CVT's

[2o6]

How do you feel about CVT's?

[GoCougs]

Nah, they didn't (or haven't) turned into the MPG and performance boon they could be. Need wider ratio range and more efficient mechanicals.

[CJ]

No.  The new Accord gets close to being as good as a traditional automatic, but I'd still prefer a traditional automativ.

[2o6]

I'm saying Yes; mostly because I am not fond of these automatics with too many speeds. They never know what gear to be in.


Granted, CVT's have their issues too, but I actually love the smoothness of a CVT. The gear spread issue seems to be an issue, but companies like Nissan seem to be getting around it, (Versa has a 2-speed at the end of the CVT).

[Raza]

No.  Had one for a couple of days.  Droning on and on and getting no power, no manual control.  Just awful.  The worst kind of automatic. 

[2o6]

No.  Had one for a couple of days.  Droning on and on and getting no power, no manual control.  Just awful.  The worst kind of automatic.  

I never understood the "droning" issue; regular automatics hold the engine note when under a constant load. And the "no power" sensation is due to the fact that there's no shift shock. They're generally the same performance as a traditional automatic.


I hate CVT's that fake shift points. That is a totally stupid idea.

[Cookie Monster]

No. I prefer manuals.

[2o6]

No. I prefer manuals.

I mean, in comparison to other types of automatic transmissions. It's a little stupid to throw a tradtional 5-speed in the mix.

[Speed_Racer]

It depends on the tuning. My parents SX4 has the CVT. It does good things for gas mileage (31 combined) but "shifts" to the fuel saving ratio at 15 mph. So it always feels and sounds like its bogging. Accelerating always requires planning ahead.

Push pedal, computer thinks about what ratio to use, engine speed increases, then finally it rubber bands forward until you it the speed you want. If you literally don't start this process 5 sec before you want to pass someone, you will miss the opportunity. Frustrating.

At the same time, I owned a Polaris ATV with a CVT and it was awesome. Quick response and always in its powerband.

But I don't think I'll ever own a cvt car. I'm not patient enough

[SVT666]

I owned one for 3 years and it took some getting used to, but I didn't like the sensations.  Acceleration was like a snowmobile and I didn't like it at all.  I did like that the speed absolutely never changed going up and down hills with cruise control on because it just varied the ratio to keep the speed without that annoying kick down automatics do.  But, other than that, there was no benefit.

[2o6]

It depends on the tuning. My parents SX4 has the CVT. It does good things for gas mileage (31 combined) but "shifts" to the fuel saving ratio at 15 mph. So it always feels and sounds like its bogging. Accelerating always requires planning ahead.

Push pedal, computer thinks about what ratio to use, engine speed increases, then finally it rubber bands forward until you it the speed you want. If you literally don't start this process 5 sec before you want to pass someone, you will miss the opportunity. Frustrating.

At the same time, I owned a Polaris ATV with a CVT and it was awesome. Quick response and always in its powerband.

But I don't think I'll ever own a cvt car. I'm not patient enough

Yeah, all CVT's aren't created equal (like all DSG's and traditional automatics). The one in the Dodge/Mitsubishi products sucks balls.


The Nissan ones are generally great.

[2o6]

I think they're great, but obviously they're not all created equal. I've heard they're developing them for large trucks (tractor-trailers) and that sounds like a brilliant idea. Ideally, it'll always be in the meat of the powerband. Providing good performance and economy.

[ifcar]

They're great for people who won't be flooring the throttle regularly, because then you don't feel the droning sensation. This works well with bigger engines in part because you don't have to work them hard routinely and in part because they often sound better, like the Nissan V6.

Where they're awful is in a car that's wheezy and slow, because the lack of shifting just accentuates that.

[68_427]

Our snowmobile works fine.

[Raza]

I never understood the "droning" issue; regular automatics hold the engine note when under a constant load. And the "no power" sensation is due to the fact that there's no shift shock. They're generally the same performance as a traditional automatic.


I hate CVT's that fake shift points. That is a totally stupid idea.

It was also a Sentra, so that definitely added to the no power issue.  There was no power.  You had to floor that thing everywhere just to get around.

But traditional automatics don't drone like that.  Revs increase and the sound changes, then it changes up as you let off and the revs go down and are quiet again. 

[MX793]

My first exposure was on snowmobiles when I was a kid (and before they ever started using them in mainstream autos).  Didn't care for them in that application, and based on my limited experience with them in automobiles, I'd prefer a fixed number of cogs there as well.

[Laconian]

Nasty. They totally sap the soul of a car. They make the engine moan low and long, like the undead.

0mph... uHHHhhhhhhhhhhhhHHHHhhhhhhhh.. 60mph

[MrH]

The inherent slipping nature of them doesn't sit well with me.  A big fat NO.

[Laconian]

I only like the Prius' CVT, because it's elegant, efficient, and so perfectly suited to hybrid applications.

[2o6]

I would take a CVT over a 10 speed automatic.

[MrH]

I would take a CVT over a 10 speed automatic.

Because there are so many cars out there with 10 speed automatics...

I wonder what the hell is going through your mind when you post things like this.

[2o6]

Because there are so many cars out there with 10 speed automatics...

I wonder what the hell is going through your mind when you post things like this.

Last time I checked, Chrysler is developing 9 and 10ATs for FWD applications.




I dont particurally care for the 6AT in the Chevy Cruze; it never knows what gear to select. I cant picture that level of indecisiveness coupled with four more gears to choose from.

[Laconian]

Aside from cost and complexity, what's wrong with more speeds? You don't have to go through each one in sequence.

[Cookie Monster]

Aside from cost and complexity, what's wrong with more speeds? You don't have to go through each one in sequence.

Having more speeds = having a greater requirement for good shift programming, something automakers seem to struggle with even with 6-7 speed autos.

[Secret Chimp]

The ones I've tried in Fords seem to work pretty well. However I'm completely unconvinced about their longevity compared to traditional automatics.

[S204STi]

I think they have their uses.  Good for runabouts, possibly good for heavy vehicles and trucks, but not so much for performance cars or luxo-barges.

[Raza]

 


Last time I checked, Chrysler is developing 9 and 10ATs for FWD applications.




I dont particurally care for the 6AT in the Chevy Cruze; it never knows what gear to select. I cant picture that level of indecisiveness coupled with four more gears to choose from.

My car has six gears and I always know what gear to put it in. Most 6 speed autos are fine.

[thewizard16]

I like the CVT in the Altimas well enough. It makes a car with mediocre power feel quicker to respond and it was really smooth overall. It seems like they would get a bit of a mileage edge out of them though, and I'm not sure that they do. In the Versa however it was just a volume pedal. Press down more, get more noise. Your rate of speed increase remains low.

[sportyaccordy]

I am not sure if the Versa I drove had it. PRetty sure it had a 4AT. In any case not crazy about em. Had one in a 2.5 Altima. Whole car including transmission sucked.

[2o6]

I am not sure if the Versa I drove had it. PRetty sure it had a 4AT. In any case not crazy about em. Had one in a 2.5 Altima. Whole car including transmission sucked.

Some older models have 4-speeds, some have CVT's. The new ugly sedan is CVT only.