Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Interesting. I had a similar conversation with the head mechanic at our local Honda dealer. I told him I was flat towing our CRV about 10K miles a year behind our motorhome, and doing DIY service to the trans at 15K and the rear diff. at 30K, using OEM fluid. He stated that is exactly what he would do, especially since you are only swapping three of eleven qts. in the trans. while following the factory recommended service procedure. His opinion is that if customers would going 30K intervals on transmission service, it would eliminate a majority of premature transmission failures he sees in the shop.
Both services are easy, quick and inexpensive (less than $30) when I do them myself.
Spot on.
It's extremely important for people to realize that a CVT is not an automatic transmission. It's entirely different. Therefore it needs to be treated and serviced differently.
I've only got 4,000 miles on my current Altima, but when I get 25k-30k on it, I'll change the CVT fluid at the same time I do my engine oil change. It's extremely simple and easy, and takes about 5 quarts.
I'm glad I've found threads like this one. I admit, I'm not the most savvy buyer. I've always driven Dodge Caravans, I had my first one for 13 years and I loved it. Got a newer one a couple of years ago. But I'm beginning to think I might like something different, maybe slightly smaller ("crossover" sized) and AWD. I'm not obsessed with gas mileage other than wanting to avoid the huge SUVs that really blow through fuel. So I was definitely considering Rogues and Muranos, as well as some of the RAV-4s, some Subarus, and finally after reading all of this troubling stuff about CVTs...thinking maybe a Mazda CX-5? Do the transmissions suck in those, too? There are a few stories out there on the internets.
How about this, car experts (and let me say, much love to you, because I admit I just do not have the expertise but don't want to buy a car in total ignorance)... In the class of vehicles where CVTs seem very common, your mid-size AWD (not a big arse SUV nor a sedan) with automatic transmissions, because not all of us *cough* even ever learned to drive a stick... Are there any that seem to have more reliability? That don't immediately send up red flags to an expert? That get lots of love at the auctions or whatever? lol
Thanks guys. You rock.
Judging from your posts on here (in general) , I bet I could teach you to drive a stick well enough that you would buy a stick-shift car, in about 2 hours tops. You can get a driving school to teach you this as well, and that may be a better option than perhaps abusing a friend's clutch trying to learn. Thing to remember is when you have actually learned to drive a stick, the area of your brain active when you are shifting, starting out, etc. actually changes. It's like your brain "writes a macro" for running the transmission. So while at first the stick will be front-of-mind and using up a lot of your attention, once you have a few week's practice it is not as intrusive, mentally.
What you have posted here (this specific post quoted), a Subaru would probably work well for you, but you want one with a stick, not a CVT (and most automatic Subies now are CVT. ) Subies with a stick come with a hill holder feature, if you push down both the clutch and brake, the brakes will hold without your foot on the pedal until you let the clutch out.
Judging from your posts on here (in general) , I bet I could teach you to drive a stick well enough that you would buy a stick-shift car, in about 2 hours tops.
I believe that if more Americans knew how to drive vehicles with manual transmissions, CVTs may never have been invented.
Location: San Ramon, Seattle, Anchorage, Reykjavik
2,254 posts, read 2,741,137 times
Reputation: 3203
Quote:
Originally Posted by K1500
I believe that if more Americans knew how to drive vehicles with manual transmissions, CVTs may never have been invented.
I know that's a stretch, but...
Americans did know how to drive manual transmissions. Until the 1940 Olds got the Hydra-Matic, every single non-electric or steam driven car had a manual. And as soon as they were available, droves of buyers switched to automatics. Really, no one wants manuals (outside of a small number of enthusiasts) or the manufacturers would still sell them.
Heck, in Europe everyone knows how to drive manuals and they are quickly changing to automatics.
Who wants to sit in heavy traffic or hilly terrain dealing with a stick?
Americans did know how to drive manual transmissions. Until the 1940 Olds got the Hydra-Matic, every single non-electric or steam driven car had a manual. And as soon as they were available, droves of buyers switched to automatics. Really, no one wants manuals (outside of a small number of enthusiasts) or the manufacturers would still sell them.
Heck, in Europe everyone knows how to drive manuals and they are quickly changing to automatics.
Who wants to sit in heavy traffic or hilly terrain dealing with a stick?
Absolutely true.
But 50 years ago we didn't have these CAFE Standards being forced on us, and gas was cheap. Absolutely nobody cared if your car got 10 mpg and your pickup got 5.
Fortunately, automatic transmissions have come a long way. But if I was forced to choose between a car with an automatic that got 15 mpg, and a similar car with a 6-speed manual that got 25, I'd go manual.
These days, the efficiency advantages of manual transmissions have largely evaporated, especially when compared to CVTs. For the 2019 Honda Accord Sedan, Sport trim, with the 1.5l turbo motor, it's EPA rated at 26/35mpg with the 6-speed manual, and 29/35mpg with the CVT automatic - the automatic (CVT) matches the manual transmission on the highway and beats it in the city.
How do you that the CVT hasn’t already been replaced?
In all likelihood, anyone with a CVT car who has replaced the CVT would use that as a selling point. The safe assumption is that it hasn't been, in the absence of documentation to the contrary.
$500,000 combines have used them for years under adverse conditions. They work just fine.
Actually, farm combines stopped using the CVT type systems many years ago, and moved to fully hydrostatic drivetrains. Unless there's one I don't know about - which very well could be...
Actually, farm combines stopped using the CVT type systems many years ago, and moved to fully hydrostatic drivetrains. Unless there's one I don't know about - which very well could be...
We might be discussing the same side of the coin with different words. Case IH use CVT in both their combines and tractors. Some are hydrostatic assisted. The same goes for John Deere. I can't speak for the rest, but certainly those two dominate in my area. CVT works under very adverse conditions, and works well.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
) Subies with a stick come with a hill holder feature, if you push down both the clutch and brake, the brakes will hold without your foot on the pedal until you let the clutch out. 
