CVT Failure - the costs

[burfadel]

I believe as part of the economy improvements the 2012 MY13 onwards may be a different unit. Not as good as the CVT8 next year though! That transmission was announced by Jatco in 2011, according to the results of googling .

Another reason why I suspect the transmission is different is pre 2012 MY13 or thereabouts CVT Lancer's require CVTF-J1 transmission fluid, and 2012 MY13 (I believe that's where the change occurred) requires CVTF-J4 spec. There are aftermarket fluids for CVTF-J1, but not CVTF-J4 or at least, not readily available. AMSOIL seems to make one but it's probably more expensive than the Mitsubishi stuff?

If they did change the transmission to a newer Jatco unit in 2012 MY13, I wonder why it wasn't the CVT8 which was already out then?! Unless... 2012 MY13 onwards do use CVT8 and that the changes in 2016 are just a revised CVT8? Who knows.

[Gleno]

Not too bad. Got a new ride now, which is (was) great....until somebody hit it in a carpark. Yeh. I think Penrith or Plumpton was your last meet? It has been ages.

Would have to be at Panthers last time I seen you, back in 2013 . What you driving now? Audi? What made you change cars? Sorry to hear about being hit in the carpark

[Gleno]

FYI the CVT in my Nephews Pulsar failed a few weeks ago, was stalling when he put it into gear. It only done 50k in about 18 months. Nissan is replacing it under warranty but so far they have had the car almost a month, he might get it back next week. Cant believe they have taken so long to get a replacement CVT.

FYI the CVT in my Nephews Pulsar failed a few weeks ago, was stalling when he put it into gear. It only done 50k in about 18 months. Nissan is replacing it under warranty but so far they have had the car almost a month, he might get it back next week. Cant believe they have taken so long to get a replacement CVT.

I'm really at a loss as to why Manufacturers are going the CVT now. Nothing wrong with 5 or 6 speed conventional automatics, although no doubt they can have there problems as well depending on what car you owned.

I wouldn't say it improves fuel economy or any power advantage. My 2008 corolla I used to own was only a 4 speed auto and the fuel economy on that car was far better than the lancer

[belle_tb_ES]

[quote:bcc1899475=belle_tb_ES]Not too bad. Got a new ride now, which is (was) great....until somebody hit it in a carpark. Yeh. I think Penrith or Plumpton was your last meet? It has been ages.[/quote:bcc1899475] Would have to be at Panthers last time I seen you, back in 2013 . What you driving now? Audi? What made you change cars? Sorry to hear about being hit in the carpark

2015 Audi S3 . I really wanted a faster car. I've wanted an Evo for ages but kinda decided after years of CJ ownership, i wanted something different. Looked for something with similar power, 4wd etc etc and decided on the S3

[Lancer1993]

I have found in the last year my CJ uses more fuel than my 93 CC coupe, the 22yo car (1.8 EFI Manual) averaged around 8.5lt/100km, often down into the 7s on longer trips. The CJ has averaged just under 10lt. Both Manual and driven in similar manor on the same roads.

I guess the big difference is the CJ is about 30% heavier and has a 33% bigger engine so will use more fuel no matter how you drive.

Need to save up and get Merlin to work his magic to not only get more out of the engine but also make it more efficient.

[tommo08]

just fyi

I have owned car from new 2010 activ and have had the transmission valve body replaced twice under warranty. ..

Car will not necessarily go into limp mode however the cel will come on and on the led display flash 'service required'

Happened in 2012 car had done approx 40 000k and a month ago at 100 000km

[Lancer1993]

Maybe it's a skewed sample but the CVTs sound like they can be fragile and prone to dying, long live the manual!

[Gleno]

Manual the better option, I mean its only the clutch you have to replace and generally that just depends on how you drive it.

So lucky you had it replaced under warranty . I wonder what causes it to fail? And do they replace the belt when they did the valve body? That's something I forgot to ask them.

All they said to me was you don't have to replace the fluid now until you have done 90K. I guess with my valve body failing at 210000, I cant complain I got some life out of it

[burfadel]

When the 4B11 got the fuel economy improvements in the 2012 MY13 model (I believe that's when it was), the required transmission fluid for both the 4B11 and 4B12 (which didn't get improved) changed to CVTF-J4. The earlier models require CVTF-J1. The pre-2012 MY13 models still have a fluid recommendation of CVTF-J1, so it suggests that a change occurred at this time. The change could be related to minor component changes. I believe the new transmission in next years model was actually available back then, it would have been nice if they could have used it . That said, it would have been nice if they changed to the 4J11 and 4J12 engines (or scrap the 2.0L for Australia all together). The 4J12 is really the only one you can find info on, it's used in the latest Outlander. The Outlander is the same platform so the engine should be compatible. I believe the main changes are a head overhaul. The 4J12 is as powerful as the current 4J12, but uses pretty much the same amount of fuel as the current 4B11. That's quite impressive in a way, considering the Outlander is bigger, has more wind resistance, and it's still not a direct injection engine. The 4J12 was available when they tweaked the 4B11, it's not an entirely new engine. It's just new outside of Japan.

You would think they would just make the 4J engines now seeing as they are more efficient and competitive, and making fewer engines keeps costs down.

So, the 2.4 could have used the same amount of fuel as the 4B11 does currently. The other thing is MIVEC has been improved in the 4J engines adding variable lift technology. The 4J12 engine therefore potentially has greater tuning capability with the Merlin treatment. Since the engine is just an updated 4B12, the current range of mods like late model air filter, extractors etc remain the same.

I think if Mitsubishi had the 4J12 as standard, the new CVT transmission, slightly updated interior like colour dash as standard, and LED tail lights for bling, as well as 6 speaker stereo with DAB+ as standard, they really would still have an attractive vehicle in comparison to other options.

Missed opportunity, and now they're using sales as en excuse... of course later on they could add direct injection for all models using the engine, and again that would be a sales plus.

[Lancer1993]

Not that this is the thread but there is a facelifted CJ for 2016 with new bumper and CVT, some interior changes also but it's not much. I agree they should have done much more to keep it current.

[burfadel]

Not that this is the thread but there is a facelifted CJ for 2016 with new bumper and CVT, some interior changes also but its not much. I agree they should have done much more to keep it current.

Considering the 4J engines are are a few years old, they just weren't available outside of Japan. In the current Outlander, they just swapped out the 4B12 for the 4J12. Imagine if they kept the EVO and used the 4J12 as the base engine .

I'm guessing nobody is enthusiastic enough to try and transplant an Outlander engine into the Lancer, lol.

[Lancer1993]

Im guessing nobody is enthusiastic enough to try and transplant an Outlander engine into the Lancer, lol.

Sounds like a challenge for some enterprising mechanic!

[burfadel]

Now this is the V6 Mivec engine as in the US spec 2016 Outlander. Apparently 70 percent of Outlanders sold in the US use the V6. It's an older engine now, like the current 4B12.



I would like to point out the great layout they chose. Look at the air intake in relation to the radiator cap. Where does the snorkel get it's air from? Oh look! The air vents for the snorkel are all the way over on the left side of the plastic panelling!

[Lancer1993]

Does look line the radiator might be sealed off from the air intake?

They have been V6 engines in Lancer/Mirage for years, I know of several people who dropped them in CE Lancers. Only thing is it doesn't really help performance in most cases as the V6 is heavier than a 4cly so any extra power is used by the higher weight. Its mainly for the looks and sound you get.

That said Mitsy could drop in a V6, boost to power and you'd have a fantastic Lancer which could be sold at a higher price point, some where between the top CJ and the old RA model.

[sarusa]

Another reason I hate the CVT and autos, they have their place but in a car like the Lancer I prefer to do the gear changing! A nephew of mine has a new Pulsars with CVT, hope it lasts.

how many clutches in 200000km. and a gearbox?