2010 Outback CVT noise concern.

[PeterD]

So my parents bought a 2010 Outback. Styling and size aside its a really nice car to drive. My Father tends to be very sensitive to little rattles and noises. There CVT equipped outback is now making some strange noises at idle in neutral. It almost sounds like the CVT chain is slapping the transmission case. it dosn't happen under load. He has taken it to a few dealers and they keep saying nothing is wrong. He has asked for them to lift a new one up and listen and they have done that. I hear the noise It doesn't sound normal. I understand CVTs are completely different but this noise doesn't sound right. Does anyone have experience with these. Any recommendations for Subaru Techs in the Greater Seattle area.

[GeneralDisorder]

I would guess that there is very little experience with these outside of the dealerships themselves owing to the fact that most are still under some sort of factory warantee - therefore..... being both new technology and such a new car in general I would not reccomend any shop besides the dealership.

 

I'll add my own feelings on the matter - NEVER buy the first generation of any new technology. Early adopters have a high probability of getting burned. Hard lesson but one that needed to be learned apparently .

 

He's just going to have to ride it out - failure may result - but until they get the bugs worked out there's no tech anywhere at the dealership level that's been highly trained on these and the most likely results are either total failure and subsequent replacement under recall/warantee - gradual failure and eventual replacement after the warantee expires - or it just makes funny noises and never fails. If the old Justy CVT was any kind of water mark on the subject..... well let's just say they were total peices of crap. Only time will tell what happens and what Subaru's response will be. In the mean time he should not be so "sensitive" - as an early adopter he's going to have to get used to quirks in the products he buys. One would think, having clearly fathered a child that is now of adult age, that he would have learned this by now .

 

GD

[PeterD]

Yeah. I was a bit surprised by there purchase, Its still covered under power-train warranty after the 3/36 is up. If its anything like there older 98 outback it made all sorts of noises and all sorts of check engine lights but went to 280k before they traded it in.

[Suba9792]

Agreed The CVT is still VERY new, I personally wouldnt want one, ugh the cost for labor and parts on that would be insane. I agree with GD about the new product deal, there is a new2.5 thats coming out or already is, that worries me.

[PeterD]

When I hear how much R&D has gone into a handful of Ford's new products it surprises me how many problems still come up. You would think after Subaru has had problems with the 2.5 they would fix it. I wonder how much testing went into that new CVT. Since most companies who made them no longer do I wonder why Subaru chose to make one as apposed to a 6 speed auto or double clutch auto. the CVT is like a Mazda rotory engine. Brilliant idea but never really worked that well.

[GeneralDisorder]

Actually - more and more car companies are adopting CVT's - notably Nissan which has switched to CVT's on all it's small and medium sized cars in the US. Virtually all of the hybrids are equipped with some form of CTV including the Prius.

 

The Subaru design is interesting in that it borrows from a very old technology called a Reeves drive - which is a set of variable pulley's on which runs a belt or in this case a chain. It's a really simple concept and fortunately it's pretty well a proven technology in the world of machinery - it was a common form of variable speed control used before electronics - back in the '40s through the '80s they were used extensively. They weren't suited to cars because of a lack of computer and electronic control - relying primarily on an operator to adjust the drive for the desired speed.

 

On the downside - it's *not* a proven technology in the world of automotive transmissions. Subaru is once again doing their own thing and opting for a design that departs from all the designs of other CVT transmissions. It's actually an elegant solution using very few moving parts - it *should* be pretty well bullet-proof eventually - but a few early design bugs are sure to creep in.

 

Fortunately it's not very similar to the Justy's ECVT. So we'll see...... I personally prefer to stand on the sidelines and watch all the guinea pig early adopters from a distance.

 

GD

Edited October 26, 2010 by GeneralDisorder

[Ricearu]

I will take the MT thank you. No flappy paddle gearboxes or crazy experimental belt drive gig's, just an extra pedal and a stick in the center console.

 

call me old fashioned

[hankosolder2]

Am I the only person who thinks that the sequential nature of modern semi-automatic gearboxes is a huge disadvantage? I frequently jump gears (i.e. cruising in 4th, use 2nd for a passing manouver with a rev-matched downshift.)

Those tap to up/downshift controls are totally vexing. Never driven a floppy-paddle shifter equipped car, but it seems very easy to downshift to a gear other than the one you want.

 

Sorry for the thread jack.

[GeneralDisorder]

Never driven a floppy-paddle shifter equipped car, but it seems very easy to downshift to a gear other than the one you want.

 

The TCU won't let you do anything dangerous. You can rapidly descend in gears though if it's setup right. Mostly that's just an "added feature" as they are not designed to be shifted at all really. They have an infinite gear range so it's best for mileage and such to just leave the TCU to do it's thing and not touch the paddles.

 

GD

Edited October 26, 2010 by GeneralDisorder

[hankosolder2]

The TCU won't let you do anything dangerous. You can rapidly descend in gears though if it's setup right. Mostly that's just an "added feature" as they are not designed to be shifted at all really. They have an infinite gear range so it's best for mileage and such to just leave the TCU to do it's thing and not touch the paddles.

 

GD

 

That was a general anti "tip/triptronic" and SMG gearboxes comment and not referring to Subaru's CVTs. With the CVT, I can see that you'd never be able to beat the computer optimized "gear" selection and the only real reason for semi manual gear selection on a CVT would be for enhanced engine braking.

 

I'd still take a 5/6MT even with a gas mileage penalty....

 

Nathan

[GeneralDisorder]

I'd still take a 5/6MT even with a gas mileage penalty....

 

Yeah - there's just something cool about the MT's. Though I do like the Reeves drive concept - it's a purely mechanical system (minus the electronic controls but still similar to the 4EAT and 5EAT) vs. the hybrid CVT's that have all kinds of electrical stuff going on with motor/generators and such.

 

GD

[Ricearu]

I love telling my car when to shift. I am fixing my friend's 1987 Supercharged MR2 with a slush box. That thing has a nanny shifter from hell. Punch it and it shifts at 6k. Even if you drag the shifter down to "1". The 4agze red-lines at 7250... bum...

[PeterD]

I was hoping the MT fanboys wouldn't chime in. :-\ thats the beauty of a CVT. no set gears it just does its thing always giving you the power when you need it. :cool: Some people just don't wan't to use a clutch anymore.

 

From a guy who has always driven a manual trans car... I wouldn't mind an auto for my daily.