I itch for a Subaru

I've been planning on getting something good for the winters here in Ohio. I thought about just throwing on some Blizzaks for my civic, which would do fine I'm sure. I'm living a little in the country now with a uphill driveway. My eyes have been open to Tacoma and Ranger 4x4 but I've always wanted a Subaru. I'm looking at the Impreza's including the Outbacks Sports from the 90's. Are all Subie's about the same as for the AWD? Are they awesome in the winter as people say? Any particular model the best? etc. I've heard stories of Big 4x4's stuck while the Subie blasts on down the road. I know tires make a huge difference. Please talk me into one

Only real difference between the Scooby AWDs I'm aware of is the presence or not of LSDs at each of the diffs.

proper winter tires will TRANSFORM a car. I put Hankook Winter I-Pikes on my Crown Vic, and it NEVER got stuck. They are awesome!

In reply to Platinum90: I'll have to research those.

I've had a '98 Forester for the past three winters(I'll be selling soon). I went for the Forester because there is a big difference in gas mileage between the Impreza/Forester and the Legacy/Outback wagon lines. Tires haven't been an issue....I'm running regular all seasons, in very good condition, and haven't had any problems going anywhere. The issues I've had have been the head gaskets(2.5), a timing belt tensioner pulley seized , and a rear wheel bearing starting to growl. Fortunately for me, my brother is a mechanic at a Subaru dealer and doesn't mind helping me out. Other than the tensioner, I had plenty of warning so I didn't get stranded.

I've been year round driving a miata. RE-11s in the summer and Mich X-ICEs in the winter. Snow/Ice tires make all the difference. Never been stuck or even worried about how the tires feel traction wise. However, the limiting factor is ground clearance. After about 4" it's a snow plow.

We had deep snow last winter. It sat in the garage a lot. A subie is on my short list for winter driving. The miata will get to sit those out from now on.

I'm finding the Outback a good mix. If only a new one was in the cards.

I've been through one new england winter in a '98 outback and I am very impressed. It is without a doubt the easiest car to drive in poor conditions that I have ever driven. The combination of high ground clearance and low center of gravity is the perfect compliment to the awd.

Under normal everyday driving I find it a little underpowered and I only get high 20's on the highway...

tb wrote: I only get high 20's on the highway...

"Only" high 20s, huh?

Are these good?

http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.jsp?ct=u&car_id=280806327&dealer_id=4541306&car_year=1997&rdm=1278614219463&lastStartYear=1981&model=IMPREZ&num_records=25&systime=&make2=&highlightFirstMakeModel=&start_year=1981&keywordsfyc=&keywordsrep=&engine=&certified=&body_code=0&fuel=&awsp=false&search_type=both&distance=100&marketZipError=false&search_lang=en&sownerid=596827&showZipError=y&make=SUB&keywords_display=&color=&page_location=findacar%3A%3Aispsearchform&min_price=&drive=&default_sort=priceDESC&seller_type=b&max_mileage=&style_flag=1&sort_type=priceDESC&address=43320&advanced=&end_year=2002&doors=&transmission=&max_price=&cardist=67&standard=false

I don't see any mechanical reason an AWD Subie would outperform a 4WD SUV, only an operator-related reason

In reply to JeepinMatt:

I've had 1990's cherokee sport's in mind as well. I hear the 4.0 is a great engine. I'm just not sure if I would actually need anything with a taller ride height.

Fletch1 wrote: In reply to JeepinMatt: I've had 1990's cherokee sport's in mind as well. I hear the 4.0 is a great engine. I'm just not sure if I would actually need anything with a taller ride height.

One thing with Cherokees is that they came with both part-time and full-time transfer cases. You can engage a full-time 4WD whenever you want, including on dry pavement. With part-time, you should not use it on dry pavement, only loose and slippery surfaces. Command-trac = part-time, Selec-Trac = full-time. You won't have to worry (or have the option of 2WD) with the Subie. I've got to look up the height of a 4WD Cherokee. I remember they weren't very tall when I was looking for one. Of course a lower COG would aid in making it less tipsy in all driving conditions.

The thing with pickups is that you've got so much of the weight hanging over the front wheels compared to a closed SUV or the Subie. Around here you'll see people throwing sand bags in the bed to even out the weight distribution a bit in bad weather.

In reply to JeepinMatt: Thanks for the info, I'm not very familiar with with Jeep's.

My dads Subaru has been pretty reliable, but, parts are really expensive, especially factory parts. The other issue, it may just be this particular car though, is that the cat failed, and a new factory one is $1700. We had a $600 one put on at a muffler shop, and it failed again in about a year. That car does burn a lot of oil, but it has less miles on it than my dads last 2 cars, both of which still passed smog with the original cat. For a car in the snow they are great, for something that is cheap to maintain, not so much.

JeepinMatt wrote: I don't see any mechanical reason an AWD Subie would outperform a 4WD SUV, only an operator-related reason

AWD has a center diff, 4WD doesn't. That center diff allows traction control (or judicious use of the e-brake) to shift power front to rear, not just left to right across the same axle.

Just a random observation from out in left field, but a long time ago I had a friend with a ragged-out Subaru Brat with perfectly bald tires. He thrashed that thing through the snow and I was amazed at the traction it had.

Travis_K wrote: My dads Subaru has been pretty reliable, but, parts are really expensive, especially factory parts. The other issue, it may just be this particular car though, is that the cat failed, and a new factory one is $1700. We had a $600 one put on at a muffler shop, and it failed again in about a year. That car does burn a lot of oil, but it has less miles on it than my dads last 2 cars, both of which still passed smog with the original cat. For a car in the snow they are great, for something that is cheap to maintain, not so much.

Our '95 Legacy has been great. Paid $3,500 for it with 95k on the clock five years ago. Did the clutch and timing belt at 127k, and just did struts at 146k. One of the flanges on the cat rusted off (welcome to Wisconsin!) and that was $400 for an aftermarket part. Other than those big tickets (which I would consider regular wear items) it's been standard stuff like brakes, tires, fluid changes, and front axles when the cv boots tore. So, overall cost of ownership has been very reasonable.

We'll see how much more my '05 LGT costs to maintain. The tires sure are more $$$!

ReverendDexter wrote:

JeepinMatt wrote: I don't see any mechanical reason an AWD Subie would outperform a 4WD SUV, only an operator-related reason

AWD has a center diff, 4WD doesn't. That center diff allows traction control (or judicious use of the e-brake) to shift power front to rear, not just left to right across the same axle.

A full-time or permanent 4WD system has a center diff, which allows it to be driven on dry pavement. A part-time 4WD system does not. The AWD system doesn't really have anything on the full-time/permanent 4WD system, but 4WD systems have a low range, while AWD's don't.

I'm not up on making charts or bullets on this board, so the best I can do is numbers

1. Part-time 4WD - no center differential, can't be driven on dry and non-loose surfaces like pavement, vehicle typically stays in 2WD until you hit the dirt/gravel/snow/mud etc... and you have to shift into 4WD, also has a low range
2. Full-time 4WD - has a center diff, can be driven on all surfaces, gives the driver the option of staying in 2WD or 4WD, has a low range
3. Permanent 4WD - has a center diff, can be driven on all surfaces, is always in 4WD and there is no option of 2WD, has a low range
4. AWD - has a center diff, can be driven on all surfraces, is always driving all four wheels and there is no option of 2WD, does not have a low range

I've got the itch too. At some point in the next year or so I will own an old Impreza project car. They are getting rare to find without a lot of rust around the fenders and under the doors near me. They didn't have AWD standard until 1996 so watch out for cars earlier than that...a lot DON'T have AWD.

I'm sure they are good in the snow even with mediocre tires...but as others said any car with good snow tires and a competent (not easy to find it seems) driver should be fine.

My Jeep Cherokee is unstoppable in the snow. It has 31" BFG AT tires and plenty of clearance to go over snow banks, buried cars, etc. The engine and tranny are bullet proof. Rust can be an issue on the rockers. Lots of cheap parts and people willing to help other Jeepers.

I really didn't notice much different between my Cherokee with the full-time transfer case and the the various Cherokees with the part-time case. Yeah you can go faster than 50mph...but if the conditions are that bad you might not want to go faster than 50...the full-time case isn't as strong when dealing with bigger tires offroad but they are both plenty beefy for normal people. I wouldn't mind either case but if you are 100% on road go for the full-time if you can find it in a clean Jeep.

Biggest differences: Impreza can autoX, Jeep cannot...normally Jeep can drive over rocks, Impreza cannot...normally Impreza gets 20-25 mpg, Jeep gets 15-20.

I say get one of each! That's my plan any way :)

JeepinMatt wrote: 4. AWD - has a center diff, can be driven on all surfraces, is always driving all four wheels and there is no option of 2WD, does not have a low range

Don't forget about the new generation of AWD "SUVs" that are FWD until they slip and engage the rears. This actually makes a lot of sense for 99% of drivers of these vehicles.

My wife's RAV4 is like this but has a button to "lock" the center diff so it is full time AWD. For all its short comings I actually really like my wife's RAV4...and that potent V6!

In reply to miatame:

Is there any year of Cherokee I should stay away from? I hear the late eighties and early nineties had a renault fuel injection or something that was bad.

miatame wrote:

JeepinMatt wrote: 4. AWD - has a center diff, can be driven on all surfraces, is always driving all four wheels and there is no option of 2WD, does not have a low range

Don't forget about the new generation of AWD "SUVs" that are FWD until they slip and engage the rears. This actually makes a lot of sense for 99% of drivers of these vehicles. My wife's RAV4 is like this but has a button to "lock" the center diff so it is full time AWD. For all its short comings I actually really like my wife's RAV4...and that potent V6!

Right-o. Usually in that case, the driver doesn't have the option because it's handled by the car (something about that sounds creepy, doesn't it?) but I wasn't aware you could lock the RAV4 into staying in AWD.

miatame wrote: My wife's RAV4 is like this but has a button to "lock" the center diff so it is full time AWD.

If the center diff was locked, it wouldn't be AWD, it'd be 4WD.

Fletch1 wrote: In reply to miatame: Is there any year of Cherokee I should stay away from? I hear the late eighties and early nineties had a renault fuel injection or something that was bad.

They had Renix fuel injection, which isn't as bad as it's reputation suggests, but can still be a little bit more of a headache to deal with. Around then, Renault did supply diesel engines, but I don't see too many of them. Both the Cherokee and Wrangler used the Peugeot BA-10/5 5-speed manual from '87-89. Those are a pain and most don't like them, including my brother-in-law. Many people report problems with the '96 Cherokees, as they were preparing to switch over to the updated '97, but that doesn't guarantee you will get a lemon. I've seen a number of '96s that did just fine. The GM 2.8L V6 is sort of hated.

The 2.8 isn't sort of hated, it's despised. I also wouldn't bother with any of the old ones with a 2.5.

But, back to the vastly superior Subarus. We're on our second one, my 4th. Yeah, okay, some of the parts may cost more than a Chevy pickup's, but the infrequency that you will need parts balances it out. Just do your homework, try not to buy a 98-02 2.5 unless it's had head gaskets and make sure the timing belt is done at the proper interval.

Driving awd cars is way different than anything else, and there is a learning curve. Practice like crazy in the snow or find a rallycross and learn what happens when you lift, gas it, brake, etc as they don't act like 'normal' cars. If you stick with it and master it, there isn't much you can't do.

Here's a great site for researching all years and models: Cars 101