2010 Nissan Murano SL

Sorry to hear you're having trouble and that doesn't sound good for sure. Did you buy your car new? How often did you service the cvt? I'm new to Murano and cvt and am alarmed at all the cvt reliability issues I read about now that I own one. I'm curious if somebody really takes care of one by the book and doesn't hammer it with abuse can get this kind of result in 130k miles. I hear of a few getting to 200k or 300k but don't know how common that is either. I certainly hear more stories of them failing at 140k than stories of anybody making it to 300k.

I had literally never heard about any of this before I owned one and I'm probably into cars way more than the average person (neighborhood dad pulls up in a brand new tundra and i ask him how he feels about the turbo v6 and he says he doesn't know what kind of engine it has). I can't believe this isn't more common knowledge somehow and that it didn't ruin Nissan's reputation if they're really that bad. I don't see any single topic on Toyota forums or even my Infiniti forum (yes Nissan but we don't get the cvt) that rivals the frequency and severity of complaints I read about cvts in these cars. Charging problems come close in frequency but not in the cost to repair.

That sounds like a crap situation for sure. This sounds like one of those strategic decision making case studies of good decision/bad outcome. Trusting a traditionally reliable Japanese car brand is a good decision compared to many alternatives but so many variables like unknown service history and nuances of living with a cvt produce greater variability in outcomes compared to average Japanese car with regular auto transmission produced for the last 20-30 years.

I don't remember where I read it but maybe in that old high mileage reliability thread and it sounded like good advice to me. One of the admins advised a person in your exact situation (presumed cvt failure) to spend the diag fee to get a confirmed diagnosis rather than assume it and give up on a car. Better to make a possibly expensive decision based on a professional analysis rather than a guess based on something that sounds like your problem that you read on the internet. I hope you have a knowledgeable mechanic you can trust to do the diag. I'm not a big fan of dealerships or used auto lots when it comes to diagnosing big problems.

FWIW, ChatGBT:

Is the Nissan JATCO CVT inherently less reliable than conventional automatic transmissions?

In terms of inherent reliability, it is difficult to make a broad generalization comparing the Nissan JATCO CVT to conventional automatic transmissions. Reliability can vary across different transmission types and models, and it depends on various factors such as design, engineering, manufacturing quality, and maintenance.

CVTs, including the Nissan JATCO CVT, have a different operating principle compared to conventional automatic transmissions. They use a system of belts and pulleys to provide seamless gear ratio changes, which can result in improved fuel efficiency and smoother acceleration. However, the complexity of CVTs can introduce potential points of failure.

Conventional automatic transmissions, on the other hand, use a series of gears to achieve different gear ratios. While they have been around for a longer time and are generally considered reliable, they can also have their own specific issues.

It's important to note that advancements in technology and engineering have led to improvements in the reliability of both CVTs and conventional automatic transmissions over the years. Automakers have been addressing issues and making updates to enhance the performance and durability of their transmissions.

Ultimately, when considering the reliability of a specific transmission, it is essential to research the particular model and year of the vehicle, review customer feedback and experiences, and consider factors such as maintenance history and driving conditions. Consulting reputable sources and seeking professional advice can also provide valuable insights into the reliability of a specific transmission type or model.

jbarnett250 said:

I tried to get GPT's opinion about reliability of CVT vs automatic transmission and it was super politically correct and non-committal and wouldn't defame either technology by saying anything negative about either. Now I'm questioning GPT's omnipotence. I'm confident if you hold all other variables equal (operator, vehicle, driving habits, maintenance performed, etc.) that regular old auto tranny would come out on top in reliability (time to failure, time to repair, cost to repair). CVT may have many good traits that make it superior to regular auto but I can't believe reliability is one of them.

Click to expand...

GPT does NOT give you an opinion. It uses online data to provide a grammatically correct response which may be entirely wrong. GPT doesn't value the data it finds, although I'm sure that a majority of negative comments would produce a negative result, since it just uses the data it finds to provide a statement.

There is no "omnipotence" involved, just mashing data to form a response.

In response to " CVT may have many good traits that make it superior to regular auto but I can't believe reliability is one of them" I would say that like most things about cars, the idea of better or worse depends heavily on who drives, under that circumstances, carrying what passengers or cargo, in what traffic settings, with what set fo driver skills, etc. Personally I prefer a manual transmission for most driving, and in other circumstances I prefer a conventional automatic to a CVT transmission, but that's from a sample size of One.

And anyone can have a bad transmission. I had a 1990 Audi 200 Turbo that needed an early automatic trans rebuild; most of the 5-cylinder Audi turbos did, and every mechanic knew that the automatic transmission used in them wasn't strong enough to handle the turbo engine. That's simply the kind of thing that is known about certain vehicles.