Nissan Note 1.6 Auto

Syman

I have had our Vauxhall Meriva for 9 years and now fancy a new(ish)car.
Our Meriva is a Manual.
While DW can drive she does not really like driving it.
To encourage her to drive more, and take some of the driving pressure of me, i am looking towards an automatic. Though of course she may not like this either.

I have seen locally to me a Nissan Note 1.6, with a CVT auto.
As i understand things the CVT is the modern equivelent of the old variomatic gearbox. am i right?

Will be looking to test drive over the next week or so. does anyone have this particulr car and gearbox, or experience of them?

Sy..

Hoof_Hearted

Had a Jazz with one. Very smooth and no problems with it. Honda went back to it after the change to the i-shift proved very unpopular.

chrisw

Check out the forums on the Note owners forum for advice:-

http://www.noteownersclub.co.uk


.

Syman

chrisw wrote: »

Check out the forums on the Note owners forum for advice:-

http://www.noteownersclub.co.uk


.

thanks, have been looking through them.
Just thought i'd get some other opinions too.

oldagetraveller

Not a Nissan, but I have a Toyota Yaris with a CVT and a similar experience to Hoof Hearted. Very pleasant to drive but not a transmission for the "boy racers" although mine has a "sport mode" which only increases the engine revs without any change in performance but does increase the fuel consumption. I never use it.
Toyota sensibly fitted the CVT to replace the awful Multimode Transmission, automated clutch and gearchange bolted onto a manual 'box (MMT) to the Mk 3 Yaris.
Fuel economy, on paper, is allegedly slightly better than the manual equivalent. I'm getting around 50mpg with a 1.33l petrol engine.

Syman

oldagetraveller wrote: »

Not a Nissan, but I have a Toyota Yaris with a CVT and a similar experience to Hoof Hearted. Very pleasant to drive but not a transmission for the "boy racers" although mine has a "sport mode" which only increases the engine revs without any change in performance but does increase the fuel consumption. I never use it.
Toyota sensibly fitted the CVT to replace the awful Multimode Transmission, automated clutch and gearchange bolted onto a manual 'box (MMT) to the Mk 3 Yaris.
Fuel economy, on paper, is allegedly slightly better than the manual equivalent. I'm getting around 50mpg with a 1.33l petrol engine.

Thanks oldagetraveller.

I am now a bit beyond the boy racer stage myself.
Hopefully i'll get to test drive one today.

The last auto i drove was an old Morris Marina Estate back in the late 80s:o

facade

Syman wrote: »

I have seen locally to me a Nissan Note 1.6, with a CVT auto.

[STRIKE]Renault[/STRIKE] Nissan no longer offer the 1.6 engine in the note:D

It is either an old shape (e11) 1.6 with a 4 speed torque converter auto, which is a good car, or a new shape (e12) 1.2 CVT, which has somewhat differing reviews, usually compaining that it is underpowered.

Syman

facade wrote: »

[STRIKE]Renault[/STRIKE] Nissan no longer offer the 1.6 engine in the note:D

It is either an old shape (e11) 1.6 with a 4 speed torque converter auto, which is a good car, or a new shape (e12) 1.2 CVT, which has somewhat differing reviews, usually compaining that it is underpowered.

the model is the 2011 (e11) 1.6 CVT auto

facade

The e11 was never officially available with CVT in the UK market. It is either an import or not actually a CVT gearbox.

oldagetraveller

"The last auto i drove was an old Morris Marina Estate back in the late 80s:o "
That was probably a "proper" auto too which I personally prefer.
The CVT is totally different as there are no detectable "gear changes" (in the Yaris anyway). If you need to accelerate and depending on the degree of acceleration needed the CVT gives the impression of a slipping clutch on a manual 'box. i.e the engine revs increase considerably but the car doesn't seem to go any faster! Hence my "boy racer" comment:p. I wonder if that gives the impression of the 1.2 CVT or CVT cars generally being underpowered?

facade

The 1.2 engine is turbo'd so that it produces zero power, and uses pretty much zero fuel under the specific conditions that the emissions test is done, so it gets a low VED and good MPG figures in the brochure.

If you make it go, then you have to rev the thing like an old FS1E with clip on handlebars and it makes one hell of a row, and gobbles fuel.