George9219 Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 After 8 years and 249,000 miles, I walked away from my 1998 Forester and purchased a new RAV4 4cyl AWD. The old girl just became too unreliable and expensive to maintain, (not surprising at that mileage), and after looking at Subes and Hondas, as well as Toyotas, the RAV4 was just a head above the others. Plusses: No more timing belt worries, a lot more interior room, comfortable seats, similar performance to my Forester, and did I mention no timing belt? Just went through my first tank of gas and averaged 27.7 MPG with a mix of two lane rural roads, and light city traffic. Frankly, with Honda coming out with an all new CRV later this year, and the new RAV4 this year, Subaru is going to be left in the dust. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericem Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 Are u kidding me, a subaru being unreliable!! The best small size suv is the forester by the way. ANd no one can supass a subaru man!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theflystyle Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 traitor!!! lol do you think your honda will hit 250k?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericem Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 lol, exactly, it could but not with the orig engine!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gnuman Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 After 8 years and 249,000 miles, I walked away from my 1998 Forester and purchased a new RAV4 4cyl AWD. The old girl just became too unreliable and expensive to maintain, (not surprising at that mileage), and after looking at Subes and Hondas, as well as Toyotas, the RAV4 was just a head above the others. Plusses: No more timing belt worries, a lot more interior room, comfortable seats, similar performance to my Forester, and did I mention no timing belt? Just went through my first tank of gas and averaged 27.7 MPG with a mix of two lane rural roads, and light city traffic. Frankly, with Honda coming out with an all new CRV later this year, and the new RAV4 this year, Subaru is going to be left in the dust. No timing belt? When did that happen? You will still have to change it every 100K, just like a Subaru. Oh, and it will be harder to change it. . . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2X2KOB Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 and did I mention no timing belt? Whatwhatwhat?? Do they use gears, or a chain, or something else? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimokalihi Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 traitor!!! lol do you think your honda will hit 250k?? You mean Toyota? And I bet it will hit higher than 250k. If you maintain it. I have a toyota truck with 300 plus(on the original engine!)on it and it ran great until my step dad neglected to change the timing chain and it eventually stretched out the chain, broke the plastic guide arms and bore a hole through the timing chain cover leading to oil in the radiator, water in the block, blown engine. If he had just replaced the stupid chain... You know toyota is number one right now anyways...lol Althought I must say I don't know why he had so many problems with his subaru. Mine has 280,000 on it right now and it runs like a top. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnceggleston Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 ok... i have my armor on, so hear goes. i like subarus, early 90's, ok. late 90's better. but i don't know what i'll do when those are to hard to come by and repair. so far i'm not impressed with the subarus of the new century. too many changes away from reliability toward ... i don't know, power? style?, luxury? some one very smart once said, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it"!!! on the other hand, only a suuby owner would have ever believed that subaru would be considered in the running with honda or toyota. those 2 have been top of the heap for a long time, along with nissan. maybe it's not subaru, maybe it's corporations and stockholders. i have a 90 nissan pickup with 175k miles and the original clutch; new radiator, but original clutch. do those things have timming belts??? You mean Toyota? And I bet it will hit higher than 250k. If you maintain it. I have a toyota truck with 300 plus(on the original engine!)on it and it ran great until my step dad neglected to change the timing chain and it eventually stretched out the chain, broke the plastic guide arms and bore a hole through the timing chain cover leading to oil in the radiator, water in the block, blown engine. If he had just replaced the stupid chain... You know toyota is number one right now anyways...lol Althought I must say I don't know why he had so many problems with his subaru. Mine has 280,000 on it right now and it runs like a top. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ferret Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 Best of luck...My wife is a big Toyota Fan....She owns a Highlander By the way, the 4 cyl has a timing chain and no maintenance interval. The V6 has a timing belt and is a BEAR to replace. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4 arm boxer Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 how could u bail on a soob @ 249k?? id have to see it tick over a 1/4 million b4 i got rid of her.. shame on you..:-\ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benebob Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 Sure the RAV4 is a nice car for the price but it is also, like most other cheaper toys (aside from the 80s trucks) designed to be a POS by 150k. Sure it'll still be running but they just start to break clips, interior bits fall off etc. Best of luck but don't be suprised when the interior shows its age. Most Subie seats are just wearing into comfort levels by then. Ever replace a timing chain? You can replace 2 belts in the time and effort it takes to replace one chain and 200k on a chain is stretching it to say the least. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
otis Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 After 8 years and 249,000 miles, I walked away from my 1998 Forester and purchased a new RAV4 4cyl AWD. The old girl just became too unreliable and expensive to maintain, (not surprising at that mileage), and after looking at Subes and Hondas, as well as Toyotas, the RAV4 was just a head above the others. Plusses: No more timing belt worries, a lot more interior room, comfortable seats, similar performance to my Forester, and did I mention no timing belt? Just went through my first tank of gas and averaged 27.7 MPG with a mix of two lane rural roads, and light city traffic. Frankly, with Honda coming out with an all new CRV later this year, and the new RAV4 this year, Subaru is going to be left in the dust. why is everyone giving this guy a hard time? he had the car for 8 years and 250k miles. I see people come on this board and criticize after 20k miles. also how long are you supposed to keep a car? I bet MOST people here don't drive anywhere near as many miles on a single car as this guy did (I know I don't). Does everyone here think a car (even a subaru) is as reliable at 250k miles as it is at 250 miles? I guess what he's getting grief over is that he picked a new rav4 over a new forester. If I was in the market now for a new compact suv, I can't say that I wouldn't seriously consider the new rav4. There are features in the rav4 that are appealing to me (although I can't say that having a timing chain or belt makes a difference to me personally). And let's talk about "cheap plastic parts" for a moment- I have to gingerly open and close my cup holder because I'm always afraid I'm going to snap that thing off. I don't regret my decision to buy a forester, because at the time it was the best small suv around (IMHO). but now, I think the playing field has changed and subaru is no longer the clear leader in this segment. maybe this is a wake up call for subaru to follow in the lead with its tribeca and "buff" up the forester with more features, while letting the OBS fill its utilitarian small suv niche. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outback_97 Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 After 8 years and 249,000 miles ... a lot more interior room, comfortable seats, similar performance to my Forester ... If I drove >30K miles a year I'd put interior room and comfort pretty high on the list too. That is a lot of miles. In another post he mentioned HG problems at around 180K miles IIRC, and some wheel bearing problems. I'd think these issues have some influence on the decision, but referring to his post above, interior and comfort were obviously important too. George, get back to us in another 8 years and let us know how she did Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itzed Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 ..snip..Plusses: No more timing belt worries..snip.. All engines have valves that need to be actuated. Rubber is quieter and easier to change but needs to be changed more often. Metal is noisy, fails without warning, but generally lasts longer. Pick your poison. ..snip..Frankly, with Honda coming out with an all new CRV later this year, and the new RAV4 this year, Subaru is going to be left in the dust...snip... Rationally I doubt it, but then it appears you need some emotional support and justification for your new decision, so I'm sure you can find some people to agree with you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr.Outback Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 What you have to remember when comparing a Subaru to a same year car of another make is that Subaru has a 5 year design cycle. Honda and Toyota have only recently switched to a 5 year cycle. They used to be 4 years. So sometimes Subaru's models get lost in the middle. They are designed to meet or exceed the competion when they debut. Think of the '00 Legacy compared to the ancient '00 Accord, or the equally ancient '00 Camry. The '00-'04 Legacy was more on par, in some peoples books, with those models then with the '02 Camry or '03 Accord. Subaru will probably redesign the Forester in '08 which will put it ahead of the RAV, but then 2 years after the new Forester debuts, a new RAV will, and start the cycle again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George9219 Posted July 14, 2006 Author Share Posted July 14, 2006 why is everyone giving this guy a hard time? he had the car for 8 years and 250k miles. I see people come on this board and criticize after 20k miles. also how long are you supposed to keep a car? I bet MOST people here don't drive anywhere near as many miles on a single car as this guy did (I know I don't). Does everyone here think a car (even a subaru) is as reliable at 250k miles as it is at 250 miles? I guess what he's getting grief over is that he picked a new rav4 over a new forester. If I was in the market now for a new compact suv, I can't say that I wouldn't seriously consider the new rav4. There are features in the rav4 that are appealing to me (although I can't say that having a timing chain or belt makes a difference to me personally). And let's talk about "cheap plastic parts" for a moment- I have to gingerly open and close my cup holder because I'm always afraid I'm going to snap that thing off. I don't regret my decision to buy a forester, because at the time it was the best small suv around (IMHO). but now, I think the playing field has changed and subaru is no longer the clear leader in this segment. maybe this is a wake up call for subaru to follow in the lead with its tribeca and "buff" up the forester with more features, while letting the OBS fill its utilitarian small suv niche. When I bought the Forester, I looked at the same three options I did this time, RAV4, CRV, and Forester. At that time, (1998), the Forester was the easy winner...no contest. This time around, the RAV4 was the easy winner. You guys that are knocking Toyota have no idea what you are talking about. I'm not going to bore you with all the stories of my Freinds' and relative's experience with Toyotas, except my buddy who had ran a 4wd pickup for 300,000 miles, and sold it for $1,800. Also, for you Toyota "experts" out there, the RAV4 has a timing chain, as should all interference engines, IMNSHO. I'm not knocking the Forester. I got eight years and nearly a quarter million miles of service out of it. Bottom line is, I drive about 30,000 miles a year, and my livelihood depends on a reliable car. The Forester was simply too expensive to keep running at this point. How many of you have actually attempted to drive 30,000 miles in a year with a vehicle that has 200,000 + miles on it. While I'm venting.....How about the reliability factor of the early Foresters? Head gaskets, wheel bearings? I feel Subaru should have paid at least a portion of the repair costs on these items. My daughter has a 1997 RAV4, purchased new, with 185,000 miles on it. Only normal maintenance and wear items, no failures. By 185,000, I had replaced two wheel bearings and a set of head gaskets on my Forester. I'm not saying not to buy a Subaru, only that there are other viable options out there, and not to explore them because of brand loyalty is stupid. If I hadn't started looking around for options in 1998, I'd be driving a (shudder!)Ford. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gahagan Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 After 8 years and 249,000 miles, I walked away from my 1998 Forester and purchased a new RAV4 4cyl AWD. The old girl just became too unreliable and expensive to maintain, (not surprising at that mileage), and after looking at Subes and Hondas, as well as Toyotas, the RAV4 was just a head above the others. Plusses: No more timing belt worries, a lot more interior room, comfortable seats, similar performance to my Forester, and did I mention no timing belt? Just went through my first tank of gas and averaged 27.7 MPG with a mix of two lane rural roads, and light city traffic. Frankly, with Honda coming out with an all new CRV later this year, and the new RAV4 this year, Subaru is going to be left in the dust. I own a 2000 Outback Wagon with 115,000 miles. I've had a few [mainly] minor problems with it but enough that I gave serious consideration to jumping the Subaru ship as well. Also, I figured I just wanted something different. My most important factors in considering a new vehicles were AWD or 4WD, safety, convienence (i.e., luxuries), price, style, comfort and reliability. (Not in any particular order) I checked out the Pontiac Vibe, Dodge Calliber, Chevy Equinox, Toyota Rav4, and all Subaru products. I considered others as well but didn't make it past the "internet research" phase, as I felt the others were way over priced. The Vibe was very nice and I may have bought it the day I test drove it if it weren't for the engine and road noise that I didn't care for. The Calliber was just extremely overpriced for what it offers, which in my opion was a cheap and gimmicky interior with an admittedly handsome exterior. The Equinox didn't appeal to me because of its customer satisfaction ratings and poor mpg. I had my decision narrowed down to the 2006 Rav4 and 2006 Legacy sedan. I really liked the Rav4 and I can honestly understand your decision. It was agile, comfortable, stylish, etc... and met up to all the things I wanted in my new vehicle. Toyota reliability is always a selling point. I came home and crunched the numbers and the Subaru won hands down! (Which is why I bought my other Subaru, too) I bought my Legacy Limited, Sedan for $21,499. It listed for $26,232. Subaru is offering $2000 incentives on that vehicle. End-of-year dealer pricing added up to a savings I couldn't reject. My car has leather/heated seats, moon roof, 6 disc CD changer, mileage readout, leather steering wheel, dual chrome exhaust tips, fog lights, mud guards, floor mats, pearl white paint, alloy wheels, AWD (of course), dual climate control, side impact air bags and side curtain air bags, lighted vanity mirrors, cruize, air, 8 way power drivers seat, power mirrors, heated mirrors and heated window wipers. I went with the sedan for the "change" I needed. The new style looks and rides much more elegant than the old AMC-ish sedan, in my opinion. The Rav4 was nearly $30,000 for the same package (leather, mats, moon roof, etc). There is no incentive and the dealers I priced with did not seem eager to come down on their price. Afterall, Rav4 is a hot selling vehicle right now, partly because all the other SUV gas hogs are heading back to the car auction and their previous owners are heading toward the smaller SUVs and SUWs. Add to that the fact that many of these customers were themselves Toyota loyalists who, wanting to stick with a Toyota, are buying the most feul effecinet Toyotas offered, and it becomes very much a Seller's Market. Not too good for the buyer hellbent on a Toyota. I only have about 50 miles on my new car so it is much too early for me to speak of anything other than the buying experience, but given Subaru's customer satissfaction rating and my own experience with Subaru's I believe I can expect a good, safe, reliable car with minor, albeit exhistng, problems. I hope you like your new Rav4. But even more, I hope some day you wish you had bought another Subaru instead. Nothing against you.....lol.....I'm just hoping I made the right decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stedler Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 I just bought my first Sube, an 05' Legacy. I'm coming from a 99' Ford Ranger xlt offroad 4.0 with a few engine mods.... (it would smoke the tires in 4 wheel drive.) but after a back injury 4 wheel drives where out, to much bouncing on the road... except a luxery 4wd.. which are out of my price range right now... I looked at a bunch of different vehicles but the subaru won out. For several reasons.. Not the least of which was reliability, and SAFETY, and fuel economy.. No BS, my last trip I had a tank of gas that I got close to 40MPG with. It was mostly 55mph on level roads with no traffic. I normaly average 35hwy and 29town. My insurance company rates the sube as one of the safest cars on the road only beat buy one car and it is a certain Volvo. The toyota Rav4 didn't even come close, poor fuel economy, poor safety record and reliability issues. My friends 06' Rav4 is in the shop as we speak. fuel rail problem i think, it's a v6. The Toys aren't even in the same league... neither are the honda's .... if I was looking for something like the rav4 I would have gone for the Outback. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theflystyle Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 my bad with the brand mix up.. it was late and honda was on my mind apparently.. but all critisim aside, i wish you luck on your new car Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benebob Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 You guys that are knocking Toyota have no idea what you are talking about. I'm not going to bore you with all the stories of my Freinds' and relative's experience with Toyotas, except my buddy who had ran a 4wd pickup for 300,000 miles, and sold it for $1,800. I'm not knocking the Forester. I got eight years and nearly a quarter million miles of service out of it. Bottom line is, I drive about 30,000 miles a year, and my livelihood depends on a reliable car. The Forester was simply too expensive to keep running at this point. How many of you have actually attempted to drive 30,000 miles in a year with a vehicle that has 200,000 + miles on it. Funny, having worked at the worlds largest auto auction that saw maybe 20k higher mileage late model Toys come in a year would probably make me someone who knows a thing or two about how cars age. I have a friend who has a Chrysler Minivan with 300k on the engine and tranny, burns no more than .5 quarts of oil in 3k so what's your point. Are you now an expert? Oh and I put 30k a year on my 88 XT6 with over 200k on it so right there is one who has attempted it. In fact I drive that car more than the other 5 which all have at least 60k less on the odo. Like I said, good luck but FROM MY EXPERIENCES there's a reason why Toyotas aren't the Toys trucks from the 80s and early 90s. Some of it is for the better but a lot of it isn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gahagan Posted July 14, 2006 Share Posted July 14, 2006 After 8 years and 249,000 miles, I walked away from my 1998 Forester and purchased a new RAV4 4cyl AWD. The old girl just became too unreliable and expensive to maintain, (not surprising at that mileage), and after looking at Subes and Hondas, as well as Toyotas, the RAV4 was just a head above the others. Plusses: No more timing belt worries, a lot more interior room, comfortable seats, similar performance to my Forester, and did I mention no timing belt? Just went through my first tank of gas and averaged 27.7 MPG with a mix of two lane rural roads, and light city traffic. Frankly, with Honda coming out with an all new CRV later this year, and the new RAV4 this year, Subaru is going to be left in the dust. Oh, and another thing........ Another reason (for me) the better choice between the 2006 Legacy and the 2006 Rav4 was/is the Legacy: The Legacy is USA 55% The Rav4 is Japan 100% Matters to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishy Posted July 15, 2006 Share Posted July 15, 2006 Hey man, good luck with the Rav4! My brother's girlfriend has one and it's been flawless for years and years. I think I would actually rate Honda and Toyota a touch higher in the reliability scale right now than recent Subarus but to me the Subaru is worth the extra premium for the rally-bred heritige and all the crazy "personality" they have. I can't wait to replace my Civic with an Impreza, Forester, or Baja. But here's the kicker: I also want to replace the wife's turbo Legacy wagon with a honda or toyota (Accord or Camry) because she doesn't care about awd at all and the turbo makes us broke at the pumps. ($1.235 per litre today) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Dude Posted July 15, 2006 Share Posted July 15, 2006 All engines have valves that need to be actuated. Rubber is quieter and easier to change but needs to be changed more often. Metal is noisy, fails without warning, but generally lasts longer. Pick your poison. Actually, timing chains USUALLY give a great deal of warning before they fail. Unlike a timing belt, timing chains become very noisey thousands of miles before they fail. While a timing chain can last up to 200,000 miles, they are generally very expensive to replace. All the cam gears, guides, tensioner and other metal parts of the chainline must be replaced along with the timing chain. Timing chains also are dependent on continuous lubrication. Timing chains can, and do, fail just like belts, turning your interference engine into a valve eater. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manarius Posted July 15, 2006 Share Posted July 15, 2006 Timing chains can, and do, fail just like belts, turning your interference engine into a valve eater. Yay for non-interference low compression EJ22's like my car! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
75subie Posted July 15, 2006 Share Posted July 15, 2006 i don`t know about new rav4's, but i had a 2000 4wd and the road noise was terrible, i hated that thing!!! got rid of it, and bought another subaru. did i mention the rav sucked in the snow i think the new rav's are bulky and ugly also. i`ll take a subaru wrx over a rav anyday and it would run circles around it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.