Seems like the trend with high mileage Subarus seems to be that they're automatic transmissions. A few H6s on here with well over 200k - and heartless's automatic with around 260K. I've seen a few 200k+ mile Subarus for sale that were 4EATS. I wonder if an automatic is a slight advantage to engine longevity? Maybe the theory that engine RPMs tend to be lower and don't go to extremes that a manual does? Also considering the disengagement and engagement of the manual's clutch may have a bit more impact on an engine. Maybe this is totally false and invalid - just a few observations. I'm not a mechanic, and respect those that are. I'm sort of a manual transmission fanatic. I've had some very unusual vehicles over the years with manuals, those that one may not even realize a stick shift was available. Those include a Dodge Caravan and a Ford Club Wagon.

I didn't particularly like the characteristics of the 4EAT, but the overall MPGs were about the same as a manual - and the fact most are quite reliable may put them in the running again for me. Of course there's the 6 cylinders with the 5EAT, but those cars usually have leather which I don't prefer. I did see a rarity - a 2011 or so Premium with the H6, which had cloth seats.

Just looking for thoughts and observations of mechanics and others on this site.

The 5EAT is hot garbo. Too many problems. Not at all reliable like the 4EAT was. 

GD

Oh wow, didn't realize that. The only real drawback of the 4EAT IMO was it's tendency to downshift at the slightest incline. Probably working as designed. 

For highway driving - at least in the Outbacks of that era, the 4EAT provided a quieter ride. The '99 5 speed manual I had was around 3200 rpm, where the '02 4EAT was around 2600.

 

On 5/25/2020 at 1:44 PM, GeneralDisorder said:

The chains are stupid since we end up resealing the chain cover's at about 70-100k anyway which is so time consuming you may as well just replace a timing belt. At least with the belt you get all new components every 105k. The chain setup is prohibitively expensive to replace but you have to open it up all the same to re-glue the massive front chain cover. Also the early one's leak right into the front AFR sensor and usually kill the $250 sensor. So there's that. The turbo models break piston skirts and are as-yet cost prohibitive to upgrade compared to the STI which is still running the EJ. 

All-in-all we really don't like them. They are more time consuming to service and aren't handling power like the EJ's. Reliability seems alright if you keep oil in them but cost of maintenance is the same or higher with the silly chain cover and cam tower leakage that all of them have. Personally I would rather deal with the EJ's head gaskets. 

GD

I know this is an old thread - but reading another Subaru forum today made me remember the post above. From the other forum: 'My Cam Carrier seal replacement was covered under my extended warranty. Otherwise, the work would have cost me about $2300.'

Is this what you were referring to GD?

Edited May 25, 20214 yr by Stelcom66

1 hour ago, Stelcom66 said:

I know this is an old thread - but reading another Subaru forum today made me remember the post above. From the other forum: 'My Cam Carrier seal replacement was covered under my extended warranty. Otherwise, the work would have cost me about $2300.'

Is this what you were referring to GD?

Cam carrier is not the same as the timing chain cover. Two different parts.  You could google them for images and exploded view diagrams 

Ok will do, thanks for the clarification. 

On 5/25/2020 at 1:44 PM, GeneralDisorder said:

The chains are stupid since we end up resealing the chain cover's at about 70-100k anyway which is so time consuming you may as well just replace a timing belt. At least with the belt you get all new components every 105k. The chain setup is prohibitively expensive to replace but you have to open it up all the same to re-glue the massive front chain cover. Also the early one's leak right into the front AFR sensor and usually kill the $250 sensor. So there's that. The turbo models break piston skirts and are as-yet cost prohibitive to upgrade compared to the STI which is still running the EJ. 

All-in-all we really don't like them. They are more time consuming to service and aren't handling power like the EJ's. Reliability seems alright if you keep oil in them but cost of maintenance is the same or higher with the silly chain cover and cam tower leakage that all of them have. Personally I would rather deal with the EJ's head gaskets. 

GD

Kind of glad now my unicorn* forester is a 2010 not a 2011.

*(bought in April, 28,000 miles, manual trans)

On 5/25/2021 at 4:56 PM, CNY_Dave said:

Kind of glad now my unicorn* forester is a 2010 not a 2011.

*(bought in April, 28,000 miles, manual trans)

Take about a great find! 28,000 miles? 

On 5/27/2021 at 10:28 AM, Stelcom66 said:

Take about a great find! 28,000 miles? 

Yes. Has some weird rust in places, mostly paint that flaked off under-hood spot welds and brackets and a little on the rear diff carrier.