Subaru Crosstrek and XV Forums banner

Oil change question for 2024

4694 Views 113 Replies 33 Participants Last post by  ProfMonkey
planning on ordering a '24 Limited soon, but wanted to do some homework as i plan ahead. can any of the first owners of the '24 Crosstrek answer the following?

  • what oil weight is used (rumor suggests 0w16?)?
  • is the drain plug accessible without removing any bottom/skid plate?
  • what is the oil capacity?
  • what model/partnumber subaru oil filter does the car use?
  • crush washer part number? (hoping it's the same as all other subarus)

i'm wanting to confirm that many of the things will carry over from my 2012 Impreza. i'm hoping i don't have to remove a skid plate to change the oil. not the end of the world if i do, but it's extra time that i dislike when i do it on my wife's CR-V. i can change the oil on 2012 quite quickly due to the easy oil filter location and drain plug being readily accessible.
81 - 100 of 114 Posts
Between DI engines, AS/S and thin oil, I bet one or more of those CAFE-driven features are going to sacrifice engine longevity.
  • Like
Reactions: 2
Between DI engines, AS/S and thin oil, I bet one or more of those CAFE-driven features are going to sacrifice engine longevity.
So we're burning less fuel, but junking our cars earlier.
  • Like
Reactions: 3
So we're burning less fuel, but junking our cars earlier.
Yes, there are almost always unexpected, unintended consequences with any new technology or political feel-good legislation.
  • Like
Reactions: 2
Yes, there are almost always unexpected, unintended consequences with any new technology or political feel-good legislation.
It would be interesting if we could calculate the extra CO emitted by building cars more often vs. the CO saved burning less fuel with features that allegedly shorten the life of cars.
  • Like
Reactions: 2
It would be interesting if we could calculate the extra CO emitted by building cars more often vs. the CO saved burning less fuel with features that allegedly shorten the life of cars.
I was thinking the exact same thing! Couldn't come up with any stats or ways to articulate it. There's a huge amount of fossil fuels consumed in the mining and production of steel, glass and plastics before you even consider what it takes to build a car and then dispose of it. Probably lots of lithium in the electronics, too.
It would be interesting if we could calculate the extra CO emitted by building cars more often vs. the CO saved burning less fuel with features that allegedly shorten the life of cars.
I think the key word here is 鈥渁llegedly.鈥 We can probably all agree that in general, today鈥檚 cars are better built and last longer than the ones made a generation ago. And I would bet the vast majority of cars junked today are scrapped because of something other than engine failure.

And it would be interesting to see a scientific study showing definitively how much oil contamination or dilution is actually required to materially shorten engine life. I would guess that at least some of what we鈥檙e worrying about in this thread might not be making a big difference in the real world.
  • Like
Reactions: 4
I was thinking the exact same thing! Couldn't come up with any stats or ways to articulate it. There's a huge amount of fossil fuels consumed in the mining and production of steel, glass and plastics before you even consider what it takes to build a car and then dispose of it. Probably lots of lithium in the electronics, too.
And speaking of disposal, back in the day, junk cars were dropped in a hopper in a steel mill. The steel was melted down and everything else was burned off - plastics, fluids, freon, you name it!
I think the key word here is 鈥渁llegedly.鈥 We can probably all agree that in general, today鈥檚 cars are better built and last longer than the ones made a generation ago. And I would bet the vast majority of cars junked today are scrapped because of something other than engine failure.
Precisely my point when I used the word "allegedly". I have owned 7 cars in my life and none of my previous 5 cars faced their demise because of engine failure. For most, it was rust that influenced my decision to let go.
Precisely my point when I used the word "allegedly". I have owned 7 cars in my life and none of my previous 5 cars faced their demise because of engine failure. For most, it was rust that influenced my decision to let go.
I can't recall ever letting a car go because of engine failure or rust and I've owned probably 20, old and new. Never bothered to count. Usually, it was "bright shiny object over here"! ;)
  • Like
Reactions: 1
I can't recall ever letting a car go because of engine failure or rust and I've owned probably 20, old and new. Never bothered to count. Usually, it was "bright shiny object over here"! ;)
For me, it's an expensive pending repair that makes my decision to change horses. I have a hard time getting rid of a car that is in perfectly good condition.
  • Like
Reactions: 2
I think the key word here is 鈥渁llegedly.鈥 We can probably all agree that in general, today鈥檚 cars are better built and last longer than the ones made a generation ago. And I would bet the vast majority of cars junked today are scrapped because of something other than engine failure.

And it would be interesting to see a scientific study showing definitively how much oil contamination or dilution is actually required to materially shorten engine life. I would guess that at least some of what we鈥檙e worrying about in this thread might not be making a big difference in the real world.
Our 2013 Chevy Equinox DI began guzzling oil (1L every 1k km) after around 4.5 years and 100k km. Presumably it was due to carbon/sludge buildup on the low tension piston rings or oil control rings as it slowed to ~1L every 3k km after an Italian tune up. GM said this was "normal", even after being sued.

My cousin with the same year/model changed their oil more often than the recommended interval and hasn't run into the oil consumption issues.

It's now at 225k km and still running, but not well. Lately I have had to change the oil every 3.5k km because that's the point where is begins to rapidly consume it. I tried just topping it off, but the litre would be gone in a few hundred km so it's likely due to fuel dilution thinning it out - the oil REEKS of gas. Pulling the PCV breather while the engine is warmed up and idling confirms tons of blowby. CEL codes for too rich and lately P0420 so cat is probably dead.
The transmission sometimes doesn't shift into 3rd when hot despite changing the fluid regularly.
ABS is disabled due to a broken wheel speed sensor/magnet that would require a new wheel bearing/hub replacement. I'd have fixed this, but we knew the vehicle was going to be replaced soon. The brakes need replacing as well.
The frame is also showing a lot of rust, but part of that is because when the engine start showing it might not last a long time I stopped having Rust Check applied - oil based fluid film that's applied yearly and SIGNIFICANTLY reduces rust.

Anyways, we're parting with this vehicle as it's no longer reliable and requires more repair work than it's worth despite the fact that it's still running. Part of that is due to CAFE inspired low tension rings, DI, PCV venting sludge into the intake, etc. but the other issues/costs (transmission, wheel bearing, rust, brakes) are also contributing to that decision.

So has CAFE caused premature failure/decommissioning of this vehicle. A little yes, a little no.


It has however given me the perspective that changing the oil often is likely your best line of defense at avoiding engine related issues.
See less See more
Subaru has responded to the MPG requirements by doing 2 things which I find somewhat interesting.

1) Ring clearance is higher. This means the rings are looser in the cylinder, letting more oil get by and reducing friction between the rings and cylinders. This is actually a very common strategy in the building of racecar engines. Take the tolerance range and go right to the loosest point for every spec. Get more power by having less resistance. So how is this dealt with in oil choice? For a racecar engine, the oil is upped to 20w 50.

2) Reduce oil viscosity. Going from 5w 30 to 0w 20 makes the oil lighter and reduces resistance everywhere in the engine. It also passes more oil past the oil ring and subsequently burns it off. The result is pretty obvious and is oil consumption.

3) This isn't MPG driven but instead market driven. Oil change intervals. Those of you who have been Subaru owners for a long time remember the 3750 mile oil change interval. Right about 6000 km. Now, they've gone to 6000 miles. This is because others are at 10k miles. Audi and Volvo are there and BMW is at 15k miles. So this is marketing weenie trumping engineers, worried that the Volvo sales person is going to tout their high miles till oil change and FUD the customer into thinking there's something wrong with Subaru. I'd guess that Subaru engineers stopped them at 6k and that the marketing weenies would like it to go to 10k. So since the oil change interval is a little less than double what it used to be means that even with the older close clearance engines and 5w 30 oil, normal consumption might be noticed.

So Subaru is probably best known for consumption "issues" because of the warranty that if the engine uses 10 ounces in 1200 miles, they give you a free short block. But if you look at Hyundai, if you use 32 ounces in 1000 miles (a quart), they'll tell you that it's normal usage. So good luck finding a vehicle that doesn't use oil.
See less See more
  • Helpful
Reactions: 1
Crosstrek model years 2013-2014 had a 7,500 mile OCI. The OCI was reduced to 6,000 miles after excessive oil consumption raised its ugly head.
Subaru has responded to the MPG requirements by doing 2 things which I find somewhat interesting.

1) Ring clearance is higher. This means the rings are looser in the cylinder, letting more oil get by and reducing friction between the rings and cylinders. This is actually a very common strategy in the building of racecar engines. Take the tolerance range and go right to the loosest point for every spec. Get more power by having less resistance. So how is this dealt with in oil choice? For a racecar engine, the oil is upped to 20w 50.

2) Reduce oil viscosity. Going from 5w 30 to 0w 20 makes the oil lighter and reduces resistance everywhere in the engine. It also passes more oil past the oil ring and subsequently burns it off. The result is pretty obvious and is oil consumption.

3) This isn't MPG driven but instead market driven. Oil change intervals. Those of you who have been Subaru owners for a long time remember the 3750 mile oil change interval. Right about 6000 km. Now, they've gone to 6000 miles. This is because others are at 10k miles. Audi and Volvo are there and BMW is at 15k miles. So this is marketing weenie trumping engineers, worried that the Volvo sales person is going to tout their high miles till oil change and FUD the customer into thinking there's something wrong with Subaru. I'd guess that Subaru engineers stopped them at 6k and that the marketing weenies would like it to go to 10k. So since the oil change interval is a little less than double what it used to be means that even with the older close clearance engines and 5w 30 oil, normal consumption might be noticed.

So Subaru is probably best known for consumption "issues" because of the warranty that if the engine uses 10 ounces in 1200 miles, they give you a free short block. But if you look at Hyundai, if you use 32 ounces in 1000 miles (a quart), they'll tell you that it's normal usage. So good luck finding a vehicle that doesn't use oil.
First off, race engines use a muvh higher viscosity oil because of the high revs and other abuse they go through, not because of the ring clearance.

On your third point, I find that hard to believe. I don't know anybody who switched to a different brand of car because their oil change intervals are longer. This just sounds silly. "Oh, I'm going to buy a Volvo, Audi or BMW next time because I have to change the oil in my Subaru so often!" Nope, I don't believe this.

Crosstrek model years 2013-2014 had a 7,500 mile OCI. The OCI was reduced to 6,000 miles after excessive oil consumption raised its ugly head.
Maybe. Though I think the engine was improved in the 2nd generation as well.
1) Ring clearance is higher. This means the rings are looser in the cylinder, letting more oil get by and reducing friction between the rings and cylinders. This is actually a very common strategy in the building of racecar engines. Take the tolerance range and go right to the loosest point for every spec. Get more power by having less resistance. So how is this dealt with in oil choice? For a racecar engine, the oil is upped to 20w 50.
I think you are referring to low tension rings. Rings are not "looser in the cylinder". The car would have no compression if the rings literally had a gap between them and the cylinder wall.

  • Like
Reactions: 2
Subaru has responded to the MPG requirements by doing 2 things which I find somewhat interesting.

1) Ring clearance is higher. This means the rings are looser in the cylinder, letting more oil get by and reducing friction between the rings and cylinders. This is actually a very common strategy in the building of racecar engines. Take the tolerance range and go right to the loosest point for every spec. Get more power by having less resistance. So how is this dealt with in oil choice? For a racecar engine, the oil is upped to 20w 50.

2) Reduce oil viscosity. Going from 5w 30 to 0w 20 makes the oil lighter and reduces resistance everywhere in the engine. It also passes more oil past the oil ring and subsequently burns it off. The result is pretty obvious and is oil consumption.

3) This isn't MPG driven but instead market driven. Oil change intervals. Those of you who have been Subaru owners for a long time remember the 3750 mile oil change interval. Right about 6000 km. Now, they've gone to 6000 miles. This is because others are at 10k miles. Audi and Volvo are there and BMW is at 15k miles. So this is marketing weenie trumping engineers, worried that the Volvo sales person is going to tout their high miles till oil change and FUD the customer into thinking there's something wrong with Subaru. I'd guess that Subaru engineers stopped them at 6k and that the marketing weenies would like it to go to 10k. So since the oil change interval is a little less than double what it used to be means that even with the older close clearance engines and 5w 30 oil, normal consumption might be noticed.

So Subaru is probably best known for consumption "issues" because of the warranty that if the engine uses 10 ounces in 1200 miles, they give you a free short block. But if you look at Hyundai, if you use 32 ounces in 1000 miles (a quart), they'll tell you that it's normal usage. So good luck finding a vehicle that doesn't use oil.
To add to others' similar comments...

IMHPO, that's a lot of inaccurate conjecture that conflates two disparate scenarios, at least one, regarding Subaru, based on a past long ago in automotive years and totally inaccurate today.

I've built race engines. Rings must be fitted with larger end-gaps, not a flat "looser tolerances," IN FORGED PISTONS due to their thermal characteristics, not to gain power. In the building of those engines the process of blueprinting them is anything but your scenario. And anyway, what's a race engine got to do with anything Subaru.

I've owned, only, Subarus since 1992, 31 years, with a wide mix of models, engines, and transmissions. Not a one burned oil. Including the fact that three of those had turbo EJ motors making over 100hp over stock. Not one of mine have ever burned oil. In fact, not one had to be repaired by a dealer for anything.

I also advise those who don't understand modern oil technology to spend some time updating themselves to a new reality.

One thing I do that (I firmly believe) contributes to an engine's long healthy life: I always change my oil at 3,000 miles, regardless.
See less See more
  • Like
Reactions: 2
I've built race engines. Rings must be fitted with larger end-gaps, not a flat "looser tolerances," IN FORGED PISTONS due to their thermal characteristics, not to gain power. In the building of those engines the process of blueprinting them is anything but your scenario. And anyway, what's a race engine got to do with anything Subaru.
In my reply I started to mention ring end gap but then thought that has nothing to do with them being "looser in the cylinder" and erased it. LOL

One thing I do that (I firmly believe) contributes to an engine's long healthy life: I always change my oil at 3,000 miles, regardless.
I agree. I believe there is much more to oil than just the measurables from a UOA. Coking in ring landings is one and can't be measured by any UOA. You get coked/gummed up ring landings and you'll be burning oil. Then add GDI and the issues with IVD's. I'd much rather error on the side of caution.
  • Like
Reactions: 2
First off, race engines use a muvh higher viscosity oil because of the high revs and other abuse they go through, not because of the ring clearance.

On your third point, I find that hard to believe. I don't know anybody who switched to a different brand of car because their oil change intervals are longer. This just sounds silly. "Oh, I'm going to buy a Volvo, Audi or BMW next time because I have to change the oil in my Subaru so often!" Nope, I don't believe this.



Maybe. Though I think the engine was improved in the 2nd generation as well.
I think there鈥檚 something to the third point. It鈥檚 not uncommon to see Total Cost of Ownership numbers in car reviews and comparisons these days. No doubt that factors into the purchase decision for some people.

...And I would bet the vast majority of cars junked today are scrapped because of something other than engine failure.
Atmosphere Sky Electricity Flash photography Deer


Around these parts, you could go through 3 a year because of these. LOL
See less See more
  • Like
  • Wow
Reactions: 2
I think there鈥檚 something to the third point. It鈥檚 not uncommon to see Total Cost of Ownership numbers in car reviews and comparisons these days. No doubt that factors into the purchase decision for some people.

I think CR is talking about the cost of major service intervals. They can be pricey indeed. An oil and filter change is still under $100 even with a quality synthetic oil.

At the end of the day, scheduled maintenance is a predictable cost. I think most people are more concerned with a car that won't sucker punch them with an expensive repair or leave them stranded. 30K mile major service at a Subaru dealership is around $600-700. That is much less than some repairs cost.
  • Like
Reactions: 1
81 - 100 of 114 Posts
Top