I've driven the Ford Focus/Fiesta with their automatic transmissions (the dry clutch "automated manual" unit). The Fiesta failed during the road test (wouldn't upshift) requiring me to pull over and shut the car off to "reset" the transmission. The unit in the rental Focus was rough and slow-shifting...especially at slower speeds...felt like their was something wrong with it. I'd hardly call these cars with that transmission "refined". In fairness, the driving dynamics/comfort was very good with each car...both were enjoyable to drive except for that piece-of-[censored] transmission. Ford has supposedly improved the transmission yet again in the revamped 2015 models (it's been what...5 or more years?). They should have deep-sixed that lemon and gone with a regular 6 speed automatic years ago.
2015 Corolla or 2015 Civic CVT??
- Thread starter flinter
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: flinter
A Cruze, huh? Wow, when I test drove the Cruze it was downright scary. It was a hot summer day in NJ and with the AC now, the car's
tiny engine had literally no power! It was dangerous merging onto a highway! Horrible!
Forced between a Cruze and a Focus...Focus hands down.
Don't buy the small engine option if you don't want it then.
A Cruze, huh? Wow, when I test drove the Cruze it was downright scary. It was a hot summer day in NJ and with the AC now, the car's
tiny engine had literally no power! It was dangerous merging onto a highway! Horrible!
Forced between a Cruze and a Focus...Focus hands down.
Don't buy the small engine option if you don't want it then.
Boy, there's a lot of garbage being spewed in this thread from many different people. There's almost no point in trying to add anything useful, but I guess I have a few minutes to waste...
OP - drive them both and see which you like better.
CVTs have come a long way, even though they aren't going to be a perfect alternative for someone like me who likes a manual.
And as noted, Honda and Toyota have been using them in some models for a while, so they're likely pretty well versed in the topic, even if the new Civic and Corolla don't use the exact same model of CVT.
I will say, the criticism of Ford's dual clutch transmission rings true from my experience. My friend just bought a Focus and it's all herky-jerky at low speeds.
Originally Posted By: flinter
A Cruze, huh? Wow, when I test drove the Cruze it was downright scary. It was a hot summer day in NJ and with the AC now, the car's
tiny engine had literally no power! It was dangerous merging onto a highway! Horrible!
Forced between a Cruze and a Focus...Focus hands down.
Which exact Cruze did you drive? It seems you may be exaggerating for effect.
I recently bought a Cruze after test driving lots of different models. The Cruze Eco, even though it's geared for fuel economy, has plenty of power for merging onto the highway, even with the A/C running.
OP - drive them both and see which you like better.
CVTs have come a long way, even though they aren't going to be a perfect alternative for someone like me who likes a manual.
And as noted, Honda and Toyota have been using them in some models for a while, so they're likely pretty well versed in the topic, even if the new Civic and Corolla don't use the exact same model of CVT.
I will say, the criticism of Ford's dual clutch transmission rings true from my experience. My friend just bought a Focus and it's all herky-jerky at low speeds.
Originally Posted By: flinter
A Cruze, huh? Wow, when I test drove the Cruze it was downright scary. It was a hot summer day in NJ and with the AC now, the car's
tiny engine had literally no power! It was dangerous merging onto a highway! Horrible!
Forced between a Cruze and a Focus...Focus hands down.
Which exact Cruze did you drive? It seems you may be exaggerating for effect.
I recently bought a Cruze after test driving lots of different models. The Cruze Eco, even though it's geared for fuel economy, has plenty of power for merging onto the highway, even with the A/C running.
Originally Posted By: stephen9666
I will say, the criticism of Ford's dual clutch transmission rings true from my experience. My friend just bought a Focus and it's all herky-jerky at low speeds.
Oh god I hate that thing so much. I have a friend with a 2014 Focus auto.. It's gross. 5MT or nothing in a Focus.
I will say, the criticism of Ford's dual clutch transmission rings true from my experience. My friend just bought a Focus and it's all herky-jerky at low speeds.
Oh god I hate that thing so much. I have a friend with a 2014 Focus auto.. It's gross. 5MT or nothing in a Focus.
Why not just buy a manual version of the car you want?
It will be cheaper to buy, cheaper to maintain, and
more reliable than any automatic, DSG, or CVT.
I would consider the Focus or Fiesta over the two Japanese cars as long as you buy the excellent 5 speed manual trans.
It will be cheaper to buy, cheaper to maintain, and
more reliable than any automatic, DSG, or CVT.
I would consider the Focus or Fiesta over the two Japanese cars as long as you buy the excellent 5 speed manual trans.
Last edited:
It definitely won't necessarily be more reliable. You probably assume that because when things break in manual transmissions, people just consider it regular maintenance to replace because it's cheap. If you can drive a manual but can't maintain it, it won't be any cheaper over the auto.
Originally Posted By: horse123
It definitely won't necessarily be more reliable. You probably assume that because when things break in manual transmissions, people just consider it regular maintenance to replace because it's cheap. If you can drive a manual but can't maintain it, it won't be any cheaper over the auto.
Things don't break in the manual boxes unless they are abused. If you know how to properly drive a manual you can almost be certain of having to do NOTHING to that clutch, flywheel, or trans for 200k miles. The only possible maintenance might be changing the gear oil at
100k miles or so. Even then if the unit wasn't abused the oil will still be in decent condition. Try that with ANY automatic, CVT, or DSG units.
One thing is certain for me. When I buy a new car it MUST have a regular manual gearbox, or I will NOT consider it.
It definitely won't necessarily be more reliable. You probably assume that because when things break in manual transmissions, people just consider it regular maintenance to replace because it's cheap. If you can drive a manual but can't maintain it, it won't be any cheaper over the auto.
Things don't break in the manual boxes unless they are abused. If you know how to properly drive a manual you can almost be certain of having to do NOTHING to that clutch, flywheel, or trans for 200k miles. The only possible maintenance might be changing the gear oil at
100k miles or so. Even then if the unit wasn't abused the oil will still be in decent condition. Try that with ANY automatic, CVT, or DSG units.
One thing is certain for me. When I buy a new car it MUST have a regular manual gearbox, or I will NOT consider it.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: GiveMeAVowel
One thing is certain for me. When I buy a new car it MUST have a regular manual gearbox, or I will NOT consider it.
Same here....one day while getting my MT Altima oil changed at the dealer I spotted a newer version (5 years and @ 55k miles, 125k miles newer) also with an MT and while making an offer a dealer salesman asked to buy my older Altima...couldn't be more coincidental or a sweeter deal....
Then...10 years later...
When my 2nd Altima got totaled @ 195k miles I got worried after looking at Craigslist that I wouldn't find a decent MT...and I HAD to HAVE an MT...then at my 1st stop at a dealer I found I found the 05 Camry (!?!?!? couldn't believe that) with a newly installed clutch...closed the deal when I saw no other in the following week that came close condition-wise...
...my 14th vehicle (excl. motorbikes) with an MT...
One thing is certain for me. When I buy a new car it MUST have a regular manual gearbox, or I will NOT consider it.
Same here....one day while getting my MT Altima oil changed at the dealer I spotted a newer version (5 years and @ 55k miles, 125k miles newer) also with an MT and while making an offer a dealer salesman asked to buy my older Altima...couldn't be more coincidental or a sweeter deal....
Then...10 years later...
When my 2nd Altima got totaled @ 195k miles I got worried after looking at Craigslist that I wouldn't find a decent MT...and I HAD to HAVE an MT...then at my 1st stop at a dealer I found I found the 05 Camry (!?!?!? couldn't believe that) with a newly installed clutch...closed the deal when I saw no other in the following week that came close condition-wise...
...my 14th vehicle (excl. motorbikes) with an MT...
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: 2010Civic
Honda has had a CVT in the civic hybrid since 2001. Almost 15 years, not exactly unproven if you ask me.
Yet most people think average lifespan of an automatic is 150k, give or take. A manual only has to have an average lifespan of say 200k to be better.
Toss in a clutch so as to make driving in snow easier, and it seems a no brainer to drive stick. Automatic only if you can get it cheaper.
Honda has had a CVT in the civic hybrid since 2001. Almost 15 years, not exactly unproven if you ask me.
Yet most people think average lifespan of an automatic is 150k, give or take. A manual only has to have an average lifespan of say 200k to be better.
Toss in a clutch so as to make driving in snow easier, and it seems a no brainer to drive stick. Automatic only if you can get it cheaper.
Originally Posted By: 2010Civic
Honda has had a CVT in the civic hybrid since 2001. Almost 15 years, not exactly unproven if you ask me.
Honda has had a CVT in the Civic HX since 1996. They require very frequent fluid changes (like every 10-15k)
Originally Posted By: Noey
No CVT is "refined" It's all about MPG (and emissions). If you want 'refined', try a Ford Focus or Fiesta//or a Chevy Cruze.
The Focus and Fiesta have DCT's, which are even *more* unproven than CVT's. And Ford's DCT's are among the worst. The Focus has already been recalled because of it, and the Fiesta only has D and L for six gears, and no paddles.
Honda has had a CVT in the civic hybrid since 2001. Almost 15 years, not exactly unproven if you ask me.
Honda has had a CVT in the Civic HX since 1996. They require very frequent fluid changes (like every 10-15k)
Originally Posted By: Noey
No CVT is "refined" It's all about MPG (and emissions). If you want 'refined', try a Ford Focus or Fiesta//or a Chevy Cruze.
The Focus and Fiesta have DCT's, which are even *more* unproven than CVT's. And Ford's DCT's are among the worst. The Focus has already been recalled because of it, and the Fiesta only has D and L for six gears, and no paddles.
Originally Posted By: SOHCman
270K on my hondas 5 speed manual, no issues, and with original clutch... I would love to see a cvt do even close
This is common on Japanese models but also some German models as well, it isn't uncommon to see them with
that many miles WITHOUT A SINGLE RELATED COMPONENT REPLACED and they still work perfectly.
270K on my hondas 5 speed manual, no issues, and with original clutch... I would love to see a cvt do even close
This is common on Japanese models but also some German models as well, it isn't uncommon to see them with
that many miles WITHOUT A SINGLE RELATED COMPONENT REPLACED and they still work perfectly.
I see no reason, with proper maintenance and driven properly, that one can get to 250K or so with a new HONDA CVT.
I wouldn't put my foot into a GM (Govt. Motors) vehicles, if they went with a begging bowl and filed Chp9, how worse can it be. GM makes junk.
Look at their line up nothing worth mentioning - 90% of profits for Ford and GM comes from Truck and Truck based SUVs. Big demons like the Subs, Escalades, Yukons and all that trucks that guzzle like no tomorrow.
Americans have very short memory when it comes to oil prices and in general have lousy auto buying habits in driving these 7000 lb gorillas day-in and day-out.
Look at their line up nothing worth mentioning - 90% of profits for Ford and GM comes from Truck and Truck based SUVs. Big demons like the Subs, Escalades, Yukons and all that trucks that guzzle like no tomorrow.
Americans have very short memory when it comes to oil prices and in general have lousy auto buying habits in driving these 7000 lb gorillas day-in and day-out.
AMEN !! American publics memory is way to short when it comes to gas guzzlers. Makes soccer moms "feel" safer. Wait until they have to take severe evasive action swerving to avoid hitting something in the road.. Roll over very very likely.
One time I was literally less than 200 feet short of a bridge. I looked down to get my toll money. When I looked up there was deer that looked to the size of an elk standing in the right lane. I swerved so hard to left I cherpped the tires badly jerking the wheel to the left and then back to the right to avoid hitting that dumb 12 point buck. If I would have been driving a SUV instead of my Fusion I guarantee I would have rolled over easily. Those vehicles just aren't has safe as people are thinking they are made out to be. The biggest key to safety of vehicles is A) maintainence of the integrity of the passenger compartment B) strength and integrity of the roof structure C) as much as possible the mitigation of a fire breaking out D) ALL safety equipment working properly and maintaining proper function throughout accident sequence.
A big honking vehicle DOES not guarantee all of the above happens. Added weight MAY help. But may not as well. What if that heavy V8 motor is pushed too far back in a head on collision and compromises the passenger compartment?? What if the driver takes severe swerve to avoid something and the vehicle rolls over and the roof collapses too much crushing the neck of a passenger or driver killing then instantly?? Bigger does not mean safer at all times. A vehicle that has great quickness and stability under those circumstances can be far safer than a big honking SUV. Also if said quick and responsive car has the ability to maintain integrity of its drivers and passenger compartment... Its a huge win win.
But again, God bless America. We soon forget $4.40 a gallon.
One time I was literally less than 200 feet short of a bridge. I looked down to get my toll money. When I looked up there was deer that looked to the size of an elk standing in the right lane. I swerved so hard to left I cherpped the tires badly jerking the wheel to the left and then back to the right to avoid hitting that dumb 12 point buck. If I would have been driving a SUV instead of my Fusion I guarantee I would have rolled over easily. Those vehicles just aren't has safe as people are thinking they are made out to be. The biggest key to safety of vehicles is A) maintainence of the integrity of the passenger compartment B) strength and integrity of the roof structure C) as much as possible the mitigation of a fire breaking out D) ALL safety equipment working properly and maintaining proper function throughout accident sequence.
A big honking vehicle DOES not guarantee all of the above happens. Added weight MAY help. But may not as well. What if that heavy V8 motor is pushed too far back in a head on collision and compromises the passenger compartment?? What if the driver takes severe swerve to avoid something and the vehicle rolls over and the roof collapses too much crushing the neck of a passenger or driver killing then instantly?? Bigger does not mean safer at all times. A vehicle that has great quickness and stability under those circumstances can be far safer than a big honking SUV. Also if said quick and responsive car has the ability to maintain integrity of its drivers and passenger compartment... Its a huge win win.
But again, God bless America. We soon forget $4.40 a gallon.
Originally Posted By: Nick1994
Doesn't the Corolla have a "more real" transmission? The 4 speed automatic? I'd get that and skip the CVT junk.
I think it will be Honda or Toyota that can make the automotive CVT reliable and able to consistently last 100K miles. It- pretty clearly- will NOT be Nissan/JATCO.
With that said, fact is, the 4 speed auto in the base model Corolla will run 200, 300K? without problems. Aisin makes the most reliable conventional automatics out there.
Doesn't the Corolla have a "more real" transmission? The 4 speed automatic? I'd get that and skip the CVT junk.
I think it will be Honda or Toyota that can make the automotive CVT reliable and able to consistently last 100K miles. It- pretty clearly- will NOT be Nissan/JATCO.
With that said, fact is, the 4 speed auto in the base model Corolla will run 200, 300K? without problems. Aisin makes the most reliable conventional automatics out there.
flinter, I don't see how you could go wrong with either CVT equipped vehicle. Given Toyota and Honda's relative slowness in adopting this style of CVT, I'm sure they got it right. There's no way they'd risk loosing the longevity/durability factor associated with these cars.
Like any CVT, if you're a car guy, the first few times you drive it, it's going to feel weird to you. After the first few drives, I absolutely loved the CVT in my 2012 Subaru Legacy. Subaru is probably the last to adopt any new technology, and they've been churning out mostly CVTs since 2010.
Like any CVT, if you're a car guy, the first few times you drive it, it's going to feel weird to you. After the first few drives, I absolutely loved the CVT in my 2012 Subaru Legacy. Subaru is probably the last to adopt any new technology, and they've been churning out mostly CVTs since 2010.
Originally Posted By: rjundi
The whole idea of CVT and failing is paranoia since the entire basis is one car company's implementation of it(Nissan) with one maker(Jatco).
Toyota has had incredible reliability with Prius which using something called e-CVT.
But I'm going to guess that the Corolla CVT has nothing to do with a Prius one(as it needs an electric motor), and is the same basic design as the Jatco with a chain and pulleys. I would assume that Toyota has made sure these CVT's will last for Corolla type reliability though. No need to scrimp on it for a few bucks to kill their golden goose.
The whole idea of CVT and failing is paranoia since the entire basis is one car company's implementation of it(Nissan) with one maker(Jatco).
Toyota has had incredible reliability with Prius which using something called e-CVT.
But I'm going to guess that the Corolla CVT has nothing to do with a Prius one(as it needs an electric motor), and is the same basic design as the Jatco with a chain and pulleys. I would assume that Toyota has made sure these CVT's will last for Corolla type reliability though. No need to scrimp on it for a few bucks to kill their golden goose.
Do we know where Toyota and Honda are sourcing their CVTs? I wouldn't be surprised if it was Jacto as opposed to Aisin. Even Subaru's CVT is built by Jatco, specifically for Subaru. Not all Jatcos are the same- by a long shot.
Pretty sure Jatco has the majority of the market in the States for CVT technology.
Pretty sure Jatco has the majority of the market in the States for CVT technology.
- Status
