GDI, CVT and turbo = $$ and trouble?

[JHZR2]

Cars are designed for 100-150k service life. At minimum parts are made to statistically work in full performance past a 60k warranty period.

Some people drive like jackrabbits, some like plain idiots, stressing and dynamic scenarios will wear equipment faster than steady state use. How smart and well people operate and maintain their equipment determines how long it will last.

Very simple cars like old MB diesels, well proven to be 250-500k mile cars, still have plenty that had transmission or engine issues at 100-200k miles.

The average driver gets afraid of their car at 100k and trades it. The average used car price has depreciation built in to factor at least some level of repairs. It's why many nice euro cars can be bought for a song at a certain point. The challenge is that low end cars demand such low end prices once depreciated that the repairs may be more than the car is worth. Then you start to have a monetary liability issue.

 

[tony1679]

Originally Posted by flinter
This is the reason as I was car shopping in 2017, I decided to go with the Hyundai Elantra, still with port injection, naturally aspirated and NO CVT. I almost went with the Chevy Cruze! That would be a costly mistake for sure!
It's scary how similar this sounds to my shopping experience. I almost went with a Cruze too. These were my two finalists. I went with the Elantra for many reasons but the main one was the Cruze being either turbo or timing belt. Petty, I know. After about a week with the Elantra, everytime I see a Cruze, I have to say "[censored] I'm glad I didn't make that mistake" to myself. Now when I look at a Cruze, I see nothing but repairs, ugly design, and cheap materials. It's crazy how my runner-up is so different now in my eyes.

***But on a very serious note:***

I did A LOT of research on A LOT of cars when shopping for my Elantra. I ruled out the '17+ Elantras due to price, but I also ruled them out because I thought they were direct injected...? Doing some more research just now, I see they're Atkinson cycle (which I thought were similar, but it looks like I was wrong there). Am I nuts? I swear they were DI.

Regardless, I wouldn't trade my '16 for anything.

 

[bbhero]

Originally Posted by aquariuscsm
When we rented the Nissan Rogue with the cvt I loved it!! I love the way cvt's drive.



I have put 237,000 miles on my Nissan Altima VQ CVT... I like the way it runs. Stay in it and push harder and it just keeps rpm up...

Though the generation after my car certainly had issues with the CVT transmissions.

 

[tony1679]

Originally Posted by aquariuscsm
When we rented the Nissan Rogue with the cvt I loved it!! I love the way cvt's drive.
Said no one 1 person ever.

 

[4WD]

Originally Posted by tony1679
Originally Posted by aquariuscsm
When we rented the Nissan Rogue with the cvt I loved it!! I love the way cvt's drive.
Said no one 1 person ever.


Not me at least … seem to get that one often over the last 3 years since I want hatchbacks … The last one was almost new and did not scream getting nowhere like the first I drove. Better !

 

[bbhero]

Like the 3 or 4 speed automatic transmissions were so great ...

They were garbage in many cases has well... And they sucked donkey balls at certain speeds where it would shift between high gear and 3rd gear constantly... Up... Down.. up ... Down... Up down...

A 4 speed Pontiac my family got in my childhood the automatic transmission blew up 2 times 4 months.. Purchased brand new off the lot. A great transmission...

My dad was highly irritated. We got a manual 4 speed Honda hatchback which was perfect. Then a Honda 5 speed manual which was great. Then we added a Ford Probe 5 speed which did great. Which the red Ford Probe eventually became my car my senior year of high school.

A great 4 speed transmission in my mom's Ford Expedition blew up before 90k miles... I knew that was going to happen years before. How?? It did the world famous shifting up .. down... Up... Down... Up ... Down between 35-50 mph... The second transmission was going bad two years after being installed.


I did just have a friend who had the CVT fail in his Sentra at 106k miles... A CVT made after mine. I also think the motor used in combination matters quite a bit has well.

 

[Nick1994]

I hear people complain about GDI but have yet to see realistic GDI problems.

100k on my Sonata and.... no GDI problems.

People gotta grow up.

 

[Skippy722]

Originally Posted by Nick1994
I hear people complain about GDI but have yet to see realistic GDI problems.

100k on my Sonata and.... no GDI problems.

People gotta grow up.


But new technology is scary, evil, and must be shunned! Nobody needs more than a 4 speed torque converter slush box, 4 cylinders, MPSFI, and a single camshaft!

 

[Ws6]

Originally Posted by Skippy722
Originally Posted by Nick1994
I hear people complain about GDI but have yet to see realistic GDI problems.

100k on my Sonata and.... no GDI problems.

People gotta grow up.


But new technology is scary, evil, and must be shunned! Nobody needs more than a 4 speed torque converter slush box, 4 cylinders, MPSFI, and a single camshaft!

New tech is scary. Look how bad the first DIs were with carbon build up. Looks how bad the first automatics were, with Ford even being responsible for many deaths due to their C series slushboxes. Look at...

...new tech needs vetting. I refuse to buy drivetrains with less than 3 years on the road to draw from data on.

 

[Skippy722]

Originally Posted by Ws6
Originally Posted by Skippy722
Originally Posted by Nick1994
I hear people complain about GDI but have yet to see realistic GDI problems.

100k on my Sonata and.... no GDI problems.

People gotta grow up.


But new technology is scary, evil, and must be shunned! Nobody needs more than a 4 speed torque converter slush box, 4 cylinders, MPSFI, and a single camshaft!

New tech is scary. Look how bad the first DIs were with carbon build up. Looks how bad the first automatics were, with Ford even being responsible for many deaths due to their C series slushboxes. Look at...

...new tech needs vetting. I refuse to buy drivetrains with less than 3 years on the road to draw from data on.


I agree on the vetting, but there are people (here and elsewhere) who refuse to accept new technology at all, no matter how much vetting it goes through. I have a coworker who can't wrap his mind around naturally aspirated v6's making 300+ horsepower from the factory lol

 

[LoneRanger]

CVT's are indeed great road transmissions, but as seems evident with the new CVT Subarus, off-road is where they mess the bed. Unless they figure out how to work a low range into them or otherwise improve low/crawl speed torque delivery to the wheels. The CVT's off-road performance is regrettable considering how capable the previous gen Subaru's with conventional automatic transmissions (or manual transmissions) were off-road.

 

[bbhero]

Really good points ^^^^^

I will say that in the snow and ice... My car sounded funky with the CVT.... I did choose to use the manual mode which helped a lot. Still it was not totally normal at certain times... I think your points here are very, very accurate.

 

[PimTac]

Originally Posted by bbhero
Really good points ^^^^^

I will say that in the snow and ice... My car sounded funky with the CVT.... I did choose to use the manual mode which helped a lot. Still it was not totally normal at certain times... I think your points here are very, very accurate.




Interesting point. I've never driven a cvt vehicle in the snow. Having AWD would help with that but if one didn't have it that would be something to ponder.

So did the cvt change the gear aspect as the engine sped up during slippery transitions? That would seem to go against the idea of trying to crawl out of such a situation.

 

[Andrew1972]

This is flinters justify and validate an Elantra purchase he's uneasy about.

 

[4WD]

What does all that mean ?
Why not compare CVT to the 8 speed Dodge currently uses instead of things not related …

 

[DweezilAZ]

Originally Posted by tony1679
Originally Posted by flinter
This is the reason as I was car shopping in 2017, I decided to go with the Hyundai Elantra, still with port injection, naturally aspirated and NO CVT. I almost went with the Chevy Cruze! That would be a costly mistake for sure!
It's scary how similar this sounds to my shopping experience. I almost went with a Cruze too. These were my two finalists. I went with the Elantra for many reasons but the main one was the Cruze being either turbo or timing belt. Petty, I know. After about a week with the Elantra, everytime I see a Cruze, I have to say "[censored] I'm glad I didn't make that mistake" to myself. Now when I look at a Cruze, I see nothing but repairs, ugly design, and cheap materials. It's crazy how my runner-up is so different now in my eyes.

***But on a very serious note:***

I did A LOT of research on A LOT of cars when shopping for my Elantra. I ruled out the '17+ Elantras due to price, but I also ruled them out because I thought they were direct injected...? Doing some more research just now, I see they're Atkinson cycle (which I thought were similar, but it looks like I was wrong there). Am I nuts? I swear they were DI.

Regardless, I wouldn't trade my '16 for anything.

This will make you feel even better:

http://dashboard-light.com/vehicles/Chevrolet_Cruze.html

 

[wemay]

99% of the public could care less and just want a vehicle to get them "there" reliably. That's what their experiencing with their purchase. We forum surfers fall into some kind of paralysis when 5K of 1 million vehicles has an issue.

 

[fdcg27]

Some folks find the application of well established technical development scary.
None of the three you mention are new at all, although DI is the most recent.
Mainstream manufacturers known for good vehicles don't build junk.
If Honda wants to offer a DI/turbo/CVT powertrain then I'd say it'll hold up just fine.
Of course, our newest Honda has neither DI nor a turbo nor even a transmission.

 

[MCompact]

I've owned three turbo GDI cars and all have provided exemplary performance. The mildly tuned GDI turbo in my 2007 MS3 was running just fine at 158k miles when I flipped it for the 2er. No experience with CVTs- I prefer a car with either three pedals or a ZF 8HP.
The N55 in my F22 returns over 26 mpg in everyday driving and still runs the quarter in the high twelves, so I'm more than fine with that "frightening" modern technology.

 

[Imp4]

Originally Posted by DweezilAZ
Originally Posted by tony1679
Originally Posted by flinter
This is the reason as I was car shopping in 2017, I decided to go with the Hyundai Elantra, still with port injection, naturally aspirated and NO CVT. I almost went with the Chevy Cruze! That would be a costly mistake for sure!
It's scary how similar this sounds to my shopping experience. I almost went with a Cruze too. These were my two finalists. I went with the Elantra for many reasons but the main one was the Cruze being either turbo or timing belt. Petty, I know. After about a week with the Elantra, everytime I see a Cruze, I have to say "[censored] I'm glad I didn't make that mistake" to myself. Now when I look at a Cruze, I see nothing but repairs, ugly design, and cheap materials. It's crazy how my runner-up is so different now in my eyes.

***But on a very serious note:***

I did A LOT of research on A LOT of cars when shopping for my Elantra. I ruled out the '17+ Elantras due to price, but I also ruled them out because I thought they were direct injected...? Doing some more research just now, I see they're Atkinson cycle (which I thought were similar, but it looks like I was wrong there). Am I nuts? I swear they were DI.

Regardless, I wouldn't trade my '16 for anything.

This will make you feel even better:

http://dashboard-light.com/vehicles/Chevrolet_Cruze.html

Yikes!! You look at the data and it's no wonder the Cruzes aren't made anymore. What a bunch of junk!!!