how is subaru not on this list?

[theflystyle]

its apparently the list of the top 10 cars to make it to 200,000 miles... and also the ones that wouldnt make it..

 

LINK

 

the only way i can see how this list works is that its for new production cars. but even so, should the newer subies not be on this list??

 

-your thoughts?

[OB99W]

Perhaps Subaru owners whose cars reach over 200,000 miles would rather do maintenance than participate in a Consumer Reports survey.

[85T-REX]

The add says "Good Bet" not "Sure Bet". Plus, they only go to 200,000 not 300,000.

[uniberp]

The add says "Good Bet" not "Sure Bet". Plus, they only go to 200,000 not 300,000.

I subscribed to CR once, but was disappointed in the totally commercial mainstream products they reviewed and the very amateur advice they gave on DIY topics. I unsubscribed shortly after.

 

I was looking for advice on a vacuum cleaner, but they didn't review anythign but the most widely available ones, the Hoovers, Kenmores, Dyson, Bissell, etc. I wanted comparisons with the Simplicity, Riccar but they didn't have it.

 

The most highly rated Kenmore were subsequently bid up to near retail on ebay.

 

It may be that people who responded to the survey are too mainstream. They had a sample of 7,000, of which a small number would be Subes.

 

In a sense, we should be thankful for those people who CANNOT maintain their Subarus and correct things like clicking CV's and bogging performance. That increases the pool of inexpensive cars for those of use who can.

[Subarupusher]

I think the results are are more skewed by what type of person buys those cars. A few of the models look like realtor or sales cars and those pile up the miles. Another group look like the stereotypical high gas mileage cars that commuters pile mileage on.

 

Do people buy Subarus to pile the miles on due to high gas mileage? No. Can you picture sales people or realtors buying Subaruas in droves? No.

 

 

I always picture us Subaru owners as moderate commuters that like to take their cars into the outdoors (thus not being in immaculate condition to impress clients). The miles take a few decades to pile on and we are not reading or responding to CR about our cars since worrying about replacing them is not on the radar.

[GeneralDisorder]

HAHA! Well what you guys are missing is stuff like this:

 

"All the cars in the magazine's "Good bets" list are manufactured by Honda and Toyota"

 

Gee, I wonder who's paying for the big print ads with CR and the other mags that are published by that company

 

And most of the rigs in the "bad choice" section are luxury rigs - statistically people just don't keep those for long enough to care about that kind of mileage.

 

It's not that Subaru couldn't hang with the "good bet" crowde - it's that they don't have to pay some magazine to reassure their consumers of that fact.

 

GD

[wtdash]

I saw that article in CR, which I subscribe to, as well. I’m surprised they allowed CNN to publish that, although CR also partners w/MSN Autos.

 

Lexus, Toyota and Honda have are historically @ the top of CR's lists. Deservedly so, IMHO, as they are the most reliable and have the highest resale value (which justifies the fact that they’re rarely discounted when new).

 

These brands are ‘much better than average” vehicles, whereas Subes fall into the ‘better than average” ratings. But Subes are in the top 5 of all cars….along the lines of Mazda (b4 Ford bought ‘em) and a couple others.

 

NO OFFENSE to Uniberp, but part of the reason CR focuses on mainstream products is to ensure they get a statistically significant amount of responses on their annual questionnaires, which provide their reliability ratings. And they are definitely inclined toward the average consumer – not the enthusiasts that comprise the USMB or other boards.

 

CR takes NO ADVERTISING $$ from anyone – they’re wholly funded by subscriptions and donations (That’s why I get an effing request every month! J).

 

Here’s some info I pulled from “somewhere” that shows a couple Subarus:

 

SPORTS/SPORTY CARS

 

Most Reliable

Lexus SC

 

Toyota Camry Solara (4-cyl.)

 

Subaru Impreza WRX

 

 

Honda S2000

 

Mitsubishi Eclipse*

 

 

 

Least Reliable

 

Pontiac Solstice*

 

Mercedes-Benz SL

 

Mercedes-Benz CLK

 

Mercedes-Benz SLK (V6)

 

Chevrolet Corvette

 

Porsche 911

 

Ford Mustang (V6)

 

 

 

 

 

SMALL SUVs

 

Most Reliable

Toyota FJ Cruiser*

 

Honda Element

 

Honda CR-V

 

Toyota RAV4*

 

Subaru Forester

 

 

 

 

Least Reliable

Kia Sportage

*Based on one model year; redesigned or introduced for 2006.

[GeneralDisorder]

I like a Toyota, and I recognize the Honda reputation but have not had any remarkably good experiences with them.

 

Subaru's, like many other brands, have their share of quirky models. What they lack is consistently bland, cookie cutter cars produced in huge numbers for the masses. Subaru's are a specialty brand targeting very specific niche markets. They really don't have any models (anymore) that are "just transportation" like the Camry, and the Accord/Civic. The people looking to buy a cookie cutter civic are looking for something entirely different than those that look to buy a Subaru of any kind. If you want variety and innovation in your cars, you ARE going to tade some reliability factor - Subaru does this better than a LOT of other manufacturers - If they wanted the cookie cutter market they could have just stuck with the EJ22. That's just not what Subaru is about though.

 

GD

[wtdash]

....That's just not what Subaru is about though.

 

GD

 

And we are grateful for that!

[Manarius]

If you want variety and innovation in your cars, you ARE going to tade some reliability factor - Subaru does this better than a LOT of other manufacturers - If they wanted the cookie cutter market they could have just stuck with the EJ22. That's just not what Subaru is about though.

 

GD

No. Subaru is turning into cookie cutter cars and bland styling. Look at the new Impreza.

[elborak]

"All the cars in the magazine's "Good bets" list are manufactured by Honda and Toyota"

 

Gee, I wonder who's paying for the big print ads with CR and the other mags that are published by that company

CR is independently published and does not accept advertising.

 

You may not agree with their conclusions (and their surveys are obviously biased by the demographics of their readership), but they are not for sale.

[86BRATMAN]

CR is independently published and does not accept advertising.

 

You may not agree with their conclusions (and their surveys are obviously biased by the demographics of their readership), but they are not for sale.

 

I beg to differ. One such example would be the "comparison" of the Chevy Cobalt SS/SC model, the Acura RSX base model, and the Scion TC of a couple years back. They clearly "compared" the top of the line SS/SC Cobalt to the lowest model RSX. If it was a fair comparison they would have put the Cobalt up against the comparably equiped and comparably powered RSX Type S. I wonder which car won the "comparison".

[elborak]

How does that disagree with my post? I said you may well disagree with their conclusions. Likewise you can question their testing methodology. But they are definitely not for sale.

 

For example, they purchase all of their vehicles retail rather than accept donor vehicles from manufacturers specifically to avoid specially tuned "testing" cars.

 

Go ahead and argue their results. I often do myself. But they are honest.

[(goldfish)]

I beg to differ. One such example would be the "comparison" of the Chevy Cobalt SS/SC model, the Acura RSX base model, and the Scion TC of a couple years back. They clearly "compared" the top of the line SS/SC Cobalt to the lowest model RSX. If it was a fair comparison they would have put the Cobalt up against the comparably equiped and comparably powered RSX Type S. I wonder which car won the "comparison".

 

It makes me ask, "Was cost an issue for this test?" Fair is only a view point.

[GeneralDisorder]

CR is independently published and does not accept advertising.

 

You may not agree with their conclusions (and their surveys are obviously biased by the demographics of their readership), but they are not for sale.

 

I humbly point out that one does not need to take money directly nor does one even have to accept money per say to be in somoene else's pocket..... sure, they may not accept money - but I bet they don't turn down all that free swag, or invitations to such and such party with free booze and food, etc. It's all about how you butter them up. Doesn't have to be money.

 

Their readership is clearly biased - for one thing it's entirely made up of people too scared to make decisions for themselves. While I'm not knocking the practice of researching a product before you buy, you also have to have some variety in your sources for your research - if you rely on CR for everything then you are just living out of a pre-packaged box, and if you don't think they won't give a favorable review to the company who got them plastered in Vegas last week..... well you would be wrong.

 

I've read the occasional CR in a dentists office, but somehow have managed to surround myself with quality stuff despite being entirely out of touch with the sheeple (their publications, and media as well) I seem to be surrounded with.

 

GD

[elborak]

I humbly point out that one does not need to take money directly nor does one even have to accept money per say to be in somoene else's pocket..... sure, they may not accept money - but I bet they don't turn down all that free swag, or invitations to such and such party with free booze and food, etc. It's all about how you butter them up. Doesn't have to be money.

I guess we'll just disagree on this one. Some of their tests are good, some suck. But I'm quite familiar with the history of Consumers Union. They take their independence very seriously. They refuse to allow their name to be used in any advertising and have successfully sued on multiple occassions over the point.

 

If you really think they'd bias an auto test costing hundreds of thousands of dollars, and risk their credibility, over some "free booze and food", I'm glad you're not working for my company!

 

I suggest you read about Consumers Union before judging them. I'm guessing you're just assuming everyone is for sale without actually knowing anything about CU. If I'm wrong in this opinion, sorry.

[Rooster2]

I find the 200K list pretty ridiculous. With proper maintenace, like change the oil every 3 K miles, and driven with reasonable care, every car made today should easily be able to make at least 200K miles before hitting the wrecking yard.

 

It is a real shame to go to a wrecking yard, and see cars that are there, not because they were wrecked, but because they were poorly maintained, or simply hard driven into the ground. What a waste of money!

[GeneralDisorder]

I suggest you read about Consumers Union before judging them. I'm guessing you're just assuming everyone is for sale without actually knowing anything about CU. If I'm wrong in this opinion, sorry.

 

For some reason. in the US people just don't seem to get that everyone is for sale. In virtually every other country in the world all you have to do is slip someone a bill or two. Here it's *really* the same, but it's not nice to talk about it. Politicians, corporations, media - they are all in bed with someone.

 

Want to know what kind of thought went into a product - take one apart and put it together again. More people should rely on their own senses rather than those of everyone elses.

 

GD

[jon38iowa]

I ask this question:

Is there a possibility, that Toyota is just a hair better than Subaru?

I don't want to cause a fire storm, but just wondering. :-\

[Gene J]

I ask this question:

Is there a possibility, that Toyota is just a hair better than Subaru?

I don't want to cause a fire storm, but just wondering. :-\

Sad to say yes. My 97 Toyota PU is great and warranty work consisted of a glove box door that warped. Everything else has been maintanence.

 

98 Subaru. Battery, alternator, master cylinder, clutch, lots of light bulbs. Maintanence. Plus ... Need I mention headgaskets?

[GeneralDisorder]

Sad to say yes. My 97 Toyota PU is great and warranty work consisted of a glove box door that warped. Everything else has been maintanence.

 

98 Subaru. Battery, alternator, master cylinder, clutch, lots of light bulbs. Maintanence. Plus ... Need I mention headgaskets?

 

You're a moron if you think two specific models are indication of the brands as a whole.

 

I can name off Toyota's that sucked just like I can name Subaru's that suck. Try the early 90's toyota V6's for example - they had as many headgasket problems as the phase one 2.5's. Then there was the T100's .

 

As a mechanic that has worked on many brands and many models it's pretty easy to see that it's not simply a matter of brand, but of specific models. Yes the phase one 2.5's suck - which is why I would never own one (unless it was CHEAP). You bought a terrible example and that's on you - just as it would be if you owned a yota with that early V6.

 

GD

[86BRATMAN]

With the exception of the ej25 hg issues, I'm going to say they are right on par with each other.

[Manarius]

With the exception of the ej25 hg issues, I'm going to say they are right on par with each other.

In terms of reliability? I guess so. But, Toyota's are just meant to be daily drivers in nice weather. Subaru's are a little more sporty with the ever useful AWD.

[schlit]

Originally Posted by Gene J

Sad to say yes. My 97 Toyota PU is great and warranty work consisted of a glove box door that warped. Everything else has been maintanence.

 

98 Subaru. Battery, alternator, master cylinder, clutch, lots of light bulbs. Maintanence. Plus ... Need I mention headgaskets?

 

Preach on man, totally with you on this one. Maybe it's because the Subarus that are currently reaching 200,000 miles are part of the "lemon years" 1998-2002. My god, I know several people who bought sub's in these years and they'll never buy one again because of repairs. I've just about had it with mine. My other car that has 165,000 miles has had far fewer and cheaper maintenece repairs than my 85,000 2002 forester.

 

It seems like people on this site turn a blind eye when it comes to all the expensive problems these years have. Maybe the newer models are better, but they just havent been around long enough for most to reach that 200,000 mi marker.

[91LegLS]

[/i]

 

It seems like people on this site turn a blind eye when it comes to all the expensive problems these years have. Maybe the newer models are better, but they just havent been around long enough for most to reach that 200,000 mi marker.

 

My '91 has 180K and I've recently had to repair a few things like replacing the driveshaft because of bad U-joint bearings, ball joints, radiator, alternator rebuilt and I'm on my third driver-side electric seatbelt. I'm not ready to ditch the thing because I realize that the items replaced were aging. Other than the seatbelt, which the local stealer wants $400 just for the part, I haven't had to duplicate any repairs.

 

My seatbelts have been found used for $25.