Well, OK, I won't be talking about cats...
These are my experiences with CVTs over the last 20 years (snowmobiles) and 6 years for autos.
CVT-slow?
CVT's have one overriding characteristic. They (can) keep the engine at or near peak power while the vehicle accelerates. Those of you who have ridden two-stroke motorcycles know just how slow an engine can be when it's below the power peak. Once a CVT-equipped vehicle reaches peak power RPM, it WILL out-accelerate other transmission types, vehicle weight and HP being equal. CVT's also do not suffer from between-gears slowdowns (which would make riding snowmobiles very impractical).
The SCCA had (has?) a D-sports class that had several very fast CVT equipped race cars. So you curmudgeons can stop with the rhetoric.
There is a downside hidden here. CVT's have a limited range of gear ratios, so your typical Subaru Impreza, for instance (I owned one for 6 years), which has an overall ratio intended to keep the RPM down at higher speeds, has a very tall "first gear" (the lowest ratio). This means you won't be launching a typical CVT auto from a stop. It's as if it starts out in second gear.
Data Point: My 2012 Subaru Impreza Sport Limited with a whopping 148 HP and tons of AWD weight, would accelerate 0-60 in 8.5 seconds (as measured with a GoPro, using the 30 frames-per-second to time, and the tach to determine launch, and a GPS-calibrated speedo to determine 60 MPH). For a car that heavy, that's not at all bad. HOWEVER, that extended to 9.8 seconds if the CVT was NOT in manual shift mode. In 'auto shift' mode, the computer kept revs at peak torque, not peak HP RPM. NO review of that time noted this discrepancy, and quoted the slower time (fake news!).
Driving a CVT on hilly terrain is a pleasure, as the RPM is genty varied to meet power needs. Same thing when strong headwinds came my way.
Economy. My Imp achieved three tanks of 38+ MPG US (hand-calculated). I commuted 40 miles on county roads, with speeds mosty 55 MPH, and stops every 2 to 6 miles. In normal driving, I got 34 MPG summer, and 27 winter. At the time, I thought this was fantastic.
Cold temps and the CVT. My Impreza took about 10 miles of driving to warm up its CVT oil. MPG was not good prior to that. My Current CX-5 can get 28+ MPG with short 2-miles-one-way trips. The Imp would have been around 23.
The CVT sound. Most reviewers say it drones. Well, it certainly attempts to stay at one RPM, which isn't really sporting, and the CVT steel drive chain also whines when the CVT is cold.
Reliability. NASIOC the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, had something like TWO CVT failures while I was a member. The Subie CVT is very reliable. It would have been very expensive to replace out of warranty, as only replacements were available.
Subaru dealers mostly told customers that CVT oil changes were not recommended. This may bite Subaru as time goes on.
I have owned a dozen motorcycles, 4 manual trans autos, and one Honda CUT with manual transmissions. I drove an 18-speed pop truck for a while (and could double clutch its 5 speed tranny with 3 speed transaxle). I almost always enjoyed shifting when *I* wanted the engine to shift. I found using the flappy-paddle shifters on the Imp to be an acceptable substitute. I very much missed being able to launch the car at peak HP RPM, although the several impromptu stoplight drags I ran didn't seem to care. (I don't know if the other drivers knew they were racing...haha)
I talked the wife into a 2012 Outback. It is SLOW. I hate it. I also owned a 2000 Outback with LSD, and a 5-speed manual. That is my most favorite owned car, which includes a 1996 CRX, a modded Mitsu Eclipse (that would spin all four tires in first gear!), an audi turbo awd a4 that I hate, and my current CX-5, by far the best engineered car I have owned.
I hope that this post will educate those of you with open minds. CVT's aren't inherently evil, and don't have to be boring, if you can 'shift' them at will.
These are my experiences with CVTs over the last 20 years (snowmobiles) and 6 years for autos.
CVT-slow?
CVT's have one overriding characteristic. They (can) keep the engine at or near peak power while the vehicle accelerates. Those of you who have ridden two-stroke motorcycles know just how slow an engine can be when it's below the power peak. Once a CVT-equipped vehicle reaches peak power RPM, it WILL out-accelerate other transmission types, vehicle weight and HP being equal. CVT's also do not suffer from between-gears slowdowns (which would make riding snowmobiles very impractical).
The SCCA had (has?) a D-sports class that had several very fast CVT equipped race cars. So you curmudgeons can stop with the rhetoric.
There is a downside hidden here. CVT's have a limited range of gear ratios, so your typical Subaru Impreza, for instance (I owned one for 6 years), which has an overall ratio intended to keep the RPM down at higher speeds, has a very tall "first gear" (the lowest ratio). This means you won't be launching a typical CVT auto from a stop. It's as if it starts out in second gear.
Data Point: My 2012 Subaru Impreza Sport Limited with a whopping 148 HP and tons of AWD weight, would accelerate 0-60 in 8.5 seconds (as measured with a GoPro, using the 30 frames-per-second to time, and the tach to determine launch, and a GPS-calibrated speedo to determine 60 MPH). For a car that heavy, that's not at all bad. HOWEVER, that extended to 9.8 seconds if the CVT was NOT in manual shift mode. In 'auto shift' mode, the computer kept revs at peak torque, not peak HP RPM. NO review of that time noted this discrepancy, and quoted the slower time (fake news!).
Driving a CVT on hilly terrain is a pleasure, as the RPM is genty varied to meet power needs. Same thing when strong headwinds came my way.
Economy. My Imp achieved three tanks of 38+ MPG US (hand-calculated). I commuted 40 miles on county roads, with speeds mosty 55 MPH, and stops every 2 to 6 miles. In normal driving, I got 34 MPG summer, and 27 winter. At the time, I thought this was fantastic.
Cold temps and the CVT. My Impreza took about 10 miles of driving to warm up its CVT oil. MPG was not good prior to that. My Current CX-5 can get 28+ MPG with short 2-miles-one-way trips. The Imp would have been around 23.
The CVT sound. Most reviewers say it drones. Well, it certainly attempts to stay at one RPM, which isn't really sporting, and the CVT steel drive chain also whines when the CVT is cold.
Reliability. NASIOC the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, had something like TWO CVT failures while I was a member. The Subie CVT is very reliable. It would have been very expensive to replace out of warranty, as only replacements were available.
Subaru dealers mostly told customers that CVT oil changes were not recommended. This may bite Subaru as time goes on.
I have owned a dozen motorcycles, 4 manual trans autos, and one Honda CUT with manual transmissions. I drove an 18-speed pop truck for a while (and could double clutch its 5 speed tranny with 3 speed transaxle). I almost always enjoyed shifting when *I* wanted the engine to shift. I found using the flappy-paddle shifters on the Imp to be an acceptable substitute. I very much missed being able to launch the car at peak HP RPM, although the several impromptu stoplight drags I ran didn't seem to care. (I don't know if the other drivers knew they were racing...haha)
I talked the wife into a 2012 Outback. It is SLOW. I hate it. I also owned a 2000 Outback with LSD, and a 5-speed manual. That is my most favorite owned car, which includes a 1996 CRX, a modded Mitsu Eclipse (that would spin all four tires in first gear!), an audi turbo awd a4 that I hate, and my current CX-5, by far the best engineered car I have owned.
I hope that this post will educate those of you with open minds. CVT's aren't inherently evil, and don't have to be boring, if you can 'shift' them at will.
