Subaru Crosstrek Engine problems by year

Glassman Subaru overfilled the coolant reservoir to mask the fluid loss and subsequently refused further diagnostics, hanging up on the consumer. The secondary franchise dealer (Hodges Subaru) is refusing to accept the vehicle for a safety-critical combustion gas block test and UV dye trace until December 8th. The manufacturer refuses to facilitate an immediate safety inspection, forcing the daily operation of a vehicle with a severe, active cooling system defect on public highways.

before it caused any damage. Oil had exploded all over the engine and a hose had bursted off. Again, no warnings/lights ever came up. Vehicle could have exploded and caused major harm/death to me or anyone nearby on the road. Vehicle has been towed to a Subaru dealership and they have done a tear down inspection. Currently waiting on Subaru of America to do an inspection themselves.

malfunction that can result in engine performance issues, loss of power, engine stalling, or engine damage while driving. Such a failure has the potential to create a safety hazard if it occurs during vehicle operation, particularly at highway speeds or in traffic. Subaru has previously acknowledged valve spring failures in certain vehicles through Recall WTY-84 involving engine valve spring fractures that could lead to engine malfunction or stalling. *Yes. The failure was diagnosed and confirmed by Subaru of Olathe, which provided a repair estimate totaling several thousand dollars and recommended repair of the valve spring failure. Subaru of America relied on the dealer's diagnosis when approving goodwill assistance toward the repair costs. *The vehicle was inspected by Subaru of Olathe and the diagnosis was reviewed by the [[redacted]] Customer Advocacy team at Subaru of America as part of a goodwill assistance request. There is no indication that the vehicle was inspected by police, insurance representatives, or other third parties. *Vehicle started stalling at lights and jerking when in motion, seemed to have no power available and dangerous and appeared suddenly in Sept. of 2026. *Vehicle is a 2017 Subaru Crosstrek with approximately 72,000 miles. It was purchased new and maintained primarily through Subaru dealerships. The owner believes a valve spring is not a wear-and-tear item and should reasonably last the life of the engine. Costs over $9000 INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

If the oil level drops too low, the engine can experience severe internal friction, leading to scored camshaft journals and rod knock while driving. Ultimately can lead to engine failure. Further, it is an immediate fire hazard, especially in the Crosstrek boxer engine design with the oil commonly dripping downward onto high-temperature exhaust components like the catalytic converter or exhaust manifold. Additionally, oil leaking can travel to the spark plug wells and causes misfires, loss of acceleration, and sudden stalling. Moreover, oil leak destroys electronic and sensors including the wiring harness and serpentine belt. Also, toxic cabin fumes from leaking oil burns can pull into the vehicle's HVAC system and creates an immediate health hazard that can impair driving the vehicle. It is well-documented by Subaru of this issue stemming from factor sealant application (RTV) rather than a wearable maintenance item. Specifically, Technical Service Bulletin TSB 02-192-24 regarding engine oil leak diagnostics. There are 95,000 miles on the Crosstrek only. Subaru Service quoted me $6,101.54 to repair. Please issue a recall on the 2016's Crosstrek to mandate Subaru to fix the dangers at no charge to the customer. Thank you.

(the upper oil pan and internal coolant crossover O-rings inside the FB20 engine block). These internal seals failed prematurely, allowing pressurized engine oil and coolant to cross-contaminate. The chemical exposure deteriorated the cooling system hoses from the inside out until structural failure occurred. The failure required an emergency tow, an entire engine-out reseal, cylinder head machining, and replacement of all compromised cooling components at a cost of $5,000 out of pocket. Premature degradation of internal coolant crossover seals in Subaru FB-series engines is a recognized safety defect that causes sudden fluid loss, loss of forward propulsion, and severe hazard on active roadways at relatively low mileage. Subaru of America has declined to issue a recall or assist (Case #[redacted]). I request a formal NHTSA defect investigation into premature internal coolant crossover O-ring failure on 2013-2018 Subaru Crosstrek vehicles." INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

codes P0700 and P0752 and determined that an internal valve body solenoid had failed. Because the solenoid is not serviceable separately, the entire valve body assembly was replaced under the manufacturer's warranty. My concern is that a brand-new vehicle experienced a sudden loss of acceleration at only 63 miles, creating a potential safety hazard for my family and other motorists. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)

identify a cause for the sudden failure. However stated it could not be determined if this failure is or is not related to a previous major engine repair made a year ago. - The engine has been inspected by the dealership and warranty company. - There were no warning signals prior to either engine failures. The first one being a year ago for head gasket failure that allowed oil to mix with coolant. With the most recent failure the engine ticked briefly after braking to merge for construction, the oil pressure light followed by engine light turned on 5 seconds before engine completely lost power.

was intended to permanently remedy an ECM software defect that over-energizes and melts the ignition coils. Subaru of America (Case # 260630-2101598) is denying coverage, claiming that because the recall was executed 90,000 miles/5 years ago, and because the current software Calibration ID (CID) matches their post-recall database, the thermal melting is standard "wear and tear." I am filing this complaint because a safety recall remedy must be permanent and effective. The physical evidence, a melted plastic coil housing with a hole blown through it, is an engineering impossibility under normal wear and tear and proves that the original software patch failed to permanently mitigate the high-voltage overloading defect. Over a 5-year period of gradual thermal degradation, the defect reoccurred, creating the exact highway hazard the recall was mandated to prevent. I request a federal investigation into the long-term efficacy and failure rates of the WRE-21 software reflash.

dynamics (traction/stability) control, and hill start assist. It took about two minutes to manage the lurching, power-limited vehicle across multiple lanes of traffic to reach the shoulder. My partner was in the vehicle. Had this happened on a bridge, a grade without a shoulder, a tunnel approach, or in heavier traffic, I believe a collision was a realistic outcome. The vehicle was towed to a Subaru dealer and diagnosed with a failed Thermo Control Valve. Sixteen trouble codes were stored, including P26A6, P0606, P060B, P2138, P2135, P2122, P2119, P2004, P2005, and P0191. Mileage was 49,983. There was no prior symptom. The vehicle had a full multi-point inspection at the same dealer only 11 days and ~1,400 miles earlier ([[redacted]]); nothing was flagged. This failure mode is already known to Subaru, addressed by Technical Service Bulletin 09-119-24 and a warranty extension to 15 years/150,000 miles; the dealer repair order confirms the TSB. I am concerned Subaru handles a safety-relevant failure, one that disables collision-avoidance systems at highway speed, through a quiet warranty extension rather than a recall or owner notification. Owners get no warning and discover it only when it fails dangerously. I request NHTSA open a formal safety defect investigation. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)