david 1664

I am looking to get an outback. looking at a gen 3 1999-2003
not sure if i should go with the 2.5 or 3 L engine.

what are the pros and cons please advice needed

thanks

David

scooby546

iTrader: (1)

Hi mate, I had a few Legacy's in my time, but only one outback - I had a 2001 H6 outback up until earlier this year, and it was a really good car. Its got a timing chain rather than the belt on the other 4 cyl engines which is good for maintenance costs, I found the space was great, ground clearance was also good (about the same as hyundai tucson incidentally which was a surprise). Self levelling rear suspension is handy for heavy stuff, really comfy capable car, I really enjoyed it.

Mine was knocking on the door of 80k miles, had to replace one rear drop link and one O2 sensor and weld up the rear back box but that was it. Incidentally Subaru would charge about £300 for a O2 sensor (H6 has three in total) but you can get them independantly if required, dead easy to replace the front ones (most likely ones to fail), iirc i paid about £100 for one sensor after import duty etc.

Hope that helps,

Cheers

Pete

stanmo

iTrader: (1)

My wife has a MY02 H6 from new, currently on over 84k. It's not bad, think hers had the odd occasion where it was difficult to start, when damp - Subaru couldn't sort it out, but it hasn't done it for a while now.

Handling isn't up to WRX / STI levels, tends to understeer, but then being used to a lowered/modded UK turbo and a type 25, it's not a fair comparison.

Have had one battery, and a suspension arm that has needed changing. Tyres are a little unusual, Yokohama Geolanders, which can be 10 or 20 pounds more than the usual T1-Rs or F1GS that impreza users buy.

As a workhorse, it's pretty good, doing the school run every day, towing a caravan (groan), filling up the boot with shopping, dog, prams, etc. Currently getting about 27mpg in this weather, auto box probably doesn't help. On a longish 40-50+ mile run sometimes breaks 30mpg.

The local Subaru dealer (Haddocks) refused to believe our reasonable fuel consumption, so if this is the general opinion, prices will be deflated. Might be worth going for an 03 or later model, I think this had an equal length manifold and revised ECU, allowing an extra ~10% power plus setting the profile switch to 'Power' raises the auto box shift point when going for it.

Not having to change a rubber cambelt is certainly a bonus at service time. Air and oil filters are the same as impreza - costs should be similar, except for cheaper insurance.

My in-laws had a 2.5 outback - which was a bit underpowered in my opinion.

It's not the most popular station wagon in the US for nothing, I guess.

MOTORS S GT

iTrader: (2)

I had a 99 2.5 outback for 5 years, bought it with leaking head gaskets ( externally leaking, a common problem on the early 99-2000 cars) it had 53000 on the clock, apart from the gaskets, which can be done with the engine in, & usual service items it never gave a moments trouble, & i towed my rally car up & down the country with it.
When i sold it it had 175000 miles on it, still on its original exhaust too.
The only thing which showed any wear was the fuel filler flap .
They are a bit sensitive to the tyres you fit, they don't really like anything other than the Yoko Geolanders, they are as mentioned a little dearer, but do suit the car, & last well.

david 1664

Thank you for your help. have bought a gen 3 1999 outback 2.5. collecting next week

David

quicker

iTrader: (6)

Hi David, Have you tried:-
www.uklegacy.com