Will CVT last long?

[shiwei]

I found most Honda vehicles are designed with CVT transmission now. I am concerned that the chain used for the CVT will not last for long miles, since this chain is the main path to transfer power from engine to vehicle.
If the CVT could last at least 200K miles, I would like to buy a CVT car. Any comments on the CVT, pros?

Topic

[Gary]

If you want my honest opinion as someone who has worked with transmissions, the CVT is not a good choce for a car application. ATV, snowmobile, scooter etc…ya it’s fine. Those things don’t have nearly as much weight to carry as a car nor the same conditions. CVTs are too young a technology in automotive to predict their longevity. Nissan has had serious problems with theirs(made by JATCO) and Jeep has also had some issues in the Compass and other models that have used it. Hondas, well the CVTs in Hondas seem to be much better but only time will tell. Most transmission shops will NOT rebuild a CVT due to the nature of how they fail and they instead get replaced for exorbitant amounts. When a CVT fails, its usually the chain/belt you are refering to and it is almost always a catastrophic failure with shrapnel everywhere from said metal belt/chain. A conventional automatic may fail in a much less catastrophic way such a burnt out clutches, fractured sunshell, worn valvebody etc. Point being, you are better off with a conventional automatic or manual long term. A CVT would be fine if you were just keeping the car for 5 years or less while still under warranty.

[shiwei]

Agree. I am looking at Jeep cherokee with AT, the bad is that it has 9-speed transmission that is very problematic.
I will probable choose a 6speed AT, such as Accord.

Thank you, pro.

[Gary]

[quote=”shiwei” post=135790]Agree. I am looking at Jeep cherokee with AT, the bad is that it has 9-speed transmission that is very problematic.
I will probable choose a 6speed AT, such as Accord.

Thank you, pro.[/quote] Your very welcome, a 6 speed is tried and true, can’t go wrong with that. Good luck with whatever you choose!

[zero]

They actually just released a service bulletin in the last couple of weeks about the somewhat older CVTs. It would appear that someone either goofed or miscalculated the heat treating process on the cones. The cones can fail and leave the car inoperable. As far as I know it only affects some 2014 models.

If you don’t have any problems with the “feel” of the CVT operation there’s no reason to rule it out. Personally I prefer to row the gears, but that’s just me.

[Gary]

[quote=”DaFirnz” post=135813]They actually just released a service bulletin in the last couple of weeks about the somewhat older CVTs. It would appear that someone either goofed or miscalculated the heat treating process on the cones. The cones can fail and leave the car inoperable. As far as I know it only affects some 2014 models.

If you don’t have any problems with the “feel” of the CVT operation there’s no reason to rule it out. Personally I prefer to row the gears, but that’s just me.[/quote] Is the TSB for Honda? Nissan was having problems for much longer 2007-2013 and Jeep has been also having problems with them since their introduction on certain models. These transmissions are not designed for longevity(past the 5 year mark and alot don’t even make it this far) they are used to meet CAFE standards.

The OP intends to keep this car longer than the typical 5 year/100k miles, so I would still advise against a CVT. They are in essence, a disposable transmission. I too, prefer to row my own gears.

[zero]

Yes it’s for Honda. It’s shouldn’t be a huge surprise that early generations of anything technological have issues. It happens with everything.

We’re getting to the point where everything is disposable. It’s usually cheaper to replace with a used or remanned unit than it is to have whatever engine or transmission be repaired or rebuilt. Head gasket goes? Fuck it, just put a used motor in.

[Chris England]

I think it is also worth bearing in mind that it is not in the interest of any car manufacturer to produce any car that will last too long, I believe decisions like this are made with full knowledge and on purpose with the intent that they will ideally around 100k miles be beyond economical repair, car manufacturers have to sell cars the quicker the ones they sell die within a reasonable mileage the better for them.

I honestly believe that nowadays components are purposely designed and built to fail around a certain time frame, I think the idea of getting any new(ish) car to 200k miles+ is optimistic to say the least……….

[Hokiedad4]

[quote=”PembsPanther” post=136099]I think it is also worth bearing in mind that it is not in the interest of any car manufacturer to produce any car that will last too long, I believe decisions like this are made with full knowledge and on purpose with the intent that they will ideally around 100k miles be beyond economical repair, car manufacturers have to sell cars the quicker the ones they sell die within a reasonable mileage the better for them.

I honestly believe that nowadays components are purposely designed and built to fail around a certain time frame, I think the idea of getting any new(ish) car to 200k miles+ is optimistic to say the least……….[/quote]

Seriously? The average car on the road is 11.5 years old, older than any time in automotive history. Cars now last far longer than 25 years ago, and with far less maintenance cost. Why? That’s what people want to buy. How did the Japanese brands take GM and Ford to the cleaners over the past three decades? Reliability.

Any manufacturer who designs a car that will ony go 100k in this day and age will quickly go out of business.

[Author]

Replies