Er.... it would be a good point if Subaru hadn't agreed with everyone and changed it after 20 months!

 

Erm....

The newage lasted more 20 months!!

 

The blobeye design was released 20 months after the bugeye. People complained vociferously about the bugeye design and sales slumped, Subaru facelifted it to the blobeye which was much better received and sold well through another facelift until it was replaced by the hatch in 2007!

 

So the newage lasted more then 20 months then

 

I'll give you 10k and my Clio. PM me.

 

Does pm mean punch me Give me the 10k first then i'll think about it

 

Now, you can get a Mini Countryman JCW, which at least has the right displacement, a turbo, and 4 wheel drive, just a pity BMW pulled the plug on the works team.

Think you'll find engine capacity on the decrease, hence ford going from 2.5 st down to 2.0 st, even the bog stock 1.6 been replaced by 1.0 turbo, VW/Audi group using 1.2 TSi engines instead of bigger capacity naturally aspirated, I know that's not a good performance car example but even F1 are changing from V8 down to small capacity turbo engines.
There was a time a few years back when manufacturers upped the capacity to get around emissions targets, hence Subaru putting the chocolate 2.5 engines in for European/American markets, but now manufacturers have the technology to create small capacity turbos with comparatively big power outputs and low emissions.

The Megane is 2 litre.

 

Even F1 are downsizing the engines from 2.4 V8s to 1.6 V6s!

 

i don't think F1 voluntarily switched to V6 Turbos. They were forced in order to create more excitement by making the teams build entirely new cars and thus mixing the cards.

 

Im pretty sure B&Q are doing the same with their wheel barrows too.

 

Nothing to do with that, it's to make the engines, or rather power trains, more relevant to future road car technology and hopefully encourage more manufacturers to join the sport in the medium to long term.

 

Element of truth to both those statements, I would have said.

 

And hopefully it will make the sport more exiting rather than just being dominated by one person .

 

Red Bull still have the best designer and one of the top drivers.... I doubt much will change!

 

Apart from reasons allready discussed rising prices running costs car tax,fuel (and looks to some )

Who would buy another Subaru after the now famous 2.5 chocolate engines that went pop

The enthusiasts read scoobynet and the now massive 2.5 Engine failures (and even the diesel ones ) with such a varity and often low mileages
When you pay 25/35k on a car

Basically the engine should not fail after a short length of time and why should you really have to pay 5-10k on a rebuild and change the spec which showed Subaru got it totally wrong with the 2.5 and chocolate pistons


Who honesty would upgrade to a hawk or hatch or buy another one


Intersting to see who will buy the new Subaru in 2014 / 15 when it comes out


Me I'm happy with my old classic as a collectors car and don't regret swapping my wrxd for my Nismo and getting a civic gt as a sensible car

Next car on my shopping list would not be a Subaru unless I now the new one will be totally reliable and will not go pop

 

Totally agree with this and the mantra on here of 'just get it forged and it's a great car' makes me LOL! Trots off people's tongues like it can be done in 2 secs for a fiver Newsflash: most people buying a car do not expect to have to spend £3k upwards rebuilding the engine, they tend to expect the manufacturer to have done a good job of that in the first place!

 

I think another way to look at this, is who would buy another Subaru, after the disgraceful way Subaru UK have treated most of their customers that have experienced failures?

 

Do these 2.5 engines actually fail if the car is kept bog standard at 280 bhp with no modifications to the engine , ecu , boost pressure etc ? I dont know thats why im asking the question ?
I bought a modified 2.5 wrx hawk but on a standard engine . A couple of days after i bought it i took it to scoobyclinic to have them vet the car , It made 410bhp that day . They turned it down to 380bhp , They also made enqueries with prev tuners ZEN and JGM to see if it was forged or rebuilt engine but it wasnt , It was on the original standard 2.5. It had done 48k miles and i did another 12k miles giving it the propper gun and having fun and i had no problems with the engine. The gearbox went bang tho . Why didnt my chocolate engine melt at a long time being at 380 and 410 bhp

 

Why are you asking me? The thread at the top of the page has examples of all tunes of this engine going bang and of course there are many that are fine too. The point is percentage wise there is a high failure rate and hence anyone buying one needs to be prepared for the costs of an engine failure. This to me is not a small consideration yet it is continually brushed off in here like it is! That is all I was saying. Glad your particular car is fine btw

 

I was just making an example with my old car , I sold that 2 years ago , maybe it went pop as the buyer was driving it home , I dont know.
I suppose i was just lucky that engine didnt fail with me running it at about 180bhp more than when it came out the box.
My question is does the 2.5 engines go pop if the cars engines and power is kept bog standard , Or is this just a problem when the car has been tuned to make 330bhp or higher ?

 

As said I belive they have had issues in all states of tune. I believe there have been head gasket issues on 2.5 WRX cars, but how common that is I don't know.

 

Having sifted through the engine failures thread some time back, it was mentioned that the STIs were more prone to blowing head gaskets due to the higher pressure of the bigger turbo and possibly being bounced off the rev limiter but whether this is true or not . . .

 

Fair comment. Im fairly certain my next car will be a hawk as i did like the 2.5 engine, But after what i have learnt on here it will definetly have to be a forged one and also been done by one of the well known engine builders . But having said that the feeling i get is that forged engines have not got a reputation for high miles and reliability ? I dont know , maybe i should just go for a low milage jdm 2.0 hawk.

 

It would appear that the factory standard and PPP map have had a big part to play in failures.
So, no with regards to your 'bog standard' question

 

I'm not aware forged engines struggle with high mileages unless the engine is built incorrectly e.g. Piston slap etc.

Forged parts are stronger than the stock crap so they should last ages if done properly.

Agreed with the points about us saying it's a great engine (the 2.5) if built properly. It is a great engine when built properly, in fact it seems great in stock form until it goes. My argument is that it should have been built properly to begin with - either with forged parts or just not in a way that made it blow up with standard cast internals.