I'm a car n00b looking at the Nissan Versa. Is there a better option to get a reliable CVT without spending a lot?

I heard that they're actually reliable now. Did I hear wrong or are you just behind the times?

>he thinks he can shift more efficiently than a computer

That's why I'm asking for alternatives.

owners.nissanusa.com/content/techpub/common/2016/2016-nissan-service-maintenance-guide.pdf

>Every 30,000 miles replace CVT fluid
>Every 60,000 miles replace CVT belt

It says replace cvt fluid after 60,000 miles, no mention of cvt belt

>there is no good CVT from a car manufacturer because people didn't understand why their car sat at a constant RPM rather than fluctuating
>the entire point of CVTs was made useless because people are idiots

Fuck what CVTs have become in cars, but dont try and say CVTs are a shit.

I never understood why all these cvt cars "shift".
Is it really purely because people expect that from a car?

Yeah. People complained that the cars didnt shift. It felt weird and no one wanted them so they just made them shift.

Why do you want a CVT?

There's nothing goof about a versa as well, it's a lame ass commuter car.

Get a auto fiesta or even a fit and you will get about the same mileage and have tons more fun.

Also CVT a bitch to maintain, a bitch to accelerate and otherwise just a bitch. I own a Nissan Rogue with one, if it wasn't such a comfy family hauler i would hate the fuck out of it.

>auto Fiesta
No. The Fiesta and Focus have a dual clutch which is unreliable lurching crap

And the Versa has a CVT which is an unreliable slow crap.

My 99 crv accelerates quicker than my Rogue despite having 40 less horsepower and a 18 year old Automatic that's never been maintained.

CVT slow as FUCK.

I like the idea of a CVT because it seems like the future of cars if done right. Ideal torque and efficiency at all speeds seems pretty great, no?

I was also looking at the Fiesta, but I'm not so sure about Ford's reliability compared to perhaps a Toyota.

Perhaps I'm in the wrong place - I'm not an aggressive driver at all, so acceleration isn't especially relevant. All I need is a "lame" commuter car.

Got a versa 08 hatch its indestructible
166k only to had to replace the catalytic converter thingy and brakes

Im sure it has nothing to do with the weight difference.
Quit bitching and get rid of your rogue, faggot.
>Muh fast family hauler

Honda's CVTs.

I have a 09 CVT versa with 250k km. Only problems I've had with was the cat, and one transmission under warranty. The car is reliable but it's a boring piece of ugly shit. 6/10

Why the fuck would you ever want a CVT?

Get a toyota corolla. Stop thinking about another car company. Or get a Honda Fit, great commuter as well. Or Toyota yaris a little scary on the highway, but also a great commuter. Plus plenty of features.

CVTs don't provide ideal anything right now, they're just being used to enhance fuel efficiency. They won't be used for anything high performance for years as it stands. The're just too weak.

There's NO reason you should want a CVT in a cheap commuter. this guy claimes he's gone 250 km and had transmission troubles. Great, my CRV is at 280,000 and the best i've done is flush it's fluids.

If you want peace of mind get the car with the LEAST amount of features. I bought hydraulic steering when electric was taking over, and until the bugs where ironed out, I didn't get electric steering. Same with electric throttle. It's just about tech needing time to be perfected.

Shut up faggot, you don't know shit, they're basically the same:

99 crv EX AWD: 3126 vs 2016 rogue SV AWD: 3,596

Not only that the rogue 2.5 liter makes 170 vs the 2.0 honda makes 147
133 torks at 3500 for CRV, and rogue is 175 at 4400

Maybe it's that RPM thing where the CRV has more torque closer to low end than the rogue so it accelerates faster, but the rogue clearly has some crazy power loss in the tranny.

Also it's not about being fast, it's being able to overtake ANYTHING or taking a left without making sure the other cars aren't a kilometer away. it's just REALLY sluggish.

Do you keep a snowmobile for 10 years and put over 100000 miles on it driving it every single day? Thought not.

Is there a car that has a CVT without "shifting" and using it properly?

> this guy claimes he's gone 250 km and had transmission troubles
Have you failed to see the k near the number 250?

I know, i missed writing it.

Doesn't change that 250,000 is also too soon to be having transmission troubles.

Also consider that he said it was done under warranty, standard warranty is 100,000 km or 5 years for drive train components.

That means he had the problems within 100,000 km of buying the car. Doesn't speak too highly.

>this thread
fuck OP is a fucking retard, go ahead and buy a shitty cvt no one is stopping you from getting a retarded transmission
>INB4 muh its a pre-programmed computer

You heard wrong, or read a piece of marketing/propaganda/shill and took it as immediate, indisputable, enough-info-to-make-a-fiscal-decision-on-a-low-return-commodity fact without doing any research.

In short.

You're young and stupid.

Base model SFE Fiesta

Dirt cheap

Only comes with 5spd manual that's fucking bulletproof

The boosted 1.0 liter sips gas and otherwise keeps a low tier mileage focused shitbox from being kill-yourself boring

Added hilarity: it's the best sounding 1-liter on the market

>shift more efficiently than a computer

It's not about efficiency. It's about feeling. You'd understand this if you had something with enough power.

You can't check your trans fluid; only the stealership can.

The warranty for the CVT was extended to 200k km because the technology was new. Other than that the car has been pretty reliable

>it's the best sounding 1-liter on the market
Doesn't it have a sound symposer?

At what mileage did the tranny fail at?

I've owned cars with known transmission problems like an Odyssey, and the problems didn't show up until 210,000 km or so. I repaired it around 270,000 cos until over 250k it wasn't really TOO bad. Also fucking automatics. I hate them.

>I want an A to B practical commuter car
>better buy the worst one with the worst transmission available

>All I need is a "lame" commuter car.
then get any car with a conventional (classic computer-controlled hydraulic) auto transmission and you're done ... if you put neutral on stops and don't abuse on kickdown it will last forever

My buddy has a Versa with the CVT and he loves it. He is simply an A to B driver and upgraded from an automatic Geo metro (I know.) Other Than TPMS problems he has had absolutly no other issues with the car over the 3 and a half years he has had had it. He especially like the CVT but like I said A to B driver.

After doing more research I'm favoring the Honda Fit. Toyota is awesome, but I'd like a hatchback and the Yaris doesn't appeal to me at all.

>auto fiesta

the DCT is awful in the fiesta. Have you ever driven one?

my dd is an 05 cvt altima 2.5 with 120k and the cvt has given me no issues yet so take that how you will

Honda fit ain't bad at all. Don't get the older gen it had problems with leaking or something. The current gen is really good.

No i drove the manual. It was pretty nice i thought. I mean for a fucking shitty city hatchback it was nice.

Older == 2015? or before that?

They're ok in niche uses, but they're shit for a daily driving car.

the fit is shit compared to the mazda 3 hatchback. don't get me wrong, the fit is the best car honda's selling right now, but that doesn't say much. i test drove both the fit and the 3 and would have gone with the fit if the 3 wasn't so much better in just pretty every regard

definitely take a mazda 3 for a test ride if the fit sounds up your alley

This

Rev matching feels so good

>reliable CVT
>cvt
>reliable
>....
No

same with the smooth take-off

slick 2-3 shift

true engine braking

rowing through the gears while you navigate a windy road

it's all so rewarding

No as in older generation.

The generation before this one had leaking problems, so i've heard.

I think i agree, i drove a fit and i really don't know where the 'fun' comes from. I haven't driven a Mazda 3 yet.

I need to find someone who owns one or a dealer willing to let me drive one.

>I need to find someone who owns one or a dealer willing to let me drive one.

any dealer that won't let you test drive a car isn't worth your time or patronage

Just buy the cleanest civic you can find for 3k. Usually an em2. It's got everything you need and nothing you don't.

>any dealer that won't let you test drive a car isn't worth your time or patronage
I know that. And the Mazda dealers around here are fucking ass holes.

They basically won't even give you a look at the car, until you start talking about buying it. There's no such thing as 'shopping around'.

Very few other dealerships have done this to me, even fucking Chrysler let me check around and play with the Dodge charger even though i told them i wasn't buying.

So i don't know what's going on with Mazda, i went to 3 different dealerships and basically they're not interested in serving you unless you look like you're ready to buy. It's not just the 3 by the way, i also wanted to check out the CX-5 when i was actually ready to buy cos i needed a family hauling crossover. Fuckers wouldn't even let me check it out thoroughly, didn't even offer a test drive.

I went with Nii san instead and ended up with a very comfortable though under powered Crossover. I like it, but i wish i could afford a armada.

that's really weird. none of the mazda dealers in my area are like that

>tfw CVT is fucking amazing but businessmen are making engineering decisions and fucking everything

I was lucky tranny died at 190k. The problem with tranny problems in used cars is that they are way to expensive. Especially with CVT's

Go for the Scion iM then. Literally a hatchback Corolla. Also because Scion died most Toyota dealers are now cutting prices on them.

Mine does $1,000 below invoice on Scion iM's to start.

Yea i know, it's just my area. But i don't wanna travel for a decent dealer even if it means i never experience a Mazda 3.

Yup.

Also CVT is at the point where you can't fix them at all. Manuals you can fix everything yourself, automatics are hard but CVT don't even try.

I fixed an autotranny in a 98 civic, took me 2 whole weeks to figure it all out and put it back together. Just had to replace clutches and bands.

DCT are better.

CVT advantage is being able to keep the revs constant, but with the higher powerloss and inability to use higher power engines makes them shitty.

Even Nisan who has an absolute CVT fetish, you can't even get most Nissan without CVT only is willing to go up to a v6 with the murano.

Toyota needs to just stop trying to appeal to 'kids'.

Oh I agree and they did stop, which is why Scion is dead..

>DCT are better.
>heavier
>harder to repair
>more reliability issues than CVT

I actually thought something was wrong with a rental focus I had once

Turns out the problem was that it was a focus

I thought we're comparing potential performance.

In an overall case all are worst than a Normal automatic or a manual.

CVT has more power loss than both Auto and Manual.
CVT weighs about the same or sometimes heavier than a similarly ranged auto, obviously more than manual.
Also can't be fixed for shit and reliability is meh.

I'm sure they'll both get better with time, but currently the planetary automatic is king of automatics. Also manual is still the best for all the mechanical problems. Easiest to fix, lightest, most reliable of any transmission type and of course the least power loss because of the lack of power loss in fluid or control components.

Faggots.