Jump to content
Ultimate Subaru Message Board

Sound Off: How many miles on original HG?


Recommended Posts

I want to throw a poll out there and see how many miles you've gone without a head gasket issue.

 

Please list year/make/model/ auto or manual.

 

Here's mine:

 

2000 OBW

5-spd

86,000

 

No signs of HG issues of yet. Mostly freeway driving (30mi one way to work).

Knock on wood!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 64
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Lost count a long time ago how many head gaskets I have replaced on customers cars but it has been a lot.

 

97-99 OB's 2.5L DOHC engines.

Lowest milage ~80k

Highest milage ~180k

 

2000 and newer 2.5L SOHC engines.

Lowest milage ~35k Obviously sent to dealer for warranty replacement.

Highest milage ~188k

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the EJ25 is the only engine that will produce interesting results. any other subaru engine usually holds the head gaskets for the life of the engine if they are properly taken care of.

 

Any engine over 120,000 that blows a HG is racked up to age.

nip! i'm not sure that's relevant to this thread, that's been hashed out over and over. that is equivalent to saying this: "it is impossible for a bad design to affect failure rates beyond 120,000 miles". that's absurd and you know it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the EJ25 is the only engine that will produce interesting results. any other subaru engine usually holds the head gaskets for the life of the engine if they are properly taken care of.

 

 

nip! i'm not sure that's relevant to this thread, that's been hashed out over and over. that is equivalent to saying this: "it is impossible for a bad design to affect failure rates beyond 120,000 miles". that's absurd and you know it!

 

No but its impossible to blame a bad part for after 120,000 miles. Many cars blow HG's over that age, and it is not blamed on design. If you use that criteria, then anything that fails over 100,000 miles is a bad design.

 

Also its still not 100% proven that it is a desighn issue, as opposed to a cleanliness issue, an assembly issue, or a bad run of head gaskets.

 

For instance, Dodge neon, which is running at 100% failure rate (at about 60K), is a bad design.

 

I am sorry but if it made it past 120,000 miles, its not a bad design.

 

nipper

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm trying to keep things straight for people trying to figure this stuff out and based on your assertions there is no difference between EJ22 and EJ25 headgasket failure rates after 120,000 miles - that is completely false and not good for people looking for information.

 

Also its still not 100% proven that it is a desighn
let's not make this worse by getting hung up on semantics. we all realize there is some issue at hand with EJ25's, regardless of how you define it or what you call it.

 

If you use that criteria, then anything that fails over 100,000 miles is a bad design.
what? i never said "anything that fails after 100k is a bad design" ???? more semantics, use whatever word you like that describes the EJ25 "issue" to your satisfaction...it's not a criteria, i never used that word. it's statistics, logic and experience. you really honestly believe that whatever "issue" they have, has NO EFFECT on the failure rates after 120k. for someone with engineering experience that's hard for me to imagine you really believe that - that the failure rate magically drops to zero...is that an asymptote, a limit? all semantics aside, experience tells us this, it is quantifiable:

 

more EJ25's fail after 120,000 miles than EJ22's.

 

that alone is enough, but then there are tens of thousands of EJ22's that are much older than EJ25's. the EJ22/EJ18 debuted 6 years before the EJ25. based on your "age" assesment, there should be far more 120k+ EJ22's with head gasket issues than EJ25's. that logic is comical, it is not at all even close to what we see in the real world (coming from someone who looks for an buys EJ's with bad head gaskets). actually, it's quite the opposite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have to side with Gary on this one. Several reasons:

 

1. The EJ22 is the gold standard for all EJ engines. It was the first, and so far it is still the champion for reliability. That is nearly undisputed here, and elsewhere in the Subaru community.

 

2. We are *only* talking about Subaru's. Dodge Neons are no more applicable than the lunar rover. What is considered "reliable" depends a lot on customer expectaions, and if you have created the expectation (as Subaru has, I would argue, with the EA series, and the EJ22) that the engine should be major-failure free for 300k+, then you can't go and produce something like the EJ25 phase 1 that rarely lasts beyond 120k on head gaskets, and has a higher failure rate of bottom ends and expect people to just accept that.

 

3. You can't call it a bad run of head gaskets either. First, the failures correspond directly to the introduction of the "open deck" cast blocks used in conjunction with the DOHC heads, and higher cylinder pressures - they really should have used a closed deck design as the EJ22T did - instead they gambled with the customers money. Further, Subaru redesigned the head gaskets 6 times. If that's not an admission of a "problem" then I don't know what is. A simple "bad run" or "poor assembly" would not require a redesign even once, let alone 6 times.

 

4. The "Design Issue" argument is further born out by the fact that the phase 2 engines continued to have head gasket problems. It took time and lots of money to R&D the problems away. Three generations later and our figers are crossed that the problems are now gone. But it is pretty obvious they existed and took effort to overcome.

 

And to Gary - the EJ22 development was began in 1985, and debuted in 88 an 89 elsewhere in the world. We got them in 90, but they predate the EJ25 by a bit more than 6 years. The EJ25 was a simple "update" to the EJ22 design (or it was supposed to be) where the displacement was increased and the blocks cast with a less expensive method than sand casting.

 

GD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If we could access the failure rates of the EJ25 HG's, I'm sure we could see that they run better than 50% over 100k mi, increasing exponentially with every 10k mi beyond that. In my book that's a defect. Be it a design issue, or bad parts.

 

The actual cause is really moot, as no-one has come forward to explain the problem satisfactorily. I feel that Subaru needs to step up & admit there's a problem. With the age of the motors in question, I don't feel they're responsible for fixing them. Although they SHOULD find the problem & make a retrofit kit to solve it at a discount to the owners. 120k mi is WAY too soon for HG's to expire naturally. They are NOT a wear item.

 

When I pull my motor, I intend to do a thorough post-mortem on it. While I may not find the actual cause, I may find a few things to set others looking in the right places.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My 95 2.2 Legacy wagon had a small external antifreeze leak at +137K. I had both head gaskets replaced as a precaution. The shop confirmed no internal oil or antifreeze leak. It was another shop that diagnosed the head gasket problem after a pressure test of the coolant system. I'm not sure how far I could have gone without replacing it but didn't want to take any chances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...