhere I'm losing coolant...
In reading some of your concerns, I have some suggestions.
1. Before you replace the MAF, clean it with the appropriate solvent. I do this yearly and I can feel a difference and it is cheaper than a new MAF.
2. De-carbon the engine. Unfortunately we are stuck with ethanol and the amount will be increasing to 15% in the near future. I use Power Foam from Amsoil. Make sure the engine is fully warmed up. You disconnect the intake hose at the throttle body and start the engine. Spray the Power Foam into the throttle body. The engine will cough, sputter and run badly while you are spraying and may almost stall.
3. Once the can is empty, shut off the engine and re-attach the intake hose to the throttle body.
4. Wait ten to twelve minutes, re-start the engine. It will run badly and smoke will appear out of the tailpipe. Drive the car sort of hard to blast the crap out of the engine. The smoke maybe blue, brown or black. Once the smoke stops, then you are done. I have done this to various Dodges, and Fords with good results.
I would check with your local Subaru dealer before doing this. I have had he heads off 150,000 mile Subaru's and have seen no indications of carbon build up. And these newer Subaru's burn ultra clean.
Doing a MAF cleaning and/or decarbonizing the engine may void any emmision warranties.
A thought about increased ethanol content of fuel. Some vehicles, Subaru is one, do not support high alcohol content fuel. That may change on new models, but through 2012, alcohol fuels are not recommended. Here in Nevada, our fuels go 3% ethanol for emission control in the winter. Both my 2000 Forester and my new Outback run like a lame race horse during the 3 months we have to endure the stuff.
I had a new Subaru Legacy and it had lots of problems. Now, any car can have problems, so the issue really is how the company takes care of the problem. And with Subaru, I experienced incredible frustration. The bottom line was that no dealer knew how to fix the problem, and Subaru would not help at all. They kept stringing me along until the warranty ran out.
With Honda on the other hand, you will get super service. They stand behind the product and they have superior engineering.
good luck
As to the ethanol content in fuel, I hate it. Our Mercury Milan runs best on fuels with little or no ethanol. The more ethanol there is in the fuel, the worse the car runs, especially at idle, which becomes rather bumpy.
What you maybe experiencing in the winter is the ethanol picking up any moisture in the fuel tank and pulling it into the fuel system, thus the loss in performance.
Money maker, that, as a rule, has no benefit to the operation or maintenance of the vehicle. Like undercoating a car back in the 60's. Easy money, high profit.no value. Now, in the early 70's, BMW DID have a serious problem with crud build up in the entire air induction system, from the MAF through the head. So bad, in fact, all devices had to be pulled and cleaned with walnut shell blasting. Talk about an expense to the vehicle owner! Datsun (remember them...before Nissan?!!)...used to sell an chemical fuel injection cleaner treatment, it was quite a involved setup, what with hooking up all the tubes and hoses to the system. (Usually the 260Z) Oh, and *Trained* (sic) Subaru technicians performed the service, not car owners. Seen this dodge before....I worked as a dealership tech all the way through service department co-ordinater in my career. I have seen first hand how manufacturers get out of doing a service under warranty. I saw Saab buy it big time when their 900S models started burning up Garret turbochargers. Factory said it was owner abuse..ie: not letting the turbo spin down before turning the engine off. They would replace the first turbo under warranty, but after that, the owner was on the hook for a $2000.00 repair. A lawsuit took care of that policy....... Long story short, just make sure your Subaru dealer says it is ok for you to perform the cleaning service..and to be safe, get it in writing, to cover your interests.
{{What you maybe experiencing in the winter is the ethanol picking up any moisture in the fuel tank and pulling it into the fuel system, thus the loss in performance
No, Subaru's do not run well on ethanol. And the ethanol is not in the fuel to control moisture absorption from winter's higher humidity...I'm not sure what the emission reducing process of ethanol in gasoline is, but the powers to be think it works. (The key here is 'thinks') Besides, the new fuel filters do a good job of separating moisture out of the fuel before letting it through to the fuel system. MC
On another note, I have been speaking with independent auto repair shops, so far three of them, and have been asking them that if they had the choice between a Subaru Outback or a Honda CRV with AWD, which would they take? So far it is 3-0 for the Honda. All say that Honda has better engineering, and two have made comments about Subaru head gasket issues and oil leakage. One told me that he has seen and worked on 2009 and 2010 Outbacks with about 100K miles on them that required new head gaskets. They were naturally aspirated and not turbo and had received proper care and maintenance. I am going to speak with a few more independent shops before I make up my mind, but it does not bode well for Subaru. I like the car and it drives nicely plus you see tons of them on the road but to hear what the independent shops have to say is disturbing.
There is a new engine in 2013 Outbacks that has the head gasket problem solved. It was first used in the Forester for two model years so it has on-the-road proof of reliability. Earlier and current turbo Subaru engines use a different block that does not have the gasket problem.
Would I be better off getting the Forester if it already has the new head gasket design?
Yes, the design is not just a new head gasket but a a new cylinder head that has different cooling water flow. Either a 2012 Forester OR a 2013 Outback has the new design. Interior passenger room is almost identical, but the shorter Forester has less cargo room. If you keep your car 12-15 years 2012 vs. 2013 depreciation differences, if any, are not significant.
Thank you for your response. It is helpful. I have been doing further research by calling independent repair shops that deal with all brands of cars and trucks. So far I have spoken with seven shops and the score is six for Honda and one tie.
Some of the main points are:
1. Reliability and engineering. The six shops said that the Hondas are more robust overall.
2. After market parts: many more are available for the CR-V than the Subaru and they cost less.
3. Head gasket issue with the Subaru. Several shops mentioned this without prompting with some shops talking about redoing head gaskets in 2009 and 2010 Outbacks.
4. Company backing of their respective product. Several shops told me that Honda does a better job of backing their product than Subaru and I believe that one or two posters here have said much the same.
5. I am a bit scared of the CVT. I understand how they work and that they are a good way to get more MPGs. If they do fail, I understand that repairing them is very expensive.
I drove the Outback and really liked it and sat in the Forester and liked the airiness of the passenger compartment as well as the visibility out of the car. The one cubic foot of cargo capacity extra in the Outback is offset by the shape of the cargo area in the Forester.
I am not trying to poop on the Subaru but this will probably be the last new car I purchase and I want something that is dead reliable and easy for me to maintain. Based on my findings, a Honda it will probably be.
Honda has its own set of issues, trannies for V6 models and A/C compressor for recent CR-Vs.
Let me correct myself - ALL brands have their issues, but either of these is certainly far above average overall.
The shortest warranty is 3 years or so, really it's 5 years for powertrain.
So those mechanics are looking at cars 5+ years old, or 2007 models and older.
The other Subaru weak spot, BTW, was wheel bearings on the Impreza and Forester. Forester moved to the Legacy's sealed type design and complaints dropped.
Fortunately we haven't seen a frequent issue pop up again and again since those two, fingers crossed.
However, what about those vehicles in which the owner drives 60K miles in less than five years? As I understand most car warranties, it is either time or mileage, which ever comes first. That would mean I would probably need to purchase an extended warranty to say 100K or more miles for the drivetrain.
I have looked at the Honda forum and I am aware that they have their issues too. I think a few more calls/visits to shops and dealers will give me the information I need.
As emissions get tighter and fuel economy standards rise, cars in general will become more complex and more troublesome. I find that PZEV Subarus produce less power than their non_PZEV brothers. The same holds true for Kia and Hyundai. I find it funny that you need to burn more fuel to get cleaner emissions. I know Honda and Subaru have good in-house diesels that they sell in Europe. It would be nice to see them in the U.S.
I'm not sure that the PZEV has less power for Subaru, at least not the Forester. I'm thinking PZEV was actually rated a couple HP higher for my model year - 2010. I doubt it's noticeable either way. The EJ25 in my car can be quite spunky with the five-speed when I ask it to be. :shades:
It's a solid car overall.
1) MAF cleaning (or the ability to do so) varies by manufacture and design. I cannot say this as fact, but it seems I’m seeing that older systems that used IAC were more tolerant of chemistry. Newer systems with electronic throttles and no separate IAC (like my Toyota) have dire warnings in TSB’s and the service manual to NEVER spray the MAF but to clean the throttle plate and surrounding sealing surfaces very carefully. I guess I’d have to call these systems more high strung (?) as they rely on the plate position and MAF feedback to very carefully meter and control idle stability.
2) Decarbonizing? Lots of discussions all over the web about SeaFoam and similar products used in this way. Half in the tank, half sucked in thru a vacuum hose. The real issue on many modern designs is to find a vacuum hose that enters early enough that the cleaner gets evenly distributed. There are also concerns about carbon chunks scoring cylinder walls, getting caught in valve sealing surfaces, clogging cat inlets, etc. My advice - only if you are absolutely sure you need it. Add it to fuel in a good concentration, but skip the forced feeding.
3) Chemistry lesson: Ethanol is added to fuel to provide additional oxygen in a homogeneously mixed (liquid bearing) form. It is known as an oxygenate, because when ethanol (C2H5-OH) decomposes it releases the hydroxyl along with ethane (a gaseous fuel). The normal stoichiometric fuel/air mix provides enough air to burn the ethane (a very clean burning fuel), so the extra oxygen (and presumably hydrogen) help with converting unburned fuel into water (H2O) and carbon dioxide (C02). Without the extra oxygen, you tend to get more carbon monoxide (CO) out the tail pipe. In NY we pretty much universally use 10% blend. The downside is the reduced energy content of blended fuels, so mileage suffers overall. Other seasonal tricks (changes in light volatiles content) may also impact some engines drivability.
Ethanol is hygroscopic (collects and binds with water), but in cold climates we used to add either methanol or ethanol to fuels for exactly that purpose! It’s called DRYGAS, and it was a great way to prevent fuel system corrosion and gas line freeze. Given that fuels contain a lot more of it than we added in the old days, I guess there could be debate about how much more water this might attract. On the other hand, the closed fuel systems on today’s cars don’t allow nearly as much airborne water vapor into the fuel system, so it’s probably a wash.
4) On the subject of Honda CRV – have they fixed the post oil change fire issue? I guess you don’t have to worry about an aging CRV as much if it simply burns up in your driveway!!! OK, slight exaggeration, but it was a known problem for a while! Tranny longevity has also been a knock. Lastly, there was a strong argument that the (Haldex??) AWD system was slow to kick in, making the CRV only an occasional AWD verses Subaru’s renowned reputation for outstanding AWD systems. Assess your need for a good AWD system, then decide. To be fair, my sister loves her '08 CRV, as does my neighbor ('04, IIRC).
Subaru is incredibly popular in the NorthEast. Can’t swing a dead cat without hitting one or two in my parking lot at work. Today I walked out and thought there must have been a SURARU ONLY PARKING sign installed, as I was pretty much surrounded.
5) Head Gaskets . Yes, as my 2002 Outback is less than 200 miles away from rolling 100k, I could tell you more than you want to know about the root cause of the scrubbing, the myriad attempted engineering fixes over the years, etc. Suffice to say that the F series engines (mine was an E) don’t route cooling water thru the head gasket, but use hoses to connect the head to the block. That change, plus additional ribbing should solve this issue. For long term ownership, wait for a 2013 Outback. Other than the head gaskets, it has been a pretty amazing ownership experience. I still enjoy driving the wagon daily.
Did I cover the last two weeks adequately?
I will say this..my 2000 Forester was much better on ice and snow than my 2011 Outback...had better side wind stability as well. But..the 'cush' of the Outback outweighs the minor differences between my Forester and the new Outback.
I just hope I can get the mileage up on the Outback..only averaging 25 mpg..and that is 90% highway driving on cruise control. The local dealers blow me off, saying that's normal. Heh...I may have my company attorney write a letter to Subaru, asking them to correct the mileage issue or give me a new car. THAT might get Subaru's attention as there is now court precedent on the mileage claims on new cars.
MC
Now one can certainly argue that the EPA test methodology is flawed, or that the car makers somehow set up engine/transmission calibration to take maximum advantage of the test routine, but those are the numbers that they are legally obliged to quote. Unless Subaru deviated from the script, they have the EPA to fall back on with any legal challenge to their claims. You'd have to prove that your particular vehicle was somehow different from the vehicle Subaru submitted for testing, or that your vehicle was somehow mechanically deficient.
The test method is available. Why not try duplicating it and see what you come up with?
MC
You sound like enough of a car guy to realize that there are a hundred test variables that impact mileage results. Who now gets to decide where and how the drive should be done if there are no standardized tests? And this is supposed to somehow make things better? Crazy....
You and I both know there are places that local courts just shouldn't meddle. I see a serious appeal in the cards.
Interesting sidebar story:
I was talking to someone I'd seen around town before at the gas station near home. She is on her 5th OBW in 13 years or so. Her husband has this thing about trading in her car at 40k miles. She was in her 2012, and I think she said it now had like 15k miles on it, so it was broken in. She complained that the '12 got several mpg less than her nearly identical 2010. Sample differences? Who knows....
http://www.autoblog.com/2012/02/02/california-woman-wins-civic-hybrid-lawsuit-ag- ain/
MC
which would see plaintiffs get a $100 to $200 and $1,000 discount on a new Honda and trial attorneys get $8.5 million
Head gaskets are typical for the 2000- 2003? Subaru models. I jsut had ours done on a 2001 Outback. Some of the rest, might just be due to age? However I'm at least wondering about the mechanic's ability. Seems a bit curious it all went bad right after the head gasket job.
Time for a new Subie. New ones won't have the head gasket issue due to a redesign.
1. Wheel bearing failure. Three times I had to replace the undoubtedly cheap wheel bearings on my car, the first before 30,000 miles. Fortunately, neither bearing seized on the highway, but the possibility of it makes me cringe. Subaru, you ought to know better. Much better.
2. Leaking head gasket + front cam seal before 150,000 miles. Huge disappointment. I bought this car on the premise of better reliability than my previous Mercury Mystique. But hell, in 175,000 miles, my Mercury never developed serious engine problems. Nor faulty wheel bearings, ever. As kids like to say these days: WTF.
3. A pandemic of electrical issues before 150,000 miles. The past two years I must have been stopped by the cops an average of 1x/3 months for broken lights. Boy, how these things went. And then there is the radio which refused to turn on, even with the engine running, before coming back a few days later. Again, never saw any of this in my cheap cheap cheap Mercury Mystique.
4. Oh, the... tires. Three times I had to replace four tires because of a single sidewall cut to a single tire. Stretch a $125 tire replacement into a $500 4-tire replacement anyone?
That's right, Subaru. I want a divorce. And I am not sure I want to ever see you again.
...despite the amazing ways in which that Legacy zipped through snow while everyone else skidded, especially on slopes. Or the ways it steered, always so tight and responsive, with zero body roll. But. In the end, I want a car that works, not one that doesn't (notice the double-negative anyone?)
And what is up with the new CVT? I love the concept, but boy, step on the gas just a bit and does it get loud inside. It sounds like a mechanic hammering metal on metal - at a rate of 4000 hits per minute. Add to that the annoying high pitch drone that accompanies the hammering - a drone which, now that I think of it, reminds me of my mother's sewing machine, as its pulley drive system plugged away... Just amplify the sewing machine by, oh, a factor of 100 and you have the Legacy. So quiet.
The CVT certainly sounds different than other automatics (DSGs sound different than others, too), I didn't find it noisy or unresponsive in the Legacy I drove.
I certainly agree with lifeson34 about the handling on the third generation outback and fourth-gen Legacy cars. It was wonderful; night-and-day different from the fourth/fifth generation (2010+).
This is my first car with a CVT and this CVT is different from the 2012 and earlier Outback CVT. I have driven both and the newer version is more responsive and has significantly less of a "rubber band" sensation than the older version when accelerating. This version is noisier when accelerating as it whines. On level pavement, the CVT is dead quiet.
Fuel economy is good for what the car is. The one long trip my wife and I took from MD to NYC got us a bit more than 27 MPG with average cruising speed at about 70 MPH through hilly country (we do not take I-95) and the engine barely had 1500 miles on it. Our 2010 Mercury Milan with 2.5L four and FWD does not do any better on that trip.
The doors and body structure on the Outback are solid and all of the doors and the tailgate give a solid "thunk" when closed. Even the base Subaru we considered had the same solidness to it. Even at speed there is no "hood shake" that I can see.
One area where I'll object:
4. Oh, the... tires. Three times I had to replace four tires because of a single sidewall cut to a single tire. Stretch a $125 tire replacement into a $500 4-tire replacement anyone?
...despite the amazing ways in which that Legacy zipped through snow while everyone else skidded, especially on slopes.
Catch that? The tight control of uniform wheel rotation - both a blessing and a curse....
As long as the tread depth on the tires is within 2/32's of the same, it shouldn't be an issue at all.
Unfortunately, that wasn't the case for my car, plus I wasn't going to pay the money the local shops wanted for replacing the stock tire. Those things are junk, anyway. So, I spent $900 on a new and far, far better set. The other option was $350, and that was just a single tire. I don't feel bad about the new set; I just wasn't planning to buy it for another couple of years!
If it starts again after a long drive, the alternator is working.
How old is it? 5+ years and I would no longer trust the battery. I replaced the one in my van at Costco for less than $80. Piece of mind well worth it.
Upon doing some research, I discovered that the recall was limited to those cars having the factory remote start capability. If the FOB gets damaged, it could start the car without you even knowing it. My Subaru does not have remote start.