One of my uncles had a 2004 Murano with 130,000 miles on it, no problems. He just got a new Murano because he wanted a new car.
When did your CVT Transmission break? Or not?
- Thread starter dareo
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: artificialist
One of my uncles had a 2004 Murano with 130,000 miles on it, no problems. He just got a new Murano because he wanted a new car.
In Florida where it is so level that some people NEVER use a parking brake, and the temperature never gets cold enough to cause transmission fluid to thicken, transmissions have an easy life. Compare that to driving up and down mountains in a much wider range of temperatures, and it becomes a no brainer why a CVT would last long in Florida.
Take that same model with the same CVT and similar use except for the hills and weather of a city like Pittsburgh and the life expectancy of a CVT can be a completely different story.
One of my uncles had a 2004 Murano with 130,000 miles on it, no problems. He just got a new Murano because he wanted a new car.
In Florida where it is so level that some people NEVER use a parking brake, and the temperature never gets cold enough to cause transmission fluid to thicken, transmissions have an easy life. Compare that to driving up and down mountains in a much wider range of temperatures, and it becomes a no brainer why a CVT would last long in Florida.
Take that same model with the same CVT and similar use except for the hills and weather of a city like Pittsburgh and the life expectancy of a CVT can be a completely different story.
I wonder how many CVT haters would appreciate this analogy?
We have a new 2013 Fleet Van that has the newer 6L90 six speed slushbox in it. This is a 3500 Savana 6.0 gas engine with 2 full tons in it, quite heavy.
My one driver does not like it. He prefers the older 4L80 4 speed auto. In my observations I noticed he drives the gearbox with his foot, coaxing it into the gear he wants by moving the throttle.
This is precisely what the new slushbox does NOT like. It prefers that you pick a steady throttle position and then it will adjust the VVT and pick a gear as the computer sees fit. This may explain some of us not liking CVT's... who knows.
I know I love the new truck. It simply will not upshift at low rpm and always maintains some revs unless you are over 52-55 mph.
We have a new 2013 Fleet Van that has the newer 6L90 six speed slushbox in it. This is a 3500 Savana 6.0 gas engine with 2 full tons in it, quite heavy.
My one driver does not like it. He prefers the older 4L80 4 speed auto. In my observations I noticed he drives the gearbox with his foot, coaxing it into the gear he wants by moving the throttle.
This is precisely what the new slushbox does NOT like. It prefers that you pick a steady throttle position and then it will adjust the VVT and pick a gear as the computer sees fit. This may explain some of us not liking CVT's... who knows.
I know I love the new truck. It simply will not upshift at low rpm and always maintains some revs unless you are over 52-55 mph.
Originally Posted By: JimPghPA
Originally Posted By: artificialist
One of my uncles had a 2004 Murano with 130,000 miles on it, no problems. He just got a new Murano because he wanted a new car.
In Florida where it is so level that some people NEVER use a parking brake, and the temperature never gets cold enough to cause transmission fluid to thicken, transmissions have an easy life. Compare that to driving up and down mountains in a much wider range of temperatures, and it becomes a no brainer why a CVT would last long in Florida.
Take that same model with the same CVT and similar use except for the hills and weather of a city like Pittsburgh and the life expectancy of a CVT can be a completely different story.
That car was 100% driven in Texas which has far more hills than Florida. That in mind, his car would never experience temperatures under 10F, so the CVT fluid might not get to viscous.
Originally Posted By: artificialist
One of my uncles had a 2004 Murano with 130,000 miles on it, no problems. He just got a new Murano because he wanted a new car.
In Florida where it is so level that some people NEVER use a parking brake, and the temperature never gets cold enough to cause transmission fluid to thicken, transmissions have an easy life. Compare that to driving up and down mountains in a much wider range of temperatures, and it becomes a no brainer why a CVT would last long in Florida.
Take that same model with the same CVT and similar use except for the hills and weather of a city like Pittsburgh and the life expectancy of a CVT can be a completely different story.
That car was 100% driven in Texas which has far more hills than Florida. That in mind, his car would never experience temperatures under 10F, so the CVT fluid might not get to viscous.
Originally Posted By: kam327
Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
"Everything" is CVT now? I disagree. Conventional automatics are still in the overwhelming majority, and as they continue to add more speeds and smarter torque convertors, it may well be that CVTs never make deep inroads.
Seriously? Honda just added it to their midsize top seller and Toyota is about to add it to their compact top seller. So in the midsize segment, 2 of the top 3 sellers will have CVTs and in the compact segment 2 of the top 4 have a CVT or a DCT (Focus). And if the Sentra makes it back into the top 5, that'll be 3 in the top 5 without a conventional auto.
I'd say those are pretty deep inroads.
Its substantial, don't get me wrong. But its far from "everything," and they seem to be quite reliable in the compact segment. Midsize... we'll see.
Originally Posted By: 440Magnum
"Everything" is CVT now? I disagree. Conventional automatics are still in the overwhelming majority, and as they continue to add more speeds and smarter torque convertors, it may well be that CVTs never make deep inroads.
Seriously? Honda just added it to their midsize top seller and Toyota is about to add it to their compact top seller. So in the midsize segment, 2 of the top 3 sellers will have CVTs and in the compact segment 2 of the top 4 have a CVT or a DCT (Focus). And if the Sentra makes it back into the top 5, that'll be 3 in the top 5 without a conventional auto.
I'd say those are pretty deep inroads.
Its substantial, don't get me wrong. But its far from "everything," and they seem to be quite reliable in the compact segment. Midsize... we'll see.
Have a little over 44K in my '10 Maxima, and subscribe to multiple Maxima message boards. Overall owner experience is generally good - with few failures.
My fluid maintenance understanding is identical to Critic's. I have also heard from knowledgeable folks that a significant percentage of failures have been traced to "admitted" use of non OEM fluids.
All-in-all, once I got used to it, I like mine.
My fluid maintenance understanding is identical to Critic's. I have also heard from knowledgeable folks that a significant percentage of failures have been traced to "admitted" use of non OEM fluids.
All-in-all, once I got used to it, I like mine.
I'm approaching 150K on my '05 Freestyle with Ford's now-discontinued CFT-30. I've had zero issues. I do a drain and fill every 30K, and the full-flow filter every 60K. Factory recommendation is 60K drain/fill and filter. I DIY, but I think the service is expensive from the dealer, mainly because changing the filter is a bit of a pain (I believe it's $300.00 or so at the dealer). I live in a hilly area as well and it's obviously held up well.
Personally, I like this WAY better than a stepped automatic. It mates well to the purpose of the vehicle, which is a giant wagon. If launching at stop lights is your thing, this isn't the car or transmission for you; but passing at 40-60mph, the torque converter locks down quickly and it behaves like a normal transmission. Then, once you're up to cruising speed RPM' drop back down to 1,600 or so @ 60mph. I'm a big fan of the low RPM at highway speeds, both for fuel economy and noise.
For those who see this as a passing fad?? I doubt it. Nissan, Subaru and now Honda have bought in, full-stop. I just don't see them going away anytime soon. I prefer manual transmissions but for an automatic the driving characteristics of this particular CVT are really good, IMO.
Personally, I like this WAY better than a stepped automatic. It mates well to the purpose of the vehicle, which is a giant wagon. If launching at stop lights is your thing, this isn't the car or transmission for you; but passing at 40-60mph, the torque converter locks down quickly and it behaves like a normal transmission. Then, once you're up to cruising speed RPM' drop back down to 1,600 or so @ 60mph. I'm a big fan of the low RPM at highway speeds, both for fuel economy and noise.
For those who see this as a passing fad?? I doubt it. Nissan, Subaru and now Honda have bought in, full-stop. I just don't see them going away anytime soon. I prefer manual transmissions but for an automatic the driving characteristics of this particular CVT are really good, IMO.
The Prius CVT is a totally different design which has no belt. It has proven to be very reliable which is not surprising since it consists of a planetary gearbox that uses two electric motor/generators to control final drive to the wheels. It does not change gears at all.
Originally Posted By: mva
The Prius CVT is a totally different design which has no belt. It has proven to be very reliable which is not surprising since it consists of a planetary gearbox that uses two electric motor/generators to control final drive to the wheels. It does not change gears at all.
The Prius isn't even a transmission at all in the truest sense. Its a drive system that sums/differences the speeds of an electric motor, gasoline engine, and road wheels.
A transmission varies the ratio between an input shaft and an output shaft... period. No third input.
The Prius CVT is a totally different design which has no belt. It has proven to be very reliable which is not surprising since it consists of a planetary gearbox that uses two electric motor/generators to control final drive to the wheels. It does not change gears at all.
The Prius isn't even a transmission at all in the truest sense. Its a drive system that sums/differences the speeds of an electric motor, gasoline engine, and road wheels.
A transmission varies the ratio between an input shaft and an output shaft... period. No third input.
^^^Thanks for that, "third input" indeed. The design they stole from the small corp here in Palm Harbor!
But yep, no belt, so likely durable as the dickens...
But yep, no belt, so likely durable as the dickens...
My co-worker's Murano has 165,000 miles, still on the original transmission. Still seems to work perfectly. He's a professional driver, but he is hard on things. That Murano is no stranger to full throttle runs, high speed travel and yes, mild off roading.
63,000 miles on the Caliber, and I'm not a big fan of the CVT at all. It's getting its first fluid change soon, even though Chrysler says it's a lifetime fluid if the vehicle is not serving in severe conditions. Having said that, CVT +4 or whatever it is costs an arm and a leg.
My wife has had a Mitsubishi Outlander CVT for about 4 years now with no problems. I think it is good for her style of driving, as her previous CR-V could never figure out which gear she should be in (her pattern of braking and accelerating).
But I see problems every day with people who come in with ATF in them. Especially dangerous is reading the Amalie label where they say their Synthetic Universal ATF can be used in CVTs. I've seen it in dozens of failed units.
And yes, lots of Murano failures in our market, especially in The city of La Paz that is mountains, with steep hills to go up and down all day. Nissan stopped selling them in that city.
It basically boils down to most that are coupled to engines under about 3.0 to 3.2 L are safe (ignoring turbos), Murano and others with the 3.4+ engines are, in my opinion more prone to failure. This should really be converted to torque, but I have not sat down to draw those correlations. To fix this they need to accelerate the CVP transmission development.
Meanwhile the advances in 8 speed and dual clutch will do better in the higher hp engines.
But I see problems every day with people who come in with ATF in them. Especially dangerous is reading the Amalie label where they say their Synthetic Universal ATF can be used in CVTs. I've seen it in dozens of failed units.
And yes, lots of Murano failures in our market, especially in The city of La Paz that is mountains, with steep hills to go up and down all day. Nissan stopped selling them in that city.
It basically boils down to most that are coupled to engines under about 3.0 to 3.2 L are safe (ignoring turbos), Murano and others with the 3.4+ engines are, in my opinion more prone to failure. This should really be converted to torque, but I have not sat down to draw those correlations. To fix this they need to accelerate the CVP transmission development.
Meanwhile the advances in 8 speed and dual clutch will do better in the higher hp engines.
Originally Posted By: kam327
On paper anyway DCTs have superior performance characteristics and are highly efficient.
Actually that's completely wrong. The problem with CVTs is strength right now, and usually factory programming in the TCU. My CVT would be much more pleasant to drive if it would get up to at least 4500RPM within a second of mashing my foot to the floor, instead it takes about 4 seconds to get there, and then it doesn't even hit redline until I'm already going 65 from a stop sometimes.
CVT > any transmission on paper.
how the [censored] did I end up in this thread from 2013??????????????????????????
On paper anyway DCTs have superior performance characteristics and are highly efficient.
Actually that's completely wrong. The problem with CVTs is strength right now, and usually factory programming in the TCU. My CVT would be much more pleasant to drive if it would get up to at least 4500RPM within a second of mashing my foot to the floor, instead it takes about 4 seconds to get there, and then it doesn't even hit redline until I'm already going 65 from a stop sometimes.
CVT > any transmission on paper.
how the [censored] did I end up in this thread from 2013??????????????????????????
Last edited:
Bringing back the old thread here. Our 2010 2.5L Nissan Altima should have over 190k miles on it and still on the original CVT. It's with our son now. But I know it's had two drop the pan and refill with the same volume of Castrol CVT fluid.
oilBabe did experience one bought of a limp-home mode about 60k miles ago, but it was like 110 degrees out and I'm sure she was doing 80+ MPH returning to STL from TX.
I did a fluid change when she got home and we're still driving the car. Probably should have changed the fluid sooner, but it's been fine since then. Probably took some life off of it, but it will get the boy to his first new car purchase.
It's been a remarkably reliable car.
I still don't care for the CVT driving experience, but it does the job.
oilBabe did experience one bought of a limp-home mode about 60k miles ago, but it was like 110 degrees out and I'm sure she was doing 80+ MPH returning to STL from TX.
I did a fluid change when she got home and we're still driving the car. Probably should have changed the fluid sooner, but it's been fine since then. Probably took some life off of it, but it will get the boy to his first new car purchase.
It's been a remarkably reliable car.
I still don't care for the CVT driving experience, but it does the job.
6 year old Subaru, 70,000 miles. No issues, still works perfect.
2007 Caliber: still on the FACTORY CVT fluid at 150k miles
2012 Caliber: 103k, not sure if it's ever been changed or not, but runs great
2012 Caliber: 103k, not sure if it's ever been changed or not, but runs great
My mom had a 2007 Altima 2.5
CVT was completely flawless for 150,000 miles. Car was running great but was totaled at that point.
I did drain and fill the CVT every 25k - 30k. I used Nissan Fluid.
I felt the CVT worked very well in this car. I did not like it initially, but I kept it for a week and put around 400 miles on it. I really enjoyed that car for what it was.
CVT was completely flawless for 150,000 miles. Car was running great but was totaled at that point.
I did drain and fill the CVT every 25k - 30k. I used Nissan Fluid.
I felt the CVT worked very well in this car. I did not like it initially, but I kept it for a week and put around 400 miles on it. I really enjoyed that car for what it was.
- Status
