Don't mean to jack the thread here but what do the subie owners think about the Ringland failure issue that WRX and STI are prone to ? I know STI is at a higher risk but still.
Last edited:
Let's Play Replace the Company Vehicle - Again
- Thread starter nakkers
- Start date
I had a 2012 Rogue with CVT. It wasn't bad. Apparently, Nissan has added some steps or shift points to the newer versions?
The Forester's CVT doesn't get great feedback from reviews.
Then CVT in the Saturn VUE tends to grenade prematurely.
But it seems all makers are going with CVT for better fuel efficiency.
I may not get the VW since the availability of specific trim level looks to be gone.
Might have to go with one of the others now.
You just confirmed what many people, incl me, hate on Nissans and many other cars for that matter .... easier dos NOT equal better. The cars with steering feedback designed and calibrated correctly is the one where you don't complain that it's heavy at slow speeds (not even for a woman) and you always know what the front wheels are doing. You can NOT have a very light steering, yet correct feedback. Nissan cannot rewrite physics. Ability of the car to steer and stay stable at high speeds is another factor ...
If you are looking for ... "just not bad transmission", CVT will do for you. But if one expects something closer to DGT feel or coming even of manual, I don't see how I could ever pay for a car with CVT. I just could not take it, not even for a day. It was the simple worst car switch in my experience, fortunately lasted only 48hrs ... 6sp manual TDI 09 model to Altima with CVT 2013 model. It was a happy day when I got my car back, let's just say that .... LOL
rbjeepthing
Well-known member
My wifes 08 WRX had the worst piston slap on cold startup I have ever heard on a street car. So bad that Subaru admitted it was abnormal and extended our engine warranty to what we felt acceptable at 200,000km. we personally never had an issue but i have two friends that had blown motors do to ringland failures.
You should hear it on my Av...sounds like a diesel
If all you are doing is highway cruising with the cruise control set, and gentle driving around town, they get the job done, and they avoid "shift shock" because the transmission gradually changes to a different ratio and you never notice it changing gears. In that application, they are okay, with the exception that a good many of them tend to be explode-a-matics, and you can't fix them, only replace the whole unit (and a junkyard one would be a very risky bet).
The Altima is a tolerable highway cruiser with the exception that I hate the steering. With a smaller engine tied to that transmission, like in a Versa (another rental that I hated), the engine often revs waaaay high on uphills just to maintain cruise control. Strangely, the tiny engine in a Chevy Spark works well with the CVT in those. I actually didn't mind that car. Different calibration ... often that makes all the difference.
Country roads, and situations where you want acceleration NOW, are where CVTs become miserable. Yes, I know a lot of people either never drive like that or don't care. With a regular stepped-ratio transmission, you can select a known gear and hold it, or shift to the gear that you know you'll need. Some CVTs give you fake gear choices ... but at that point, why bother?
I guess the demographics of this board don't align well with the ideal driver for a CVT. I mean, I would generally prefer a manual myself as well, unless automagic transmission technology gets to the point where fuel economy is significantly better than a manual. When I see the average Canadian driver on the roads though, driving the average ultra-bland Canadian automobile, it seems like almost the perfect use case to me. Somebody out there has to like them...
Might as well start painting them green and red.
Red_Liner740
Well-known member
Meh, eh, those crash tests with ever moving goal posts are of little concern for me. Crash any car a certain way and you'll find a weakness. It's a new test for 2013. The small overlap into an immovable object with no crush zones. How many times do you know anyone who crashed like that? Can you think of a single thing on the road that will have zero give like that test?
in fact, iihs top pick for 2013? Jeep grand cherokee. Go watch its video and you'll see the exact same "head-missing-airbag" situation. Score, marginal. At least the escape didn't buckle it's doors like the Jeep. Yet it gets top pick?
So all of us driving older cars that were never designed to withstand such an impact have a death wish? I guess the people driving the cars with no airbags are just plain suicidal?
in fact, iihs top pick for 2013? Jeep grand cherokee. Go watch its video and you'll see the exact same "head-missing-airbag" situation. Score, marginal. At least the escape didn't buckle it's doors like the Jeep. Yet it gets top pick?
So all of us driving older cars that were never designed to withstand such an impact have a death wish? I guess the people driving the cars with no airbags are just plain suicidal?
Bridge/rock/jersey barrier/parked or disabled truck (depending on the weight and design of the truck, this could be reasonably close to immovable).
I agree that the the performance in any single test is a reasonably useless metric to judge a vehicle by. Especially when the tests are well defined, a single bracket can be constructed to distribute the force in the crash test.
Sorry, but when I shop or recommend a "new" car, I always check the safety ratings as well.
If a manufacturer has the presence of mind to engineer it to ace even the unlikeliest of crashes when others clearly can't, that speaks volume to me.
Having said that, I wouldn't touch, nor recommend an Escape.
If a manufacturer has the presence of mind to engineer it to ace even the unlikeliest of crashes when others clearly can't, that speaks volume to me.
Having said that, I wouldn't touch, nor recommend an Escape.
You are going to find that almost all vehicles whose original design pre-dated that test will do poorly, and almost all vehicles designed after that test became known will do well. The North American Ford Escape is basically a European-market Ford Kuga, which was introduced in 2007 - before anyone thought about that type of collision. For a vehicle that wasn't originally designed to pass this test, I'd say it does okay - it's certainly better than many others.
The Forester had a redesign for the 2014 model year. It's designed to pass that test - and it does.
In order to pass this test, a lot of vehicles are being engineered using extremely tough, hot-stamped, high-strength alloy steel for the underlying structure that surrounds the door, all the way around the A and B pillars plus the roof reinforcement and a section of the rockers. The idea is to prevent that section of the bodyshell from deforming in this type of collision.
Be mindful of the law of unintended consequences. If you happen to wreck one of those vehicles and need to be cut out using the "jaws of life" ... it could prove difficult. It may take longer. Whoever responds to the emergency call might not have the right tools to do it. Hot-stamped parts are tough to deal with.
The Forester had a redesign for the 2014 model year. It's designed to pass that test - and it does.
In order to pass this test, a lot of vehicles are being engineered using extremely tough, hot-stamped, high-strength alloy steel for the underlying structure that surrounds the door, all the way around the A and B pillars plus the roof reinforcement and a section of the rockers. The idea is to prevent that section of the bodyshell from deforming in this type of collision.
Be mindful of the law of unintended consequences. If you happen to wreck one of those vehicles and need to be cut out using the "jaws of life" ... it could prove difficult. It may take longer. Whoever responds to the emergency call might not have the right tools to do it. Hot-stamped parts are tough to deal with.
Red_Liner740
Well-known member
Bingo...Thats why i mentioned that its a test new for 2013, Escape was already on the market by the time the test came out...
Very few objects that a car might encounter have either that sharp of an angle or are immovable. Very few. Frankly, there are MANY more criteria above this test that i rate the cars on.
Sure, a vehicle passes all the safety tests with flying colors only for me to hate every single moment of being in it.
Whats most ironic is that here we have Honda boy making fun of a manufacturer for failing a crast test, while riding a motorcycle on a motorcycle forum!
Tell me, whats the crash rating of the motorcycle you ride? Non-existent?
Tantamount to a guy not recommending a certain handgun due to bad trigger design causing accidental discharges as he sits down to play a round of Russian roulette.
Very few objects that a car might encounter have either that sharp of an angle or are immovable. Very few. Frankly, there are MANY more criteria above this test that i rate the cars on.
Sure, a vehicle passes all the safety tests with flying colors only for me to hate every single moment of being in it.
Whats most ironic is that here we have Honda boy making fun of a manufacturer for failing a crast test, while riding a motorcycle on a motorcycle forum!
Tell me, whats the crash rating of the motorcycle you ride? Non-existent?
Tantamount to a guy not recommending a certain handgun due to bad trigger design causing accidental discharges as he sits down to play a round of Russian roulette.
I should add that one of the vehicles that does poorly on the IIHS small-overlap test ... is the Chrysler minivan (the current generation pre-dates that test by far, and the replacement is already in the works - they're not going to re-engineer the bodyshell to pass this test with only a year to go in the current generation).
By real-world crash statistics, a Chrysler minivan is one of the safest vehicles on the road. (Yes, it's largely because of who drives them.)
By real-world crash statistics, a Chrysler minivan is one of the safest vehicles on the road. (Yes, it's largely because of who drives them.)
Its ok, most crews have a chainsaw with them, they'll need it when they have to cut off your crushed legs on the 'easier to work on' vehicles.....
45 sec mark.....
[video=youtube;TZC8Ykl1esE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TZC8Ykl1esE[/video]
Last edited:
