Vehicles with CVT Transmission

[Mikeyeo]

Having read many postings from forumers that vehicles with CVT transmission have the perception of being slow in pick-up such as the Mirsubishi Lancer, I came across an article on CVT and wish to share some light with forumers.

 

What is CVT?

 

CVT (Continuous Variable Transmission) provides the driver with more power, better fuel economy and a smoother driving experience when compared to a traditional automatic transmission. No wonder many car manufacturers like Nissan and Honda are replacing their vehicles

[Chickensoup]

Having read many postings from forumers that vehicles with CVT transmission have the perception of being slow in pick-up such as the Mirsubishi Lancer, I came across an article on CVT and wish to share some light with forumers.

 

What is CVT?

 

CVT (Continuous Variable Transmission) provides the driver with more power, better fuel economy and a smoother driving experience when compared to a traditional automatic transmission. No wonder many car manufacturers like Nissan and Honda are replacing their vehicles

[Sgnick]

Example, Toyota Sienta, 1.5L with CVT, at 100kmph, RPM is 2K.

 

BTW, if u suddenly floor the pedal, there is a rubberband effect for CVT, a very slight delay followed by a sudden surge in acceleration. I think delay also partly due to e-throttle.

[Watwheels]

Must see what engine the CVT gearbox is mated to and the transmission programming.

 

If the CVT is mated with a big CC with TC like in an Audi, I dun think the acceleration will be sluggish.

 

If mated to a 1.5L engine like the big/heavy bodied Lancer EX, common sense will tell you it's not a performer which the CVT is not at fault.

 

[Ncss]

CVT is unable to take high torque and high power. Generally used in smaller engines. Those 1st Generation CVT used in Subaru Justy, the metal belt always get roasted.

 

OIC... I keep wondering why mercedes uses CVT for their smaller A/B-class but not in their big brother E/S-class...

[Iziz]

CVT is unable to take high torque and high power. Generally used in smaller engines. Those 1st Generation CVT used in Subaru Justy, the metal belt always get roasted.

 

Main killer of CVT is torque, not horsepower.

 

Agree with bro Watwheels, u need higher CC for CVT transmission in order not to have to sluggish effect. Personally I think at least a 2L.

[Chickensoup]

OIC... I keep wondering why mercedes uses CVT for their smaller A/B-class but not in their big brother E/S-class...

CVT long term reliability is still questionable.

 

Merc A200T is CVT 193bhp/280Nm torque and does 0-100km/h in 7.3 sec. That is not slow. Surely their E and S class can use also but don't know why. My guess is the Bell housing for the transmission. A/B class engines are new design. They are not the same blcok as the C/E/S which dates back 20 years in the making.

 

Nissan 3.5L engines are at times coupled with CVT also.

 

The design of CVT is supposed to be very efficient.

[Watwheels]

CVT long term reliability is still questionable.

 

Merc A200T is CVT 193bhp/280Nm torque and does 0-100km/h in 7.3 sec. That is not slow. Surely their E and S class can use also but don't know why. My guess is the Bell housing for the transmission. A/B class engines are new design. They are not the same blcok as the C/E/S which dates back 20 years in the making.

 

Nissan 3.5L engines are at times coupled with CVT also.

 

The design of CVT is supposed to be very efficient.

 

On the contrary CVT is very reliable. Problem is that the power delivery is "too smooth" that you hardly feel the power coming from the engine.

 

Taken from wiki

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuously_variable_transmission#History

 

Advantages

 

* CVTs can compensate for changing vehicle speeds, allowing the engine speed to remain at its level of peak efficiency. This improves fuel economy and by effect, exhaust emissions.

 

* CVTs operate smoothly since there are no gear changes which cause sudden jerks.

 

* Very few problems have been reported with the CVT transmission, lowering the cost of ownership.[citation needed]

 

* There are 25% fewer moving parts to a CVT transmission.[citation needed]

 

* They are also cheaper, but still expensive to repair.[citation needed]

 

* The fluids do not have to be changed as often as in an automatic transmission.[citation needed]

 

Disadvantages

 

* CVTs operate smoothly and efficiently, without spending energy to jerk the car during a shift. This can give a perception of low power, because many drivers expect a jerk when they begin to move the vehicle. However, the expected jerk of a non-CVT can be emulated by CVT control software, thus eliminating this marketing problem.[citation needed]

 

* Since the CVT keeps the engine turning at constant RPM over a wide range of vehicle speeds, pressing on the accelerator pedal will make the car move faster but doesn't change the sound coming from the engine as much as a conventional automatic transmission gear-shift. This confuses some drivers and, again, leads to an impression of a lack of power. This can be considered a disadvantage if the driver desires to hear the engine change tone.

 

* CVT torque-handling capability is limited by the strength of their transmission medium (usually a belt or chain), and by their ability to withstand friction wear between torque source and transmission medium (in friction-driven CVTs). CVTs in production prior to 2005 are predominantly belt- or chain-driven and therefore typically limited to low-powered cars and other light-duty applications. Units using advanced lubricants, however, have been proven to support any amount of torque in production vehicles, including that used for buses, heavy trucks, and earth-moving equipment.

Edited January 14, 2009 by Watwheels

[Meowmeow9211]

 

I used own a 1998 Honda Civic using the CTV liked it was mentioned "Main killer of CVT is torque, not horsepower" . Honda is well known for it's powerful engines but when my 98 civic combined with the CVT it made the car runs a bit liked rubber bent effects . On a few occasions when moving out from a stand still out at Singapore and Malaysia small roads to the main road situations. Most of times I couldn't speed up in time becaused of this rubberish effect . The car enigine is roaring but the car just wasn't moving along with the roaring sound of the engine. That was when I was using the 'Normal' mode for normal driving imagine if I were to use the "Economic" mode (which the pick up speed would be worst) , I will don't know kenan bang how many time liao from behind. If I were to use the "Sport" mode, the fuel needle will drop liked 1/4 from my place in the East to the city, thus still considering CTV low F.C ? The CTV is really super smooth when it is "so-called" changing it's "Gears" but it is at some real situation where you need instant power that this CVT in smaller C.C cars don't meet the expectation for the general drivers. From then my next few cars down the years, I tried to avoid using CTV anymore.

 

These are just my personel feeling about my 1998 Honda Civic which was using the CTV back then.

 

[Akula]

Used to have all the std perception of CVTs, but after driving friend's Estima and missus's Vellfire find that its very efficient w/o the laggy effect.

Cruising at 90kmh is around 1700rpm. Very quiet. stepping a little more will have the rpm going up to abt 2000+.

Think a modern CVT have mostly eradicated the few weaknesses.

Example of good CVTs can be found in, Nissan, Audi, Toyota, Mercedes etc.....

[Shull]

my civic ES8..1.5L VTEC engine mated to CVT tranny..crusing on NSH 140kmh@3000-3500rpm..

 

FC wise, 50:50 highway:normal, i can get min 13km/l on normal driving pattern..

 

reliability? 7yrs car liao..no prob with the tranny..

[Enduro25]

for my opinion ,i now driving an auto DOHC(no cvt) and compared to auto with CVT..there is a pro and cons..without CVT u can notice tat ur pick up can react faster than CVT,CVT is gd when u drive ur car at crusing spd..but in terms of FC,i believe tat car wif CVT obtain gd FC as compared to those w/o CVT

[Kxbc]

Cruising at 90kmh is around 1700rpm. Very quiet. stepping a little more will have the rpm going up to abt 2000+.

That's quite true. My RPM seldom more than 2k, can count on one hand. It's usually in the region of 1.5k for normal city driving and 2k for HW driving 90km/hr.

 

Oh, I also using a CVT transmission but car not torquey.

[DarkLord]

my civic ES8..1.5L VTEC engine mated to CVT tranny..crusing on NSH 140kmh@3000-3500rpm..

 

FC wise, 50:50 highway:normal, i can get min 13km/l on normal driving pattern..

 

reliability? 7yrs car liao..no prob with the tranny..

 

Mine 1.5L MIVEC engine mated to CVT.. Cruising at 120km/H at 2000rpm. FC less than 10km/L. This CVT has been proven to take up to more than 400nm torque without problems.

[Kelpie]

Having read many postings from forumers that vehicles with CVT transmission have the perception of being slow in pick-up such as the Mirsubishi Lancer, I came across an article on CVT and wish to share some light with forumers.

 

What is CVT?

 

CVT (Continuous Variable Transmission) provides the driver with more power, better fuel economy and a smoother driving experience when compared to a traditional automatic transmission. No wonder many car manufacturers like Nissan and Honda are replacing their vehicles

[Triston77]

my civic ES8..1.5L VTEC engine mated to CVT tranny..crusing on NSH 140kmh@3000-3500rpm..

 

FC wise, 50:50 highway:normal, i can get min 13km/l on normal driving pattern..

 

reliability? 7yrs car liao..no prob with the tranny..

 

you are one lucky guy. in the 4 years that i had my ES8...i think i've changed the starter clutch at least 3 times.

 

finally gave up and sold the car off. no more CVTs for me until the technology has really been tested and proven..or..when car makers face out traditional gearboxes.

 

correct me if i'm wrong...but if CVT gearboxes are really that great, shouldn't we see carmakers moving in that direction? instead of coming up with DSG..PDK and whatever with more gear ratios?

[Kelpie]

you are one lucky guy. in the 4 years that i had my ES8...i think i've changed the starter clutch at least 3 times.

 

finally gave up and sold the car off. no more CVTs for me until the technology has really been tested and proven..or..when car makers face out traditional gearboxes.

 

correct me if i'm wrong...but if CVT gearboxes are really that great, shouldn't we see carmakers moving in that direction? instead of coming up with DSG..PDK and whatever with more gear ratios?

 

I think only Nissan is the faithful follower of CVT. I once read from a magazine that they are slow into Hybrid engine among their peers becase they felt that CVT is a more fuel economical approach in reducing fuel consumption. Hybrid costs more to build and through the manufacturing process emits more waste. Theortically, CVT is a great concept but is mostly applied to bread and butter cars with the emphasis on comfort.

 

Regards,

 

Regards,

[Yuan]

I am driving one with CVT. Honestly, I don't find the pick up slow. Or maybe I am a slow driver.

 

I would not floor my accelerator or depress hard to move fast or increase speed. I just depress and let go and then depgress on the accelerator pedal again.