Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Midsize Sedans 2.0

1334335337339340742

Comments

  • joe97joe97 Posts: 2,248
    Why are you only adding 07 and 08 on one car and not the other, new car or not?

    Don't answer it because that was not the point. Comparing how many reviews one car has, certain model year(s) vs. certain model year(s) of another car prove little in the overall scheme of things. In addition, a more (or less) reviewed model concludes little to nothing about the function of the CVT.
  • karpediemkarpediem Posts: 46
    I am going to answer it..... the 07 and 08 Altima is the same car, the 07 and 08 Accord is not. Having only 10 reviews of a car is not a good representation of what the car actually is compared to 100's....unless you actually believe the 09 Malibu should have a 10.0 rating :confuse:
    You are right though, the consumer review mean nothing when comes to the actual mechanical function of the CVT, but how the consumer likes the CVT probably plays a huge role when they are reviewing an Altima.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Posts: 5,751
    I didn't like the Altima either. Didn't like the way it drove or the styling. With regards to the numbers, you can take away what you want, but there are at least twice as many reviews for the Accord, and the Accord probably sells at 2:1 to the Altima.
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Posts: 1,230
    Felt infinite [non-permissible content removed] too...

    Although a poor choice of words, it does show just how the CVT has affected car buyers. Some have grown to like it, some absolutely hate it.

    Of course, it doesn't affect me, since I don't consider cars without a clutch pedal anyway... :)
  • igozoomzoomigozoomzoom Waleska, GeorgiaPosts: 797
    I'm not sure that I'd easily acclimate to the CVT with a lower powered engine like the Sentra or Versa. I had a Sentra 2.0S CVT as a rental a few months back and it just felt weird even after a week driving it.

    The Altima 2.5S with 175hp is awesome with the CVT, in my opinion. Tests have pegged 0-60 in 7.5 seconds and the fuel economy is impressive as well. A co-worker recently bought an '08 2.5S and I've driven it numerous times. Other than training your ears/brain to accept the engine noise to remain much the same until you get up to speed is the only tricky part.

    I will be very interested to see how Nissan's CVTs hold up over the long haul. But there's no arguing with the fact that they do increase efficiency both in fuel economy and performance. The Altima with a 5-speed automatic would trail a bit behind the CVT. The Versa does- SL has CVT but S is saddled with 4-speed automatic to keep price lower.
  • louisweilouiswei Posts: 3,717
    Better get used to the CVT...you're going to see more and more of them...

    That's okay, looks like the DSG is really catching on too so I guess I am saved...

    Test drove the Altima 3.5L with the CVT... didn't really like it.

    Then I had an Audi A4 with CVT as rental for 2 weeks... really don't like it now.
  • madpistolmadpistol Posts: 126
    The CVT is hit or miss unfortunately. So many people have come to accept automatics/manual transmissions that people are resistant to change. As another poster said though, you'd better get use to the CVT. You're going to see more and more of them.

    More than likely, there's 2 reasons Nissan's chosen to adopt the CVT so widely

    1. reliability (less moving parts = more reliable)

    2. fuel efficiency (optimum power/gear ratio)

    You'll see more people complaining about quirks from other cars. The Accord's fuel consumption for the 190hp 4-cyl and wind noise come to mind. The Camry isn't so great either. The 2.4L 4-cyl in the Camry is slow and lethargic while the V6 has/had transmission problems. On the other side of that canyon, there are very few reviewers that complain about the CVT in the Altima... that includes professional reviews.
  • captain2captain2 Posts: 3,971
    forgetting about the main reason? Cheaper to produce? I also believe the reason why those reviewers don't generally find fault with the CVT is partially attributable to Nissan's rather transparent application of the technology, as well as those reviewer's understanding of what a CVT actually means relative to the driving experience - they are simply getting what they expect in the Altima.
    In my CVT equipped Rogue (Altima drivetrain) it is interesting that if I 'shift' into a 6th gear at 70 mph engine rpms are at about 2600 rpm BUT if I leave the CVT alone the the engine speed can be as much as 500 rpm lower to hold the same speed.
  • budhbudh Posts: 109
    For someone who values low wind noise, low cabin noise, few squeaks and rattles, and takes bumps in the road well, which of the following tend to be best or worst in these areas?

    Civic, Corolla, Sentra, Elantra
    Accord, Camry, Altima, Sonata
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    The Camry is probably the quietest, smoothest riding car in this segment, but you may fall asleep behind the wheel.
  • joe97joe97 Posts: 2,248
    If I recall correctly, the Sonata has the best NVH (noise, vibration, harshness) in the group. It has been reported the cabin is so quiet that often times one would not realize the engine having been turned on already.
  • elroy5elroy5 Posts: 3,741
    Yes, Sonata = Camry clone.
  • madpistolmadpistol Posts: 126
    The Camry/Sonata are incredibly quiet, but the Altima is also fairly serene when idling and cruising. It's amazing how subdued the wind noise is for such a sporty midsize sedan.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Posts: 5,751
    The Accord's fuel consumption for the 190hp 4-cyl and wind noise come to mind.

    I can't speak to the wind noise, but I know the 4-cyl can hit in the high 30s with conservative freeway driving at speed limits.

    On the other side of that canyon, there are very few reviewers that complain about the CVT in the Altima... that includes professional reviews

    Car reviews are like restaurant and movie reviews. :surprise
  • mz6greyghostmz6greyghost Posts: 1,230
    I can't speak to the wind noise, but I know the 4-cyl can hit in the high 30s with conservative freeway driving at speed limits.

    Yeah, just about any midsize sedan can hit the high 30s, if they're tailgating an 18-wheeler.

    I can understand mid 30s, but 38-39 MPG? Right... Got any proof?

    Car reviews are like restaurant and movie reviews.

    That's right, they're called opinions. If you don't care for the CVT, fine, but there are a lot of people that do, and there's no reason to mock them for it.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,747
    The advantage to a CVT is that it can keep the engine RPM at a constant speed and it can choose whether that speed is the most fuel efficient or the most powerful depending on what the driver is asking for.

    The disadvantage is that it's expensive compared to a regular transmission and until recently could not handle much torque. Long term reliability is still a question mark.

    The other downside to some is that it simply feels different because the engine RPM doesn't change the way it does with a conventional transmission. To others it's a neat feature.
  • moocow1moocow1 Posts: 230
    Well except for the fact they don't look alike, the interior of the sonata is better, and it's way cheaper :) That and it gets better gas mileage and has more power :) Not much of a clone is it.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Posts: 5,751
    Got any proof?

    Yep.
  • tallman1tallman1 Posts: 1,874
    I can understand mid 30s, but 38-39 MPG? Right... Got any proof?

    I think the OP was talking about an 08 Accord but several of us get the high 30's on the highway quite frequently in the 06/07 version. We even have a 40 mpg club with several members. ;)
  • busirisbusiris Posts: 3,490
    The disadvantage is that it's expensive compared to a regular transmission and until recently could not handle much torque. Long term reliability is still a question mark

    Seems to me that less moving parts equals less cost, and from what I have read, that theory appears to be true. Can you cite any evidence to qualify the claim?

    I somewhat agree on the reliability issue. But, to be fair, seems that Toyota has been having far more auto trans serviceability issues than Nissan has been having with CVT's.
  • akirbyakirby Posts: 7,747
    You're forgetting volume. It costs a lot more to tool up a plant to produce a few thousand CVTs than it does to produce hundreds of thousands of regular transmissions. If they were producing and selling hundreds of thousands of CVTs they may well be cheaper.

    Short term reliability seems to be fine now but we're still not sure about 6-10 years out. And there is still a significant torque limit.
  • madpistolmadpistol Posts: 126
    That's exactly what I'm talking about. The '03-'07 Accords were very fuel efficient and quite peppy in 4-cyl form. That's what made it so appealing to most normal consumers. The new '08 Accord, however, boasts the same fuel economy, but higher horsepower. I've heard numerous complaints about people getting between 20-22 mpg in mixed city/highway driving. Some of those drivers claim they drive mostly on the highway. That's not a very good number for a midsize (?) 4-cyl sedan. At the same time, some of those people may have gotten the accord thinking it's a 4-door, 4-cyl sports car... bad assumption. A lead foot will never get you very good mileage.

    Now, I'm not saying that all of those people that complain about the new Accord's gas mileage are idiots. I'm sure their findings are grounded in a fair deal of driving and personal research. People just need to realize that it's a larger car, a higher horsepower engine, and Honda tuned it to be a fun car to drive. Naturally, that's going to make people want to drive it harder. I think that would have an effect on certain people's opinion about the car's fuel efficiency.
  • explorerx4explorerx4 Central CTPosts: 9,966
    what is your method for measuring the gas mileage?
  • busirisbusiris Posts: 3,490
    You're forgetting volume. It costs a lot more to tool up a plant to produce a few thousand CVTs than it does to produce hundreds of thousands of regular transmissions. If they were producing and selling hundreds of thousands of CVTs they may well be cheaper.

    Not really...I was comparing apples to apples. Number of units to number of units.

    In Nissan's case, its more than a few thousand...the vast majority of Altima's come with CVTs.

    But, I agree if you are referring to a few units .vs. many units.
  • aviboy97aviboy97 Posts: 3,159
    Hey everyone,

    My first Mazda6 is on a truck headed to my dealer as we speak. It's an s GT in Performance White. I should have this car early next week. I will check back once I give it a test drive!
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Posts: 5,751
    What is yours?
  • backybacky Twin CitiesPosts: 18,784
    For the smaller cars, Corolla, Elantra, and Sentra are all very good in these areas (for a small car anyway). I noticed a little more wind noise in the Corolla and Sentra than the Elantra. Civic is a clear step down from these cars in cabin/wind/tire noise and in ride firmness. Of these four cars though, only Elantra and Sentra are mid-sized, interior-wise.

    For the bigger cars, Camry and Sonata have the advantage in the interior noise and ride smoothness.
  • tallman1tallman1 Posts: 1,874
    what is your method for measuring the gas mileage?

    I figure my mileage the real way... or the old fashioned way. :shades:

    I also have a trip computer with my Navi unit and the two are always pretty close either way.

    (lol, kdshapiro)

    More details here: Honda Accord Real World MPG
  • madpistolmadpistol Posts: 126
    I'm really looking forward to seeing how the 2009 Mazda6's compare to the '07-'09 Altima's, as they seem to be perfect competitors. Please let us know what your initial impressions are of this car! It's quite good looking IMO. :)
Sign In or Register to comment.