I first learned to drive on a Fiat 124 sports with 5 speed and never had any issues with the transmission, and it was fun to drive, also manuals used to get better gas mileage back in the day.


But now it seems the manuals have lost their edge on gas mileage, but I came across the following..."On the 2014-2015 Civic and 2015 Fit, the continuously variable transmission (CVT) may have a weakened drive-pulley shaft (the part connected to the crankcase) that can break when exposed to high hydraulic pressure. This can result in power loss and even the front wheels locking up while driving. Honda first found the problem in July 2014 and since then has received 23 warranty claims for broken shafts. Starting this month, dealers will update the transmission software with a “stress reduction program” to reduce the pressure within the gearbox in certain situations."...http://blog.caranddriver.com/honda-r...r-cvt-trouble/


For the long term, are manual transmission on the Honda's worth the bother or have automatic especially the CVT surpassed it.

 

In the 2016 Consumers Reports Car Brands Reliability Report Honda dropped 4 places to 8th. In the 2017 Consumers Reports Car Brands Reliability Report Honda dropped a further 2 places to 10th.

Though these numbers are not broken down by model, part of Honda and other car manufacturers' issues has been their newer transmissions, namely their CVTs ad DCTs, as well as their difficult-to-use infotainment systems.

CVTs are pretty new for cars. The 2015 Fit was the first year for the CVT. For long term reliability the jury is still out. I bet on the 6MT.

That said, I don't see a whole lot of posters on here with CVT issues.

 

Lots of threads on the GK forum on this topic.

While I normally prefer the MT, I went CVT on the Fit and have been relatively happy with it, especially on our road trips where you spend quite a bit of time at higher speeds and the CVT is a lot quieter at only 2500 rpms. Going up the hills and managing stop and go traffic in "S" mode is actually pretty responsive so I don't feel like I'm giving up much in that area.

Personally, if this was an 'around town' care and was spending more time at less than 70mph, I would have gone the MT route even with the short gears since you can skip as needed and do it all the time in my other vehicles as needed.

 

The CVT has surpassed the manual transmission in fuel economy and considering the poor job Honda did on the MT gear ratios there's no simply reason to buy one of those unless you're an MT fanatic or drive in rugged terrain where an MT might be desirable.

As mentioned there are now an awful lot of CVTs on the road racking up the miles and few problems turning up. The drive shaft issue (along with a handful of other general quality problems) was on the early release of this version of the Fit and should not be an issue unless you're buying a used Fit made in that time period.

 

[QUOTE=woof;1358923] there's no simply reason to buy one of those unless you're an MT fanatic or drive in rugged terrain where an MT might be desirable.

Up front cost is a reason to buy one...particularly in Canada where there is a $4100 difference between the base 6 speed and the lowest end CVT.

just saying...

 

My main reason that even a crappy manual (not that the Fit's is, other than oddly spaced ratios) is loads more fun than an automatic....am sure the CVTs will prove to be fine, if it floats yer boat....they did not float mine. Transmission choice is highly personal, if there are options, which are becoming scarce anymore

 

The $4100 difference buys you more than a CVT transmission. You get a package of improvements which includes heated front seats, air conditioning and probably some other stuff.

My very first new car was like the basic Fit, it was a brand new 1975 VW Rabbit. Std transmission, no A/C, no heated seats, no nothing, but it was a really fun car to drive and I really enjoyed it. Five years later though when I was driving home form work in heavy stop and go traffic I realized what a pain an MT was to drive in city traffic I now found myself in and I never bought another one although I held on to the VW til it rusted out about 1991. And yeah, I live in Canada too.

 

I've always been an MT guy and I was really tempted by the Fit CVT. I think the GK MT gear ratios are awful. And I didn't appreciate the MPG hit; even though the CVT is more expensive I knew I'd get that back plus more eventually in MPG savings -- not as fast now that gas is cheaper but I plan to keep the car for a long time anyway and the longer you own the more you save.

But in the end I got the MT for the simple reason that at some point I figured I might regret driving a CVT but I'd never regret driving the Fit MT, even with its drawbacks. Flawed logic maybe but that's what did it for me.

 

[QUOTE=MelR;1358936] Wow, even if you are talking Canadian dollar= .75 USD, that is still a lot of money for the CVT and other options. In the USA the CVT is 800 USD, but I chose the 6spd manual for the fun part in driving, and because the CVT reacted slowly when I floored the gas pedal.

 

I swear I just finished reading through a thread where people loved the 6mt in the GK...? That's odd, I HATE the CVT in my wifes 15'. I have a 12' accord and im looking to upgrade soon and theres a 15 certified 6mt EX Fit for $13,500 locally with 35k miles seems like too good a deal to pass up. But Ill have to drive the car first. Im still not over the thought of a 9th gen accord v6, so much power!

 

Sounds like fine logic to me......I HATE CVTs , not a fan of traditional automatics either, but ......in the dreaded autonous automotive future, I guess that'll be our only choice. Am keeping our 6 spd LX for the VERY long haul

 

I chose the CVT and I am loving it.

 

The CVT reacts slowly if you use ECO mode. when I need quick response for heavy traffic or fun I turn it off and or switch to sport mode

 

I am picking up the 6 spd in a couple of days, but I am considering changing it to the CVT because of the lower rpm and engine noise at highway speed. I test drove a CVT yesterday. The only annoying thing was when I accelerated, the engine rev to a very noisy high rpm. Maybe it was because I am lead footed.

 

Regardless of transmission, the manual and the CVT both start to get loud above 3K RPM.

On the flats, you can keep it below 3K RPM on the CVT unless you like to jack rabbit from light to light or you need some power for merging onto a freeway.

 

I'm pushing 48K on my CVT EX, purchased a bit over two years ago. I had initially sought a 6MT (all my DDs for the past 30+ years have been manuals), but after learning the ratios were not suited to highway cruising (and with a little prodding from my wife, who will only drive a manual when pressed), I switched to the CVT at the last moment.

My use case includes a 40-50 minute drive to work on a mix of rural farm roads (very poor quality), State highways and interstate. Being in the Middle West, it's mostly flat and mostly straight. I also make multiple 15-hour trips annually to my Dad's (who is entering late-stage Dementia, so I've been trying to make the most of the time we have left). I will also sometimes take a "long cut" to work that includes a 4-mile run on a very twisty road that's a lot of fun as long as a deer doesn't surprise you around a corner. Finally, I occasionally like to autocross.

The CVT shines on the interstate, with engine noise below the threshold of noticing up to around 70-75 MPH (with the radio at "normal" levels). It also shines in town in heavier traffic, and oddly, the ECO mode has also turned out to work really well when there's snow and ice on the ground in the Winter since it dulls throttle response. I rarely use ECO any more other than that, and normally use Drive mode for trips and commuting.

I didn't really use Sport mode much at first, but now have come to enjoy it in two situations. First is in town in lighter traffic - it effectively is like shifting to a lower gear, which allows better use of engine braking between lights, etc.. I don't use the paddles in this case. The other use is with the paddles when I'm autocrossing or driving an engaging road. I initially didn't like the upshifts with the paddles as they are slow and sloppy compared to a manual. But once I started blipping the throttle between paddle shifts (same as you'd do with a manual), it comes closer to feeling and sounding like a manual. There are a couple longer tunnel/bridge overpasses in town, and it's a real hoot to wind it out going through those (I have a Tanabe Medallion exhaust, so it sounds pretty nice).

That said, earlier this year, I went back to my dealer and drove a 6MT just to see what it was like after driving the CVT for over a year. Taking the car out on the interstate confirmed that the CVT was definitely the right choice there (for my preferences). In heavy traffic around the dealer, the CVT would also be the better choice. But elsewhere, I found the "engagedness" of the manual to be more desirable than the "disconnectedness" of the CVT.

All things considered, I think I probably made the right choice for my use case with my Fit. Had the 6MT ratios been better suited to interstate speeds (higher 6th), that would definitely had tipped the scales in its favor.

es

 

It was a tough decision. ALL my cars BMWs and Porsches have been manuals. After reading a lot about 6spd manual and CVT, I broke the trend and bought the LX CVT in modern steel metallic today. Its duty is mundane daily errands and boring long trips. I just took delivery, so I do not have a long term opinion on the CVT yet. Its stable mate is a Porsche 911 Turbo, 6 spd, of course.

 

The "drone" of the manual at highway speeds or above is not that bad, even with a Tanabe Medalion Touring axleback....or perhaps I've just suffered a significant amount of hearing loss due to seeing The Ramones in clubs dozens of times

 

CBGB's, Danceteria, Mudd Club, Irving Plaza; what did you say? I can't hear you.

 

One of the differences that convinced me the CVT was the way to go had to do with engine rpm at cruising speed. My reasoning is that higher rpm means more wear on the engine cylinder bores and rings. Less wear means longer engine life. For example the 6 speed manual at 80 mph @ 4000 rpm while the CVT at 80 mph @3397 rpm. Less rpm, less wear. The other wear factor is the 6 spd does not hold a constant rpm between shifts while the CVT does. Less stress on the engine if you keep the rpm constant. After all, this little 1.5 liter is not a sports car engine.