Low Mileage Maintenance Schedule

[isis]

I have owned two of these and as you call it have never lost compression or blew my engine up. Of course I don't make sense less modifications.

Oh and subaru replaced the clutch on my stock car with less than 10 thousand miles on it. Subaru customer service is light years beyond anything Ford does. Ford will argue with you over little warranty repairs.

There’s nothing wrong with the ej motors. They don’t tolerate low oil very well with the engine layout and the amount of g’s they can pull around tight corners but they’re plenty stout. Tune them up to 150% of stock levels and they do just fine. I’ve had 3 2.0L gd/gg subies and the last one I had was cranked up pretty good. Cams, reworked turbo, my own boost control and over 2000 reflashes smoothing out the tune. It was as slick as a sewing machine and smoother than any factory engine. Tip top tuning. I wish I had that kind of time for my CTSV and my Raptor. I could make them sing.

 

[TurboTJ]

You do realize that the STI stands for subaru technica international right? They are a rally car legend especially with the legendary 22B. I get it in America that they are unknown but rally cross is picking up a fan base here. I love the feel of the car and AWD in a Hot rod package. You may not like the car but that doesn't mean it is not cool. Prodrive and Vermont rally car make sti race cars, and STI holds the fastest isle of man record within one minute of a sport bike something that will not be matched by a mustang, gtr or a be all gt40.

I love how the only things you bring up are Subaru marketing propaganda and no substantive facts. If they had a fast car, they should have raced it where it could be compared with many other cars as a benchmark. Cars are normally faster than bikes... don’t know why Subaru wasn’t.

But we know what they say about opinions so let’s stick to the technical facts about why it’s a terrible design.

• Boxer engines create a lot of complexity for little/no benefit. For example, there is twice as many cam shafts which mean twice as many actuators for VVT, twice as many head gaskets (which are know to fail and repair requires REMOVING the engine) twice as many cam seals. All of this more or less equates to twice as many problems
• The cylinder is flat meaning getting an even oil distribution is difficult/impossible.
  
• The turbocharger cannot be located near the exhaust ports meaning you must run a smaller turbine wheel to get decent spool. Smaller turbine wheels lead to higher EGT’s which create a ton of problems (don’t ask me how I know). This is why for a long time, the STI despite having 25% more displacement actually had a smaller turbo than the Evo.
  
• The exhaust routing makes equal length headers more difficult making twin scroll less/not effective
• The entire engine is cantilevered in front of the front wheels! Mass ahead of the front wheels REDUCES the weight measured at the rear wheels. This is already a problem on front engine cars and Subaru has exacerbated it
  
• Top mount intercooler. I probably don’t need to say more
• Try changing spark plugs
• Turbocharger plumbing - turbo plumbing is already difficult but when you locate all four cylinders in the four corners of the engine bay, you make it worst and getting perfectly even flow in/out of each one is hard
• Timing belts must be twice as long (which makes stretch an issue) or you must have two
• Basic maintenance on the cylinder heads requires removing the entire engine.

Subaru will tell you “but it lowers the center of gravity” which is true... kind of. The engine is lower but you raise a ton of components higher in doing so and make things complicated. They have never offered any numbers on how much it lowers the CG and that’s because it’s a gimmick. Compare these problems to an I4 like in an Evo and you will see why they make so much more HP with significantly fewer engine problems than a Subaru.

Having said all this, Subaru’s are well made and there is talk of going away from the boxer engine. This would mean better performance, reliability and fuel economy. I’m all for this.

Remember, there is a reason why no one else mass produced boxer engines in front engine configurations.

 

[jamanrr]

I have changed the spark plugs on an sti several times. Use the right tools and it is not that bad. I am very familiar with the motor and have experienced zero issues that you represent as prone to the car. I basically ordered the car custom as similar to the hero fast and furious sti. A porsche boxer and the subaru are very different animals. The unequal length headers make it sound cool with a nice rumble. Don't know what you have against the sti but if taken care of they will be very dependable and durable cars.

 

[TurboTJ]

I have changed the spark plugs on an sti several times. Use the right tools and it is not that bad. I am very familiar with the motor and have experienced zero issues that you represent as prone to the car. I basically ordered the car custom as similar to the hero fast and furious sti. A porsche boxer and the subaru are very different animals. The unequal length headers make it sound cool with a nice rumble. Don't know what you have against the sti but if taken care of they will be very dependable and durable cars.

Nothing against it more than any other crappy design but it does bother me when STI drivers (with their flat billed baseball caps, vape pen and monster energy stickers/shirts) can’t tell me why the car is good besides how much they like the sound, kind of like Harley riders.

I guess I don’t see justifying a flawed design as it sounds cool or “has a nice rumble” as sufficient. I was hoping you could educate me as to what I was missing with some of these major design flaws - I genuinely want to know.

I was in the market a while back for an AWD sports car. I wanted an STI. I like the interior, huge trunk, build quality and they look decent. After looking more into them and driving a few, I couldn’t justify buying one and chose a sports car with a better engine/AWD system

Once Subaru improves their AWD system, stiffen up the chassis and switch to an in-line engine, I’ll take another look.

 

[jamanrr]

Nothing against it more than any other crappy design but it does bother me when STI drivers (with their flat billed baseball caps, vape pen and monster energy stickers/shirts) can’t tell me why the car is good besides how much they like the sound, kind of like Harley riders.

I guess I don’t see justifying a flawed design as it sounds cool or “has a nice rumble” as sufficient. I was hoping you could educate me as to what I was missing with some of these major design flaws - I genuinely want to know.

I was in the market a while back for an AWD sports car. I wanted an STI. I like the interior, huge trunk, build quality and they look decent. After looking more into them and driving a few, I couldn’t justify buying one and chose a sports car with a better engine/AWD system

Once Subaru improves their AWD system, stiffen up the chassis and switch to an in-line engine, I’ll take another look.

What was that better car with and system if you do not mind me asking? Torsen rear end with a Getrag 6 speed and equal length drive shafts for near perfect front to rear tow and yaw control with a fully locking differential with control through a DCCD is about as perfect an AWD setup that you can ask for in any AWD vehicle.

 

[TurboTJ]

What was that better car with and system if you do not mind me asking? Torsen rear end with a Getrag 6 speed and equal length drive shafts for near perfect front to rear tow and yaw control with a fully locking differential with control through a DCCD is about as perfect an AWD setup that you can ask for in any AWD vehicle.

From a handling perspective. I found that both the S4 (with the sport differential) and the Evo beat the STI. I tested by coming to a complete stop on snow, cranking the steering wheel all the way to one side and flooring it. The STI just plowed mostly forward with significant understeer (regardless of DCCD mode). The S4 was able to whip the rear end out and oversteer nicely. The Evo did the same. I do ice racing in the winter, so this is important to me.

I chose the Evo (though it was a hard decision between the Evo and S4).

From an engineering perspective, the Evo’s front differential is more or less the same as the Subaru. Despite what Subaru owners think, there is no torque steer and it does have equal length axle shafts. (WTF is the point to Subaru’s “Symmetric” AWD??)

The center differential on the STI is a bit different than the Evo. I have found that the Evo’s is much more responsive and able to change torque split in an instant. However, the STI’s DCCD is still decent. I have taken both apart and definitely prefer the Evo’s.

The Evo stands out once you get to the rear axle. The active yaw control can transfer 100% of torque left or right. It does this with hydraulic plates on top of a LSD, kind of like the GTR rather than by using the vehicles brakes. The algorithms that control this are superb and give you limitless control in a skid. The Subaru rear differential was just a limited slip. It had the ability to apply brakes to get some sort of yaw control (Subaru was just being cheap with this) but it’s a night and day difference compared to the Evo/S4. I hope Subaru upgrades to a real AYC system..

I’ve been ice racing for 4 years now and have yet to lose a race to a Subaru (though I’m sure there are some better drivers out there that could beat me in their Subaru’s or maybe I just need to race more).

 

[jamanrr]

The sti is up too 59 percent rear wheel biased which could have explained why you plowed through. Symmetrical awd just means that the front, rear and center drive/ half shafts are all the same length. The front differential is all one piece with the transfer case. In theory this provides better drive train power with the ability to get all 4 wheels turning at their intended speeds/ power levels. Like the 4A setting on the gen 2 raptors. It puts down power at all 4 wheels at the same time in some pre determined ratio as power and wheel slippage occurs.

 

[Merica]

That’s an interesting way to live. I guess I word prefer to get a car that doesn’t need that level of support for defective parts (Maybe an Evo or S3/S4?) but to each his own.

S3/S4 not needing support, thats funny

 

[TurboTJ]

The sti is up too 59 percent rear wheel biased which could have explained why you plowed through. Symmetrical awd just means that the front, rear and center drive/ half shafts are all the same length. The front differential is all one piece with the transfer case. In theory this provides better drive train power with the ability to get all 4 wheels turning at their intended speeds/ power levels. Like the 4A setting on the gen 2 raptors. It puts down power at all 4 wheels at the same time in some pre determined ratio as power and wheel slippage occurs.

The Evo and S4 have symmetrical sized axle shafts as well. Even though on the Evo, they don’t come out on the vehicle centerline, they have an intermediate driveshaft so that there is no torque steer. In fact, I’m not aware of any performance AWD vehicles with unsymmetrically sized axle shafts.... Subaru is very skilled at marketing though to make you think your AWD system is special and something only Subaru can provide.

 

[TurboTJ]

S3/S4 not needing support, thats funny

Yeah... maybe that’s a stretch haha