Has anyone had a 2.5 STi that hasn't crapped itself??

[Mandalore]

V10 SPM said:

vxr2010 said:

I looked at an 09 or 59 plate Sti , it was slow and not that exciting and involving to drive

I found that my 59 STI felt almost as quick as my Viper GTS and it was certainly a much slicker package with great power delivery and surprisingly practical as well.

^^ Impreza's are the marmite of sports cars.

No matter the drive, ride or performance, some people just don't seem to jell with them.


I find a lot of fellow Evo owners, bought one simply because it wasn't an Impreza.

[rb5er]

mmcd87 said:

tonyb1968 said:

Is it a small amount that go wrong?
No, its a very excessive amount that let go for an engine, a small amount would be a few percent, not 40-50% of the engines out there (and it is that bad).

Where did you get 40-50% value from?

He made it up. Its probably more like 5% but I have made that up too.

[vxr2010]

I've always liked scoobys , I think they are full of character , I think the 08 and 09 hatchbacks look like any other hatchback , the saloons they later produced looked more the part , I've had my fsti for 8 years now it is the best of both worlds it's quick and a big boot , if I bought an 09 I would want it mapped but then I would worry about engine issues , I'm sure if it was mapped it would make a lot of difference , I feel how older cars drive can be more fun but then it's nice having a more modern interior , for me drinving a Monaro is better than a vxr8 , as far as how many failures who knows , I think less in the uk , I hope they have accepted there error and changed the Pistons in the newer cars but I've not read any thing to say they have , when Foz dies I will buy an Sti Subaru again just don't know the model

[tonyb1968]

rb5er said:

mmcd87 said:

tonyb1968 said:

Is it a small amount that go wrong?
No, its a very excessive amount that let go for an engine, a small amount would be a few percent, not 40-50% of the engines out there (and it is that bad).

Where did you get 40-50% value from?

He made it up. Its probably more like 5% but I have made that up too.

LOL, no its not made up, 2.5ltr STI engines sold less than the 2003-2005 cars from 2006-2015, of those I have NEVER seen so many in a workshop whilst under warranty (or after), my local dealer use to have 1 a week in (they probably had 2 2ltr cars in a year and 1 of those was for a power rebuild), if you want perfect figures then you wont get them but just go over to scoobynet and look at how many people have had issues, and those will be just the ones on scoobynet, let alone the general public.
The failure rate will be as high as 50%, thats what killed Subaru in the UK, no one wants that engine and the sooner they replace it the better.

2ltr new age STI cars on the other hand have a very low failure rate.

[rb5er]

Unless you have any evidence, any evidence at all of your percentage then yes you have indeed made it up.

Aeeing lots in a garage does not mean that you have a percentage figure to relate it to.

Show some proof or you are just making up random numbers and spouting bullst as truth.

[vxr2010]

I asked my local Subaru garage and they do know me so no reason not to trust them , they were aware of issues but had not seen many 2.5 going wrong , the one they were working on on the time was a 2 litre that the owner had not checked oil and killed the engine

[Godzilla_88]

drumsterphil said:

About 3.5 - 4k I think - I've had a number of 2.5 rebuilds over the years so costs have varied.

Whereabouts are you?

That's the sort of price I was thinking.

I'm in Edinburgh. I've done a bit of research and found there may be a company called AWD in Perth worth using but to be honest I'm not averse to travelling for a good garage so if you have any suggestions?

[paulmoonraker]

texaxile said:

BM paulmoonraker had a Hawk STi rebuilt by Extreme Scoobies in Essex, from what I remember it was a bit of a beast. He's a good guy to ask regarding what to do when rebuilding a 2.5, which included getting a new oil pump , as the standard ones aren't all that good either.

Yes, mine is now 10K miles post re-build and runs great. It had Omega forged piston which are the harder alloy, however, when up to temp it runs as quiet as standard which is testament to the accuracy of the machine work. It's worth fitting a Killer Bee oil pick up pipe also as that is a known weak-point.

[drumsterphil]

Godzilla_88 said:

That's the sort of price I was thinking.

I'm in Edinburgh. I've done a bit of research and found there may be a company called AWD in Perth worth using but to be honest I'm not averse to travelling for a good garage so if you have any suggestions?

I've heard of AWD but no experience or opinion on them.

I use a guy called Andy Kindon near Durham (even though I live near Lincoln) He's been building forged 2.5s for years and his experience is second to none IMO. Taken a while to find the right guy but he built the 2.5 we ran in the RB5 (which was a daily driver at 500hp) plus the Hatch STi build.

Edited by drumsterphil on Monday 8th February 19:39

[Godzilla_88]

drumsterphil said:

I've heard of AWD but no experience or opinion on them.

I use a guy called Andy Kindon near Durham (even though I live near Lincoln) He's been building forged 2.5s for years and his experience is second to none IMO. Taken a while to find the right guy but he built the 2.5 we ran in the RB5 (which was a daily driver at 500hp) plus the Hatch STi build.

Edited by drumsterphil on Monday 8th February 19:39

Thanks for the info, Durham is only a couple of hours down the A1 so sounds like the perfect choice! I always prefer to go to garages/people that come recommended.

Out of interest, what's it like to drive an RB5 with 500bhp as a daily? It sounds like a monster!

[drumsterphil]

Godzilla_88 said:

Thanks for the info, Durham is only a couple of hours down the A1 so sounds like the perfect choice! I always prefer to go to garages/people that come recommended.

Out of interest, what's it like to drive an RB5 with 500bhp as a daily? It sounds like a monster!

If you want Andy's contact details then let me know, he really knows his stuff. He's built engines for a number of local area big power builds. Bob Rawle also does mapping events at Andy's unit on a regular basis so it works well as a one stop shop for building and mapping cars.

The RB5 belonged to my ex-wife. She had it built to that level from the 350bhp it had when I owned it - put simply it was a monster, but very easy to drive with decent clutch, 6 speed etc. She spent a lot on the car and everything was uprated or changed (there was very little RB5 left)and it was an awesome road car (I think it ended up doing an 11.5 @ 127mph so pretty speedy).

Edited by drumsterphil on Tuesday 9th February 12:39

[JM5]

I put 30k miles on a 2009 STI (around 10k standard + 20k at 380BHP) with no problems.
Currently have a standard 2015 STI which I've put 21k on again with no problems.

[tonyb1968]

rb5er said:

Unless you have any evidence, any evidence at all of your percentage then yes you have indeed made it up.

Aeeing lots in a garage does not mean that you have a percentage figure to relate it to.

Show some proof or you are just making up random numbers and spouting bullst as truth.

Oh please, ive been around Subaru's for over 15 years, i have seen the effects of the 2.5 STI fallout, if ypu want exact figures then go ask the engine builders, for instance WMS are quite happy to tell you how many of these STI 2.5ltr engines, inc FSTI, they have rebuilt due to failures and how many enquiries they get PER DAY for rebuilds, that includes the 1 per day average they have in being rebuilt... of course witb only a 5% failure rate and this being only 1 engine builder, there isnt an issue with the STI EJ 257 engine... though the EJ255 does have a far better reliability record with very few failures.

[vxr2010]

The forester engine seems a good one , mine was rebuilt due to hg failure at around 100,000 miles and crank bearings were worn and done too , I think it's a 255 block but I believe it's a 257 engine ? Is it just a head difference I heard it was the same lump as the 2 litre jdm

[rb5er]

tonyb1968 said:

rb5er said:

Unless you have any evidence, any evidence at all of your percentage then yes you have indeed made it up.

Aeeing lots in a garage does not mean that you have a percentage figure to relate it to.

Show some proof or you are just making up random numbers and spouting bullst as truth.

Oh please, ive been around Subaru's for over 15 years, i have seen the effects of the 2.5 STI fallout, if ypu want exact figures then go ask the engine builders, for instance WMS are quite happy to tell you how many of these STI 2.5ltr engines, inc FSTI, they have rebuilt due to failures and how many enquiries they get PER DAY for rebuilds, that includes the 1 per day average they have in being rebuilt... of course witb only a 5% failure rate and this being only 1 engine builder, there isnt an issue with the STI EJ 257 engine... though the EJ255 does have a far better reliability record with very few failures.

It is said that the 2.5 is more prone to issues than the 2.0. This is likely true. All I said was that putting a 50% figure on it is likely pure fantasy, it could just be 5%. Chances are we will never know but theres no need to make up random "statistics".

You do know that 87.7% of statistics are made up don't you, oh look another random figure anyone can pluck out of the air. Without any evidence then there is no true statistic.

So a garage gets some enquiries....and? Means nothing.

[vxr2010]

Up to early 2007 But not all 2007 , engines were generally fine , the weakness has come in from late 07 to 08 were they changed the Pistons that's when it started going wrong , Pistons changed for economy and emissions .. Bad move by Subaru , don't know if they have changed it since , 2 litre engines fail too crank bearings are a weakness but that is part by the design of the engine , the 2.5 is the more torque lump and in my opionon the better driving engine , does not mean I don't like the 2 litre too , any turbo engine for that matter any fi engine is at higher risk of it going wrong , I think evo engines are stronger but I would always buy a Subaru

[TEKNOPUG]

vxr2010 said:

Up to early 2007 But not all 2007 , engines were generally fine , the weakness has come in from late 07 to 08 were they changed the Pistons that's when it started going wrong , Pistons changed for economy and emissions .. Bad move by Subaru , don't know if they have changed it since , 2 litre engines fail too crank bearings are a weakness but that is part by the design of the engine , the 2.5 is the more torque lump and in my opinion the better driving engine , does not mean I don't like the 2 litre too , any turbo engine for that matter any fi engine is at higher risk of it going wrong , I think evo engines are stronger but I would always buy a Subaru

FI is not inherently unreliable. The issue comes with the ease at which you can increase the power. People think nothing of increasing the power of a stock WRX/STi engine by 50%. High revs cause more wear to an engine than an increase in torque (they tend to fail more spectacularly). Try increasing an NA engine by 50% and see how long it lasts without major internal work. A 2.0l STi engine running 350bhp is a far simpler and reliable unit than say a BMW S52B32 tweaked to run similar power.

Subaru dropped the ball with the 2.5, there is no doubt. The extra capacity & torque are a positive step up in performance over the 2.0 but it's let down by the specification of it's components. I've not been in the market for a 2.5 so I don't know whether the price reflects this issue (ala RX8) or whether they are expensive if you factor in a rebuild is a far greater potential requirement than a 2.0?

[vxr2010]

From what you appear to be saying , I think there is little difference in reliability between the 2 litre and earlier 2.5 litre , the early 2.5 Sti uses the same block as the 2 litre jdm , even the forester xt uses the Sti block , there was a period of less capable crank bearings , plus now chocolate Pistons aka Subaru suicide , the 2.5 needs to rev less it can run less boost and still get more power and has a lot more torque , the forced induction there is more to go wrong but the car needs FI to get the best out of it , for drive ability I prefer my Foz , head gaskets can go on any engine , a v8 in a Subaru would be good but keeping the four wheel drive , reliable power and a good noise but until that happens then Subaru engines will do the job

[TEKNOPUG]

vxr2010 said:

From what you appear to be saying , I think there is little difference in reliability between the 2 litre and earlier 2.5 litre , the early 2.5 Sti uses the same block as the 2 litre jdm , even the forester xt uses the Sti block , there was a period of less capable crank bearings , plus now chocolate Pistons aka Subaru suicide , the 2.5 needs to rev less it can run less boost and still get more power and has a lot more torque , the forced induction there is more to go wrong but the car needs FI to get the best out of it , for drive ability I prefer my Foz , head gaskets can go on any engine , a v8 in a Subaru would be good but keeping the four wheel drive , reliable power and a good noise but until that happens then Subaru engines will do the job

The crucial thing about Subaru USP is the boxer engine configuration. This allows better packaging, (wheelbase, weight distribution, COG etc) which all positively enhance performance. Lose this and it will just be the same as any other car.

[vxr2010]

I like Subarus as they are but a v8 would be interesting , shame Subaru created a problem with there Pistons and then did not accept there error , poor actions for a company , I will in the future want a new Sti , but would worry about the engine in the newer cars