GDI, CVT and turbo = $$ and trouble?

[flinter]

Hi,

With the trend for car makers to sell cars with ALL 3 of these....GDI, CVT and turbo be a troubling long term issue with major expensive repair bills that the average consumer is really not aware of yet?
I really wonder about cars like the new Civic and Accord, for example, both with all 3 of these features be in store for MAJOR EXPENSIVE mechanical issues as the car ages and be more expensive to maintain than say the current Hyundai Elantras, with NO GDI, NO turbo and a traditional 6 speed automatic transmission?

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!

Seems the trend is for planned obselescence in modern high tech cars. The average consumer is still being lured into purchasing these cars, not even thinking about the long term cost of ownership, very scary if you ask me!

 

[mclasser]

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.

Yep, I went with the Elantra for the same reasons.

 

[atikovi]

Originally Posted by flinter
Seems the trend is for planned obselescence in modern high tech cars.


Most cars from the 60's were worn out before 100,000 miles. Most cars these days can go over 200K without a major repair, except maybe for the CVT, but those are improving too.

 

[flinter]

Really got to wonder if a 2019 Honda Accord will REALLY go to 200K WITHOUT major repairs and expenses.

 

[PimTac]

Then don't buy one. I'm sure you can find a 80's Chevy Citation for a good price.

 

[4WD]

Ok

 

[Imp4]

Originally Posted by flinter
Really got to wonder if a 2019 Honda Accord will REALLY go to 200K WITHOUT major repairs and expenses.
Originally Posted by PimTac
Then don't buy one. I'm sure you can find a 80's Chevy Citation for a good price.

Seriously, if you're worried about the general quality of today's cars, let's make this the 2nd offer of a mid-eighties GM/Chrysler product for you.
Of course there are anomalies, but in general most OEMs put out very high quality product in comparison to where we were 30+ years ago.

 

[HouseTiger]

For what it's worth on the CVT issue, my wife has a 2006 Ford 500 with a CVT. It has just shy of 191,000 miles on it. It has had the transmission fluid and filter exchanged twice at our local Ford dealer -- mainly because the dealer charged less than any other service facility in our area (go figure!!). We've had exactly ZERO issues with it. My guess would be 13 years later the technology has likely improved.

 

[flinter]

House Tiger,

That's promising than.

 

[Andrew1972]

I think the cry babies whines about the complexity of fuel injection, ABS brakes, multi valve engines, variable valve timing, 4/5/6 speed autos and .... yet they are common place in modern autos and trouble free.

 

[MrMoody]

Originally Posted by Imp4

Seriously, if you're worried about the general quality of today's cars, let's make this the 2nd offer of a mid-eighties GM/Chrysler product for you.
Of course there are anomalies, but in general most OEMs put out very high quality product in comparison to where we were 30+ years ago.

My 89 LeBaron turbo 5-speed made it almost 300k, with nothing more major than drive axles and timing belts. To me it was roller cams and fuel injection that made all the difference, helped by superior oil and seal materials. A 1984 carbureted engine wouldn't last nearly as long as a 1987 computer injected one. I don't see longevity as changing much since 1988.

 

[blupupher]

A part of me agrees.
I have steered clear of Turbo GDI motors, I know many are good with a good track record, but the bad ones scare me.
Same for CVT. My brother has had 2 Nissan Altimas with CVT and over 200,000 miles on one and almost 100,000 miles on the other with no issues, and he does nothing to maintain the transmissions.

I did buy a vehicle with DI though, and steered my mom to a vehicle with DI also.

 

[philipp10]

Sorry but I have not heard of "all these CVT failures you speak on other than the early Nissans when they didn't do the proper testing. It's not like automatics have such a stellar record....lol. Heck go to change an automatics fluid and people freak about all the things that might go wrong.

I suppose we all could go back to driving a 1976 Chrysler if that would make you feel better....

 

[skyactiv]

Stay tuned flinter as you'll soon disapprove of what I'm in the middle of buying.

 

[LoneRanger]

Well I've (we've...) went and bought two similarly designed powertrains to what the OP describes, albeit no CVT's but the newer transmissions with lots of gears.

In April we got her GMC Terrain w/ 9-speed transmission, and 1.5 liter GDI turbo I4. Then last month I got the F150 with the 10-speed transmission and 2.7 liter GDI twin turbo V6. Guess we'll see how this goes, I have more confidence in the Ford if simply because they've been doing the small displacement GDI turbo thing much longer than GM has.

 

[emg]

Forester XTs have all of those and don't seem to have had any major issues so far. Of course, the oldest isn't much more than five years, but there are a bunch out there with over 100k miles.

But, yeah, the potential for expensive problems is one reason we bought the non-turbo Forester.

 

[dishdude]

Since a new DI, turbo and CVT bashing thread seems to be created daily, why not make it a sticky?

 

[aquariuscsm]

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

 

[zzyzzx]

At least they now mostly have timing chains.
I don't see periodically replacing a turbocharger to be any worse than a timing belt, and probably a lot easier.

 

[CT8]

They may or may not be failure prone and yes if there were no turbos for example there would be no turbo failures that said I enjoy the 2.7 engine in my F150 more than any engine I have ever owned.