Which is more durable, the Baojun 510 AMT or CVT?

[DelValentina]

In terms of reliability, both perform well, but the CVT offers a significantly better driving experience compared to the AMT transmission. The AMT transmission has noticeable gear shift jerks and relatively chaotic shift logic, making its overall performance inferior to the CVT. Introduction to the Baojun 510 automatic transmission: 1. Lightweight design: The total weight of this transmission is 90KG, which is considered mainstream in its class. To ensure compatibility with more vehicle models, designers minimized its overall size. For example, the oil pump is built-in and uses an electric pump, eliminating the need for metal components like drive gear chains. 2. Torque converter lock-up optimization: This CVT transmission can lock the torque converter at lower speeds, thereby improving the overall transmission efficiency. This not only reduces emissions but also effectively saves fuel. However, whether this approach will cause jerking remains to be seen over time.

[ElliotLee]

As a long-time automotive enthusiast specializing in car mechanics, I observe that the Baojun 510's AMT transmission is an automated version of a manual gearbox, featuring a relatively simple structure. Its clutch components are prone to wear but have low replacement costs, typically requiring maintenance after around 50,000 kilometers. On the other hand, CVT transmissions rely on a steel belt and pulley system, offering smooth performance but potentially experiencing belt slippage or overheating under high loads, which can affect longevity. From a durability perspective, AMTs are more robust and resilient, especially for urban commuting or frequent stop-and-go scenarios, as they are based on proven manual designs with fewer precision component failures. Empirical data shows many budget vehicles opt for AMTs due to their affordable repairs, with lifespans reaching up to 10 years. While regular maintenance like oil changes can extend the life of both transmissions, CVTs exhibit slightly weaker reliability under extreme conditions. In summary, AMTs excel in durability, making them ideal for cost-conscious owners.

[VonBrayden]

I drove the Baojun 510 AMT version for over two years and noticed slight jerks during gear shifts, but never encountered major issues. Routine maintenance just involved oil and clutch plate changes, costing only a few hundred yuan. Later, I tried my friend's CVT version, and the driving experience was indeed as smooth as silk. However, the 4S shop mentioned that if the CVT's steel belt wears out, replacing it can be quite expensive. In terms of durability, the AMT performs more stably, especially under heavy loads like long-distance or mountain driving, as the AMT is less prone to overheating or failure. Personally, I prefer the AMT for its tank-like reliability—it’s worry-free for daily driving. Also, considering fuel consumption, the AMT is slightly thirstier but has lower overall costs, while the CVT saves fuel but incurs higher long-term expenses. I’d recommend test-driving both, but for long-term use, the AMT feels more dependable.

[BryceFitz]

I've worked at an auto repair shop for ten years and repaired many Baojun 510 transmissions. AMT repairs are straightforward – clutch issues can be fixed in ten minutes with affordable parts. CVT failures often require complete replacement, which is costly and time-consuming. From a durability perspective, AMT's robust structure resists damage from bumps or misuse, ensuring long lifespan. While CVT's steel belt system provides smooth operation, slippage or overheating can easily render it useless. For maintenance, regular inspections are crucial – AMT requires less frequent servicing, whereas CVT needs professional adjustments. Based on experience, AMT proves more durable and cost-effective in vehicles like the Baojun 510.