Subaru Added Security Plus Agreement, Zurich Shield, and other Purchase Add-ons / Protection Plans

[Anonymous]

Looking at Subarus and getting strong recommendation from dealer reps to buy the Added Security Agreement.
They strongly implied their extended warranty was recommended by Consumer Reports, when actually Consumer Reports does not recommend any extended warranty plans.

It kind of pisses me off...why should I need extra warranty coverage? Aren't they supposed to be reliable?

Any experience with this plan and/or with the others offered? I'm tempted by the Zurich Shield, which is supposed to keep the car looking new even without washing.

Thanks for any input!

[Anonymous]

How many extra years does it give you? 5? So 8 years total?

Some of the newer after market protectants are worth it. I don't know anything about Zurich Shield though.

[Anonymous]

And just a bit of reference.

https://jalopnik.com/advisor/subaru-extended-warranty/

[Anonymous]

I’d get it.

By the time my Crosstrek had 90,000 miles, I’d replaced 5 wheel bearings, both CV axles, the rear differential, all the valve springs in the cylinder heads, 6 brake rotors, and it was using 1 quart of oil every 1,200 miles.

All that BEFORE 90,000 miles.

I’ve had other cars that reached a similar mileage with no repairs at all except for brake pads and tires.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’d get it.

By the time my Crosstrek had 90,000 miles, I’d replaced [b]5 wheel bearings, both CV axles, the rear differential, all the valve springs in the cylinder heads, 6 brake rotors, and it was using 1 quart of oil every 1,200 miles.
[/b]
All that BEFORE 90,000 miles.

I’ve had other cars that reached a similar mileage with no repairs at all except for brake pads and tires.

The frame wasn't true. Or, you just beat the living sh*t out of cars.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d get it.

By the time my Crosstrek had 90,000 miles, I’d replaced [b]5 wheel bearings, both CV axles, the rear differential, all the valve springs in the cylinder heads, 6 brake rotors, and it was using 1 quart of oil every 1,200 miles.
[/b]
All that BEFORE 90,000 miles.

I’ve had other cars that reached a similar mileage with no repairs at all except for brake pads and tires.

The frame wasn't true. Or, you just beat the living sh*t out of cars.

I buy it. Subaru's reputation for reliability is entirely unearned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’d get it.

By the time my Crosstrek had 90,000 miles, I’d replaced 5 wheel bearings, both CV axles, the rear differential, all the valve springs in the cylinder heads, 6 brake rotors, and it was using 1 quart of oil every 1,200 miles.

All that BEFORE 90,000 miles.

I’ve had other cars that reached a similar mileage with no repairs at all except for brake pads and tires.

So, wait, this warranty covers basic maintenance like brake rotors and oil changes? If so, yeah, that's definitely worth it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d get it.

By the time my Crosstrek had 90,000 miles, I’d replaced [b]5 wheel bearings, both CV axles, the rear differential, all the valve springs in the cylinder heads, 6 brake rotors, and it was using 1 quart of oil every 1,200 miles.
[/b]
All that BEFORE 90,000 miles.

I’ve had other cars that reached a similar mileage with no repairs at all except for brake pads and tires.

The frame wasn't true. Or, you just beat the living sh*t out of cars.

“The frame wasn’t true”???? WTAF does that even mean? Do you even know anything about cars, or what?


Most cars today don’t have “frames”. They are unibodies. Made of dozens of precisely stamped and folded sheets of metal of various shapes and sizes, all welded together on jigs by robots. They have tolerances of less than a millimeter when they come off the assembly line at the plant. A improperly shaped unibody wouldn’t even fit on the assembly line. So no, there is no such thing as “the frame isn’t true”. Not since about the year 1980 or so. JFC, every time I read posts here it’s an enlightenment into how little all you “smartest people in the room” know about cars.


Anyways, the issue with the wheel bearings and CV axles have everything to do with 1) poor component quality, and 2) sloppy engineering when it comes to platform sharing / component sharing.

In the case of the Crosstrek, it uses the exact same CV axles and wheel hub unit bearings as the Impreza. But it uses the coil springs and struts from the Outback. Which is why it sits 3” higher than the Impreza. That extra height puts the CV axles at sharper angles to the hub bearing unit than they’d be on the Impreza. That sharper angle causes the already poor quality CV joint to wear out faster. It also wears out the hub bearing unit faster for the same reason. Instead of designing and spec’ing a different CV and hub unit, Subaru just used the same ones on both cars because it’s cheaper. Check any online parts site and compare the part #’s for the hubs and CV’s - they’re the same parts. Likewise the coil springs and struts. Same part #’s as the Outback.


So yeah, it’s got nothing to do with the way I drive, or “the frame being untrue”. It’s got everything to do with Subaru’s corner-cutting engineering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d get it.

By the time my Crosstrek had 90,000 miles, I’d replaced [b]5 wheel bearings, both CV axles, the rear differential, all the valve springs in the cylinder heads, 6 brake rotors, and it was using 1 quart of oil every 1,200 miles.
[/b]
All that BEFORE 90,000 miles.

I’ve had other cars that reached a similar mileage with no repairs at all except for brake pads and tires.

The frame wasn't true. Or, you just beat the living sh*t out of cars.

“The frame wasn’t true”???? WTAF does that even mean? Do you even know anything about cars, or what?


Most cars today don’t have “frames”. They are unibodies. Made of dozens of precisely stamped and folded sheets of metal of various shapes and sizes, all welded together on jigs by robots. They have tolerances of less than a millimeter when they come off the assembly line at the plant. A improperly shaped unibody wouldn’t even fit on the assembly line. So no, there is no such thing as “the frame isn’t true”. Not since about the year 1980 or so. JFC, every time I read posts here it’s an enlightenment into how little all you “smartest people in the room” know about cars.


Anyways, the issue with the wheel bearings and CV axles have everything to do with 1) poor component quality, and 2) sloppy engineering when it comes to platform sharing / component sharing.

In the case of the Crosstrek, it uses the exact same CV axles and wheel hub unit bearings as the Impreza. But it uses the coil springs and struts from the Outback. Which is why it sits 3” higher than the Impreza. That extra height puts the CV axles at sharper angles to the hub bearing unit than they’d be on the Impreza. That sharper angle causes the already poor quality CV joint to wear out faster. It also wears out the hub bearing unit faster for the same reason. Instead of designing and spec’ing a different CV and hub unit, Subaru just used the same ones on both cars because it’s cheaper. Check any online parts site and compare the part #’s for the hubs and CV’s - they’re the same parts. Likewise the coil springs and struts. Same part #’s as the Outback.


So yeah, it’s got nothing to do with the way I drive, or “the frame being untrue”. It’s got everything to do with Subaru’s corner-cutting engineering.

Oh, and don’t even get me started on the improper annealing and tensioning on the valve springs. And the soft-as-brass “steel” in the brake rotors, which you could literally scratch a gouge in with a ordinary screwdriver. Or their complete inability to source a cylinder head gasket or valve cover gasket that doesn’t leak. Because that might cost $2.57 more per car than the crappy 1960’s-style cardboard gaskets they still use in 2020.

Crappy, lazy engineering and cut-rate materials.


But the marketing team is Top Shelf.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d get it.

By the time my Crosstrek had 90,000 miles, I’d replaced [b]5 wheel bearings, both CV axles, the rear differential, all the valve springs in the cylinder heads, 6 brake rotors, and it was using 1 quart of oil every 1,200 miles.
[/b]
All that BEFORE 90,000 miles.

I’ve had other cars that reached a similar mileage with no repairs at all except for brake pads and tires.

The frame wasn't true. Or, you just beat the living sh*t out of cars.

“The frame wasn’t true”???? WTAF does that even mean? Do you even know anything about cars, or what?


Most cars today don’t have “frames”. They are unibodies. Made of dozens of precisely stamped and folded sheets of metal of various shapes and sizes, all welded together on jigs by robots. They have tolerances of less than a millimeter when they come off the assembly line at the plant. A improperly shaped unibody wouldn’t even fit on the assembly line. So no, there is no such thing as “the frame isn’t true”. Not since about the year 1980 or so. JFC, every time I read posts here it’s an enlightenment into how little all you “smartest people in the room” know about cars.


Anyways, the issue with the wheel bearings and CV axles have everything to do with 1) poor component quality, and 2) sloppy engineering when it comes to platform sharing / component sharing.

In the case of the Crosstrek, it uses the exact same CV axles and wheel hub unit bearings as the Impreza. But it uses the coil springs and struts from the Outback. Which is why it sits 3” higher than the Impreza. That extra height puts the CV axles at sharper angles to the hub bearing unit than they’d be on the Impreza. That sharper angle causes the already poor quality CV joint to wear out faster. It also wears out the hub bearing unit faster for the same reason. Instead of designing and spec’ing a different CV and hub unit, Subaru just used the same ones on both cars because it’s cheaper. Check any online parts site and compare the part #’s for the hubs and CV’s - they’re the same parts. Likewise the coil springs and struts. Same part #’s as the Outback.


So yeah, it’s got nothing to do with the way I drive, or “the frame being untrue”. It’s got everything to do with Subaru’s corner-cutting engineering.

Oh, and don’t even get me started on the improper annealing and tensioning on the valve springs. And the soft-as-brass “steel” in the brake rotors, which you could literally scratch a gouge in with a ordinary screwdriver. Or their complete inability to source a cylinder head gasket or valve cover gasket that doesn’t leak. Because that might cost $2.57 more per car than the crappy 1960’s-style cardboard gaskets they still use in 2020.

Crappy, lazy engineering and cut-rate materials.


But the marketing team is Top Shelf.

Seriously, they and the Jeep Girl team deserve both a beer for marketing, and a beating for selling such shoddy but cool cars.

[Anonymous]

My MIL has always purchased the paint protector shield service, not sure if any were Subaru cars. Her cars did look great for years.