When to trade cars

[Jake M]

I'd vote for an I4, simple easier to work on, last for ever. The Wankel is a neat idea but short life. Why is a V6 used? Miserable contraptions to service.

If they shoehorned an I4 into the engine bay, it wouldn't be simple or easy to work on. The hood would have to get raised, plus they'd have to turn it sideways and ditch everything that's Subaru about the Subaru containing it.
I do agree about the short life of existing Wankels, and they're not really something that entertains me too much, I just know that they're getting kicked around again. No idea of somebody is going to overcome their quirks, or if it's just getting kicked around. But there IS a very large amount of horsepower available that way in a VERY small package. Probably that's why they didn't die as soon as the first ones out almost immediately proved their shortcomings.

Subaru with a V6? H6 (flat six) I think. They couldda snuck one by me, I don't think so.... It's have to be the Ascent, but I don't think they could even squeeze a V motor into that one without designing a completely different car.

 

[woodchucker]

I'd consider a Subaru if they got rid of that flat 4 and put a I4 in there.

They won't. They pride themselves on that. But it's the weak part. Head gaskets at 100k

 

[Aaron_W]

The new ones are a lot better than the older ones, by leaps and bounds, you don't need the Subaru Tune up every 60 to 90 thousand miles but that's still a problem. (The Subaru Tune Up if you don't know, pretty much entails taking the engine out, replacing the head gaskets, timing belt, water pump, cam seals, block seals, pretty much taking it down to a short block, and refreshing everything that has a gasket or a seal in it. They're simple, so it's not the undertaking it is on other vehicles, but it's still obviously a big deal). Anyhow, the new ones are Way improved in that department, but still not on par with "everybody else".
Anyhow, the I4 "could" happen if the market demands it, but it's gonna take redesigning the car, and pretty much giving up everything that makes a Subaru a Subaru. Their rather unbelievable AWD system (which as I say, most owners NEVER get to take advantage of), is what keeps them selling cars.
And the rust..... These things rust in the desert. I think Subaru is happy to let the maintenance drive the owner's to make a call on them, before they get "forced out" by the rust.
I agree, that'd be a wonderful thing, but I don't see it happening any time soon.

A Wankel engine would fit in there pretty nice. Those are seeing some new interest from several manufacturers, although I've got no idea if they're just being revisited on principal with newer manufacturing technologies, or if there's an actual development that's gonna get them over their own batch of "quirks".

Never heard about rust being an issue, hasn't been on mine. I've also known a lot of people with Subarus who lived in snow country, I think every third person I worked with in Yosemite owned a Subaru.

Agree replacing the boxer with an I-4 would completely change the car and probably end the company at least in the USA.
The boxer engine like the AWD is a defining characteristic of the car. It allows for a lower center of gravity, a lower hood line and an overall more compact footprint. Putting an I-4 would make the car just like everything else on the market and with the size of the company (one of the smallest mainstream automakers), they would probably fade from the US market.

Subaru is #25 in the world market, smaller than some brands most Americans have never heard of. Subaru has found a very specific niche in the USA and exploited that small market.

 

[Aaron_W]

They won't. They pride themselves on that. But it's the weak part. Head gaskets at 100k

For a very specific period of time on the non-turbo version an engine they haven't used in the US since 2010.
They screwed up on the head gaskets around 2000 when they changed them. They were addressing it by the late 2000s. It was a simple fix, just use the turbo's head gasket on all the engines.

You hear all this stuff about how Subarus are unreliable, yet when it comes to surveys looking at reliability and repair costs they usually fall right about the middle, not the best or worst.

 

[terry_g]

I have owned two new Honda Civics and now own a 2021 CRV The first Civic I kept for four year and had no problems with it. The second Civic the mechanism that raises and lowers the seat failed and was replaced under warranty. My wife is small and liked it all the way up and I am tall and used to lower it all the way. I must have got more use than it was designed for. The CRV when it was a year old the driver side seat belt would not pull out and was replace under warranty. Otherwise it has been a great vehicle. I usually sell my vehicles when they are approaching the end of the extended warranty. My next vehicle will probably be a Honda CRV.
I worked as a dealer mechanic for twenty four years. Dealer mechanics are trained on the newer stuff and know how to fix it. They also have factory tech support. When a private shop replaces an expensive part when troubleshooting an electronic problem and it doesn't fix the problem they can't return the part. The dealer doesn't have to worry about that.

I take my vehicle to the dealer for servicing now that I'm older I don't want to do it myself anymore. The Honda dealer where I live has been excellent to deal with. They recently changed ownership. I hope that doesn't change anything.

 

[nobog]

I can't imagine that the average Joe that buys a Subaru buys it because it has a flat 4 engine (in my case just the opposite). Other than the forementioned lower center of gravity (mass), I see very little advantage, if any, over an I4. I4's are the standard "go to" engine in just about everything now-a-days. They are cheaper, lighter, easier to service, proven reliable, make good power + reasonable milage. That flat 4 might be Subaru's claim to fame but even BMW puts an I4 in their motorcycles in addition to their brand-defining opposed twins.