@chucktobias You don't. My grandma had a brand-new Subaru Outback in 2002 and I'm obviously very familiar with the brand, but I've never personally owned a Subaru. Are those 2.4L engines direct injected? If they're basically Subaru's version of the EcoBoost engine, I'd pass. She also drives 26 miles one way to commute to work every day, so the miles will add up quickly.

@justin-shepherd - I have Subarus in my past as well. Ages ago I owned a 1970 Subaru 360 and a 1978 Subaru DL sedan. Neither is representative of what they're selling today.

Current Subaru engines are indeed direct injected and, unlike Toyota, there is no auxiliary port injection to keep intake valves clean. I don't think they're as bad as Ford's EcoTrash engines. However I would be leery of modern turbocharged engines in general. They seem too lightly constructed and over-boosted for long, reliable life.

@chucktobias I laughed when you called EcoBoost engines EcoTrash, haha.
She's driving my car until next month, when she get paid next. Then she is going to have the mechanics we've used for years investigate it further. Her head gasket is blown, but she still wants more confirmation, I guess. Some of the exhaust escapes out of the cooling system and I pointed that out when it was running. She's stubborn.

Her habit of the pushing the gas on her car until the turbo kicked in would be hard to break. She pretty much expects a turbo to kick in, now. I guess it adds a "thrill". Even when I drive it, I'd go 60 in the 55 without realizing it. She's gotten a couple tickets in the Mustang for speeding.

@justin-shepherd Well, it she wants that hard-hitting turbo boost it's likely going to cost $$$$ over the life of the car. They don't make them any more like my old SAAB whose turbocharged engine has given no problems in 29 years and nearly 380,000 miles. (Of course that engine is built physically much stronger and is more lightly boosted than what is sold today.)

@chucktobias Thinking about it, do you know off-hand what materials make up your Saab's engine? Aluminum has no fatigue limit, which means every time a turbocharger kicks in on a modern car, the aluminum fatigues and a tiny bit. I learned that, among many other things in materials science for engineers years ago. Cast iron and steel both have a defined fatigue limit, and they can last pretty much indefinitely, as long as the fatigue limit is not reached. If the engine is made from cast iron or steel, that's going to be way more durable than any modern car's engine.

@justin-shepherd In a lot of ways it's a ridiculously overbuilt engine by today's standards. Cast iron block, aluminum head, sodium-cooled exhaust valves with forged crank, rods, and pistons. Simple single-stage turbocharger providing moderate boost (2.3 liter engine makes 200 horsepower). Electronic voodoo uses the spark plugs as knock sensors and controls boost. People who race these engines can overboost them to make 400-500 horses without any internal modifications. (This only applies to pre-GM models. The GM era engines were significantly cheapened.)