CVTs are everywhere - have we finally accepted their reliability? (2009, automatic gear)

[PacoMartin]

Originally Posted by StealthRabbit

Hope we are not accepting a 'throw-away' vehicle @ 100k miles, hopefully they could be incinerated for power recovery. I expect 500k minimum miles from my cars,

These are 3 and 4 cylinder cars with CVT and no paddle shifters for sale in 2022. I've also indicated displacement in liters and aspiration. I doubt that any of these cars will run for 500k minimum miles.

My father bought an early 2010 Suzuki with CVT and it dutifully ran for 103K miles and we had to sell it to Carvana on the advice of two mechanics who said it was not worth fixing.

Do you think affordable cars like this should not be for sale?
====================================
Mitsubishi Motors Corporation 3
Mirage 1.2 Naturally Aspirated
Mirage G4 1.2 Naturally Aspirated

Ford 4
Escape Awd Hev 2.5 Naturally Aspirated
Escape Fwd Hev 2.5 Naturally Aspirated
Maverick Hev Fwd 2.5 Naturally Aspirated

Honda 4
Accord 1.5 Turbocharged & 2.0 Naturally Aspirated
Accord Sport/Touring 2.0 Naturally Aspirated
Civic 4dr 1.5 Turbocharged & 2.0 Naturally Aspirated
Civic 5dr 1.5 Turbocharged & 2.0 Naturally Aspirated
CR-V Awd 1.5 Turbocharged & 2.0 Naturally Aspirated
CR-V Fwd 1.5 Turbocharged
HR-V Awd 1.8 Naturally Aspirated
HR-V Fwd 1.8 Naturally Aspirated
Insight 1.5 Naturally Aspirated
Insight Touring 1.5 Naturally Aspirated

Kia 4
Forte 2.0 Naturally Aspirated
Forte Fe 2.0 Naturally Aspirated
Soul 2.0 Naturally Aspirated
Soul Eco Dynamics 2.0 Naturally Aspirated

Nissan 4
Altima 2.5 Naturally Aspirated
Altima Awd 2.5 Naturally Aspirated
Altima Awd SR/Platinum 2.5 Naturally Aspirated
Altima SR 2.5 Naturally Aspirated
Altima SV/SL 2.5 Naturally Aspirated
Kicks 1.6 Naturally Aspirated
Sentra 2.0 Naturally Aspirated
Sentra SR 2.0 Naturally Aspirated
Versa 1.6 Naturally Aspirated

Toyota 4
Corolla 1.8 Naturally Aspirated
Corolla Hybrid 1.8 Naturally Aspirated
Corolla XLE 1.8 Naturally Aspirated
Prius 1.8 Naturally Aspirated
Prius Awd 1.8 Naturally Aspirated
Prius Eco 1.8 Naturally Aspirated

[Universe93B]

Originally Posted by Shark01

No, do not trust them…..auto companies use them just to save money, and just want them to make it out of the warranty period.

Is the CVT one of them? Because automakers might do many things that may not make it out of the warranty period. But I’m trying to find out about the cvt - spoke with someone who has a Honda covid with a cvt and has 189k miles. No issues with standard maintenance.

Looks like they have become mainstream with “regular” cars.

[PacoMartin]

Originally Posted by StealthRabbit

I would suspect a dealer or transmission repair shop to recommend the most profitable for them. Cheap to manufacture, must be replaced, not repaired, will fail immediately after warranty period. So the provided info seems right on.

Some reports I have read said the idea that CVT is inexpensive to the automaker is false. They cost as much as a typical 7 speed automatic transmission. The paddle shifters do increase the cost somewhat.

There is a table of transmission costs for MY2020 in the annual EPA "Automotive Trends" report. Manual transmission 5 speeds MT5 is the cheapest transmission, and is 19% cheaper than Manual transmission 6 speeds MT6.

Automatic Transmission is AT, Dual clutch transmission is DCT, and continuous variable transmission is CVT. There is further definition for Level 2 L2 and Level 3 L3 for additional features. CVT is not less expensive than other options.

• $1,564 MT5
• $1,928 MT6
• $2,227 MT7
• $2,085 AT5
• $2,063 AT6
• $2,331 AT6L2
• $2,299 AT7L2
• $2,195 AT8
• $2,442 AT8L2
• $2,649 AT8L3
• $2,546 AT9L2
• $2,546 AT10L2
• $2,753 AT10L3
• $2,116 DCT6
• $2,654 DCT8
• $2,333 CVT
• $2,519 CVTL2

[28173]

Originally Posted by WRM20

Why do you dislike CVTs? What about them do you find annoying?



Car makers are moving to CVTs because they are more efficient with an added benefit of taking up less space than a 10 speed automatic transmission that has a lot more parts. A 10 speed automatic needs 4 planetary gear sets. A CVT has two variable pulleys and a belt.

rubber band like response

[RayinAK]

Originally Posted by WRM20

Why do you dislike CVTs? What about them do you find annoying?



Car makers are moving to CVTs because they are more efficient with an added benefit of taking up less space than a 10 speed automatic transmission that has a lot more parts. A 10 speed automatic needs 4 planetary gear sets. A CVT has two variable pulleys and a belt.

CVT's allows the engine to consume less fuel, but it doesn't mean that they are more efficient. They are cheaper than automatic transmissions with oil-immersed gears, but weaker. Some of the Subaru engines aren't very powerful and not very fuel efficient, but coupled to a CVT they work quite well for the average family members who don't worry about things like transmission shifting performance and things like that; they just want to "reliably" go from point A to point B. Some others enjoy paddle shifting, and that is fine too. Subaru automobiles with automatic and manual transmissions are fine too if that is what one wants or needs.

But for an automobile maker, a CVT does its job relatively well, and is cheaper to build. Automobile makers aren't putting a CVT in a car just for the benefit of the "buyer," but to the benefit of the shareholders. No product out there becomes cheaper form year to year, so the industry has to figure ways to reduce production costs, while maintaining net profits.

These are the F1 transmissions (for those what want to know about paddle-shifting and things like that in Formula 1):
https://www.sportskeeda.com/f1/f1-tr...stem-explained

[StealthRabbit]

Originally Posted by PacoMartin

These are 3 and 4 cylinder cars with CVT and no paddle shifters for sale in 2022....

....

Do you think affordable cars like this should not be for sale?
====================================
...

Just give us a real transmission and a real engine (Diesel preferred)

Crank windows and manual locks are fine too.'

(Of course a manufacturer would rather sell a disposable car, rather than one that will give dutiful service for a few hundred thousand miles)

We (Humankind) do not need any more disposable products. It ties up a lot of resources, and adds tremendously to our ecological footprint to keep replacing disposable products. (One will do)

How many computer printers have you had to buy? (Hopefully none!) go paperless!
There are mountains of plastics and electronics and tires...

Do we need more? (I vote not!)

I seriously doubt CVT's are more expensive for manufacturers, or they wouldn't be using them (Unless it Guarantees them a fresh $20,000 sell every 100,000 miles). Manual tranny and clutch is a fine and proven alternative. For 110+ yrs

[OutdoorLover]

"In 1993 Williams ruled the Formula 1 with a high tech car the FW15C. Williams made use of e.g. active suspension controlled by computer setting it up perfectly for every corner. Williams was a leap ahead of the competition and was also making progress on other areas such as the transmission. Together with Van Doorne’s Transmissie Williams was working on the development of Continously Variable Transmission. The push belt CVT offered the advantage of allowing the engine at peak engine capacity. This leaded to a special sound as there was no engine rev. drop during cornering. Also it was a new experience for the driver. At that time David Coulthard was the driver. The main advantage of the CVT was that it was faster than the auto shift transmission. Unfortunately the new technology was banned before it could be raced in Formula 1, because it was too good and would result even more seconds of Williams racing ahead of competition. However CVT was banned in Formula 1. It proofed CVT Pushbelt technology is suitable for the higher torques. Next the 30 mm belt was developed resulting into the production of the 30/12 belt suitable for torque levels up to 350 Nm."



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P0lWdUXwVJs

[StealthRabbit]

Originally Posted by OutdoorLover

"In 1993 Williams ruled the Formula 1 with a high tech car the FW15C. Williams ...was also making progress on other areas such as the transmission. Together with Van Doorne’s Transmissie Williams was working on the development of Continously Variable Transmission. .... Next the 30 mm belt was developed resulting into the production of the 30/12 belt suitable for torque levels up to 350 Nm."
.

How often do F1 cars get their Belts and trannies changed? (Likely every race)

That's extremely compatible with ""CVTs are everywhere - have we finally accepted their reliability?""

How many CVT drivers here are using a Van Dorn CVT?
How many CVT drivers have been getting their belts changed every 500 miles?

A Great product for Joe Average.

[RayinAK]

Pros and cons of CVT's?
https://advancedtransmission.com/cvt...pros-and-cons/

This one lists 15 pros and cons, one of which is the lower towing capacity of CVT's (for those interested). I am not trying to imply that CVT's are worst than automatic transmissions that have oil-immersed gears, just pointing out some of the pros and cons of both CVT's and automatic transmissions. You be the judge based on what you want or need:
https://greengarageblog.org/15-cvt-t...-pros-and-cons

[OutdoorLover]

Originally Posted by RayinAK

Pros and cons of CVT's?
https://advancedtransmission.com/cvt...pros-and-cons/

This one lists 15 pros and cons, one of which is the lower towing capacity of CVT's (for those interested). I am not trying to imply that CVT's are worst than automatic transmissions that have oil-immersed gears, just pointing out some of the pros and cons for both CVT's and automatic transmissions. You be the judge based on what you want or need:
https://greengarageblog.org/15-cvt-t...-pros-and-cons

I had a CVT, and it was fine. I see a lot of people ranting about CVTs here and on the web, but I haven't seen anyone who has some credentials saying that CVTs are actually less reliable than conventional automatics, and/or anyone showing any actual rigorous data.

These guys say "CVT transmissions have been shown to improve fuel efficiency and are typically more dependable than typical automatic gearboxes."... these guys say "In general, CVTs are no more or less reliable than traditional automatic transmissions. "

A lot of the people here who say they're unreliable, have never had a failure with a CVT, have never even owned a vehicle with one, and they seem to just repeat what they hear, and I get that same feeling about a lot of the web postings - not based on much. It may be because I am a scientist, but I want more than "people are saying"... especially when my own experience with a CVT showed no issues, none.