4 spd. auto vs. CVT

[tishpit]

It appears the CVT transmission is only available on the hatchback SL model, according to the Nissan website (unless I'm reading this wrong). I prefer the sedan model, but was hoping to get the better mileage posted for the CVT. For those of you with either transmission, can you tell me what the mileage is like in both? I'm curious if in "real world driving," the CVT is that much better in city mpg than the 4-spd.? Is it worth paying quite a bit more for the upscale SL in order to get the CVT?

[tKowReCkLeSs]

the CVT is so worth the money, I drive about 80 miles everyday to and from work and i get about 35 MPG, also you get the 6 disk cd changer and Aux outlet if you go with the SL model plus Alloys.

[greggie195]

I can olny tell you about my experience with the CVT. I like this transmission alot, it feels very smoth but takes some getting used to. My car now has about 1400 miles on it. Last 3 tank fill ups:

30.8mpg31.5mpg30.2mpg

This is mostly highway but I Do some NYC street driving so it is about 30% stop and go, the rest is highway driving 65-75mph avg. Im rather happy with the MPG. I do not know how this compares to the 4 speed. That really sucks that you can't get the CVT on the Sedan.

[tKowReCkLeSs]

oh the versa has 3 different transmissions avalible.

1.8 S Models ( same for Hatch and Sedan) 1) 4 speed Automatic

2) 6 Speed manual.

1.8 SL ( Same for hatch and Sedan) 1) CVT

2) 6 Speed manual.

[tKowReCkLeSs]

My mistake you are right CVT is NOt avalible for 2009 Model, it used to be. When i bought my 2007 it was avalible but things change sucks.

[frankoV]

Worth it.

[alonsorules8]

I have 2 versa's in my family I have the SL cvt that it's lifetime avg.of fuel economy is 32.5 mpg, and my mom has a S with a 4 speed auto getting 30.0 mpg life time.

[kc5f]

Another vote for. Not fantastic mileage, but worth the comfort.

[Shad0wXCalibur]

I have a CVT. I got it in a sedan, too. Good thing I bought it before they stopped then...

[1_Sleek_Versa]

What they stopped making Versa's with CVT trans??? Why???

I'm so happy with mine!!

[tishpit]

Yeah... I'm very disappointed that they no longer offer the CVT in the S-version sedan. I would have to go with the SL hatchback which is more $$$ and I really want to keep my payments down, yet get good mileage. I think they should discontinue the 4-spd and make all autos the CVT based on the mileage and positive remarks on it. Hey Nissan... are you listening?!

[kc5f]

Sleek - They only stopped it in the sedan, apparently. Another plus for the HB!

Tish - They never did offer it on the S. It's always been SL only. And some folks get better mileage with the stick, but I'm not unhappy with the CVT's mileage.

[tishpit]

Thanks everyone for the input... the CVT does sound like a great transmission, but after reading many other threads and posts, I am feeling equally o.k. with the 4-spd. Seems like both are good trannies, so whew... another anxiety attack avoided

[Slither]

Dealer techs told me they see far fewer failures with CVT.

[sooner4x4]

Dealer techs told me they see far fewer failures with CVT.

I don't recall reading any threads on this forum where an owner reported a transmission failure which is a good thing. CVT, 4 speed or 6MT.

Not to say there hasn't been any transmission failures in a Versa but they must be quite rare.

[t19uz]

i've heard that cvt have some issues in some heavy traffic jam country , like mine. Indonesia Jakarta.

A lot of cvt transmition have problems like my honda Fit.

Luckyly i have a 4 spd auto nissan tiida.

[Saphira22]

I'll be honest, CVTs are nice and do offer better mileage, but I've really had nice gas mileage out of 09 Versa and its a 4 spd. auto, and I live in Western North Carolina where the gas crisis has hit pretty hard, so I don't make that statement lightly. Just putting in a friendly word for the 4 spd. auto.

[DUCeditor]

The CVT has several advantages beyond just gas mileage.

One is the the motor is always in exactly the "right" gear. Never a bit too high, or a bit too low. The advantage of this especially shows itself when one is forced to ride for a time a a slow posted speed such as in a kid-filled residential area. My own street is marked "25mph" and it goes up and down hill. OK, I can't say I do the silly posted limit, but even at a reasonable and responsible 30 or 35 a four speed will be hunting and searching. With the CVT the rpm just goes up and down a bit as the transmission chooses the exactly correct ratio; not hunting, no surging, no abruptness.

At higher speeds this is equally true but since the vehicle is running at a higher gear ratio the effect is somewhat masked. Unless, of course, one is unlucky enough to be a just the edge of the programmed change-gear point. The it's up/down/up down with the 4 speed in comparison the smooth going with the CVT.

Worth the money for the SL? I think so. Better appointments. Better transmission. Better sound system: Altogeather a more pleasant driving experience.

-don

[superskunk]

Worth the money for the SL? I think so. Better appointments. Better transmission. Better sound system: Altogeather a more pleasant driving experience. -don

some of us like it old school... lol....

[Slither]

I don't recall reading any threads on this forum where an owner reported a transmission failure which is a good thing. CVT, 4 speed or 6MT.

Not to say there hasn't been any transmission failures in a Versa but they must be quite rare.

Re: Dealer techs told me they see far fewer failures with CVT.

Sorry I should have elaborated better.

I was told by the service reps @ my dealership that they see a lower failure rate with CVT across the board with Nissan.

[sooner4x4]

Re: Dealer techs told me they see far fewer failures with CVT.

Sorry I should have elaborated better.

I was told by the service reps @ my dealership that they see a lower failure rate with CVT across the board with Nissan.

I think I read more into your earlier post than what you actually said.

I wonder if the failure rate the service reps are talking about is taking into account the total number of CVT and regular auto's in service across the board, factoring in mileage on the trannys. The CVT's haven't been around all that long relatively speaking, so there probably aren't a ton of high mileage CVT's out there, compared with conventional auto trannys.

I hope the CVT's turn out to be bullet proof. I wasn't ready to take a chance on a relatively new transmission design (been there done that one time), and am very happy with the shifting characteristics with the 4 speed auto.

[dorway]

Though CVT is relative new to other transmission types, it has been 17 years since March equipped CVT in or about 1991. Xtronic CVT is the third generation CVT design from Nissan. It was released in 2002. I think it's mature enough for everyone.If it's the choice between 5 spd auto and CVT with price difference, it's hard to choose. But it's quite obvious that 4 spd auto is not a good match with subcompact car with 1.8 engine.

[worcestersix]

I had a 1989 Suburu Justy, with CVT transmission. that had 120,000 miles on it. The body rusted away from New England rock salt. But I never had a problem with the transmission and that was the first year for Suburu. Just picked up our 2009 SL Versa with CVT. Will let you know if any problems evolve...Surprise Arizona...

[Slither]

I think I read more into your earlier post than what you actually said.

I wonder if the failure rate the service reps are talking about is taking into account the total number of CVT and regular auto's in service across the board, factoring in mileage on the trannys. The CVT's haven't been around all that long relatively speaking, so there probably aren't a ton of high mileage CVT's out there, compared with conventional auto trannys.

I hope the CVT's turn out to be bullet proof. I wasn't ready to take a chance on a relatively new transmission design (been there done that one time), and am very happy with the shifting characteristics with the 4 speed auto.

I think they were implying 'new' warranty claims. They see fewer problems with the CVT.

My understanding is CVT has fewer components and is more [modular?] when it comes to repairs.

[sooner4x4]

Your correct about fewer parts in a CVT compared with a traditional auto transmission. In this regard, and with the theory that simpler is better, the CVT could turn out to be a great transmission. Potentially the transmission of the future. Unless the rubber band breaks that connects the two pulleys, actually the belt is a metallic material according to Nissan.

If the following link works, it contains a lot of good - somewhat technical info from Nissan on the CVT:

http://www.nissan-global.com/E....html
Modified by sooner4x4 at 7:10 PM 10/13/2008

[winnipegnissanlover]

Continuously Variable Transmission completely rocks!

It is worth so much more than Nissan is charging for it! Better performance AND better fuel economy (than even the M6)!? Way less maintenance?! No shift shock AND no gear hunting!?

You said something about low payments. What's more important to you, the impression you get from a low monthly car payment, or actually SAVING $$$$$?

It was a no-brainer for me, once I looked at it that way. Plus did I mention that the CVT is more fun to drive?

[winnipegnissanlover]

The Versa's CVT used a steel belt (not a rubber one); and CVTs have been in use for a hundred years or so in drill-presses and snow-mobiles and other ATVs, plus other applications. It was also invented by Leonardo DaVinci (genius) in the 1500s... before the combustion engine and cars were even conceived of! Although it will see so much more popularity as it filters through the market, it is not merely the transmission of the future, (and you Manual Transmission enthusiasts are gonna want to kill me for what I'm about to write) I dare say it is the best transmission of all time - past present and future!

[kerrton]

Has anybody got close to 100,000 miles on their CVT yet? It would be nice to use as an example to those who believe that the CVT won't have the long term durability of a conventional. Also, have you had the CVT fluid changed over that time? Some say it never needs to be changed, other dealerships recommend quite short intervals, not sure why the inconsistency?

[Knightro2]

Per the service manual I believe it states that the CVT fluid should be changed at 120k. I'd think the CVT would out last conventional trannys because it doesn't take periods of higher loads (ie, shifting from gear to gear). Less to wear out. But who knows. It's relatively new technology in the consumer market. Only time will tell.

The inconsistency from dealers wanting shorter intervals is because it helps them in their pocket book.

[Onyxblue]

Has anybody got close to 100,000 miles on their CVT yet?

I think Kc5f has more than 80k miles.