Avensis Automatic

[runboy]

I'm thinking of buying an Avensis (new shape). I want an auto, but how does the 1.8 cope with an auto box-would the 2.0 be any better.

Does anyone have any real-life experience of the performance of the auto box?

Thanks

[jamesholden]

I have an old shape 2.0 Avensis auto. Toyota make some of the best auto boxes around. The 1.8 would probably cope fine but looking at all the trouble with the VVT-i engines in particular the 1.8's at the moment I would hold off a while and see if the new shape Avensis suffers from the same trouble.

Personally I have found that Toyota's British build quality isn't very good so would recommend you find a nearly new Camry instead, the UK ones are made in Japan and judging from the one we used to have and other Japanese built Toyota's there far superior, something like a 2.4 Auto Camry would be on a par with a 2.0 Avensis auto.

[Airbag]

I have an 03 new shape 1.8 T3-X Auto with 14000 miles on it, I bought it with 12000 miles on it from Toyota Fleet (Derby) via my dealer. I've owned Merc C180 auto and a Merc C230 Kompressor Sport auto previously. When I got the car I was slightly disappointed with the car's acceleration in auto mode, as other people have noted, but that was in comparision with my Merc C230. However, I believe that in auto mode the gearbox is set up for maximum economy/lowest emissions, so you don't get to accelerate as quick as you might wish for. Over the last couple of months I've been using the sequential bit of the gear stick on country roads and that is much more satisfying, but I've kinda lapsed into letting the auto box do it it's thing. Now I'm used to the car I think it's as good as it gets with a 1.8 engine , the kickdown is very responsive, and I note that at traffic light grands prix it usually takes a much bigger car to get away before me. The smoothness and quiet ride kinda deceives you into thinking the car is slow. Would I buy another? Yes, I think I would, the auto is very smooth, and the car is as comfortable and much better equipped than either of my Mercs. At the end of the day a 2.0 litre engine will always offer more power, but at the expense of economy (?) and I get 44-48 mpg with my Avensis, which is just great. The proviso is I drive on my own a lot of the time, with four people in the car I'd probably want a bit more power.

So to answer your question - try one if you can - the handling is very good on these cars which tends to make up for a lot, the auto and 1.8 engine works very well (for me). I don't know if there's a diesel option with auto yet, but if there is that would be my next Avensis. And of course, there's no substitute for cubes. !!

[duncanda]

Like Airbag, I have a 2003 T3-X 1.8 auto, hatchback. I bought it in July with 7,000 miles on the clock and have now done about 8,300. The dealer gave it a 10,000 mile service. I traded my Mercedes E240 V6 auto in for it and I used to have a Mercedes C230 Kompressor auto. I get about 37mpg (indicated by on-board computer) on a motorway run, this has been with just me on board and 4 up plus luggage. Perhaps I'll get similar mileage to Airbag once the engine runs in.

The Avensis is more quiet than either Mercedes, handles better than the E240, but of course lacks the oomph of both. It is spritely off the mark. When road testing the Avensis, I stepped from my E240 into it and was impressed by the intial take-off. It cruises well at motorway speeds and it is easy to hold a conversation with people in the back without raising your voice.

I tend to use the auto in auto mode, but when I have used it in sequential mode I was impressed at how quickly it changed gears. Quicker than kick-down in my normal autos.

Overall it's spritely enough for town use, cruises well at motorway speed, quiet at all speeds, comfortable, economical, got lots of kit and roomy. I only wish it had cruise control. Enjoy.

[runboy]

Thanks for the replies-make interesting reading.

I don't know what it is with the Camry...I just can't like the interior!

[Airbag]

As a postscript to this thread I was wondering whether the auto transmission is adaptive, as it was on my Mercs : here's part of a review of a USA Camry - "Opt for Toyota's four-speed electronically controlled automatic and you'll be getting an excellent transmission. The ECTi transmission mated to the V6 features an adaptive program that responds to individual driving styles. Drive more aggressively and it will delay the shift points for more spirited performance. Leisurely cruise around town and it will shift sooner for smooth, fuel-efficient performance."

I have thought the car to be quicker than when I first bought it, but of course, that's probably me. Does anyone know if the transmission on Avensis is adaptive? The other thought is that fourth gear does seem like an overdrive, certainly for winding country lanes the sequential shift and third gear seems more suitable, and when you move the shift into Sequential the box drops into third by itself anyway. I was driving in town on auto yesterday and noted that the transmission tries hard not to go above 2.5k rpm, so it does seem as though the auto side of things is set up for max economy. As you'd expect! And interesting to note another Merc owner shifting to Avensis. :-)

[mandracchio]

I have a 2004 Avensis Wagon 1.8 auto and previously owned a Mercedes CLK 200 kompressor auto. I agree that the Avensis is quieter and much more confortable than my previous Merc. Anyway, acceleration is obviously not comparable (from the other hand, the CLK had 192 HP). I seem to remember that the Avensis transmission is adaptive (as that of the CLK), but I have a very quiet drive so I don't think it will be very useful to me. I miss two things from the CLK: the cruise control (it was real relaxing!) and the five speed automatic transmission (four speed are less smooth). Another small annoyance is that whenever you change the direction of the airflow (up vents, down vents, and so on) the 'auto' mode of the climate control turns itself off. In the CLK you could use the 'auto' mode and select your preferred vents.

The bottom line: I am satisfied and would buy another one, expecially if a diesel auto model will be available (a sunroof won't make any hurt, too - here in Italy it's not available).

[Alberto Michelatti]

Hello.

I have from December 14th 2004 a Toyota Avensis II 1.8 VVT-i sedan automatic: I find the japanese Aisin AW 4 speed automatic transmission impressively smooth and precise in select, just at he right moment, the shift points; however the thing that impress me much is the apparent lack of weight of the car when it take-off! surely due to the up-to-3,0x torque multiplication feature of the torque converter I have to be very attentive at red lights if I have some car in front of mine! the car jump forward in a really sporty way... I'm very satisfied of this!

I drive my Avensis mainly with a calm style and I find the car very comfortable; due to the A/T creep feature, at the stops on uphill on the twisty road that there is by me it's like having a Subaru-like "hill holder" feature, because the car almost never go reverse.

In my opnion, I find the 1ZZ-FE 1.8 VVT-i engine is well mated with the car size and, because of the impressive amount of torque always available due to the continuos variable valve timing VVT-i system: so, I find that "only" 4 speed are sufficient; even if the Avensis 2.4 D-4 has an Aisin AW 5 speed automatic transmission (did you know that this is the first FWD Toyota ever made mated with a 5 speed A/T?) I think that if Toyota engineers think that 4 speed are sufficient it mean that 4 speed are sufficient!

A curiosity: at the beginning I thought that the "S" letter on the left of the "D" one stayed for "Sport", like in Subaru Legacy with E-5AT or BMW Steptronic, instead it just stay for "Sequential"; however I drive the car mainly in "D": the first days I tested the sequential mode but I haven't find not much fun to play with the shift lever; the auto mode is so efficient that I quite never feel the need to use the sequential one; instead I find that the sequential mode is useful on downhill, especially before a sharp and slow corner.

I wonder why Toyota engineers don't put an automatic transmission on the 280 Nm 2.0 D-4D diesel engine: Aisin AW is producing by some time a state-of-the-art 350 Nm 5 speed automatic transmission: it's now fitted on Alfa Romeo 166 2.4 JTD, Lancia Thesis 3.2 V6 and 2.4 JTD, Opel Vectra and Signum, Renault Espace, Laguna and Vel Satis, Saab 9-3 and 9-5, and Volvo S40/V50, S60/V70/XC70/C70, S80 and XC90.

I wish they do this when they will present the Avensis 2.2 D-4D 180 hp Clean Power on summer 2005; in my opinion, I think that nowadays is out our era that a human being have to think at what gear is better to shift to (an ECU can do this perfectly) and, moreover, having to move directly the clutch pedal that, for me, would haven't to exist.

Alberto.

[Airbag]

Hi to everybody!

A curiosity: at the beginning I thought that the "S" letter on the left of the "D" one stayed for "Sport", like in Subaru Legacy with E-5AT or BMW Steptronic, instead it just stay for "Sequential"; however I drive the car mainly in "D": the first days I tested the sequential mode but I haven't find not much fun to play with the shift lever; the auto mode is so efficient that I quite never feel the need to use the sequential one; instead I find that the sequential mode is useful on downhill, especially before a sharp and slow corner.

←

I've had my '04 T3-X Auto for about six months now, and I'm still happy with it. It's been to France a couple of times and is very good in the cold weather here, currently 2C-0C , and warms up very quickly. I use the sequential box in manual a lot too, especially for country lanes, where you can keep the box locked in third to keep the revs up in the power band. I drive in London quite a bit, and wouldn't want a car with a manual gearbox - unless it was a full-on sports car. Opinions differ, but auto-transmissions have always been able to shift gear much more efficiently than humans, and they can off course handle a much greater amount of torque than manual boxes, which is why you find them on large American cars, dragsters, and , er, submarines. There's less wear than on a clutch, and there's less wear on suspension and crankshaft/lower engine because of lack of transmission snatch. Passengers get a more comfortable ride too. For the ultimate in a low maintenance Avensis I'd have a 120 -150 HP turbo- diesel engine, and a self-adaptive autobox. That would be very nice to drive.

[Alberto Michelatti]

Airbag wrote:

"Opinions differ, but auto-transmissions have always been able to shift gear much more efficiently than humans, and they can off course handle a much greater amount of torque than manual boxes, which is why you find them on large American cars, dragsters, and , er, submarines. There's less wear than on a clutch, and there's less wear on suspension and crankshaft/lower engine because of lack of transmission snatch."

I think that nowadays is out of our era that a human being has to think at what gear is better to shift to (an ECU can do this perfectly) and, moreover, having to move directly the clutch pedal that, for me, would haven't to exist. So I would like to explain because for me the conventional automatic transmission with hydraulic torque converter is the best choice:

1) since the birth of the automatic transmissions, there is no power flow interruption during gear shifting, like in the more quick Direct-Shift-Gerabox system of Audi/Volkswagen group; not even a robotized manual transmission like, for example, the BMW SMG (or Ferrari F1) can do this;

2) an ECU always knows exactly the input shaft rpm and the output shaft rpm, matching them perfectly just at the right moment (an human being never could do this so: in my opinion, this is quite impossible);

3) the engine can't never stall, shutting off by its own: with a manual transmission, when you take-off and don't apply sufficient throttle or release too fast the clutch pedal the engine can stall (very dangerous in the road traffic!); also when you have to do an emergency braking, maybe that for the panic you release the clutch pedal wrong and, as well, the engine can stall, leaving you with a much more less efficient braking system just in the wrong moment;

4) the automatic transmissions are electronically and perfectly self-protected against drivers mistakes and, moreover, there isn't to worry about clutch overheat or synchronizers wear;

5) for the life of car, there isn't to worry about the expensive clutch-disc substitution;

6) with a manual transmission, how many burning-wheels dragster-style starts can you do without the clutch overheats? With an automatic transmission, instead, you can do this for the times you want, endlessly;

7) with a manual transmission, when you are at a stop on a uphill, when you have to start you have to release very carefully the clutch pedal, risking to overheat it; with an automatic transmission, instead, you have just to apply trottle, regardless of the weather, grip, slope, car load and anything else;

8) due to the automatic transmission creep feature, at the stops on uphill it's like having a Subaru-like hill holder feature, because the car almost never go reverse;

9) with automatic transmissions there's less wear than on a clutch, and there's less wear on suspensions and crankshaft/lower engine because of lack of transmission snatchs;

10) due to the automatic transmission kick-down feature you can get speed very fast, pulling yourself out fastly from bad and dangerous traffic situations;

11) due to the up-to-3.0x torque multiplication feature of the torque converter, a car has more acceleration when you accelerate out of a stop. Moreover almost all automatic cars today have the torque converter lock-up clutch, that eliminates the slippage between the pump (input power, engine side) and the turbine (output power, transmission side) of the torque converter. This by-pass function is studied to improve fuel economy at constant speed.

12) for the ultimate, the comfort and satisfaction given by an automatic transmission in the city traffic, in my opinion, are really priceless; it's true that the fuel consumption in this condition is higher, but you also have a lot more acceleration and this is undoubtedly a safety factor;

If someone is interested in a very detailed description of an automatic transmission, here there is the explanation for the ZF "4HP18 Q/EH" one (using the Ravigneaux gear train arrangement): http://www.digest.net/alfa/FAQ/164/pb94/pb94-6.htm.

Here there is the description of the state-of-the-art 6 speed "TR-60SN" Aisin AW automatic transmission (using the Lepelletier gear train arrangement), fitted on the Porsche Cayenne and on the Volkswagen Touareg (as well as, for example, as on the Volkswagen New Beetle, Audi TT and Audi A3): 6speedautotranny.zip.

Alberto.

P.S.: please don't say this to anyone, but this is the untold reason why the automatic transmission is absolutely the best choice...

[mandracchio]

I think that if Toyota engineers think that 4 speed are sufficient it mean that 4 speed are sufficient!

Hi Alberto,

nice to meet another Italian fellow in this UK forum! I mainly agree with your posts, but I'm sure that 5 speed would be smoother - anyway, costs rule and an Avensis is much cheaper than a Merc...

Reading your posts, I was wondering if you're linked someway to Toyota or Aisin-Warner? Just curious... :-)

Regards and happy new year,

Mauro

[Alberto Michelatti]

Happy New Year to you all!!!

Alberto.

[mandracchio]

Today I took the time to count the number of speeds of my automatic transmission (Avensis 2004) and, strange as it can be, I counted five steps from a stop condition to about 80 km/h, with constant (and light) throttle. But this A/T isn't supposed to be a 4-speed one? With 'step' I mean a sudden and slight decrease of the RPMs and the feeling of a different gear engaged.

Is there any kind of 'overdrive' or what?

Mauro

[Airbag]

Today I took the time to count the number of speeds of my automatic transmission (Avensis 2004) and, strange as it can be, I counted five steps from a stop condition to about 80 km/h, with constant (and light) throttle. But this A/T isn't supposed to be a 4-speed one? With 'step' I mean a sudden and slight decrease of the RPMs and the feeling of a different gear engaged.

Is there any kind of 'overdrive' or what?

Mauro

←

Stick it into 'sequential' at a standstill, go down to 1st, then watch the numbers change on the gear indicator as you change up. Or count them!

[Alberto Michelatti]

Mauro,

the fifth "step" that you felt is the torque converter "lock-up" function that, over a certain speed (about 75÷80 km/h with the fourth speed) eliminates the slippage between the pump (input power, engine side) and the turbine (output power, transmission side) of the torque converter; this by-pass function is studied to improve fuel economy at constant speed.

I have noted that when, at about 75÷80 km/h, the torque converter lock-up is activated the rpm fall of about 100 rpm, making feel you the existence of a non-existent fifth speed.

So, if you want a proof, at about 80 km/h lift your foot from the accelerator pedal: obviously the rpm fall; if you reapply the foot on the accelerator pedal, the rpm will return at about the same value but, after 1÷2 seconds, it will fall of about 100 rpm: this is the sign that the torque converter "lock-up" has been activated; now the engine is directly linked with the epyciclic geartrain of the automatic transmission.

I have also noted that the torque converter lock-up is activated, at about 80 km/h, only in the fourth speed; at now, I personally don't know if and at what speed the ECU activates it in the other speeds.

Here there is an official Toyota USA tech document related also to the torque converter "lock-up" function: http://www.autoshop101.com, Technical Articles, document #16, "Electronic Transmission #1 - Operation.pdf" (file size 574KB).

Friendly,

Alberto.

[mandracchio]

Mauro,

the fifth "step" that you felt is the torque converter "lock-up" function that, over a certain speed (about 75÷80 km/h with the fourth speed) eliminates the slippage between the pump (input power, engine side) and the turbine (output power, transmission side) of the torque converter; this by-pass function is studied to improve fuel economy at constant speed.

I have noted that when, at about 75÷80 km/h, the torque converter lock-up is activated the rpm fall of about 100 rpm, making feel you the existence of a non-existent fifth speed.

So, if you want a proof, at about 80 km/h lift your foot from the accelerator pedal: obviously the rpm fall; if you reapply the foot on the accelerator pedal, the rpm will return at about the same value but, after 1÷2 seconds, it will fall of about 100 rpm: this is the sign that the torque converter "lock-up" has been activated; now the engine is directly linked with the epyciclic geartrain of the automatic transmission.

I have also noted that the torque converter lock-up is activated, at about 80 km/h, only in the fourth speed; at now, I personally don't know if and at what speed the ECU activates it in the other speeds.

Here there is an official Toyota USA tech document related also to the torque converter "lock-up" function: "http://www.autoshop101.com", Technical Articles, document #16, "Electronic Transmission #1 - Operation.pdf" (file size 574KB).

Friendly,

Alberto.

←

Thanks for your thorough explanation, Alberto. It really feels as a fifth speed kicking in at about 80 km/h, even though the small RPM decrease (about 100 RPMs)!

Cheers,

Mauro

[Alberto Michelatti]

[uumode]

In this day an age a 4 speed auto is a bit in the dark ages, 5 gears please!

I find the 1.8 auto is quite swift in normal conditions as the engine is quite flexible at low revs, and it moves off the line quite cleanly. At motorway speeds though if you want to make a quick overtaking move it lacks a bit of power.

The auto box has a 'coasting' characteristic, so when you have your foot off the gas at say 40mph, the car rolls an incredibly long way without foot on pedal, saving petrol... rolls perhaps 500 yards or so. Sometimes I come off a 60mph zone to a junction and just 'coast' a long distance saving fuel.

Downside of mine is that it has a faint high pitch whistling noise at 36-40mph

anyone else have this?

(can hear it with stereo and fan off)

[Mkuk0]

I did drive an auto 'vensis a while back and absolutely HATED that coasting feature, left me with NO engine braking at all, nearly stuffed car into a hedge 1st bend I came to, expecting it to slow down when I lifted off the throttle...I suppose its ok if you expect it, but it caught me out for sure!!

[silverarrow]

:

noise can be from the door seals and also front windsreen not bonded correctly

also i think 5 gears is a good point may be 6

happy motoring