Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Outline · [ Standard ] · Linear+

 Vios 2006 and Saga SV

views
     
jayraptor
post Jul 21 2013, 10:23 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
115 posts

Joined: Apr 2013
QUOTE(ItsWL @ Jul 21 2013, 01:18 PM)
Guy~ pls advise, which 1 shud i get, the price is jus about 4k different

-Toyota Vios 2006 G-spec ( 120km +/-)
-Proton Saga SV

Why and why not u choose vios / saga

smile.gif
*
I'll go Vios used, make sure it is accident free and the wiring is not altered. 120,00km, no problem. Even if you send the Vios to Toyota SC for full engine overhaul, it will only cost RM4k at most. FC wise is king, city driving can get 12km/L when others are at 9-10km/L. Toyota conventional gearbox would only get little slippage after breaching way over 200,000km or 230,000km depends on how well the owner treat the car. Still can engage all the gears without issue, hassle free.

I won't buy Saga because of its old tech engine, still using timing belt I assume and probably without VVT. Gearbox if CVT, that is even wanted to avoid at all cost. Not sure whether local gearbox overhaul shops can fix that today. I've seen how City and Sylphy owners have to buy new rather than fix when theirs had the steel belt dislocated previously. Maintenance for CVT also higher, have to pay RM400+ at 60,000km service interval. Not cool.

This post has been edited by jayraptor: Jul 21 2013, 10:26 PM
jayraptor
post Jul 22 2013, 11:49 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
115 posts

Joined: Apr 2013
QUOTE(dares @ Jul 22 2013, 12:30 AM)
Saga CVT uses the same engine block as a normal Campro, but the cams and piston are different from the older Saga BLM. This is to redistribute the torque across the RPM range. You are right it does not have VVT.

Whats wrong with timing belt? The Fiesta Duratec TiVCT also use timing belt. Fark, it doesnt even have independent ignition coil! doh.gif

CVT oil change at 60k km for RM400, 4AT oil change every 20k km for around RM150. You tell me which is cheaper. A well maintained CVT can last quite long, Proton has tested the Belgium made CVT for up to 250k km, so it is largely reliable. The true weakness of CVT is that it is sensitive to heat and even though the Saga is fitted with a CVTF cooler, you should not subject it to high torque load for prolonged periods of time. This is true for any CVT aplication.

As for the Vios, I assume it is the old gen Vios as my house has the very last batch of the NCP42 model bought in 2007, done around 90k km. Maintained according to schedule it is a damn reliable workhorse, but even so some parts have already been replaced eg. Valve seal, wheel bearings, driveshaft, engine mounting is due for a replacement, and lately there have been weird noises from the engine bay which we still have not identify the source.

If the car is well taken care of it can last quite some time I figure, if the TS knows where to find an honest mechanic to service it then he is good to go. But the caveat is the car must be found in good condition to begin with.
*
Do you mean P1 Saga 4AT ATF fluid change at 20,000km interval? That is truly unacceptable. Toyota gearbox, they stated oil change at 100,000km while many uncles don't even bother to change and the gearbox still in 1 piece after 200,000km.

As long as it's CVT and no valve timing, I would avoid. Valve timing is compulsory nowadays and must have dual VVT for newer cars. Without VVT is like no fuel injection back in 90's end up high on FC. Today's cars are much heavier than back then and VVT especially dual is the answer to overcome size + weight problem without compromising FC.

Later tech, it will be compulsory for GDI + Turbocharged.
jayraptor
post Jul 24 2013, 11:49 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
115 posts

Joined: Apr 2013
QUOTE(dares @ Jul 23 2013, 02:25 PM)
The Vios at home changed every 40k km as per the schedule given by the SC's SA. Forgot the price, but it was not less than RM200.

Anyway, the lack of VVT is somewhat mitigated by a variable intake manifold aka the IAFM. Not as efficient as VVT, but it helps nonetheless. My FLX SE's FC was not much worse than my Fiesta's (keyword here is NOT MUCH WORSE, but still not as good), partly because the Saga was running on CVT. Bear in mind Ford brought many new tech to bear, including twin variable cam timing (intake and exhaust) as well as dual-clutch. Not to forget, I paid a lot more for the Ford as well.

You can always theorize how stepped transmissions is cheaper to maintain and how VVT is superior than everything. But you have to drive and maintain the car to see if those theories hold water in reality.

Like I said, in terms of refinement, comfort and FC the Vios still owns the Saga CVT. You just have to get a one in prime condition, otherwise if you get a problematic unit with parts at the end of their operational lifetime, you might as well get the Proton - at least warranty is free.

Out of topic, just FYI, Preve's CFE Campro comes with VVT.
*
Variable air intake doesn't help reduce FC that much as seen in some earlier generation Conti, US & Koreans made when they have not able to develop proper VVT in early 2000s. Toyota SC got greedy and set short interval to cheat owners? People don't change ATF fluid that short interval for conventional AT, at least 100,000km onwards only.

Saga FLX
Engine 1332cc with VIS but no VVT
output 94ps@5750rpm
torque 120Nm@4000rpm
kerb weight - 1055kg lo-spec / 1065kg hi-spec
CVT gearbox
0-100km/h 14.5s

Fiesta 1.6 AT
Engine 1596cc dual VVT + VIS
output 122ps@6300rpm
torque 152Nm@4050rpm (website showing 148Nm ??)
kerb weight 1153kg hatchback / 1171kg sedan
6AT - strong & bigger gears 3.917 1st gear
0-100km/h forgot whether 9.9s or 9.7s

Saga relies on smaller engine & lighter weight for FC. Saga FC can't even beat Myvi 1.3VVT. How sure are you that Saga can beat Fiesta in city FC? Fiesta is 1 of the few B-segment (budget <100k) so far that could challenge Vios in real city driving. Preve Campro VVT is belt driven which is less effective like older generation Korean made when they first came up with VVT, all belt driven. Only Sonata NF Theta engine & later i30/Forte Gamma engine equipped with timing chain have proper FC comparable to Toyota.

This post has been edited by jayraptor: Jul 24 2013, 11:50 PM
jayraptor
post Jul 25 2013, 12:56 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
115 posts

Joined: Apr 2013
QUOTE(Gouki @ Jul 25 2013, 12:35 AM)
do not mislead ppl pls gayraptor. who says ppl dont change ATF earlier than 100k mileage? in fact most service booklets recommend customer to service at 50 or 60k intervals. if ppl's auto gearbox got prob you gonna compensate for what you said here in misleading the public? doh.gif

and pls dont make ppl laugh on your jokes, will ya? timing chain or timing belt driven engine will not determine the FC of the engine lar. lol! laugh.gif  doh.gif
*
You think Toyota so kind and generous to give timing chain? FYI, timing chain cost more expensive to produce and that chain alone cause Toyota to lose out millions out of 60k timing belt replacement income. They have no choice but to give timing chain as the VVT could only operate well with timing chain.

Toyota is known as reliable & durable, some uncle doesn't even bother to change ATF and their old Toyota gearbox still in 1 piece. FYI, conventional gearbox is mechanical and the ATF fluid is there to serve as lubricant. CVT gearbox ATF not only as lubricant but to allow the movable face to operate well.

CVT is made as more gears alternative when they could not produce 5AT with larger gears at that time. Today, gearbox manufacturers have no problem coming up with 6AT, 7AT and the latest 10AT gearbox with much larger gears than the Manual transmission counterpart.

Probably your self made turbocharged engine have to service everything early as the air intake & exhaust part pressure doesn't comply and inefficient choking the engine. Breath in too much air and can't fart out the air well causing excessive pressure trapped inside and more carbon buildup. Have to clean everything often therefore your maintenance cost go skyrocket.

There is no joke here, only you and those who could not accept reality and facts said so to prevent the knowledge from spreading. It's an unethical strategy called make facts look like made up with you bunch outnumbering that comment.
jayraptor
post Jul 26 2013, 10:06 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
115 posts

Joined: Apr 2013
QUOTE(Gouki @ Jul 25 2013, 01:07 AM)
omfg! what bullshit are you spewing out there now? it just show how much of an idiot and moron you are! LOL! with this post, it already good enough to prove you know nutz about cars and trying to act smart or a pro here. totally misleading forumers and the public with misguided information! if those mention above is consider as information to begin with.  doh.gif  laugh.gif
*


i didnt know timing chain can improve FC? only timing chain can make VVTi and VTEC to work? what happen to those timing belt engines in the 90s that can rev high on vvti and vtec? i didnt know CVT has "faces" to operate well. laugh.gif
and CVT is made as more gears alternative? hahahahaha
and the latest 10AT gearbox with much larger gears than the Manual transmission counterpart? laugh.gif doh.gif

and this really made my day laugh.gif
You actually don't know that valve timing works best with timing belt? That shows your lack of knowledge. If you lack the knowledge, go find out rather than blast blindly just because of your own personal reason out of hatred.

Timing chain does not improve FC. However, valve timing such as Toyota VVTi, Hyundai/Kia CVVT, Ford Ti-VCT, Mazda SVT do and they required timing chain to operate at optimum level.

Honda original VTEC is meant for high end hi-rev use, not meant for FC by the way. The way it works different from Toyota hydraulic VVT that was adopted by many carmakers today. Only the i-VTEC onwards, it was made for FC + hi-end performance.

This post has been edited by jayraptor: Jul 26 2013, 10:10 PM
jayraptor
post Jul 30 2013, 12:09 AM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
115 posts

Joined: Apr 2013
QUOTE(Gouki @ Jul 29 2013, 12:08 PM)
So replying to your own red comments in your posts, pls make up your mind. you are full of contradiction yourself. So VVT best work with timing belt or chain now? do not put words in my mouth. it is you who cant even make up your mind if VVT best work with belt or chain. u said chain, then u replied me again say belt? so who is the noob now? blind hatred? hatred of what? i never say a word in my previous comments i hate anything. its all your own assumptions and fantasies! LOL! laugh.gif

Not i said, you did. rolleyes.gif

with this paragraph in blue, just proved how "smart" you are. Just a tip for you, most VVT and VVL are activated by hydraulics. rolleyes.gif
*
If your car has VVT, example if it is Camry 2.0G '09.
1998cc with 1st generation VVT (low to mid end support only)
output 147ps@6000rpm
torque 190Nm@4000rpm
kerb weight 1450kg
city FC - 8.8km/L

If you had the intake VVT actuator removed and tune it to same tuning as above, the Camry will have the FC deteriorated to just 6-7km/L for tuning to that high plus with that weight. FYI, without VVT, the 2.0L could only tune to between 176-180Nm to get 9km/L with kerb weight of 1370kg. With 1450kg even tuned to 180Nm would experience serious underpowered and end up fuel guzzling as you need to rev harder. You think VVT for what? It's not just a name.

2nd generation full time VVT intake only could get hi-rev capability. With dual VVT, they could save FC, go hi-rev and even tune up higher to 165ps which is impossible without additional support or risk engine blown.
jayraptor
post Aug 2 2013, 10:39 PM

Getting Started
**
Junior Member
115 posts

Joined: Apr 2013
QUOTE(Gouki @ Jul 30 2013, 03:10 PM)
hahahaha, you never fail to amuse me!  laugh.gif  doh.gif
i wonder how you get all your facts from that. your own holy assumptions and fantasies again?  rclxms.gif
i know what is all this variable valve timing. stop assuming everyone know nothing and as if you know everything. pathetic lah you. you cant rebut my prev post and now come with another new bullshit.  yawn.gif


this paragraph just proved you are flawed. stop acting like you know it all. go learn up more on vvti and dual vvti before you start babbling like a lunatic again. rolleyes.gif
*
Do you own a car with VVT in the first place? If no, then what makes you qualify to talk crap here? If you only owned that old dinosaur Skyline GTR or old Subaru Impreza, that don't have VVT, only old wastegate turbocharger that draw in as much air and burn as much fuel as possible to get the extra power. If you are stuck at 90's tech, don't condemn new tech such as
VVT, GDI, etc without knowing what purpose they serve.

Seems like you are the 1 assuming here. If your car has VVT, kindly get video shoot of you removing it and throw it into fire furnace melting them to destruction. Then you'll find how fuel guzzling your car is to maintain at the same output/torque while with VVT.

This post has been edited by jayraptor: Aug 2 2013, 10:40 PM

 

Change to:
| Lo-Fi Version
0.0486sec    0.46    7 queries    GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 13th December 2025 - 09:31 PM