Subaru WRX Forum

Subaru WRX Forum (
-   Newbie Forum (
-   -   why so many low mile engine rebuilds (

fawcetteng 11-19-2012 12:37 PM

why so many low mile engine rebuilds
I'm looking to buy a '03-'05 WRX and am wondering why so many have engine rebuilds with relatively low miles on them. Is this common? Can it not take the abuse of sporty driving? Three examples in my area below - I'd appreciate any opinions on them.

107K miles:
[url=]2004 Subaru Impreza WRX[/url]

99k miles:
[url=]2005 Subaru Impreza WRX[/url]

105k miles:
[url=]Cars for Sale: 2003 Subaru Impreza WRX in Denton, TX 76201: Sedan Details - 315896618 -[/url]

brfatal 11-19-2012 01:17 PM

#1 and #2 would be poor purchases. The last car does not mention all that's done to it so we can't say. Though, the forged pistons would push me away from it unless this is just gonna be a weekend toy.

psinuse 11-19-2012 02:56 PM

While these cars are tough they are not indestructible. Most of those low mile rebuilds comes from idiots not taking care of their cars and therefore they can only take some much. I know what blew my engine and it was operator error, but even with a hole in the piston I drove it home over an hour away...Try that in a Chevy...

man show 11-19-2012 07:57 PM

My stock engine lasted 5 1/2 years and 97k miles before it needed a rebuild. I took extremely good care of the car maintenance wise, using OEM parts and synthetic fluids and taking care of every maintenance item within a hundred miles or so of the factory recommended interval. When it came to driving, I always let it warm up before I romped on it and I always let it cool down before shutting it off. Even though it's my daily driver, I drove it spiritedly fairly often.

The car was Stage 2 (using Cobb's off the shelf map) from 11k to 86k. I added a few bolt-ons and got a professional tune at 86k, and upgraded the turbo and got another tune at 93k. I blame the aftermarket 20G turbo since the engine catastrophically failed about 4k miles after the install.

I'm convinced that if I had left the car at a Stage 2 power level and kept up with maintenance, the stock engine would have lasted well over 100k, but the mod bug bit me hard :sneaky:

brfatal 11-19-2012 08:37 PM

I was on engine #3 before I ever went with a larger turbo. :(

fawcetteng 11-20-2012 09:45 AM

Thanks all. BRFatal - why do you consider #1 and #2 bad buys?

pzr2874 11-20-2012 12:25 PM

Too much junk on #2
Body issues and too many miles on #1


Dropped in rebuilt STI engine driven only 4,000 miles..... there is much more to do than "drop in" a STi motor.

psinuse 11-20-2012 03:19 PM

[quote=pzr2874;287951]Too much junk on #2
Body issues and too many miles on #1


Dropped in rebuilt STI engine driven only 4,000 miles..... there is much more to do than "drop in" a STi motor.[/quote]

Not if it's just a regular WRX motor that they told the dealership was STi motor brah, it's sum mad tyte JDM shitz yo!

pzr2874 11-20-2012 08:26 PM

LOL... and the dealership didnt chk vins and the likes....

[COLOR="PaleGreen"]I can see that[/COLOR]

BLAZE2099 11-21-2012 05:05 AM

123k on an 02 with weak tranny and bad tune and slightly larger turbo at stage two. Still strong as sh*t yo!!:nono:ROFL

Scoob 12-11-2012 10:37 PM

brb buying an sti motor then selling the car 4000 miles later

They probably don't run the same after the rebuild so the owner is ditching it before it gets worse lol

If you can, always buy bone stock that way you know no one has been messing with it and you wont get any nasty surprises in the future ;)

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:46 PM.

Powered by vBulletin®. Copyright ©2000 - 2016, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.0.8pl1 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2016 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome