2004 SUBARU FORESTER Engine And Engine Cooling Problems

I AM EXPERIENCING AN EXTREMELY STRONG SMELL OF GAS. THIS BEGAN WINTER OF 2013, WHICH I HAD REPAIRED AT MY EXPENSE OF $700+, THOUGH MY MECHANIC INFORMED ME SUBARU WAS RECALLING THIS AND REPAIRING FOR FREE ON OTHER MODELS. I AM ABSOLUTELY DISGUSTED THAT THIS PROBLEM IS RECURRING NOW WINTER OF 2014, IN A VEHICLE WHICH I DRIVE MY SMALL CHILDREN IN. THE GAS SMELL IS HORRIFIC, TOXIC, AND DANGEROUS. *TR

IN COLD WEATHER (BELOW 20 DEGREES OR SO) THE FUEL LINES IN THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT COME LOOSE AND LEAK RAW GASOLINE ONTO THE HOT ENGINE. OBVIOUSLY THERE IS A GOOD CHANCE OF AN ENGINE FIRE WITH POSSIBLE LOSS OF LIFE. THIS HAS BEEN REPORTED IN SEVERAL FORUMS, THERE IS A TSB OUT ON THIS FOR THE WRX (SAME ENGINE, SAME PART NUMBERS), AND MOST DEALERS (IN COLD STATES) KNOW OF THIS PROBLEM. *TR

Mileage: 130,000

FUEL AND EXHAUST LINE LEAKS IN COLD WEATHER. OVER THE INITIAL THREE DAY PERIOD - DAY ONE CHILDREN COMPLAINED OF HEADACHES, DAY TWO DRIVER EXPERIENCED SEVERE HEADACHE AND NAUSEA BUT DID NOT REALIZE IT WAS DUE TO FUEL LEAK. DAY THREE CABIN FILLED WITH OVERPOWERING FUMES COMING FROM HEATING VENT. HAD TO DRIVE WITH HEAT OFF AND ALL WINDOWS OPEN IN ORDER TO BRING CAR IN FOR SERVICE. HAVE HAD TO BRING CAR IN TWICE THIS MONTH TO REPAIR ALL OF THE LEAKS AND RENT A CAR IN ORDER TO GET TO WORK APPOINTMENTS. CERTIFIED SUBARU SPECIALIST REPORTED THAT HE HAS SEEN QUITE A FEW INCIDENCES OF SAME ISSUE RECENTLY DUE TO EXTREME COLD WEATHER. THIS IS A DANGEROUS SAFETY ISSUE AND IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. 2002-2003 IMPREZA RECALLED DEC 2009 FOR SAME ISSUE. *TR

Mileage: 156,000

THIS CAR HAS AN OIL LEAK COMING FROM THE TOP OF THE ENGINE. IT IS EXACTLY THE SAME PROBLEM DESCRIBED IN YOUR RECALL NUMBER 04V-473 OF SEPTEMBER 27, 2004. BECAUSE THIS FORESTER, AN XS MODEL, IS NOT LISTED IN THE RECALL 04V-473, THE DEALER REFUSED TO REPAIR THE OIL LEAK. IT IS THE SAME PROBLEM AS NOTED IN THE RECALL FOR THE XT MODEL FORESTER. *TR

Mileage: 85,000

2004 SUBARU FORESTER 2.5XS. CONSUMER WRITES IN REGARDS TO A HEAD GASKET LEAKING ANTI-FREEZE. *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED THE HEAD GASKET HAD TO BE REPLACED TWICE. *JB

HAD TIMING BELT REPLACED ON 2004 FORESTER TURBO AS RECOMMENDED ON MAINTENANCE,SCHEDULE, NEXT DAY ON HIGHWAY, LOUD SCREECHING NOISE AND LOSE OF POWER. STOPPED DRIVING TOWED TO MECHANIC. SAID IT WAS BLOWN TURBO. NEVER NOTIFIED OF BANJO BOLT ISSUE, SUBARU SHOULD RECALL OR REMEDY SITUATION AT THEIR COST. *TR

Mileage: 106,000

TL* THE CONTACT OWNS 2004 SUBARU FORSTER. THE CONTACT STATED THAT WHILE DRIVING 70 MPH THE TURBO CHARGER FAILED AND THE VEHICLE LOST ALL POWER AND THE CONTACT WAS UNABLE TO DRIVE THE VEHICLE. THE VEHICLE WAS TOWED TO A LOCAL REPAIR FACILITY WHERE IT WAS DIAGNOSED THAT DUE TO A LACK OF OIL GOING TO THE TURBO CHARGER. THE VEHICLE WAS REPAIRED. IN ADDITION, THE CONTACT STATED THAT THE FAILURE RECURRED AFTER REPAIRS DUE TO A LEAK IN THE OIL INTAKE RESULTING IN THE TURBO CHARGER FAILING. THE FAILURE MILEAGE WAS 69,968 AND THE CURRENT MILEAGE WAS 84,500.

Mileage: 69,968

CONSUMER WRITES REGARDING AUTOMOBILE MANUFACTURER DESIGN FLAW EXCLUSIVE DEALERSHIPS REPAIRS *TGW THE CONSUMER STATED HE EXPERIENCED A CATASTROPHIC FAILURE WITH HIS ENGINE DUE TO A BLOWN TURBO. THE LOCAL DEALERSHIP REFUSED TO SELL THE REPLACEMENT PART TO HIS LOCAL MECHANIC DUE TO THE CAUSE OF THE FAILURE AND THE INSTALLATION PROCESS. SUBARU LATER RESPONDED IN WRITING DENYING ALL CLAIMS EVEN WHEN THE CONSUMER SUPPLIED THEM WITH VALID REASONS. THE CONSUMER LEARNED SUBARU WAS AWARE OF THE PROBLEM DATING BACK TO 2005 AND A TSB WAS ISSUED. THE TSB STATED THAT OIL STARVATION TO THE TURBO WAS THE MAIN CAUSE FOR THE TURBO FAILURE. THE OIL STARVATION HAPPENED WHEN THE OIL FEED FILTER BANGO BECAME CLOGGED. SUBARU REALIZED THE DESIGN FLAW IN THE TURBO SYSTEM AND LATER REDESIGNED THE TURBO TO ADDRESS THE PROBLEM. *JB

I PURCHASED A 2004 SUBARU FORRESTER XT IN FEBRUARY OF '09 WITH 93,008 MILES ON IT. THE DEALERSHIP HAD ALL SERVICE RECORDS RELATING TO THE VEHICLES HISTORY, AND ALL GUIDELINES WERE FOLLOWED ACCORDING TO THE MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS. THE CURRENT MILEAGE ON THE VEHICLE IS 102,323 AND I WAS JUST INFORMED THAT THE TURBOCHARGER IS COMING APART AND NEEDS REPLACED OR THE VEHICLE WILL BE NON-OPERATIONAL. I CONTACTED SUBARU OF NORTH AMERICA AND THEY INFORMED ME THAT THERE WAS NOTHING THAT THEY COULD DO, WHICH I UNDERSTAND. MY MAIN PROBLEM IS THAT THE REPRESENTATIVE THAT I TALKED TO INFORMED ME THAT THE MANUFACTURER CHANGED ITS GUIDELINES FOR LATER MODELS OF THE VEHICLE TO A SHORTER RECOMMENDED INTERVAL BETWEEN SERVICES. THESE MODELS HAVE THE SAME ENGINE AND TURBOCHARGER AS MY VEHICLE AND THEY CHANGED THE SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE FROM 7,500 MILES TO 3,500 MILES. I UNDERSTAND THE POWER TRAIN COVERAGE EXPIRED AT 5 YEARS OR 60,000 MILES BUT MY MAIN CONCERN IS THAT THEY HAD CHANGED THEIR SERVICE REQUIREMENT FOR A REASON. THE MECHANIC SHOP THAT I HAVE TAKEN THE VEHICLE TO HAS HAD SERVICE BULLETINS ON THIS PROBLEM CONCERNING THE TURBOCHARGERS. IT STATES VEHICLES THAT ARE TURBOCHARGED SHOULD HAVE THE OIL CHANGED EVERY 3,750 MILES TO PREVENT FAILURE/ DAMAGE TO THE TURBO AND THAT I WAS NOT TO DRIVE IT OR THE ENGINE COULD SEIZE UP AND CAUSE A CRASH. *TR

Mileage: 102,323

I PURCHASED A 2004 SUBARU FORRESTER XT IN FEBRUARY OF '09 WITH 93,008 MILES ON IT. THE DEALERSHIP HAD ALL SERVICE RECORDS RELATING TO THE VEHICLES HISTORY, AND ALL GUIDELINES WERE FOLLOWED ACCORDING TO THE MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS. THE CURRENT MILEAGE ON THE VEHICLE IS 102,323 AND I WAS JUST INFORMED THAT THE TURBOCHARGER IS COMING APART AND NEEDS REPLACED OR THE VEHICLE WILL BE NON-OPERATIONAL. I CONTACTED SUBARU OF NORTH AMERICA AND THEY INFORMED ME THAT THERE WAS NOTHING THAT THEY COULD DO, WHICH I UNDERSTAND. MY MAIN PROBLEM IS THAT THE REPRESENTATIVE THAT I TALKED TO INFORMED ME THAT THE MANUFACTURER CHANGED ITS GUIDELINES FOR LATER MODELS OF THE VEHICLE TO A SHORTER RECOMMENDED INTERVAL BETWEEN SERVICES. THESE MODELS HAVE THE SAME ENGINE AND TURBOCHARGER AS MY VEHICLE AND THEY CHANGED THE SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE FROM 7,500 MILES TO 3,500 MILES. I UNDERSTAND THE POWER TRAIN COVERAGE EXPIRED AT 5 YEARS OR 60,000 MILES BUT MY MAIN CONCERN IS THAT THEY HAD CHANGED THEIR SERVICE REQUIREMENT FOR A REASON. THE MECHANIC SHOP THAT I HAVE TAKEN THE VEHICLE TO HAS HAD SERVICE BULLETINS ON THIS PROBLEM CONCERNING THE TURBOCHARGERS. IT STATES VEHICLES THAT ARE TURBOCHARGED SHOULD HAVE THE OIL CHANGED EVERY 3,750 MILES TO PREVENT FAILURE/ DAMAGE TO THE TURBO AND THAT I WAS NOT TO DRIVE IT OR THE ENGINE COULD SEIZE UP AND CAUSE A CRASH. *TR

Mileage: 102,323

ENGINE CAUGHT FIRE WHILE THE CAR WAS DRIVEN. CORRESPONDS TO NHTSA CAMPAIGN NUMBER: 7V043000. *TR

Mileage: 70,000

2004 FORESTER XT STALLED, HAD LOSS OF POWER DURING ACCELERATION AND JERKED VIOLENTLY. *TS THE VEHICLE WAS TAKEN TO THE DEALER THREE TIMES BUT THEY WERE UNABLE TO DIAGNOSE AND REPAIR THE PROBLEM. *NM

WHEN OUTSIDE TEMPERATURE FALLS BELOW 10 DEGREES F., CAR WILL NOT START OR STARTS ONLY WITH GREATEST DIFFICULTY. LAST YEAR(2004), SAME SORT OF STARTING PROBLEM WAS ATTRIBUTED TO A CRACKED IGNITION COIL. THIS YEAR DEALERS SERVICE DEPARTMENT CAN NOT FIND A PROBLEM, ALSO CAN'T EXPLAIN THE PROBLEM. *JB

Mileage: 29,500

EXCESSIVE SULFUR DIOXIDE ODOR (ROTTEN EGG). COMPANY REFUSES TO FIX CONVERTER, BLAMES FUEL. CONVERTER SHOULD HANDLE THE SULFUR CONTENT OF FUEL, REGARDLESS. *JB

Mileage: 300

CAR PRODUCING NOXIOUS ODOR INSIDE. WHEN PARKING CAR IN GARAGE, ACCIDENTALLY STEPPED ON ACCELERATOR RATHER THAN BRAKE. HIT AND DESTROYED BACK WALL. COSMETIC DAMAGE TO CAR. DEALER CLAIMS LEAVES WERE SUCKED INTO THE ENGINE COMPARTMENT THROUGH TURBOCHARGE INTAKE. BUT, ODOR WAS OF BURNT RUBBER OR PLASTIC, NOT LEAVES. AND, THE CAR IS ALWAYS PARKED IN THE GARAGE. FINALLY, MOST LEAVES WERE DOWN SEVERAL WEEKS EARLIER THIS YEAR, I.E., BY END OF NOVEMBER. *NM

Mileage: 8,000

ENGINE COMPARTMENT FIRE, RESULTING FROM OIL LEAKING IN ENGINE COMPARTMENT. THERE WERE NO INJURIES AND BECAUSE OF PROXIMITY OF FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRE WAS EXTINGUISHED WITHIN 4-5 MINUTES. SUBARU OF AMERICA (SOA) MAINTAINS THAT OIL LEAKED FROM OIL FILTER AND THAT THIS IS NO FAULT OF THEIRS. GIVEN THE HISTORY OF RECALLS OF THIS TYPE OF VEHICLE IN JAPAN FOR LEAKING OIL AND FIRES I AM NOT SURE THAT THIS POINT HAS BEEN DEMONSTRATED. SOA REFUSED TO FIX DAMAGE AND TOLD ME TO FILE AN INSURANCE CLAIM... WHICH I HAVE DONE. DAMAGE IS ESTIMATED TO BE $6-10K. MATTER WILL BE SUBROGATED TO INSURANCE COMPANY FOR SETTLEMENT.*AK

Mileage: 7,785

THE VEHICLE'S TRANSMISSION MADE NOISE WHILE DRIVING. THE VEHICLE WAS INSPECTED AND IT WAS DETERMINED THAT HE VEHICLE WAS OPERATING AS DESIGNED. THE CONSUMER WOULD LIKE TO RETURN THE VEHICLE AND RECEIVE A REFUND FOR THE PURCHASE PRICE. *NM THE CONSUMER STATED THAT THE ENGINE IS MAKING A HIGH PITCH WHINING NOISE. THE CONSUMER WAS TOLD THAT THE NOISE IS FROM THE REDUCTION GEAR TEETH TRANSMISSION AND WAS NORMAL. THE CONSUMER ALSO EXPERIENCED PROBLEMS WITH HER 1998 SUBARU FORRESTER THE CONSUMER EXPERIENCED OVERHEATING AND ENGINE DAMAGE. A FAULTY THERMOSTAT CAUSED THE OVERHEATING. AN INITIAL TEST SHOW CARBON MONOXIDE INDICATING PROBABLE DAMAGE TO THE SLEEVES BETWEEN THE PISTONS AND CYLINDERS, WHICH WOULD REQUIRE REPLACEMENT OF THE SHORT BLOCK. OVERHEATED CAMS ARE WARPED DUE TO THE HEAT.