2.5i vs 3.0h6

Alright guys im back again with a new round of cars im looking at. The 2006 2.5i deal fell through. the guy got really sketchy and wouldn't lower the price even with the info I gave him. now Im looking at a 2003 legacy limited and a 2002 outback sedan ll bean h6. both are auto. legacy has 65k and outback has 88k. both are 8 grand. they are both in really nice shape with the exception the legacy has a few chips in the paint on the rear bumper. Legacy is at Dan Perkins Subaru vs the outback at a local small dealership. Legacy is deep red, no wing and outback is dark green on top of tan with no wing. Legacy is gray cloth vs outback tan leather. I really just want to know your opinion on the H6 3.0 vs the 2.5i. yes I know the 2.5i is gutless compared to the gt and probably the 3.0(haven't driven it yet, going tomorrow) Im looking for fuel economy overall and reliability, cost to run yadda yadda yadda. I could really use your guys opinions as I only have 1 who really knows what hes talking about with subarus.

thanks

ed

here are some pics

The only benefit to the 3.0 is the power, and lack of timing belt.

Everything else goes to the 2.5

Reliability and longtivity, it's a tie.

I'm also fairly certain the 3.0 requires 91 octane. Well, it's recommended, at least.

 

The 2.5 will likely be more reliable and less costly to repair if something does go wrong.

 

Personally, I would probably buy the 3.0, but I like the added power of a six cylinder over the economy of the four. If economy is your game and you're concerned about maintenance costs I'd avoid it.

2.5i will probably have head gasket issues. EJ251's were notorious for them. They usually happen around 100,000-150,000 miles. If they gaskets go, repairs will cost no less than $1,800. In addition, as you mentioned, the EJ251 is gutless to say the least.

 

I have a 2004 Outback H6 LLBean Edition (Wagon). Or rather, my brother has it now. It was purchased new by my mom in 2004, became my first car at 90,000 miles, and is now my little brother's first car with over 135,000 miles on the clock. I swear by the EZ30D - easily one of Subaru's best engines. It pulls strong, is built amazingly well, and exhibits none of the long-term problems that the EJ251's show time and time again. In addition, it's much more powerful and torquey, so you don't have to wring its neck constantly. Honestly, the biggest letdown for the EZ30D is actually the transmission it's hooked up to - the 4EAT - although that will be a weak point with both cars it sounds like hahaha. I also swear by the LLBean Edition - the leather-appointed interior is in a whole other league from the cloth interior IMO, and the stock sound system is very good for a car as old as that.

 

For me, the Outback sedan takes the win easily.

 

Also worth noting: yes, the Outback only takes premium. I averaged about 21 mpg combined cycle in mine, mostly doing spirited drives on canyon roads. With the extra acceleration you'll have to do in the 2.5i, your average MPG will probably be closer to 23-24 MPG. So really, not too big a difference in terms of gas mileage, although regular gas stings slightly less than premium.

For me, the Outback sedan takes the win easily.

 

 

Can you confirm that the 3.0 in that year requires 91 octane?

Can you confirm that the 3.0 in that year requires 91 octane?

 

Yes, it does.

 

Well, "requires" is a loose term. My dad's been driving it for the last ~10,000 miles while my brother's been learning to drive and I've been off at college... pretty sure he's been filling it with regular the entire time

 

It still runs, so apparently it can also put up with some abuse I guess...

The H6 does require 91.

They all did, up until the 3.6 H6.

I'd also use the term "required" loosely in terms of the 91 octane. My buddy ran regular on a 2003 H6 and it ran just fine with no issues (regarding the fuel change anyway) for 100k miles. However, I'd still use the 91 just for performance reasons since it is more "tuned" that way.

 

personally I'd get the 2.5i just for the fact that it's the amazing burgundy red that subaru used to use and I hate the outback bumpers with a passion. The 2.5i will be more reliable in the long run I think.

personally I'd get the 2.5i just for the fact that it's the amazing burgundy red that subaru used to use and I hate the outback bumpers with a passion. The 2.5i will be more reliable in the long run I think.

 

Lol as someone who owns a white Outback, I can concur with you on both of those points. I really wish that SOA had offered the Outback in just one color, and I wish that SOA had just given us the Australian Outback's full body kit (front/rear bumper, sideskirts, grille, lower trim panels, flares, headlights/tail-lights, etc.). Although SOA did give us the nifty spoiler that's on my wagon, so that's good hahaha.

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/2001-2002_Subaru_Outback_(MY02)_H6_3.0_station_wagon_(2011-03-10)_01.jpg

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/09/2001-2002_Subaru_Outback_(MY02)_H6_3.0_station_wagon_(2011-03-10)_02.jpg

 

The 2.5i will be more reliable in the long run I think.

 

Whut...

Alright thanks guys. I will be driving the h6 today to see if its really a deal breaker for me on the 2.5. and yes I know about the headgasket issue. My one friend who I mentioned has 3 and has replaced all 3 by himself. Hes a head mechanic at a local shop so honestly im not too worried about that because I know hell be able to help. and my mpg definitely ranges in the top of the highway scale. im one of those guys that states he gets highway average because I live right next to the entrance and go to work early enough and get out early enough to avoid all traffic. Plus I do 60 on cruise control the whole way unless im running late. Personally Im more of an offroading fan and the outback gives me that whole vibe. I just don't know if the premium and less mpg will be worth it. oh and kind of an odd question, how does the Subaru leather hold up to dogs? I had a dodge Durango with leather and compared to my moms chevy impala in leather it was a champ.

Oh and for the gutless 2.5i, I drove the 2003 yesterday and I had driven a 2008 2.5i pzev about a week ago. NIGHT AND DAY. I felt like I could actually go in the 2003. I thought that was really weird too. possibly because of weight and emissions?

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/2001-2002_Subaru_Outback_(MY02)_H6_3.0_station_wagon_(2011-03-10)_01.jpg

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/09/2001-2002_Subaru_Outback_(MY02)_H6_3.0_station_wagon_(2011-03-10)_02.jpg

 

 

Holy giant pictures batman!

Oh and any towing differences with the 2 cars? I most likely will be using a jeep that I own but its always a possibility.

My wife had an 2003 Outback H6 for about 5 years. Got it used with about 70k. It was super reliable. Only minor issues came up. We had to replace a couple sensors one time. Another time the idler pulley seized and snapped the serpentine belt. Wasn't a big deal, I just picked up some new bearings and a belt and replaced them. I did oil changes every 3k and when we got rid of it last year for a new Outback, it had somewhere around 110k and still didn't use a drop of oil between oil changes.

 

The 4eat isn't great and mileage was terrible with her typical driving routine. She was lucky to get better than 20mpg. Average during duration of ownership was probably around 15 mpg. Steady diet of 91 or 93 octane while in our possession.

Lol as someone who owns a white Outback, I can concur with you on both of those points. I really wish that SOA had offered the Outback in just one color, and I wish that SOA had just given us the Australian Outback's full body kit (front/rear bumper, sideskirts, grille, lower trim panels, flares, headlights/tail-lights, etc.). Although SOA did give us the nifty spoiler that's on my wagon, so that's good hahaha.

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/2001-2002_Subaru_Outback_(MY02)_H6_3.0_station_wagon_(2011-03-10)_01.jpg

 

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/09/2001-2002_Subaru_Outback_(MY02)_H6_3.0_station_wagon_(2011-03-10)_02.jpg

 

 

 

Whut...

with a bigger engine comes faster driving and therefore putting a lot more stress on the engine. think about it... haha. sure the 2.5 will obviously need head gaskets but I can't imagine the 3.0 will go much longer without needing that as well haha

3.0 is much more reliable than the 2.5i. the damn thing is practically bulletproof if kept stock. id get the 3.0 in a heartbeat over the 2.5i

with a bigger engine comes faster driving and therefore putting a lot more stress on the engine. think about it... haha. sure the 2.5 will obviously need head gaskets but I can't imagine the 3.0 will go much longer without needing that as well haha

 

Let's see...timing chain, under-bucket shims, non-failing head gaskets....I've got 236Kmi on my 01 H6 and all I've had issues with were serpentine belt tension pulley bearings (that seized before I could get to replacing them), slightly dribbling valve-cover gaskets that I paid to replace just because I want a perfectly clean engine, and the transmission main o-ring failing after a full tranny flush. All in all, as it's been stated, the 3.0 H-6 are bullet proof engines!

 

-r

Alright thanks guys. I will be driving the h6 today to see if its really a deal breaker for me on the 2.5. and yes I know about the headgasket issue. My one friend who I mentioned has 3 and has replaced all 3 by himself. Hes a head mechanic at a local shop so honestly im not too worried about that because I know hell be able to help. and my mpg definitely ranges in the top of the highway scale. im one of those guys that states he gets highway average because I live right next to the entrance and go to work early enough and get out early enough to avoid all traffic. Plus I do 60 on cruise control the whole way unless im running late. Personally Im more of an offroading fan and the outback gives me that whole vibe. I just don't know if the premium and less mpg will be worth it. oh and kind of an odd question, how does the Subaru leather hold up to dogs? I had a dodge Durango with leather and compared to my moms chevy impala in leather it was a champ.

 

My best MPG in my H6 Outback was just barely under 25 MPG average on the longest leg of a trip up to Mammoth (~180 miles). That was with cruise control set at 75 and one passenger.

 

I don't know how the leather is with dogs, but I can tell you that it ages nicely and feels firm and durable in mine after tons of use (family car for ~6 years). It's also very easy to clean, since it remains taut and doesn't develop wrinkles. Is the one you're looking at perforated tan leather, or tan with the brown center insert?

with a bigger engine comes faster driving and therefore putting a lot more stress on the engine. think about it... haha. sure the 2.5 will obviously need head gaskets but I can't imagine the 3.0 will go much longer without needing that as well haha

 

Not in my experience hahaha; I very rarely need to go past half-throttle in my 2004 Outback H6, but driving a standard Outback with the 2.5i, I needed to go way past half-throttle constantly. I mean that might be down to my driving style, which is kind of built on the theory of power-on-demand, but still...

 

Haha and also, the 2.5 will need head gaskets because the factory head gaskets were faulty. That's why so many people replace them regardless of whether or not they are blown or showing signs of going. The factory head gaskets on the H6 were fine.

3.0 is much more reliable than the 2.5i. the damn thing is practically bulletproof if kept stock. id get the 3.0 in a heartbeat over the 2.5i

 

What if not kept stock???...

 

Just wondering

The manual and the sticker on the fuel door of the 3.0 states that it "Recommends Premium Fuel" which is exactly what it says, a recommendation.

 

I do notice on mine that when I use 87, I sometimes have a very slight hesitation on hard acceleration which I do not have when I use 91 or higher. I also notice that my fuel economy seems to be better with 91 or higher.

 

But, I can use 87 and have no major issues with it.

 

As stated before, the serpentine belt idler pulleys are known to fail on the H6, so I would replace them first (they are quite cheap). The only other real weakness to the engine is the valve cover gaskets, which are not expensive but sort of a pain to replace.

Id go with the Legacy off pure cosmetic appeal alone that LL Bean is hideous BUT as stated before the H6 is solid and relatively easy to maintain over the long haul.

I own a 01 h6 outback bought it at 96k 5 years ago and its still running strong at 188k on the clock. Did regular maintenance and always used 91. I have only rean into minor problems with it but nothing that wasn't solved within a day or two, (fuel filter hose went, fuel pump) I love the power of it and like many people I too wish it came in one color.

My Subaru Master Tech in San Diego swears by the 3.0 H6 - he's never had to tear one down for mechanical reasons - owner stupidity, yes, but mechanical failures, never.

 

Run it on at least 91 Octane and it will be happy, run it on less than that and it will knock. It's a high-compression engine (10.7:1 IIRC) so it needs the higher octane fuel. That's why Subaru requires it. Only 0.8" longer than an EJ25 and produces 30% more torque and power across the curve than the 2.5. It's more efficient spark delivery (coilpacks on each plug vs coilpack and wires) helps it to get more power out of each stroke at less strain per cylinder... 212 HP/6 = 35.3 HP/cylinder versus the 165/4 = 41.4 HP/cylinder

 

If I had the choice and the price was the same-ish, and the finish was better on the Outback, I'd choose that, all else equal. Slightly more cost with 6 plugs per, but more than offset by the TB costs and issues IMHO.

 

And, if it's a VDC, buy it. If it's an LLB, buy it. Can probably be bought for $7500 or slightly less, if you want