If you compare them to other vehicles in their class, they are definitely more car then SUV. Yet more capable) I'll admit, once I got a taste of what the car could do, I pushed it past what I actually plan on using it for. I just couldn't help it. Everytime we saw an obstacle we thought would stop it, it proved itself. It shocks us everytime we take it out, none stop. Definatly a proven offroader that can hold its own, but I still get people that put me down cause it's a car, and I think they don't want to see a stock $17k car walk past their $60k highly modified rig, be it a truck, jeep, or whatever. I love it on the road and off. And I was a hard core truck guy, never owned a car.
What you said is similar to what I said 21 years ago when I first drove a BG off road. I was a proper 4x4 enthusiast and even raced the Bighorn. I just kept getting surprised with my SG even to this day.
All this positive CVT stuff is really good to hear. I was getting ready to move to a less exciting manufacturer due to my mechanic calling them a "time-bomb for a gearbox". He was probably referring to the earlier models.
I definitely agree with Rally, gotta do some testing on that hill.
The new SK Forester is beginning to grow on me. I wonder if this has an even better CVT than the SJ? Also interesting is that the SJ range had a standard CVT, plus a high-torque CVT for the XT and diesel models...
Makes me wonder if they are all high torque now for longevity.
There is a quote, "CVTs: mechanics hate them but engineers love them." Engineers keep on getting better efficiency results as they improve or revise their CVTs.
I would assume that the SK has a TR580 but I will double check that with the local dealership. It would be nice to have the much beefier TR690 but they are only limited to high torque models like the late Forester XT, the WRX and the 3.6Rs. The TR690 has a monstrous chain.
The TR580 is popular though as it has a much more efficient design. The forward and reverse clutches in front of the pulleys, eliminating drag in neutral and park, whereas with the TR690, they are at the rear. There is no input clutch and secondary planetary gear anymore with the TR580.
The first release of the TR580 had problems with the secondary pressure sensor, creating a false code in the system and thereby stalling the car, and the leak in the torque converter seal, especially in cold weathers. Under warranty, they issued a much more tolerant seal to deal with extremely hot and arctic conditions. The first revision came out in Dec 2014, after the said faults were detected, but many 2015 models have already been produced . Once a leak is seen around the bell-housing, owners are obliged to drop by their dealerships or authorised mechanics for the replacement. Oftentimes, fluid level is too low breaking the whole transmission and that's why they just get replaced. TR580 revisions (and even with the 4EAT) are made at least once a year and the revision version is seen on the transmission code by the bell-housing. I have been told by the head mechanic at the local dealership that the latest TR580's chain is much beefier that last year's to handle torque much better, allowing the installation of Dual X-mode and eliminating the need for the algorithm to search for the correct ratio, although I have no proper confirmation yet.
Some dealerships are wrong when they say that the CVT fluid does not need changing. They just want people to buy new ones every three years. At 120,000km, the internal filter driven under normal conditions should already be on its limits. The recommended oil change interval for Lineartronic CVTs that go off-road is every 45,000km. NZ New CVT Subarus are serviced at the dealership and some are already at the 250,000 km mark with the original transmission. People that buy CVT Subarus second-hand from Japan are not as informed as the ones buying brand new so many would go beyond GVM and tow extra-large boats and caravans. We all know what will happen to their CVT chains in those conditions.
When planning to drive the car harder, it's recommended to upgrade the control module and valve body for aggressive lockups. This is much easier to do on a TR690 as the valve body is at the bottom of the transmission whereas the TR580 is at the top for more efficient delivery. I am OK with the TR580 as I like the friction plates in front of the pulley but if I am going to drive harder with it, I might as well have the valve body and control module upgraded. It is cheaper to do regular maintenance, not go above GVM and not tow houses than to upgrade the said parts, though.
Cvts get as much hate as cars offroading. I've heard of manufacturers (such as Nissan) that have horrific system. Turning the key is like pulling the pin out of a hand grenade. It's gonna blow, only a matter of time, and everyone associates all cvts with the worst case scenario. But if you find your way past the pure bias, you'll hear, time and time again, that Subaru is pretty much leading in reliable and usable cvts. Thought they were cool for on road application when I first heard of them, and was admittedly worried for it in an offroad environment. But I've pushed mine up hills, over rocks, through off camber bends, into mud, and sometimes all the above at the same time. Not a problem. Cvts are actually better than their automatic and manual counterparts in terms of weight, and fuel efficiency.
Upon opening a Nissan CVT's sump pan, the metal pieces/shavings are just all over the place. Belt failures are common to those that use the conventional design (Van Doorne).
I am also getting more and more good info on the reliability of these transmissions, especially from CVT specialists. Many are fans of the chain and I think it's just good engineering to have placed such instead of the Van Doorne. I think having CVT on a low-cost from 1985 pays for low-cost long-term research. Cheers.
