Automatic advice please

Inforapennyinforapound

I will be buying my partner a small automatic car soon.

We have never owned an auto so my main question is : is there anything to be aware of when choosing an auto as opposed to a manual (of which ive owned many).

And any recommendations? Been looking at fiestas, Jazz,Micras. These cars,im my opinion,are quite reliable. We want a 2nd hand and will pay perhaps £3k-5k.
The car is only for one person(no kids) so a small hatchback type is ideal.
Thanks in anticipation of useful replies.

reeac

One issue is whether you have any views regarding continuously variable transmissions. Personally I don't like them and although I'm a great fan of the Jazz, and have owned a manual version for over 11 years now, their only only automatic is a CVT.. My big car is a conventional torque converter 5 speed auto and I think that it's great.

forgotmyname

Some autos are terrible, jerky in traffic and not that fuel efficient.

£3 - £5k shold get you a nice car, but try and find one where they have proof of having the gearbox serviced. Most of them are treated as sealed for life units and often shocks people when they fail due to neglect, or wonder why they fail at fairly low mileages. Answer = lack of servicing.

System

Check the front brake discs and pads as they take a lot more hammering than a manual car.

Inforapennyinforapound

reeac wrote: »

One issue is whether you have any views regarding continuously variable transmissions. Personally I don't like them..

What is a continuosly variable transmission? And how do i know if a certain car has this?
As i said,we will look at the jazz,fiesta,micras probably. Do these fall into the above category?

Thanks all so far

IamNotAllowedToUseMyName

CVT (Continuously variable transmission) is a development from an old DAF rubber band drive system, where instead of cogs, it has a metal belt between some disks that are in a v shape. By cunning means they can change the distance between them which means that the belt changes position to change the gearing.

Originally the gearing was continuous, but people found this disconcerting (revs stayed constant but the car accelerated) so they modified the control to allow the belt to sit in fixed positions representing gears.

It is old tried and tested technology - quite light weight hence the attractiveness - but the alternative DSG (dual clutch) systems are tending to be more popular but is expensive so will not be found on cheaper cars.

CVT is a better bet in an older car than DSG - DSG are fiendishly complicated and basically unrepairable if they go wrong - CVT are simpler (though I doubt many a garage would be keen to repair either).

Jerkiness on non-traditional autos comes down to what sort of clutch mechanism they employ to get them going - a traditional sloppy auto uses a liquid slopping around (torque converter) in the lower gears though these days there is direct drive for higher gears. My experience is that DSG is disappointing compared with a proper modern auto (the electronics have to guess how to slip the clutch).

CVT is a sensible choice on an older car. I think the main point is that you can't over-drive them. DSG encourage people to try going through the gears under high torque (you don't lift of the accelerator) so the drive train is shocked more - they are sold on this feature in performance cars, but it is not a great idea for longevity. Traditional autos are smooth and the way they work means that there is not the same stresses.

knightstyle

Our old Juke had "normal" auto transmission and our old Auris had the dreaded MMR box. Both very different to drive but never had any problems in several years ownership.
The Auris was much much more frugal, very noticable as the Juke also had a small fuel tank.
Long test drive in traffic is a must.

wazza99

I'd agree, check what sort of auto box it has. We bought a Peugeot 3008 1.6 auto with the single clutch auto, it was awful, jerky and just terrible at pulling away, swapped it for the 2.0 torque converter traditional style auto and couldn't believe the difference.

The 1.6 could have put me off auto's for life !! but the 2.0, love it.

Sicard

I prefer autos in today's stop start traffic but the only downside is you can't push-start one when the battery goes flat.

Hoof_Hearted

The wife has a CVT Jazz. It's a brilliant car to drive. Honda tried an alternative -- the i-Shift -- and people hated it, so they went back to the CVT. This is her second one and never had a problem. They also have flappy paddles, although she never uses them.

iolanthe07

I would stick to the tried and tested torque converter autos as found on Hyundai i10 and Kia Picanto, among others. It will use a little more fuel, but torque converter technology goes back decades and they are generally very reliable, smooth in operation and trouble free. In the unlikely event that you have a problem, they don't cost an arm and a leg to fix.