Engine failures
 

With regards to the above title, we hear and see a lot of posts regarding engine failures, has anyone official (maybe someone from SIDC) raised this with subaru UK?

I have personally experienced an engine failure on a my98 impreza turbo and was forced to sell the motor with a dead engine as I did not have the money at the time to fix. Currently now own a P1 and don't want this to happen again!!!

rob

P1 engines do have a habbit of going pop.

dipster

Apparently cause Subaru didn't do a very comprehensive job about converting the Sti V engine to run safely on UK fuel. IIRC Some kind of additives in the fuel tank that tend to have given up the ghost after about 60k.

Get it properly remapped for UK fuel, problem solved!

NS04

MY99 had an engine go!!!!!!

What would they raise? Whilst UK engines do fail from time to time, most scoobies that go pop are imports, then you have the whole fuel and unknown history problems creeping in! AFAIK there is no single inherent problem with the design of the engine that has been responsible for the majority of failures. If anything it seems to be another component weakness that seems to make engines let go, i.e. the MAF.

Like all engines, it has its strengths and weaknesses. You have to remember, classic engines will be getting on now and they are often driven hard....and not always very well! ;-)

NS04

Modify your car and expect it to go bang!!

Have you ever thought and wondered why SUBARU do NOT squeeze 400BHP out of their stock cars??? Have a little think, do some research, get the grey matter working and then the penny will drop ............... BECAUSE THEY DO NOT LIKE IT!!

The number of Derrrr brains on here who stretch their engines outside the design parameters and then squeal like babies when their engines blow up amazes me!! :rolleyes:

OK, there are the odd engine blow-ups due to faulty engines (as in EVERY vehicle you get a bad one now and again).

BUT, Subaru engines and cars are as solid as they come.

Foooook about with them at your own risk!! Just don't tar the rest because YOU have been a wally!! :rolleyes:

Pete

here here !

Keep the mods sensible and don't become obsessed with it and you'll have relaible quick motoring as I have with 4 cars in 9 years and no sign of an engine going bang and if you do decide to mod choose your tuner carefully. As with everything you gets what ya pays for

Steve

I do believe scoobyrob was raising a question. He never said he modified his engine, nor that when his old car's engine went, that it had been modified.

Why don't you f*ck off again pslewis? Surely there's an mx5 site somewhere for di(kheads like you. How is your hairdressers car BTW?

scoobyrob, ignore comments from pslewis, he's a old fart that thinks he's funny.

I wouldn't panic to much about your engine going. It does happen, but normally when people are seeing what the top spead is for a long time or continually ragging it about. If you look after it, you'll be fine (and I don't mean driving it like Miss Daisy!)

ben44 .... is that the same ben as Derrr Brain Benny from Crossroads?? Cos you're talking like a halfwit!! :rolleyes:

He asked why no-one had raised the issue of engine failure with SUBARU UK ..... I am simply stating that there IS NO ISSUE!!!!

Only idiots modify their cars and expect 100% reliability!! and only spoilt babies come on here to cry about it!!

Pete :D

PS, your wrong, you focus only on imports, as a P1 owner who's engine went pop at about 60k, as many have now done and as P1woc shows clearly, there is an issue. I agree modding is a reason for many to go and also hard driving/lack of care etc. can claim many, but when my P1 went both the company that did the rebuild and Subaru said there was an issue with the P1 but it would never be accepted, they hinted it surrounded the map and yes fuel etc, it appears there was a bit of cost saving with the chip and basically the type r one was used. Since the rebuild I have carried out quite a few mods and accepted it would go bang on the standard map, but after a trip to TSL and a grand later I am confident (argh it will blow now!!!) that if driven properly the car is safe.

One thing that does amaze me is people saying its blown but i did everything right and drove it carefully, yes, but did the owner before you?

Coming from you. Fooking hell, that is harsh.

So how is your mx5? Or don't you want to admit owning a girls car?

He IS an old fart.....























and...












he IS funny :)

IMO reasons for engine failures on scoobs are:

Wrong fuel used - jap cars
Stupid modifications - like super chips (poor maps) and bleed valves
Abuse - over revving
Neglect - not servicing the car when needed.

Agree - there is nothing wrong with the design etc - stay away from the above and you should be OK.

Agree - P1 maybee has a poor UK fuel map concidering it performance targets. solution - put good fuel in (e.g optimax) it or remap.

Not sure about MAFs???:)


Pete ... i thought youd gone?

Andy

Sorry Mr Lewis, but I completely disagree with you on this one. There is a massive issue to do with the "softness" on later engines. My mate just bought a completely standard MY00 UK Impreza turbo, 80K with full history (some dealer, some subaru specialist), previously owned by one lady. Shortly after getting the car, the air mass meter went down which I promptly changed, and within 2000 miles of it being replaced, No3 big end bearing collapsed. I am a fully qualified mechanic to trade, and have never seen such a pathetically soft engine that struggles to get by engine destruction after such a relatively minor thing as a airmass meter going wrong.

I do foolishly love the cars, but find it more than a tad annoying that you have to explain to your mates missus (who was driving the car at a steady 2000revs on the motorway and pulled in within 60 seconds of the noise appearing) that "these things happen on Subarus". They are now £2000 lighter now (with an engine out of a 54 WRX that is reputedly stronger) and quite rightly wondering why they sold a perfectly good Volvo V40 Turbo for something that has more reliability issues than the Rover K series engine.

It's always number three isnt it? Perhaps this is due to number 3 being the last injector receiving the lowest pressure? Some MYs have an inherent fault with the oil pump too.

Was it the whole engine + managment system? Did it fit straight in?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AC-scoobie

Was it the whole engine + managment system? Did it fit straight in?

---

Yes, it was just the inlet manifold, crank pulley and N/S inlet cam pulley (for the position senders) that needed changed. The boy tryed to flog us a Forrester Turbo engine, but this was more like a late model STi engine that had cam adjusters and such like on it, and could have fitted with a good deal of grief, but for the money he paid, he wanted something that just slid in.

GC8, I've looked to AndyF's website and you seem to be right about the fuel rail being part of the reason why No3 is the usual suspect (apparently it is more likely to detonate because of insuffucient fuel supply), but even so, it is no excuse for a standard car to allow it's engine to self destruct.

My personal opinion is that any perceived unreliability of these engines (99-00 Turbo and P1) is, in the vast majority of cases, down to contamination of the MAF sensor.

If there was a problem with the mapping then the engines would have been dying from the start and they weren't. Remember that I have probably done more 'hard' miles in these cars (certainly when they were new) than most and the only time I've seen any problems it's been down to contamination of the MAF sensor, primarily by oil due to too much being in the sump.

Set the oil level at half way between the marks and replace the MAF on the same schedule as the filter (every 30k IIRC) and you will significantly reduce the potential for problems. Change the air filter, decat, put too much oil in or run it past 60k on the original MAF and the chances go up significantly. One thing to remember is that when a failure of the MAF causes poor enough running to notice, it may well have been detting as well which puts the bearings under undue stress.

The relatively small numbers of failures that do happen also seem to be just after the cars change ownership as well, perhaps again re-inforcing the MAF contamination cause;
Just been serviced for the sale/new onwer and oil level too high + new owner trying to find out just how quick his new car is and using high rpm = oil around the breather system contaminating MAF sensor

Mike

Mike. Wouldnt it be great for the CEL to come on when ECU detects MAF problem?


Bob

the thing i have noticed is when you read cars for sale(imprezas) there are so many that have had new engine or rebuild!!! alot more than other makes of cars IMO!!!

PSlewis..you definately are wrong. Do a poll on here to see how many P1/Sti V/Sti V1 standard or slightly modified engines, mapped for UK fuel or not, have gone pop and you will find that there are many, mine included.

There is a well known, documented problem with big end bearing failure on these cars, so to state that there isn't a problem is incorrect.

Dave

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikeWood

My personal opinion is that any perceived unreliability of these engines (99-00 Turbo and P1) is, in the vast majority of cases, down to contamination of the MAF sensor.

---

Whilst I fully appreciate what you are saying Mike, and I realise that you are not willing to take our side on this subject, I think that you'll find that most people are quite disgusted that the failure of such a relatively "minor" part (whether due in part to there own negligence) can lead to self-destruction of an engine at (by modern standards) relatively low mileage, considering, as far as I have seen in any service schedule, there is no mention of replacing the MAF sensor. On no other engine that I have worked on so far, has the failure of such an item had such catastrophic consequences. Sorry to seem so harsh on this subject, but it is something that has a large percentage of the ownership worried.

My mates STI V6 Type-R went bang at around 50k - car was completely standard and he's owned it from new - serviced more or less every 6/7k
when it went for a rebuild @ Subaru they put the fault down to a faulty MAF sensor (even though he didnt notice anything wrong with the drive/idling/performance of the car)


Raf.

Can you people please paragraph your sentances, my eyes are hurting !! :mad:

Regards

Mike, as a side question then, I have a 99 Legacy GT-B that I have recently fitted a new engine to (No2 Conrod wanted to visit the outside world, but thats my fault and am not wanting to place any blame for that), is the MAF the same as Imprezas MAF's, and would you advise changing it as a service item.?
Thanks
Craig

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by No1

Can you people please paragraph your sentances, my eyes are hurting !! :mad:

---

I was always told in the English classroom that a paragraph is for a change of subject, not just the end of a sentence, thats why we use full stops, and as far as I'm aware, we have been using paragraphs at the correct places.
Craig

My personal opinion is that any perceived unreliability of these engines (99-00 Turbo and P1) is, in the vast majority of cases, down to contamination of the MAF sensor.

If there was a problem with the mapping then the engines would have been dying from the start and they weren't. Remember that I have probably done more 'hard' miles in these cars (certainly when they were new) than most and the only time I've seen any problems it's been down to contamination of the MAF sensor, primarily by oil due to too much being in the sump.

Set the oil level at half way between the marks and replace the MAF on the same schedule as the filter (every 30k IIRC) and you will significantly reduce the potential for problems. Change the air filter, decat, put too much oil in or run it past 60k on the original MAF and the chances go up significantly. One thing to remember is that when a failure of the MAF causes poor enough running to notice, it may well have been detting as well which puts the bearings under undue stress.

The relatively small numbers of failures that do happen also seem to be just after the cars change ownership as well, perhaps again re-inforcing the MAF contamination cause;
Just been serviced for the sale/new onwer and oil level too high + new owner trying to find out just how quick his new car is and using high rpm = oil around the breather system contaminating MAF sensor

Mike



Well is he right or wrong Pslewis? your mafs going to go soon:)

Hi Mike,


My personal opinion is that any perceived unreliability of these engines (99-00 Turbo and P1) is, in the vast majority of cases, down to contamination of the MAF sensor.





What about the cars from 93-98 though? these still go bang the same way but they have the better and more robust maf dont they? or do they not go bang as much?

Good to see you giving your oppinion on a subject like this:)

My Subaru is the most reliable car me or anyone in my family have ever had and that list includes mercs bimmers etc. It has a scooby ecu a full decat but gets good servicing and the turbo is warmed up and then down. The guy who owns northhants subaru has done 245k in his and he has decided now do do a rebuild before and engine failure occurs. I think if looked after they last if not then forget it. Its a 1997 car 75k

Soon to be for sale ;)