Switching from Honda to Subaru

C

Cameo

The days of my '94 Accord may be numbered and I've started looking for
its eventual replacement. This car served me well for almost 300K and
would look for another Honda except for one thing: this time I want a
4WD/AWD sedan. Honda does not have one in sedan, so I am looking into a
Subaru Legacy. Any former Accord owners out there who could compare the
two brands and models for long term reliability, quality and maintenance
cost? I am also looking for lesser road noise than I am used to in my
Accord. Is Legacy a quiet car?

Thanks for any feedback,
JR
 
The days of my '94 Accord may be numbered and I've started looking for
its eventual replacement. This car served me well for almost 300K and
would look for another Honda except for one thing: this time I want a
4WD/AWD sedan. Honda does not have one in sedan, so I am looking into a
Subaru Legacy. Any former Accord owners out there who could compare the
two brands and models for long term reliability, quality and maintenance
cost? I am also looking for lesser road noise than I am used to in my
Accord. Is Legacy a quiet car?

Thanks for any feedback,
JR

The Crosstour. With AWD you're looking at about $33,700.

For an ACCORD?!?!?!?!

(They're kind ugly, in a cool way...or is that cool in an ugly way...?)
 
Hachiroku ãƒãƒãƒ­ã‚¯ said:
The Crosstour. With AWD you're looking at about $33,700.

I don't consider Crosstour a sedan. It's more like a crossover.
Besides, it's too expensive, too.
(They're kind ugly, in a cool way...or is that cool in an ugly
way...?)

How about just plain ugly?
 
The days of my '94 Accord may be numbered and I've started looking for
its eventual replacement. This car served me well for almost 300K and
would look for another Honda except for one thing: this time I want a
4WD/AWD sedan. Honda does not have one in sedan, so I am looking into a
Subaru Legacy. Any former Accord owners out there who could compare the
two brands and models for long term reliability, quality and maintenance
cost? I am also looking for lesser road noise than I am used to in my
Accord. Is Legacy a quiet car?


Have in mind that the addition of AWD alone
is going to reduce a cars reliability, increase
maintenance costs, reduce fuel efficiency, and
maybe even reduce quietness a tiny bit.

Subaru is somewhat of a "lesser" marque than
Honda, in terms of reliability. Most likely
you will not make it to 200k without some engine
work. Generally, speaking, Subaru cars are higher
maintenance than a typical Honda or Toyota.

If you are aware of these facts, then you will enjoy
a positive experience of owning a Subaru- cars
that have a great AWD system, nice handling in
any model, torquey engines, great safety record.,
and many other attributes.

Basia
 
Have in mind that the addition of AWD alone
is going to reduce a cars reliability, increase
maintenance costs, reduce fuel efficiency, and
maybe even reduce quietness a tiny bit.

AWD does add complexity to the power train, steering and brakes, but
many Subaru models of the last five to ten years have won awards for
their reliability. Subaru Motor Corporation certainly builds the most
reliable AWD vehicles, and nowadays among the best cars.
Subaru is somewhat of a "lesser" marque than
Honda, in terms of reliability. Most likely
you will not make it to 200k without some engine
work. Generally, speaking, Subaru cars are higher
maintenance than a typical Honda or Toyota.

That used to be true. Tisn't so true with the last five years or so --
the Toyota acceleration problems were neither one-off nor a fluke,
unfortunately, and Honda also no longer holds the same reputation for
reliability that it did ten years ago. Apparently leaders at both
companies got onto the "maximize profits" bandwagon and forgot to tend
to the basics. :/
If you are aware of these facts, then you will enjoy
a positive experience of owning a Subaru- cars
that have a great AWD system, nice handling in
any model, torquey engines, great safety record.,
and many other attributes.

I agree. I've owned and driven Subarus for a quarter century now,
having owned five of them in that time. After you've become accustomed
to AWD, you'll probably never want to be without it again. At least, I
wouldn't want to be without it.
 
Catherine Jefferson said:
I agree. I've owned and driven Subarus for a quarter century now,
having owned five of them in that time. After you've become
accustomed
to AWD, you'll probably never want to be without it again. At least,
I
wouldn't want to be without it.

What do you mean by becoming accustomed to AWD? The only difference I
expect from the drive experience is better traction in winter or
slippery conditions. Would the drive feel different even when the
conditions are just fine for a 2WD? Frankly, my main reason for looking
at Subaru is the winter driving. My Accord is not much help there even
with snow tires.
 
Have in mind that the addition of AWD alone
is going to reduce a cars reliability, increase
maintenance costs, reduce fuel efficiency, and
maybe even reduce quietness a tiny bit.

Quietness is mostly affected by road noise and I don't see how an AWD
makes that louder than a 2WD. As to the cost of maintenance, I expect it
to be somewhat higher than Honda's, but hopefully not significantly so.
Subaru is somewhat of a "lesser" marque than
Honda, in terms of reliability. Most likely
you will not make it to 200k without some engine
work. Generally, speaking, Subaru cars are higher
maintenance than a typical Honda or Toyota.

Not making 200K without some engine work is pretty bad news. What about
rusting tendency? One thing I like about my Honda is that I don't see
any rusting on it after all these years. And we do have planty of wet
driving here in the Puget Sound area.
If you are aware of these facts, then you will enjoy
a positive experience of owning a Subaru- cars
that have a great AWD system, nice handling in
any model, torquey engines, great safety record.,
and many other attributes.

Finally some good news, Basia! ;-)
(Isn't that a Polish nickname by any chance?)
 
What do you mean by becoming accustomed to AWD? The only difference I
expect from the drive experience is better traction in winter or
slippery conditions. Would the drive feel different even when the
conditions are just fine for a 2WD? Frankly, my main reason for looking
at Subaru is the winter driving. My Accord is not much help there even
with snow tires.

At the time I got my first Subaru, I lived in Seattle, Washington. As
they say there, it rains only twice a year in Seattle -- January through
June, and July through December. <wry grin> Seattle itself rarely gets
heavy snowfalls, but the winter after I got there it had a week-long
freeze that resulted in a local lake (Green Lake) freezing over for the
third time in recorded history. It is also close to ski slopes in the
Cascades, and I learned to drive in snow along Highway 2 (Steven's pass)
and the North Cascades Highway.

Believe me, having 4WD (this was before the switch to AWD) made a *huge*
difference in the driving experience because I was suddenly not slipping
around the road when it was wet or icy. :)
 
Quietness is mostly affected by road noise and I don't see how an AWD
makes that louder than a 2WD.

For all practical purposes you are right.
As to the cost of maintenance, I expect it
to be somewhat higher than Honda's, but hopefully not significantly so.

You are correct.
Not making 200K without some engine work is pretty bad news.


By engine work I meant the real possibility of head gasket
failure (a fairly prevalent and known problem in older engines,
that Subaru seemingly has not resolved completely). If you
think about buying brand new, then maybe you could avoid this
issue altogether as the 2010 Legacy, and Outback, and the
2011 Foresters, have new and completely re-designed engines.
What about
rusting tendency? One thing I like about my Honda is that I don't see
any rusting on it after all these years. And we do have planty of wet
driving here in the Puget Sound area.

Haven't seen them rusting any more than other
cars here in the Sierras. I am in Reno, Nevada.

Finally some good news, Basia! ;-)
(Isn't that a Polish nickname by any chance?)

Yes it is, I am Polish too.

Basia
 
Cameo said:
The days of my '94 Accord may be numbered and I've started looking for
its eventual replacement. This car served me well for almost 300K and
would look for another Honda except for one thing: this time I want a
4WD/AWD sedan. Honda does not have one in sedan, so I am looking into a
Subaru Legacy. Any former Accord owners out there who could compare the
two brands and models for long term reliability, quality and maintenance
cost? I am also looking for lesser road noise than I am used to in my
Accord. Is Legacy a quiet car?

Thanks for any feedback,
JR

One thing that might be different is tire rotation. I have an
Impreza. I didn't rotate the tires at the recommended time. It wasn't
long before I needed new tires.
The tire guys said tires need to be rotated on schedule. I opted
for the lazy man's solution to not rotate them at all.
 
For all practical purposes you are right.

Yeah. I've found that most of my Subarus make a bit more engine noise
than the Hondas that I've driven (*lovely* cars, some of them), but not
enough to matter when you factor in road noise when you're going over
maybe 20 mph/35 kmh.
By engine work I meant the real possibility of head gasket
failure (a fairly prevalent and known problem in older engines,
that Subaru seemingly has not resolved completely). If you
think about buying brand new, then maybe you could avoid this
issue altogether as the 2010 Legacy, and Outback, and the
2011 Foresters, have new and completely re-designed engines.

Exactly. You want to avoid buying a 1997 through 1999 year model Legacy
Outback or 1998 through mid-year 1999 year model Forester. Those had
2.5 l dual overhead cam engines with truly serious head gasket problems.
On the other hand, the Legacy and Outback Sport models of those years
had a 2.2 liter engine that is one of the best Subaru ever made -- if
you get a chance to get one of them, it would be a very good car.

The original dual overhead cam engines in the Legacy Outback and
Forester models were replaced starting in mid-year 1999 (for the
Forester) and in 2000 (for the Outback) with a single overhead cam
engine that has some head gasket issues, but not too bad. This engine
model was in use through I believe 2004 before they replaced it with
*another* model that was supposed to have fixed the head gasket issue
completely, but you should check on that.

How do I know these things? My mother owns one of the 1998 Outbacks.
She's an older woman and doesn't drive a great deal, and her local
Subaru dealer is *good*, so they've managed through meticulous
maintenance and some other measures to prevent the problem so far. The
head gaskets on that car will eventually have to be replaced, though.

In addition, my husband and I own a late-year 1999 Forester with the
second type of engine. We finally had to have the head gasket replaced
in the past month. The car made it for eleven years and over 100K miles
before any symptoms showed, however, and probably would have been okay
for another ten to twenty K miles. We just don't take chances when it
comes to maintenance because we drive off-road and don't want an
emergency when we're miles from pavement and AAA.

The Forester probably also would have made it for considerably more
miles before it needed fixing (according to our mechanic) if it had not
been an extremely low-mileage car when we bought it. It had only 44K
miles on it in 2007; the first owners were a multinational who kept it
as part of a fleet for their executives, which meant that it spent more
time parked in the garage than on the road. Apparently age has as much
to do with head gasket failure on these models as mileage, which is unusual.

I also owned one of the 1998 Outback Sport models with the wonderful 2.2
liter engines that I mention above, before we got the Forester. It was
at 160K+ miles and had never needed a major repair, although it had the
rear wheel bearing failure between 50K and 60K miles that was typical of
these cars. It's now gone because of an accident that totaled it.
Apparently that's the usual end for these cars because, so far, nothing
else seems to kill them. I'm *still* bummed to have lost that car. :(
Haven't seen them rusting any more than other
cars here in the Sierras. I am in Reno, Nevada.

Small world; so am I. ;)

Subarus had problems with rust in the 1980s, but I haven't heard of any
notable troubles with rust on models after 1990 or thereabouts.
Yes it is, I am Polish too.

I'm not, but one great-grandmother had Polish ancestry and traced her
family back to a Polish man and his wife who immigrated to America in
the 1840s. 100% mutt here. ;)
 
Catherine Jefferson said:
At the time I got my first Subaru, I lived in Seattle, Washington. As
they say there, it rains only twice a year in Seattle -- January
through
June, and July through December. <wry grin> Seattle itself rarely
gets
heavy snowfalls, but the winter after I got there it had a week-long
freeze that resulted in a local lake (Green Lake) freezing over for
the
third time in recorded history. It is also close to ski slopes in the
Cascades, and I learned to drive in snow along Highway 2 (Steven's
pass)
and the North Cascades Highway.

I know exactly what you're talking about as I live on the Eastside right
off I-90, on a small hill. As much as I like my current Accord, I still
find it pretty useless on those snowy or slick days. It's too risky to
venture out with it then I hate cabin fever.
Believe me, having 4WD (this was before the switch to AWD) made a
*huge*
difference in the driving experience because I was suddenly not
slipping
around the road when it was wet or icy. :)

That's exactly what I'm looking for.
 
By engine work I meant the real possibility of head gasket
failure (a fairly prevalent and known problem in older engines,
that Subaru seemingly has not resolved completely). If you
think about buying brand new, then maybe you could avoid this
issue altogether as the 2010 Legacy, and Outback, and the
2011 Foresters, have new and completely re-designed engines.

Well redesigned engine is great but I also don't like to buy such cars
in their first model year as they still can have some bugs in them that
are mostly fixed in the 2nd model year.
Haven't seen them rusting any more than other
cars here in the Sierras. I am in Reno, Nevada.

That's good. How do people there like the TV comedy show "Reno 911"?
Yes it is, I am Polish too.

Jestem wegrem i jednak wiedzialem. ;-)
 
Dean Hoffman said:
One thing that might be different is tire rotation. I have an
Impreza. I didn't rotate the tires at the recommended time. It
wasn't long before I needed new tires.
The tire guys said tires need to be rotated on schedule. I opted
for the lazy man's solution to not rotate them at all.

Do AWD cars wear tires faster or more unevenly than 2WD? My current
Honda's Michelin tires have more than 60K in them and they still look
like having another 20K left in them. They also don't need frequent
rotation.
 
I also owned one of the 1998 Outback Sport models with the wonderful 2.2
liter engines that I mention above, before we got the Forester.  It was
at 160K+ miles and had never needed a major repair, although it had the
rear wheel bearing failure between 50K and 60K miles that was typical of
these cars. It's now gone because of an accident that totaled it.


The Impreza Outback Sport models from those years,
painted in two-tone colors were beautiful cars. I regreted
not having bought one. My drive is a 2000 Impreza Coupe,
and I love it (light, and fairly powerful, small, but as a coupe
feels larger inside, very manouverable, fuel efficient).

Also had the rear bearings replaced, but other than that no
problems whatesoever.
Small world; so am I. ;)

Nice!
Welcome to Subbie-land everybody, beautiful area,
and plenty of Subarus on the Eastern slopes of the
Sierras.

Subarus had problems with rust in the 1980s, but I haven't heard of any
notable troubles with rust on models after 1990 or thereabouts.



I'm not, but one great-grandmother had Polish ancestry and traced her
family back to a Polish man and his wife who immigrated to America in
the 1840s.  100% mutt here. ;)

:)))))
There is far more Polish ancestry in US than people
generally realize.

Basia

PS. since you are in Reno, Catherine, if you travel
I-80 frequently be careful not to speed around Truckee
California. The cops there got themselves new Laser
speed detectors, or whatever they're called, and are
very active writing tickets. Got one a few weeks ago!
Guess I should have bought a Toyota or something
that makes you feel you're speeding a lot sooner than
a Subaru :))))))
 
Well redesigned engine is great but I also don't like to buy such cars
in their first model year as they still can have some bugs in them that
are mostly fixed in the 2nd model year.


The 2011 Legacy will be a 2-nd year production.
They've issued several recalls on the car already,
so hopefully the bugs were caught and fixed.

You may also want to check out the Suzuki Kizashi,
if there are Suzuki dealerships around you. Its a new
AWD sedan from Suzuki that is getting very good reviews.

That's good. How do people there like the TV comedy show "Reno 911"?

Hey, anything is better than this:

Jestem wegrem i jednak wiedzialem. ;-)


"Polak, Wegier, dwa bratanki" says a Polish saying :)))))

Basia
 
Cameo said:
Do AWD cars wear tires faster or more unevenly than 2WD? My current
Honda's Michelin tires have more than 60K in them and they still look
like having another 20K left in them. They also don't need frequent
rotation.

The guys at the local tire shop say to rotate the tires religiously
at the recommended time. Tire rotation should be done every 7500 miles
on my '99. I waited twice
that long if memory serves. It didn't take long to screw up the tires
after I did rotate them.
The lesson I took from this is rotate them on time or not at all.
There aren't many Subies around here so I'm not sure how familiar the
local tire guys are with them.
We use 4WD pickups at work but that's a little different than cars
generally running on pave roads. The pickups seem to need tire fairly
often too.
 
Do AWD cars wear tires faster or more unevenly than 2WD?
Interesting question. I currently have a 93 Mitsu Lancer turbo AWD,
previously a 93 Mitsu Expo AWD, now a 2005 Imprezza and 98 Forester. These
are all manuals and all have essentially the same mechanical 50/50 split AWD
system with a central diff and visco unit.

I note the that the front tires wear faster than the rears on both Mitsu and
Subaru. I don't rotate the tires, as I like to see what's wearing where.

FWD will always wear the fronts faster than the rears. I feel that AWD wears
the fronts less than the FWD equivalent.

SD
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
13,946
Messages
67,510
Members
7,426
Latest member
Stucchi Guy

Latest Threads

Back
Top