Weird dead-on-road car problem today

I posted earlier about our trip to MacFaddens auction yard today. I didn't mention our car problems on the way home. We almost did not make it. This is a strange one !

I've been doing mechanical work for 50 years - but this is a new one for me. If I hadn't seen it myself, I would NOT have believed it.

This is on my newest Subaru. A 2002 Impreza Outback with a 2.5. I just had the engine out a few weeks ago and put a new clutch in, along with a timing belt.

Our family went for a drive about 25 miles from home. On the way back, on a unplowed snowy dirt road we hit a big bump and the car bottom out for a second. Just after that, the tach and speedometer started going crazy and the ABS light came on. Then the car started losing power. I kept it going and when we starting coming down a hill, I turned off the engine in an attempt to "reboot" the electrical system. Well . . . it was dead and would not turn over. Good thing I was coming down a hill. I roll-started it and limped back home. When I got to my repair shop, I could barely keep it running. It would not idle, and was spitting, breaking up and sounded like it was running on maybe two cylinders.

I got it in the shop. Checked the battery and it only had 11 volts - i.e. stone dead. I put another battery in it and it started right up and ran fine. I then tried to pull codes of the computer and there were none. Then, scratching my head a bit - I stuck a voltmeter on the battery while running. 12.6 volts - i.e. not good and going dead. I checked voltage at the alternator post to alternator case ground and got 14.8 volts. This did not seem possible. I then checked voltage between the alternator main post and engine block ground and only got 12.6 volts. I then took a sharp knife, stuck it at the seam where the alternator is bolted against the engine block and sparks flew. Seems the alternator actually lost all electrical contact with the engine although it is bolted up tightly. I would of not believed this was possible. I then ran a jumper-cable from the alternator case (after I filed a clean spot) to the battery ground and battery voltage started climbing right up.

I call this bad Subaru engineering. The "no charge" light only comes on when the alternator output lead falls below proper charge voltage. Voltage to the remaining car's electrical system is NOT monitored. So, what happened here is - the alternator made proper voltage BUT the battery was not charging and went stone dead. We almost did not make it home yet the "no charge" light never came on.

I've had Subarus so rusty the drive axles broke off - yet I've never, ever, seen an alternator lose contact with an engine it was bolted to when tight. I would of said it wasn't possible. Now I've got to take it off and wire-brush all the metal surfaces where it contacts the engine. Funny thing is . . . this is my cleanest almost rust-free Subaru. I will note that when I pulled the engine to put a new clutch in, the aluminum engine was almost "welded" to the transmission with corrosion. I had to use to big chisels to separate. The steel bolts also pulled out the aluminum threads in the engine which I had to fix. Another design flaw as I see it. Steel touching aluminum when wet causes a galvanic reaction. Dis-similar metal parts when touching should at least be treated with an anti-corrosive compound and these surely were not.

I wonder how many other new cars made in the USA are cutting corners like this? All my older Subarus were made in Japan but this one was made in the USA.

Sounds about right. Had three of the them before I figured it out. First nice orange one - leaking heads - traded for a new 81 at 100,000 miles it was too costly to save - traded for a new 85 and again at 100,000 miles was too costly to save. JV boots and converters replaced tooo many to count. So bought a 84 Pontiac at 94,000 miles knowing nothing about the history and sold at 197,000 miles, and run with a teen driver another couple of years. Good luck.

Had great luck with all our subaru's, would be almost 2 million km's on them all added together. Their aluminum blocks and components are like every other car on the road, same problems with salt and corrosion. Only thing that helps is cars with bad valve cover gaskets slobbering all over the engine.

Re the no charge condition, that is how a no charge light works in pretty much every car I've ever work on. They rarely help in diagnosing anything except belt slip.

I don't have a schematic for this Subaru but I know the charge-warning isn't hooked like some other cars and trucks. Also seems it does not monitor system voltage at all. All my GM trucks use voltmeters that sample voltage between vehicle-ground and the main battery lead at the starter-solenoid post. With them . . . a no charge condition caused by a non-grounded alternator would of shown as low voltage on the voltmeter.

This Subaru had battery voltage so low - the car finally died because the electronic fuel injection started failing. It probably hasn't been charging for a week unknown to us. I suspect other cars with ECMs monitor system voltage a bit better. With the new stuff, it's so easy and cheap to add multiple monitors that feed the ECM, I find it amazing that this could happen.

And as stated earlier, I've been driving Subarus in salt for 30 years and all get driven until the wheels literally break off the car from rust. This has never happened with any of the older ones - so it seems obvious to me that something has changed in design and/or quality.

Subaru is the short title for "Subaruhiroshima avengement", which loosly interpets into English as, "America will suffer for Hiroshima". It was designed by the less famous Japanesse war criminals bent on punishing America for their defeat. On the bright side at least it isn't a Mitsubishi. How safe would you feel driving down the road in the car built as the newer products from the same company that made the disposable Zeros that were designed and built to explode on impact for the Kamukazis? Their biggest contribution to their nation was the promise that their product would explode on impact and kill the pilot and as many others as possible! That's a car I never want to drive.

The "Hirohito's Revenge" cars made by Fuji Heavy Industries were pretty neat in the 70s to early 90s(Subaru). Nobody else sold a car in the USA with four wheel drive, 30 MPG highway mileage, and a high-low transfercase, and air-suspension to get extra ground-clearance when needed.

Now? Every time I see one of those "Subaru Love" commercials, I want to puke. Nothing special or unique or utilitarian anymore about Subarus. In fact, my wife's parents have a Ford Escape AWD that gets 30 MPG highway and is much more vehicle then newer Subarus the same size. I'm just too cheap to buy one.

The main reason why we've stuck with Subarus thus far for winter-only vehicles is because of their stopping traction. When our steep road is ice and snow bound, I've yet to drive any other vehicle that can hold the road going down the hill like a Subaru. Except maybe my Chevy plow truck when it has chains on all four wheels. Subarus seem to have an unusual weight distribution with that weird Boxer engine so far ahead of the front axle centerline.

Never thought about such a condition before, but I guess it's kinda like battery terminals and cables corroding. You get enough crud on it and aluminum will definitely corrode! As far as the bolts, I never understood why they didn't use stainless steel bolts. Wouldn't that eliminate the problem?