Jump to content

The Car Thread


Dome

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, BobbyPhil1781 said:

Yeah these transmissions are what I keep reading about and honestly, my biggest concern. I'm keeping my options open but I know what I want in an SUV and my options are a little limited. If I come across more funds in the near future, that'll open more doors..... zing!

I'm just too frugal, that's really what it is lol. 

Thanks for the info

 

5 hours ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

I completely agree with @Tugboat regarding CVT’s.  My wife’s Subaru has a CVT and while she doesn’t give af because she’s not a car person at all, I find it absolutely ruins the driving experience.

I’m not saying it doesn’t work or not to get one, hers has been reliable and such, but just drive it and make sure it doesn’t annoy the piss out of you.

Yeah.  For some people, they can buzz around in a CVT all day, and legitimately not be bothered by it whatsoever.  Like...they do work.  Technically, they get the job done.  And a lot of them seem to even be incorporating fake "shift points" these days, to try to minimize the weird sensation of it.  I just find them completely awful, personally.  They just feel...broken...even when they're operating normally.  I could never own a vehicle with one.

So it's something to try out, and see how you feel about it, in practice.  It's one thing to read on a spec sheet page and not think much of.  It's another thing to actually experience.  Maybe it's fine for you, and that's great!  Opens up some extra options like that.  But it could also be useful in straight up eliminating some options if it goes the other way.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

 

I mean, I think the new Tundra’s specs are pretty decent.

They clearly didn’t go for class leading, but they typically don’t do that at all. Sure the engine is similar to the Ecoboost, but if it’s more reliable than the 3.5, it’s a win.  Read something or watched a video (don’t remember now) where they interviewed Ford mechanics as to which engine they’d get in a new F150 and it was still overwhelmingly the coyote, follows by the 2.7 actually.  The 3.5 is the engine they see the most in the shop with issues.

If the powertrains in the new Tundra continue to be bulletproof, this is a great redesign.  If reliability falls, this is a poorly done Ecoboost tbh.

I think the towing numbers on all of the half tons are absurdly high and the payloads generally too low and this is no different. That’s my only gripe with the specs.

It's just kind of weird.  Because they didn't shoot for "class leading".  And the venerable old V8 they had for the Tundra, was a pretty bulletproof engine.  To not even offer that as an option like the Coyote, is...gutsy.  They're really going out on a limb.  Where even Ford, were pretty tentative initially, inching in with the EcoBoost motors as an "option".  But Ford took that risk with the goal of absolutely blowing the segment out of the water on "class leading" numbers, to introduce the concept of smaller displacement turbocharged motors for trucks.

 

With Toyota...it's like, yeah, the numbers look competitive and in practical terms, far more than enough for any half-ton truck.  But it has no real "wow factor" headline to underwrite its introduction like the EcoBoost carried.  And it seems to be risking a lot of what Toyota has built their reputation on with reliability/longevity, to not even quite go toe-to-toe with what is now an extremely common duo of generally pretty reliable engines with the EcoBoosts.

 

It's kind of funny with the 2.7 vs 3.5 ecoboost thing though.  That's also anecdotally, kind of what i've heard about them.  It's like when they went in and started drawing up the "small motor", they accidentally somehow made the 2.7 better than the "premium" 3.5 in some ways.  I even kind of wonder if they haven't accidentally given it more ultimate longevity with the "faux iron" block, instead of aluminum.  It really surprised me though, that they actually designed another bespoke engine for that role, rather than just tweaking the displacement/turbos/manifolds/boost/programming to "detune" the existing and proven 3.5 though.  There are so many of those things out there now, and most people don't seem to have any real problems with them.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Tugboat said:

It's just kind of weird.  Because they didn't shoot for "class leading".  And the venerable old V8 they had for the Tundra, was a pretty bulletproof engine.  To not even offer that as an option like the Coyote, is...gutsy.  They're really going out on a limb.  Where even Ford, were pretty tentative initially, inching in with the EcoBoost motors as an "option".  But Ford took that risk with the goal of absolutely blowing the segment out of the water on "class leading" numbers, to introduce the concept of smaller displacement turbocharged motors for trucks.

yeah it’s somewhat surprising I agree.  That 5.7 is rock solid (Actually just about every V8 in the half ton segment is pretty much bulletproof if we’re being honest) but it is thirsty as hell.  Not sure how much the 10 speed alone would have changed things, but like 13-14 mpg combined before any mods is downright unacceptable today.

The twin turbo v6 isn’t blowing anyone’s skirt up certainly, but it’s also the base model motor and it comparable to Ford’s higher end motors (everything but the high output 3.5). 

As far as the hybrid, if it hits 24ish mpg combined and is as reliable as pretty much every other Toyota hybrid, that’s absolutely a winner imo.

Quote

With Toyota...it's like, yeah, the numbers look competitive and in practical terms, far more than enough for any half-ton truck.  But it has no real "wow factor" headline to underwrite its introduction like the EcoBoost carried.  And it seems to be risking a lot of what Toyota has built their reputation on with reliability/longevity, to not even quite go toe-to-toe with what is now an extremely common duo of generally pretty reliable engines with the EcoBoosts.

Yeah they can’t miss, that’s for sure.

Time will tell, and I’m sure they’ll have a teething issue or two along the way, but I’d expect this power train to be good to go.  Neither the motor or trans are new, simply repurposed. If Toyota is going to use that motor in their top of the line Lexus sedan, the Land Cruiser, Tundra, etc., they must feel pretty confident in it.

Quote

It's kind of funny with the 2.7 vs 3.5 ecoboost thing though.  That's also anecdotally, kind of what i've heard about them.  It's like when they went in and started drawing up the "small motor", they accidentally somehow made the 2.7 better than the "premium" 3.5 in some ways.

I wonder too if it’s because they’re not trying to necessarily squeeze every ounce of power out of the 2.7 like they do the 3.5, especially the HO.

If I was looking for a Ford, I’d honestly probably go with the 2.7.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

yeah it’s somewhat surprising I agree.  That 5.7 is rock solid (Actually just about every V8 in the half ton segment is pretty much bulletproof if we’re being honest) but it is thirsty as hell.  Not sure how much the 10 speed alone would have changed things, but like 13-14 mpg combined before any mods is downright unacceptable today.

The twin turbo v6 isn’t blowing anyone’s skirt up certainly, but it’s also the base model motor and it comparable to Ford’s higher end motors (everything but the high output 3.5). 

As far as the hybrid, if it hits 24ish mpg combined and is as reliable as pretty much every other Toyota hybrid, that’s absolutely a winner imo.

Yeah they can’t miss, that’s for sure.

Time will tell, and I’m sure they’ll have a teething issue or two along the way, but I’d expect this power train to be good to go.  Neither the motor or trans are new, simply repurposed. If Toyota is going to use that motor in their top of the line Lexus sedan, the Land Cruiser, Tundra, etc., they must feel pretty confident in it.

I wonder too if it’s because they’re not trying to necessarily squeeze every ounce of power out of the 2.7 like they do the 3.5, especially the HO.

If I was looking for a Ford, I’d honestly probably go with the 2.7.

I think more than the motor and number of gears in the transmission...the biggest thing with the Tundra has actually been the completely insane rear end axle ratio they put in their trucks.  Like...a 4.30 rear end is genuinely insane, in a world of "efficiency".   But it does provide for some serious grunt moving a big lump off the line, in the real world.

 

But a rear axle ratio like that, also kind of means that no matter what you do...you've going to have some poor fuel economy.  The F-150s even with ecoboost torque available at low RPM are running axle rations a full digit taller than Toyota. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Starting my journey to getting either a Ram 1500 or an F150.

Debt free, my Civic is currently valued between $7.5k-8k and I don't drive it much (military barracks rat) and I invest $400/month in safe ETFs (VOO and VYM being my favorites).

If I pay my cards right, I might have enough saved up for a 50% down payment on a slightly used truck within a few months.

Edited by biggie.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/16/2021 at 6:51 AM, Tugboat said:

The whole thing with Nissan SUVs, and vehicles in general...is that they've invested fully in the whole CVT route.  It makes for awful, droning, unresponsive, poor performing vehicles, with a lot of reliability questions...that do pretty well on an EPA Fuel Economy cycle.  They don't have "gears" or even clutches and bands, so much as they have a plethora of belts whirring around inside the transmission.  It's a terrible solution to a problem that didn't exist.

 

Personally, i think the Continuously Variable Transmission is an abjectly hateful item, specifically engineered to inflict unnecessary suffering upon the masses.

A lot of current VW transmissions aren't great either.  But even the worst VW transmission, is worlds better than a CVT.

I really don't understand why people don't like CVT's. I've had one for a while and love it. I've never had any issues with my CVT and 99% of people don't have issues with CVT's. The reason for almost every CVT failure out there in the market today is that someone put in the wrong kind of transmission fluid and didn't make sure to put transmission fluid with a coolant additive in there. (it's literally like $1 more than regular transmission fluid per bottle). A Nissan CVT is something I'd take any day over a VW's transmission.

On 10/16/2021 at 11:23 AM, BobbyPhil1781 said:

Yeah these transmissions are what I keep reading about and honestly, my biggest concern. I'm keeping my options open but I know what I want in an SUV and my options are a little limited. If I come across more funds in the near future, that'll open more doors..... zing!

I'm just too frugal, that's really what it is lol. 

Thanks for the info

I love the CVT. I don't understand why people hate them as much as they do. See above.

On 10/16/2021 at 11:45 AM, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

I completely agree with @Tugboat regarding CVT’s.  My wife’s Subaru has a CVT and while she doesn’t give af because she’s not a car person at all, I find it absolutely ruins the driving experience.

I’m not saying it doesn’t work or not to get one, hers has been reliable and such, but just drive it and make sure it doesn’t annoy the piss out of you.

Subaru's CVT is the best one on the market, but Nissan's is a close 2nd. They've been the two brands doing them the longest too. For what it's worth, I've been driving Nissans with a CVT for the last decade and love them. I don't understand why people don't like them.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, scar988 said:

I really don't understand why people don't like CVT's. I've had one for a while and love it. I've never had any issues with my CVT and 99% of people don't have issues with CVT's. The reason for almost every CVT failure out there in the market today is that someone put in the wrong kind of transmission fluid and didn't make sure to put transmission fluid with a coolant additive in there. (it's literally like $1 more than regular transmission fluid per bottle). A Nissan CVT is something I'd take any day over a VW's transmission.

The bold info is good in case I do go this route. Thanks for the heads up!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, scar988 said:

Subaru's CVT is the best one on the market, but Nissan's is a close 2nd. They've been the two brands doing them the longest too. For what it's worth, I've been driving Nissans with a CVT for the last decade and love them. I don't understand why people don't like them.

It takes a certain style of driving for a CVT to be good. If you're ever in a hurry, a CVT is terrible, and very few people in this society aren't always in a hurry. Without knowing how they work, you only have to merge once to start hating a CVT.

I will say that Subaru is the least noticeable CVT. If you're not paying attention you won't realize it;s a CVT until you're speeding up to get on the freeway. Nissan is similar. The day that they can make a CVT react to acceleration the same way as a good torque converter auto, or dual-clutch, nobody will care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, BobbyPhil1781 said:

The bold info is good in case I do go this route. Thanks for the heads up!

Nissan actually sells their own CVT fluid and it's like $4 more than normal transmission fluid per bottle, but it's the best thing for their CVTs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MrDrew said:

It takes a certain style of driving for a CVT to be good. If you're ever in a hurry, a CVT is terrible, and very few people in this society aren't always in a hurry. Without knowing how they work, you only have to merge once to start hating a CVT.

I will say that Subaru is the least noticeable CVT. If you're not paying attention you won't realize it;s a CVT until you're speeding up to get on the freeway. Nissan is similar. The day that they can make a CVT react to acceleration the same way as a good torque converter auto, or dual-clutch, nobody will care.

Very few people can actually tell the difference. I've had no problems with the get up and go on mine. The people I've noticed that hate the CVT tend to be the ones used to more power. But even on a 3.5, I feel like my acceleration WITH a CVT is better than one without it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/17/2021 at 9:42 PM, biggie. said:

Starting my journey to getting either a Ram 1500 or an F150.

Debt free, my Civic is currently valued between $7.5k-8k and I don't drive it much (military barracks rat) and I invest $400/month in safe ETFs (VOO and VYM being my favorites).

If I pay my cards right, I might have enough saved up for a 50% down payment on a slightly used truck within a few months.

Youve come to the right spot if you end up with any questions. A few of us have owned Rams/F150s. 

 

Curious as to why you are putting 50% down with rates so low though? It might make more sense to finance that and invest the rest. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Matts4313 said:

Youve come to the right spot if you end up with any questions. A few of us have owned Rams/F150s. 

 

Curious as to why you are putting 50% down with rates so low though? It might make more sense to finance that and invest the rest. 

My philosophy is get car payments off the books ASAP. I have a very strong aversion to debt. Helps I'm a military barracks rat though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, biggie. said:

My philosophy is get car payments off the books ASAP. I have a very strong aversion to debt. Helps I'm a military barracks rat though.

Being a military guy who's avoiding debt is very smart, actually. Especially if you go career. having a better credit score and lower debt loan should keep you in a great spot once you retire from the military.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, scar988 said:

Very few people can actually tell the difference. I've had no problems with the get up and go on mine. The people I've noticed that hate the CVT tend to be the ones used to more power. But even on a 3.5, I feel like my acceleration WITH a CVT is better than one without it.

I will have to admit when I first started researching cars to purchase last year, all anyone ever had bad to say about Nissan's were the CVTs so that lead me to believe they were the only ones who used them. Imagine my surprise when I see the massive list of cars that use them as well. I am obviously very naive to cars but I'm surprised I don't see many more reports on other CVTs aside from Nissan.

I know one car I don't see if Mazda though and they're easily the most fun car I've ever driven. My 3 and my wife's CX5 are fantastic. The drive quality and handling are perfect but I'm going from driving 20k miles a year to roughly 4k so I don't really care too much about that these days. Covid making us work from home really changed my outlook on cars TBH.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...