If you buy a Subaru, you are an idiot. I should know, I’m a double idiot. My first Subaru, a 1998 Outback blew its head gasket at 120k miles. Cost me $2400 to replace. Being stupid, I figured they must have solved the problem by 2009. Nope, my 2009 Legacy just blew the head gasket at 107k miles. Subaru offered me 25% of the $2200 repair cost. I took it because it’s better than a poke in the eye with a sharp stick, but I will NEVER buy another Subaru. I mean c’mon, you can’t engineer a better head gasket in 11 years? Tell you what Subaru, your engineers suck. Have a competition on bring your kid to work day and have them design a new head gasket with crayons and colored pencils. They couldn’t do worse. Oh, and your “love” commercials, how about showing your customers some “love” by actually paying for a significant part of the repair. Taking 25% off a $150 shop rate is still putting a lot of $$$ in your pockets. Fool me twice, shame on me. I had a Toyota Celica that had the original clutch at 180,000 miles.
Subaru’s engine design looks like it would work really well for keeping the engine cool, what with all that empty space for coolant provided surrounding the almost free-standing cylinders. But apparently this has a downside, the head gasket hasn’t much to grip on to, and that becomes a potential failure point.
c’mon MIke, you can try their new engine design - they seem have traded an old and boring head gasket failures for high oil consumption and related oil starvation failures :]
LOL. I know, right? Even after the first failure, I was still a Subaru fan. I was even talking up the Crosstrek to my mother who’s looking for a small SUV. The dealer gave me one as a loaner while they replaced that crappy Takata air bag thing. I really liked it. Then when I went to pick up my Legacy, they told me the bad news. Now I’m steering her towards the Hyundai Tucson. My wife has had a Santa Fe for almost 9 years and still loves it. No problems. How does Subaru maintain such a strong reputation for engineering excellence?
That engine in the pic is not a 2.5…
I reiterate that retorquing of the head bolts after some run time could prevent a lot of head gasket issues.
right, the pictured is H6, which is virtually indestructible Subaru engine, so whatever we see on the picture is likely a result of abuse
on 2.5 EJ head-gasket topic, seriously, after many-many years Subaru did not care to do a thing ?!?
Yes, engines in 2007+ were supposedly getting some “updated gaskets” and we were told “now it is OK”, then reports of similar failures started to popup.
I used to have 2007 Outback with normally aspirated 2.5 - it was a great car, but I sold it just before it hit 100K mark as I was afraid to hit the issue
Repair shops specializing in Subaru repairs were reporting that 2.5 with turbo was not prone to failures, as they used some special multi-layer head gasket design, which fitted normally aspirated engine just fine, moreover, they were reporting that using that [more expensive] gasket in normally aspirated engines resulted in vehicle not getting back with this problem ever. Taking it with a grain of salt, but I assume it worked much better in any case.
Now, as a formed owner of 5 Subarus and still liking the brand, I would rather see them spending $20 more per car with a better gasket rather than pouring more and more ads into any media they can reach. Not a Subaru way unfortunately 
To be fair, new FB engine design will definitely plug a head-gasket issue for good, but now they have an excessive oil burn issue plaguing it
I was hoping to get back to Subie after they fix FB childhood issues, but it looks like they are not out of the woods yet.
a coworker bought a new 2017 legacy. the awd aspect seems nice in mn snow conditons vs a fwd camry or accord. but i think the new subies have cvt trans like the accords? only the camry has a regular auto?
I have a Forester with that engine, running 0-20 oil, never burned a drop. Non turbo. (35k miles)
I did notice that the dealers add an extra quart of oil, because of that fear. I always have to ask them to remove that quart.
Yes, it does have the CVT, but it performs great. 34 MPG in the summer. (but bummer, 26-30 in the winter)
how many miles you have on it?
I bet after 50-60K you might notic it t start burning oil, this is what I’ve read… this is if you are lucky and did not get to that 5% of lucky ones who has a profound burn right from factory
https://www.torquenews.com/1084/now-subaru-s-oil-consumption-lawsuit-settled-what-should-you-do
while they settled for some model years, new reports pour to carcomplaints.com, I’ve read some note from Subaru that they are now down to 1-2% of cars showing it from new… great accomplishment??
my experience with EJ engine (5 vehicles) was that Subaru burn oil: something like 0.5 to 1.5 quart in 5K miles, this is considered “normal”, moreover, they will not accept a warranty claim until you show above 1 quart burn in 1000 miles
switch to my current Nissans (6 vehicles sample) - I have had something like 0.1-0.2 quarts burn over 5K miles, using good synthetics of the same brand across all vehicles I reference here
Worst engine ever? My vote goes to the Vega.
I was one of the suckers that bought one. 
Hard to beat the Vega engine on a ‘worst’ list. What would be #2?
Here’s one: the ‘Iron Duke’ 2.5L 4 that GM put in the Fiero. Not a bad engine before, but they had to cut the oil capacity to make it fit, so if oil got a little too low the engine blew. If the connecting rod exited the crankcase a fire could (and did) result.
i vote for the caddy northstar. that is similar design issue with headgaskets. but the owners income level seems to skew the repair route.
are subaru owners lower income on average vs the caddy owners?
do more subarus get fixed vs the caddy owners just trading it in on a new caddy?
lower income means “tighter” owners who keep cars longer with more miles?
higher income caddy owners who prefer new car vs fixing old car?
That’s a tough question. I guess anything with a Lucas electrical system. 
Is this the 2.5L? If so, it looks pretty similar in design as far as head gasket robustness compared to the H6 I posted above apparently.
As some of you know, I’ve worked for 3 Subaru dealers over the years starting back in the late 70s. Subaru was having head gasket issues starting in the early 70s.
I’ve done more Subaru head gasket replacements that I can even begin to remember and have never had one come back on me for a failure. OEM gaskets, aftermarket, whatever; I’ve used them all.
Just my humble opinion, but I blame the problem on lack of a head bolt retorque and the elimination of 2 head bolts by going to 6 total.
Anytime I did a head gasket job I allowed the engine to sit all night. The next day the head bolts could be cranked down a bit more due to loosening slightly from gasket crush.
Something to keep in mind. The only time Subaru did not have a HG issue (excluding overheating…) was between 1977 and the mid/late 80s.
Why? Because Subaru recommended a head bolt retorque after a run-in period.
In the mid 80s Subaru said that the hydraulic lifter engines no longer needed to be retorqued BUT the mechanical lifter engines did require this.
So what happened during this period? The hydraulic engines started leaking whereas the mechanical ones did not. Subaru’s fix was to retorque the hydraulic engine head bolts also.
The engines back in this era also used 8 head bolts instead of 6 and some models actually had 10; 8 large and 2 small.
Just some trivia for what it’s worth… 
Great recap, @ok4450, thanks!
The DIY-ish part of me enjoyed reading it a lot.
The end-customer part of me was angered a lot, as I would not expect to buy a new/shiny car and then go for the sneaky head-bolt re-torque somewhere within first 5-10K miles, as dealer would not do it, and if I would do it in any traceable source, it might be a grounds for warranty cancellation, so, the middle of the night and tightly shut garage is a time and a place? 
nice pic of the 6 headbolt block. anyone have a pic of the former 8 boltblock? i am wondering where the extra 2 headbolts are placed. i assume the casting is different in that there are 2 bolts at the top and bottom between the cylinders? so there is less open waterjacket void?
google mostly shows 6-bolt ones:
https://www.google.com/search?rlz=1C1CHBF_enUS779US779&biw=1422&bih=866&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=6Vt8WoTDGMT2zgKYjqioBw&q=ej25++short+block&oq=ej25++short+block&gs_l=psy-ab.3…0j0i24k1l3.67155.67253.0.69214.2.2.0.0.0.0.73.138.2.2.0…0…1c.1.64.psy-ab…0.2.137…0i7i30k1.0.4zNRD2Xfe7w
