CVT transmission

RyanB

RyanB

Super Administrator
Management Council Member
PoA Supporter
Joined
Jul 21, 2010
Messages
16,524
Location
Chattanooga, TN
Display Name
Display name:
Ryan
Seems like the slush box transmissions are being replaced by the CVT in most applications. My 2022 Corolla Hatch has one and I like it far better than the DSG in the Volkswagen. I’m curious how these hold up in the long run and whether or not the Honda and Toyota stereotype reliability will have any change with these transmissions.
 
Nissan CVT is widely known to be crap, early Subaru as well although later Subaru are supposed to be better. I don't know how Honda/Toyota CVT are holding up.
 
We have several in our family over 100k without issue. Mostly Subaru, one Toyota.

I think the maintenance gripes were with higher-torque (>200lb-ft?) engines causing early belt wear? They seem to once again be entering the domain of the 6cyl engine+ cars. Curious if they fare better this round.

My dad actually likes them. I'm not a fan yet. Feels like slippy clutch to me. :)
 
I have one in my Sentra. You how Ted envies my Sentra. So far I really like it. Good mileage, easy driving, put it in sport mode and it really squeezes a lot out of those hamsters and makes it perform surprisingly well for a little econobox. 65K on it so far. It stands to reason that the friction bands should go out at some point, but most conventional AT's have them too and they don't seem to go out frequently.

How it operates sort of depends on how you drive it. At normal, moderate driving, it uses soft pseudo shift points. Floor it and it revs high and catches up. Go light and it smoothly shifts with no stutter.
 
Last edited:
Bill said:
Nissan CVT is widely known to be crap, early Subaru as well although later Subaru are supposed to be better. I don't know how Honda/Toyota CVT are holding up.
Click to expand...
Tell me more about Subbies. I got a 2017 Outback. So far, so good. I have it serviced regularly.
 
Bill said:
Nissan CVT is widely known to be crap, early Subaru as well although later Subaru are supposed to be better. I don't know how Honda/Toyota CVT are holding up.
Click to expand...

I've heard that, but that's not what I'm seeing, at least not among other Sentras. But they have been doing it longer than the others, so I'm sure the A models were probably not very good.
 
Sac Arrow said:
I've heard that, but that's not what I'm seeing, at least not among other Sentras. But they have been doing it longer than the others, so I'm sure the A models were probably not very good.
Click to expand...

Altimas and the small SUVs having most of the problems at Nissan. I know an indy foreign car shop owner, and he says the CVT that is fine for the Sentra dies a quick death in the heavier cars. Yes, Nissan used the same early CVT across a group of models, including much heavier cars.
 
Sac Arrow said:
I have one in my Sentra. You how Ted envies my Sentra. So far I really like it. Good mileage, easy driving, put it in sport mode and it really squeezes a lot out of those hamsters and makes it perform surprisingly well for a little econobox. 65K on it so far. It stands to reason that the friction bands should go out at some point, but most conventional AT's have them too and they don't seem to go out frequently.

How it operates sort of depends on how you drive it. At normal, moderate driving, it uses soft pseudo shift points. Floor it and it revs high and catches up. Go light and it smoothly shifts with no stutter.
Click to expand...
What year is yours? I wouldn’t preferred a standard slush-box, but evidently that isn’t an option any longer. Based off some research, it does seem Nissan has had some problems with theirs, but from what I’ve read, Toyota and Honda has had better luck and have proven to be quite reliable. I’m optimistic, but curious what I should be expecting. I definitely drive it easily. I don’t abuse it by any means. I guess time will tell.
 
RyanB said:
What year is yours? I wouldn’t preferred a standard slush-box, but evidently that isn’t an option any longer. Based off some research, it does seem Nissan has had some problems with theirs, but from what I’ve read, Toyota and Honda has had better luck and have proven to be quite reliable. I’m optimistic, but curious what I should be expecting. I definitely drive it easily. I don’t abuse it by any means. I guess time will tell.
Click to expand...

Mine is a 2017.
 
luvflyin said:
Tell me more about Subbies. I got a 2017 Outback. So far, so good. I have it serviced regularly.
Click to expand...

Anecdata:

2016 Forester; 2018 Crosstrek and 2020 Crosstrek in the family. All over 100k no issues with CVT.

I'm the oldest Subi in the family with a 2010 Outback but it uses the 5EAT slushbox. 183k no issues so far.
 
schmookeeg said:
Anecdata:

2016 Forester; 2018 Crosstrek and 2020 Crosstrek in the family. All over 100k no issues with CVT.

I'm the oldest Subi in the family with a 2010 Outback but it uses the 5EAT slushbox. 183k no issues so far.
Click to expand...
Is that 2010 5EAT a CVT? I didn't think they were making those back then?
 
luvflyin said:
Is that 2010 5EAT a CVT? I didn't think they were making those back then?
Click to expand...

Nope. 5 speed auto. Added to self-shame and confuse you only apparently. :D

Edit: 2010 Outbacks with the 4 cyl mill did indeed have a CVT.
 
I find it amusing that the CVT implementation includes “shift points” which are superfluous to the actual operation and might actually reduce efficiency. But people are used to a transmission shifting and the original CVTs got poor reviews because of not feeling “right”.
 
We had a 2010 Outback with a CVT. We put 125k on it before trading up, never had any issues.
 
Friend's wife had a Nissan Rouge with a CVT, it crapped out around 55K miles, they spent nearly $6k replacing it with a brand new CVT as no one offered repair/overhaul for it. Someone rear-ended the car and totaled it before the warranty was out on the new CVT.
 
jsstevens said:
I find it amusing that the CVT implementation includes “shift points” which are superfluous to the actual operation and might actually reduce efficiency. But people are used to a transmission shifting and the original CVTs got poor reviews because of not feeling “right”.
Click to expand...

Engineer speaking. Phony shifts do reduce efficiency!

The automakers felt they had to add the shift points in because without the increasing rev sounds, buyers thought the cars were slower and that the engine drone sounded funny.

Fiddling in various rental cars, however, there are some back doors that will eliminate the phony shift points. Probably to document better 0-60 times for their press claims.

One example that I think worked on some Nissans, was to shift to "Sport", hold full brake and full throttle for ~ 2 seconds, and release brake. No pseudo shifts and rpm stays near redline for the whole run.
 
Wish cars with CVTs would adopt Tesla-like braking, where if you let off the accelerator, it does engine braking. I guess with EV vehicles coming, it's a mute point, irregardless.
 
If you are concerned about transmission MX,
il_794xN.2038886416_t1ni.jpg
 
GeorgeC said:
Wish cars with CVTs would adopt Tesla-like braking, where if you let off the accelerator, it does engine braking. I guess with EV vehicles coming, it's a mute point, irregardless.
Click to expand...
moot
 
GeorgeC said:
Wish cars with CVTs would adopt Tesla-like braking, where if you let off the accelerator, it does engine braking. I guess with EV vehicles coming, it's a mute point, irregardless.
Click to expand...
CVTs have wear and reliability issues the way it is.

I assume the back-loading the belt in the opposite direction only further decreases transmission lifetime and increases warranty claims.
 
ElPaso Pilot said:
CVTs have wear issues the way it is.

I assume the back-loading the belt in the opposite direction only further decreases transmission lifetime and increases warranty claims.
Click to expand...
Our 2017 Forester sorta does that; if you set the cruise control and then go downhill, it will try to maintain speed by modulating rpm.
 
GeorgeC said:
Wish cars with CVTs would adopt Tesla-like braking, where if you let off the accelerator, it does engine braking. I guess with EV vehicles coming, it's a mute point, irregardless.
Click to expand...
Regardless of what others might think I believe it is a moot point.
 
Subaru outback 3.6r changed to CVT in 2014. Before that they were 5EAT which is a great transmission. We have 4 3.6r cars all 2011. The CVT will likely cause us to look for another brand AWD when it comes time to buy replacement vehicles.
 
I think CVT’s are fine now. I like them for how smoothly they accelerate but dislike them for steady state cruising. It’s always hard for me to know how much gas it needs to maintain speeds on hills. I would take CVT or a traditional auto over a DCT on a daily driver any day. They are just too jerky when going slow.
 
My 2013 Subaru has a CVT that crapped out at 103,000 miles. The warranty ran out at 100,000. Dealer put me in touch with corporate and they are going to pretty much cover the part but not labor. The original warranty was 3/36, but about 3 years ago Subaru retroactively extended it to 10/100.
 
asicer said:
If you are concerned about transmission MX,
il_794xN.2038886416_t1ni.jpg
Click to expand...
Call me crazy, but I’m not a manual lover. It’s fun once in awhile, but I don’t want to have one as a daily driver.
 
2013 Honda Accord with CVT. Put on 155K miles and zero issues on car until traded in. It had paddle shifters but I had a case where they actually came in handy. Got some bad fuel, the rev limiter would kick in I think due to emissions sensors tripping out but using the paddle shifter I forced it to around fake 5th gear and got it lugging and rolling until the 2000rpm limit was enough for high way speeds. Took it into the dealer the next morning (of course it drove just fine). He left me a $0 bill with a smile and wrote bad gas on it. CVT was nice for everyday boring driving.
 
RyanB said:
Call me crazy, but I’m not a manual lover. It’s fun once in awhile, but I don’t want to have one as a daily driver.
Click to expand...
Nah. I was a manual guy for decades. I was hard core. I’ve driven a truck with manual towing a trailer while I had an unset broken thumb. I’m over it now. Screw that. With the tech today, I see zero point.
 
RyanB said:
Call me crazy, but I’m not a manual lover. It’s fun once in awhile, but I don’t want to have one as a daily driver.
Click to expand...

You're crazy! Well you said to ... :D

Three of my four road vehicles are standard shift. They work very well and they last forever. The one automatic I have uses a GM 4L60-E and it has been a great one.

I like using my feet on the pedals ... kinda like flying my tailwheel airplane! ;)
 
I have a 2014 ford fusion energi hubris with CVT. No issues at about 70k miles. I find it to be far more responsive when accelerating compared to the new 8 speed cars I just drove. No downshifting or hunting for the right gear leads to a much more pleasant ride.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top