Acceleration -- CVT vs auto

[Mkl22]

3 minutes ago, Ichibawa said:

A golf buggy uses CVT. CVT systems are operated by 2 pulleys which changes its ratio at different speed. The weakest link here is always the belt (Rubber or metal) over time it will elongate and start to slip. With discipline periodic maintenance you can still get it to last 10 years. 

There is no best gearbox in the world as its just an additional component for the car owner to take care, maintain or splurge money on. Best is still direct drive. 

there was a post in MCF where a toyota allion hit 400k km plus before the gearbox died. thus cvt doesnt mean its weaker. in the early days of the subaru justy maybe yes. not 30years later.

[DK3410]

21 minutes ago, Mkl22 said:

disagree that the conventional torque converter auto is complex. it is the least complex of all the auto boxes.

It really depends.

Mechanically, the old-school (like those found in cars in the 1990s) torque converters were simpler. But newer "Automatics" have been re-designed to reduce weight, give it more "direct feel", faster shifts, and THESE are mechanically more complex these days than even a DCT. Though I agree with you that the basic engineering premise is the same.

A good example is the BMW ZF transmission.

Even Mazda's "Skyactiv" transmission is a fairly extensively modified version of the traditional Auto.

[inlinesix]

2 hours ago, Toeknee_33 said:

I guess it depends on the tuning of the CVT gearbox and the engine power/torque.

CVT + low-powered car = struggle

My 340bhp hybrid e-CVT is hair-trigger quick, especially in sports mode, cos there is no need for GB to drop gear, and there is no interruption to the relentless acceleration cos there is no gears to change.

For your car, electric motor is build into GB which resulted in fast acceleration from standstill. 

[Toeknee_33]

2 hours ago, inlinesix said:

For your car, electric motor is build into GB which resulted in fast acceleration from standstill. 

Agree about the initial acceleration from standstill, but at higher speeds, say from 100kmh to 160kmh, surely the small electric motor do not play such a big role.

[Rootkie]

Cvt vs auto probably doesn't matter much in everyday driving, bread n butter cars You will probably miss the gear changes in exchange for a very smooth linear acceleration which is not necessarily a bad thing. Maybe TS should look more into the reliability of the gb. Best is go for a test drive.

[markw12]

8 hours ago, Mkl22 said:

there was a post in MCF where a toyota allion hit 400k km plus before the gearbox died. thus cvt doesnt mean its weaker. in the early days of the subaru justy maybe yes. not 30years later.

i'm driving an axio with 321k km, gb's still strong hopefully can cross 400k mark! haha

[ER-3682]

9 hours ago, DK3410 said:

It really depends.

Mechanically, the old-school (like those found in cars in the 1990s) torque converters were simpler. But newer "Automatics" have been re-designed to reduce weight, give it more "direct feel", faster shifts, and THESE are mechanically more complex these days than even a DCT. Though I agree with you that the basic engineering premise is the same.

A good example is the BMW ZF transmission.

Even Mazda's "Skyactiv" transmission is a fairly extensively modified version of the traditional Auto.

Agreed,currently i driving the BMW M240i & Mazda 6...2.5...both very good Gearbox.

[Didu]

Never miss a CVT oil change, unless you want it to up lorry sooner.

[Eaststargrouper]

Nowadays where still got cars cannot overtake oil tankers on highways? Your mindsets think is 50 years ago. Every time I drive up north to Malaysia, saw lots of Malaysia made small cars like myvi , proton, overtaking don’t say lorry or oil tankers, even MPV and SUV with ease.

Thus, I don’t think any passenger cars available for sales in Singapore nowadays just because the engine is mated to CVT or Auto will make a major difference in the scenario you mentioned

[RogerNg_185295]

13 hours ago, markw12 said:

i'm driving an axio with 321k km, gb's still strong hopefully can cross 400k mark! haha

Take a photo of your mileage. 

[markw12]

7 hours ago, RogerNg_185295 said:

Take a photo of your mileage. 

[markw12]

Just now, markw12 said:

Ops it's 313k not 321k

[RogerNg_185295]

1 minute ago, markw12 said:

Nowadays seldom see any cars with such high mileage 

[markw12]

7 minutes ago, RogerNg_185295 said:

Nowadays seldom see any cars with such high mileage 

Struggling to get better f/c with my Axio lol

[ER-3682]

30 minutes ago, RogerNg_185295 said:

Nowadays seldom see any cars with such high mileage 

Have,those doing Grab...

[Fuelsaver]

On 12/19/2019 at 11:09 AM, Kklim said:

Don't cheong on the road but sometimes need to pass two oil tankers one after the other 😆

If CVT has manual mode will be ok. In fact, I've driven Mitsubishi Colt Plus turbo paired with CVT on auto mode and floored gas pedal, it did kick down and pick up speed. I liked how the CVT was optimizing the rpm and peak torque at 2.5k rpm where I could just hold the gas pedal at that position while watching my car pulled away from other cars. Anyway, do test drive to find out if Hyundai's CVT is to your preference.

[Fuelsaver]

On 12/19/2019 at 11:21 PM, Apple-Tree said:

I got that figure out long long ago.  No matter how I love my ride.  When 10 years come, Pipe-piper like me will demand my PARF back from garment.  It is an entitlement lor.

And I will buy a newer and better car lor.

CVT is actually OK laaa, but please please please, when driving a CVT car, please please please DO NOT put MUGEN sticker lor. My Kia Carens U2 VGT with Intercooler and Dual Clutch 7s, I also no put MUGEN lor.......

He put NISMO or N 🤭

[Ct3833]

On 12/21/2019 at 3:25 PM, markw12 said:

Wah respect respect, haha. 321 or 321 does not make any diff. I suppose you are quite a gentle driver ?