After reading the looong post about people reporting ringland failure on the 2.5's it seems now that there is a stigma attached to it from people on this forum.

If anyone mentions 'I am looking at one of the new hatch scooby' type threads then immediately they get shot down saying the engine is made of chocolate and it will die as soon as you drive it down the road (Exagerrated but you get the idea)

I have a feelling that because of the 2.5 failure thread it seems to be gospel now that every 2.5 will fail. I think as well that the people that respond to these threads have never experienced this as they a)Dont own one and b)Have read the failure thread.

For me I would not say they engine are **** per se as I have never experienced the issue myself as I dont own one.

How many actual 'people' suffered from this? 10? How many of these were actually sold? The reason why I sit on the fence on this one is of those that failed we dont know the reason for failure as there can be so many factors. Driven too hard, low oil, not allowed to cool down, poor quality oil etc...... All those who have engines fail will no doubt cvome on here and say that it was looked after better than their kids yadda yadda yadda.

It is always the bad ones that get pointed out, never the countless ones that have no issues.

 

At last, there is a god!

 

Most discerning motorists don't have THAT reason for not choosing one, or attaching a stigma.

It's simple really: the hatch looks like a Rover 25, and can ANYONE take that seriously?

 

Typical boring comment from a 'classic' owner.

 

What makes you say that I am a classic owner?

 

BTW Urban what were the total findings from your original post?

 

To OP
There is a stigma attached to the 2.5 because it is a real issue
( yes I'm a owner )
If you had indeed done your research you would know that the 2.5 ej257 has several issues regarding strenth / tolerances per sa
From thin liners to h/g to ringland - / I'm sure your right in saying not all will fail but if you look world wide to include North America & Australia as this is the market the 2.5 was initially developed for you would see a figure of around 20% failure across the board / now if your telling me a 20% failure rate is acceptable from a motor manufacturer then your smoking something you shouldn't be / plain & simple the 2.5 will fail if boost is raised / red lining is common & water temps arnt taken note / saying that once issues are addressed its a beutifull engine with torque from the outset .

Regards

 

My point being though that can we really compare UK cars to US and Aus market versions? They can not be the same as the UK versions because of emmission controls fuel grade quality etc... They would be mapped differently to UK cars. Maybe Subaru supplied a one map fits all across the new range and here lies one of the problems. I am aware that Subaru did release a flash update to the 2.5 to help fix this 'problem'. I would be interested to know what % failure rate we have for UK supplied cars in standard form.

jazzyjembreaze have you had this engine failure on yours?

 

Yes / HG at 15000
& at time running 350 at 1.3

 

But can we not say the same for any Impreza turbo across the range from classics to hawks with the majority of engines having big ends fail , head gaskets go etc as these seem to be far more common it would appear than the issues with the 2.5

I would be interested to know what the failure rate as a % of UK supplied cars as a percentage of cars sold as this has never been noted anywhere as far as I can see.

 

You'd need the hard data rather than most forum polls, and you'll probably not get it, so you're left with anecdotes.

All I know is that the way I tune and have taught others to tune engines works reliably on everything except the EJ257 which behaves like a wobbly thing. Wishful thinking hoped otherwise, a ring land fracture and three head gasket failures later I gave up. Tuning the 4G63 after that was a revelation. My cat could do it.

 

I didn't - that was aimed at the 'looks like'

Too difficult to tell, each scenario was pretty much different

 

John, is your cat available to teach my cat?

To the OP buy a 2.5 and if it goes bang you were wrong, if not no worries They were recalled in the US, that would be enough for me!

LOL at alcazar

 

I think I would have to agree with you with there being a stigma attached to the 2.5 failures but if you had known (before buying) that a particular make/model had a known issue with it, would you want to go buy one.

Sounds like there isn't a definitive reason to the failures but it is common on the 2.5 ltr cars. Personally I think its luck of the draw and I think has put off sales for this model in particular. Maybe more owners should report on those who havent had issues not just the ones which have failured.

 

Is there any difference between the 2.5 hatch engine and 2.5 hawk engine.

I know of 2 hawks with over 100,000 miles on them and no problems so far.

 

Completely standard 07/07 WRX STi SPec D here, 26k miles, no issues.

 

You only have to look at the JDM version of the same car, is anyone aware of a single failure vs say 20% failure on the UK version?

TX.

 

53k mile hawk 2.5 here with 350bhp ran since last 10k (1.5 years) with no issues at all.

As said, keep the oil right, keep it serviced, keep it under the rev limiter will all help. But, if its going to go it will go regardless!

 

Sorry although I see both sides to this I appreciate where the OP is coming from and has vailed comments as yes some will be to do with poor maintenance and raising the boost etc but a fair amount have gone in standard form. This has no help to the downfall of the brand in the UK, what makes me chuckle is in my view as many imported sti's, wrx's and UK turbos have gone pop due to all the points the OP raised regarding the 2.5, poor fuel, mods, oil etc but yet no one is put off buying one but they are on the 2.5. Fair come on how many p1's went let alone the rest of the models.

All we can agree on is the 01-05 2.0 has been the best out of the box by far and if you want to tune a standard car with little expense then that's the block for you. And yes I've had all years, most models and engines, forged or not and the 2.5 is a cracking lump if left relatively alone or forged. Horses for courses but I run a 330s, 5k in my ownership and it's been faultless...... Tempt fate I wonder lol

 

I am an owner of a 2008 hatch STI. I bought it with about 70k on the clock and I knew about the engine failure issue, mine had the ECU re-flash at 40k so guessed I would take a punt (It was a good few grand cheaper that any other hatch at the time due to mileage so guessed that the money I saved would go towards forging it should the worst happen).

I bought it with the intention of modding in the future. Now, 2 and a half years down the line, it's been mapped twice and now running roughly mid 380's at 1.42 bar of boost. Most people would say that I am sailing close to the wind on the standard internals but the car still gets used every day with all sorts of driving - cold starts, short journeys, long motorway runs, fast road driving and more recently a few track days. Basically the only thing it has not done is tow a trailer !!

The engine is now a shade over 98k miles so I know it will not last forever, but I am not worrying too much.... I am planning a forged build soon to go for more power and carrying on enjoying it.

As has been said in this post.... look after the services and don't rag the ***** out of it and there should be no worries

 

Not sure I can agree on the 2.0, certainly not the UK variants which have a horrible power band.

 

I have read about plenty of 2.0L engines with HG failure and spinning shells too.

While the 2.5 is not the strongest engine out there i think the issue that made the engine s fail in the hatch more prominent was the fuel cut rev limit. I believe the new map lowered the red line and had a softer fuel cut. Not really a fix imho but made the problem less likely. Why did they choose to cut the fuel rather than cut the spark at the red line?

 

Can I just ask something quickly here, what is "ringland faliure"? What does it mean? Chocolate pistons, or rings, or both perhaps?

 

Was not talking about the power band but more the fact in standard from or modded they are extremely strong, personally know of very few failures and a lot of them running low to high 4's and still going strong, try and do that in an older "classic" 2.0ltr or the newage 2.5

 

Rectal prolapse.


Possibly!

 

Ringland is the part of the piston casting that sits between the piston rings. Its the weakest part due to the amount of material there and the distance it sticks out from the main casting.
Many things can stress this area of the piston including detonation due to the opposing forces , piston rock in the bore due to short skirt pistons and or slack piston to bore tolerance,hydrolic locking. Another thing that can cause damage to ringlands is poor piston assembly during re-build. If a ring is not compressed enough and catches the top of the liner while the piston is being pushed down, this can fracture the ringland.

cracks that run this way \ / are normally due to poor assembly. cracks that run the other way ie the wider part at the bottom are normally due to hydrolic locking / too much pressure in the top or detonation.

 

exactly what he said

 

Agree. Here is my classic running 406 BHP from nearly 10 years ago: https://www.scoobynet.com/drivetrain...s-at-star.html

I pulled out a perfectly good working engine to put in a 2.3. The engine went into another car and a few years later I heard it was still running strong, but at lower power.

Maybe they cut the fuel on the rev limiter to avoid unburnt fuel igniting in the cats. Much OEM apparent strangeness is usually to do with cat protection or emissions/noise.

In terms of headgaskets, a lot was blamed on my 2.0 heads on 2.5 block, or clamping, or surface finish, or detonation. The final attempt lasted 10000 miles with a rotated GT30R running 1.6 bar peak and it never knocked once not even during mapping as I reused the map from the previous build and it was sweet, I always had the peak knock reading on the Power FC checked. The lambda on full boost over 4000 RPM was never leaner than 0.78 as I had a wideband gauge in the cabin. It was an amazingly fast car and the 2.5 did a reasonable job of spooling it, but 10000 miles was too short a refresh interval for a daily driver.

My 4G63 saw 2.1 bar peak quite frequently. My EJ205 saw 2 bar frequently. Neither pushed any coolant.

 

I was also thinking they cut the fuel rather than spark due to emissions. Rather stupid way of doing it on a turbo engine imho. If you cut the fuel while on the red line with the turbo cramming massive amounts of air into the cylinders you will run very lean and that is sure to cause piston damage. Cutting the spark would cause richness and unburned fuel to enter the exhaust . Maybe this will damage the cat but im sure these top engineers could have worked out a solution for that. I think its down to tail pipe emissions due to un-burned fuel. Probably did not pass the new government emission type testing rules. I don't think the 2.5 is a bad engine, its just the rules it has to follow show out its weaknesses.

 

My standard MY02 WRX FSSH never raced or rallied etc. had big end failure at 75000 miles.