Automatic Car Help Needed Please

tyrone2014

Hi All

im 25 and i have just got a automatic license i need to get a car for a new job in a few months, basically i will be going from A to B with rare motorway journeys, i need a car thats low price insurance,tax,and fuel.

i did my research and know that a bigger car would be better for an automatic but anything over 1.4 engine and the insurance is to high and the fuel cost are higher. looking to spend £1000-£2000
the list i researched is

Kia Picanto = seems very good
Daihatsu Sirion = hard to find but i think will be a good one
Hyundai Accent = high fuel cost,high insurance
Suzuki Wagon R+= higher price car but seems good
Hyundai Getz= very good but high road tax
Honda Jazz= very good but with cvt system, reviews said need lots of servicing
Toyota Yaris= not heard good things about the automatics
nissa micra= new models to much money and dont wanna drive old model to small for me to fit in
also people said avoid cvt, mmt, freetronic and get a proper automatic system

just wonder if anyone has an automatic car and how they are getting on with it ? and what they would go for also what is maximum mileage, and maximum year i should get ?

Thank you for all

torbrex

You should be aware that sometimes if you get a bigger engine the MPG is higher as well so if you are doing a lot of miles, this might outway the extra cost in tax/insurance.

I drive a 10 year old Mercedes C220CDi automatic and still get over 65mpg on a run and 42mpg around town.

tyrone2014

Thanks torbrex

i never though of it that way maybe i will have a look at some but with a merc if anything does go wrong it will be a lot to repair i think

torbrex

tyrone2014 wrote: »

Thanks torbrex

i never though of it that way maybe i will have a look at some but with a merc if anything does go wrong it will be a lot to repair i think

Yes that is a downside, spares can be quite expensive.

iolanthe07

also people said avoid cvt, mmt, freetronic and get a proper automatic system

A proper torque converter automatic is best but will use more fuel. A modern CVT should be OK. Avoid the others, though; MMT is horrible, imho.

Joe_Horner

CVT is an aquired taste, and most of the horror stories about reliability are a mixture of poor maintenance (they are less fogiving than cast lumps of gear wheel) and typical rumour-mill stuff concerning unfamiliar technology - if it breaks it must be the system, rather than the fact that it leaked all its oil out 10k miles ago and no-one topped it up!

From the efficiency point of view it's about as good as it gets - drive a well set-up CVT properly and you'll get better MPG and better performance than an equivalent manual easily, but you have to do counter-intuitive things like accelerating hard to save fuel in order to get the best from them. they also tend to "feel" more sluggish than they really are because you don't get the engine sounds or changes that "tell" you you're accelerating in most cars.

In other words, don't discount them on the say-so of others. Try to get a decent test drive in one or two, approach them with an open mind about the different "feel", and see how you take to them.

Much the same goes with AMT type boxes, although you won't get the same efficiency from them because the engine will spend as much time away from it's optimum speed as it will with a manual.

Even modern torque converters will rob power that a small engine can ill afford to lose until they get to the point of lock-up.

Lum

For small engines, a proper torque converter auto is not a good match at all as these small engines need to be revved quite high before changing gear, so the change can be quite jarring if it's not set up right. the sequential manual types will have the same sort of issues.

If I must have a small engine auto, I'd probably be looking for a CVT in order to get a smooth ride.

The main reason they have a bad rep, other than Joe's comments above, is that for a long time, the only CVT that was widely available was something DAF brought out in the 70s that was driven by a giant rubber band. Modern CVTs aren't like that.

Gloomendoom

If you can't run to a torque converter type car with a decent size engine, I would also recommend an CVT. As has been said, they do get some getting used to though.

There was nothing wrong with the DAF system. It just couldn't handle high torque so was limited to use in small low power cars. BTW They used two giant rubber bands.

Joe_Horner

Lum wrote: »

The main reason they have a bad rep, other than Joe's comments above, is that for a long time, the only CVT that was widely available was something DAF brought out in the 70s that was driven by a giant rubber band. Modern CVTs aren't like that.

Like this one in my daily driver

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n03FAEAZN80

They actually brought them out in 1959 (mine's a '66) and the bad reputation even then was generally undeserved. People just didnt like the way they drive or the idea of being driven by rubber bands - although no-one thinks twice about having the most highly loaded component in their engine driven by one nowadays, even though a broken Daf belt means carry on driving on one while a broken cam belt generally means a new engine!

The Dafs do give a good idea of the efficiency of CVT though - 30 BHP, 746cc aircooled engine that will sit at 70mph all day (provided you don't hit a hill) and keep up with urban traffic effortlessly, while returning 50mpg on a run without relying on computers or fuel injection

lil.smartie

Nothing wrong with AMT's look at a Smart forfour 1.1 or 1.3 or cdi if you can find one!

Kate

Lum

Joe_Horner wrote: »

They actually brought them out in 1959

Ok, I got some details wrong, but my point still stands. I just remember my dad having one when I was a kid. I think it was a C reg so made some time around 1986. Edit: Thinking about it, it was probably C from the first time around, so early/mid 60s? I mostly just remember it for being bright orange and smelly.

Personally I really like the idea of a CVT. What I don't like is these computer controlled CVTs that are programmed to change in stages to simulate a traditional auto.

I like the idea that you can have the exact optimum gear ratio for either acceleration or for fuel efficiency, and computer controlling that should be awesome.