Anyone here have experience with Subaru, Volvo or Mazda?

[future rs]

The only thing about Subarus is to stay away from the old 2.5L non-turbo cars. They went through head gaskets pretty badly.

Otherwise, they are very solid. The only issue with them is that they have a lot of suspension travel, which makes emergency lane changes a more interesting experience.

To be more specific, this issue was most apparent in the DOHC 2.5l NA engines. The EJ25d from the earlier impreza 98-99 and the early year subaru foresters from same years had these issues. If you get a newer model 2.5 from 2000+ the headgasket issue was almost non existent. Keep in mind the 2.5L engine only came in the forester and impreza 2.5 RS from 98-2001/2. (and of course all the newer models from 2002 up but those are slightly different)

The 2003 impreza WRX had a slightly different coolant system than the previous 2002 WRX. It contributed to some weird cooling issues but nothing major.

The earlier model Impreza (98-2001) and forester (98-2002) had almost identical interiors and wiring and shared the same motor and transmission. These years have some weird electrical issues that cause some interior lights to work intermittently. Can be annoying and a PITA to track down and fix.

[CompleteCustoms]

i just bought a 2002 subaru forester and i love it! i needed a winter car since i live in new hampshire and winters with an e30 are a terrible idea. i like it a lot and love the room it has and how amazing it is in the snow. basically if your looking for a winter car definitely get a subaru.

I think, of the Subarus we are considering, a Forester is my first choice. They are the biggest and the best looking (1st or 2nd gen at least, the new ones are becoming too much like SUVs).

Unfortunately my e30 is my only car, so I have to drive it as a winter car. We haven't got much snow in West Michigan yet though, I haven't even had to put on winter tires yet. (Looking for a set of cheap rims if anybody has some. I got a great deal on tires so I just need some 14" rims, preferably steelies or some bottlecaps, any condition as long as they are round and hold air.)

[CompleteCustoms]

I don't think you'll go wrong with any of the 3 listed. And at the rate this winter is going, you may not have to worry about how good it is in the snow lol.

Whereabouts in GR are you?

You're not kidding about our lack of snow. I'm originally from the tip of the mitt so I am used to getting a ton. When I first moved down here it was surprising how much less GR get, but these past two years it is almost non existent.

We're on the NE side, like a quarter mile NE of Riverside Park. Where are you?

[CompleteCustoms]

I am a huge Subaru fan. I DD my 5th Subaru after having owned a WRX wagon, 2 Impreza Outback Sports and a 2001 Outback. I would have zero problem recommending any Outback or Forester past 2005. In fact, my wife will be replacing her 2002 Civic with one soon. I like the longitudinal engine layout which makes working on the Roo's easier. Subarus also have the best AWD system of any crossover. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ooQRxlChvMw

That being said, the Volvo V70 is a little bigger. I added brackets for more legroom in all my Subarus (I am 6'5) which makes the small rear seating areas even smaller. Some years, the Volvo AWD system is questionable but I am not sure if they sorted it out by 2005. The Volvo's transverse engine makes getting to parts of the engine a little harder but its not too bad. A FWD, non-turbo (for serviceability and fuel cost) V70 would be my 3rd choice after the Outback then Forester non-turbos (again, just serviceability and fuel cost).

NASIOC is the place to research all things Subaru. Good luck

Thanks for the input. It sounds like we really can't go wrong with any of the options, but based on everyone's feedback, I think I'm starting to lean towards a Forester or V70. It's good to know that Subarus are a little small (I'm 6' 5" as well); I guess we should probably go test drive one to see if it's an issue. I don't drive her car that often though anyway. Is there a big difference in reliability and parts cost between NA and Turbo versions of Subarus or Volvos. I, of course, would like a turbo, but she doesn't really care.

[future rs]

I think, of the Subarus we are considering, a Forester is my first choice. They are the biggest and the best looking (1st or 2nd gen at least, the new ones are becoming too much like SUVs).

Unfortunately my e30 is my only car, so I have to drive it as a winter car. We haven't got much snow in West Michigan yet though, I haven't even had to put on winter tires yet. (Looking for a set of cheap rims if anybody has some. I got a great deal on tires so I just need some 14" rims, preferably steelies or some bottlecaps, any condition as long as they are round and hold air.)

The second generation of forester (2002+) is a much better buy. They have nicer interiors and less problems with electrical. They also share a ton of parts with other models (most subaru's are like legos) The forester XT was also offered in 2004 witch has a 2.5L turbo engine similar to the Subaru impreza WRX STI. The great thing about these cars is suspension from the STI and sportier models swap onto the forester along with lots of the performance parts to make one hell of a fun winter ride. 300+ whp AWD family wagon is always a good time :nice:

[future rs]

Thanks for the input. It sounds like we really can't go wrong with any of the options, but based on everyone's feedback, I think I'm starting to lean towards a Forester or V70. It's good to know that Subarus are a little small (I'm 6' 5" as well); I guess we should probably go test drive one to see if it's an issue. I don't drive her car that often though anyway. Is there a big difference in reliability and parts cost between NA and Turbo versions of Subarus or Volvos. I, of course, would like a turbo, but she doesn't really care.

You will end up paying more money for parts on the Volvo. And the difference in parts for the Turbo and Non turbo subaru models isn't much.

Just like most cars timing belt at 90k is recommended on the subaru. Replace all idlers and tensioner on the subaru as these fail more often then the belt itself.

[CompleteCustoms]

my mom had a mazda 6 wagon for a about 5 years. it had the 6AT and sport package. the car was wonderful, not a single issue, fun to drive, decent gas mileage and plenty of power. they don't nearly have the rust issues that plagued mazda 3's and proteges. parts are cheap enough and the car was easy to work on. you have about point about the FWD, but some good winter tires might mitigate most of the issues you come across.

Glad to hear someone chiming in on the Mazda. They aren't very popular, but I've always liked them. The biggest issue we will probably have is finding one, not many around the West Michigan area.

I don't have any issues with FWD, my previous car was a VW GTI, it was unstoppable with a decent set of winter tires. I've never had AWD, but I think you could get away with running all seasons year-round with it. FWD is manageable with all seasons in the winter, but I really prefer her to have winter tires. So I'm just trying to avoid having to buy an extra set of wheels and tires.

[CompleteCustoms]

The great thing about these cars is suspension from the STI and sportier models swap onto the forester along with lots of the performance parts to make one hell of a fun winter ride. 300+ whp AWD family wagon is always a good time :nice:

Agreed. Someone that lives in my area has a lowered Legacy Wagon that my wife saw before me. She doesn't really care about cars, but she liked it enough she had to tell me about it. I saw it about a week later, it's pretty badass. I think what would be ideal for me is a Forester with the 2.5T and a manual, but I might not get my way since it's her car. I wouldn't be able to tweak it too much right now since we are really focused on paying off our student loans, but we will probably own it for a long time so eventually it might become a 300+ whp AWD family wagon.

I must admit that I was very happy when she said she was thinking about a Subaru. I don't know a lot about them, but I do know they have a strong performance aftermarket. My boss actually rallies a WRX and I know a few of the guys that wrench for him, so I would have plenty of people that could help me work on it.

[325ix]

My mom has an '02 XC70. It is wonderful in the snow, has tons of room for things and gets decent gas mileage. It also has a good bit of power. All we have had to do maintenance wise is the t-belt and water pump. Otherwise just oil changes. The only real problem I have with it is that it kind of eats tires.

We also have an '09 Legacy. It is the base engine with an auto tranny. I have never driven a slower car in my life. However, it returns decent mileage. The interior seems to hold up pretty well and it is fairly comfy but, we have had a decent amount of problems with it. The tranny slips sometimes and we always have warning lights on for things such as brakes.

I would take a Volvo over the Subbie.

[Stanley Rockafella]

Is there a big difference in reliability and parts cost between NA and Turbo versions of Volvos. I, of course, would like a turbo, but she doesn't really care.

From a Volvo stand point, there's really no difference in terms of reliability and parts costs b/t the turbo and NA versions. I purchased (foolishly) an 04 S60 with 5 speed stick and NA engine believing I would save $ on repairs and fuel with the NA over the turbo and boy was I wrong! i should have just splurged on the turbo model as it could easily be run on cheaper gas too (the NA required prem. for some strange reason?!?!).

Your wife won't care until she get's behind the wheel and starts complaining at how slow the NA version is. Get any version of the turbo with FWD and be done with it (most are auto tragic anyway). Make sure to do tranny flushes with the correct Mobil 3309 atf.