|
No problem with my Fiat Punto, 40,000 miles before I sold it, although the change points were not always what I would have chosen. Changes were smooth and otherwise probably better than the alternative Formula 1-type change that I could also enagage. They must be simpler boxes that conventional automatics so maybe easier to maintain.
|
|
If it is a genuine CVT,there won't be any gearchanges!!
|
|
True, should have explained I meant that the ratio chosen sometimes seemed to cause the engine to labour slightly.
|
|
|
|
Unlike a "conventional" automatic gearbox, a Multitronic gearbox does not have a torque converter between the engine and gearbox. Instead it has a clutch (like a manual gearbox). >>
OK. The Qashqai has a torque converter. IIRC, the problem with some of the Volvo CVTs was that there was a clutch in those.
I'm a bit baffled by what bintang says about "change points". As I understand it, there aren't such things on a CVT unless you engage the tiptronic effect.
I think the boxes are simpler and certainly lighter. I did consider a diesel Qashqai with a conventional auto but you had to hve 4WD which I didn't want, and given potential problems with the DPF I'm glad I got the petrol, though I doubt my driving style would have brought about problems.
|
|
A mate of mines Audi A6 avant is on its third multitronic box. The first replacement box was done under warranty. The second was out of warranty and set him back £5K. Ouch!.
|
I drove an early CVT car a bit, a Volvo-badged enlarged DAF with a renault 1100 engine and DAF rubber-band transmission.
It wasn't a very nice car but the transmission worked all right, making a faint whistling noise sometimes on the overrun. I never got used to the way it sounded though, with the engine revving quite high at a constant speed as the car accelerated. You could make it sound better by lifting off, but then of course it stopped accelerating.
A properly sorted and adequately strong cvt could be nice in a large-engined car though, one that didn't need most of its available power to provide any urge. But as far as I know no one has made a CVT suitable for that sort of use, and their longevity remains suspect even in the low-powered models that offer them.
|
>>made by DAF who I believe pioneered CVT technology.
I think Mobylette and Raleigh mopeds may have preceeded DAF with CVT. A simple system that involved only one set of variable pulleys and a spring loaded, swinging engine.
|
|
The Daf system used a centrifugal clutch - the engine flywheel had eight small brake shoe type clutch pads four trailing and four leading - the trailing ones gave the initial take up then the four leading bit in at higher revs -They were cross springed with soft and hard springs the clutch drum was like a drake drum and took drive to rear -- drive then was by two centrifugal belt drives on my Daf44 - later models had a diff and one belt. mine was good in snow due to two belts giving limited slip diff effect -- I liked my Daf 44 Estate
|
|
Here's something to make ya'll larf ... imagine the 'ultimate driving machines' being fitted with a CVT (hahahahaha!)
|
A properly sorted and adequately strong cvt could be nice in a large-engined car though >>
Not sure how large an engine Lud had in mind, but Nissan use a CVT in their 3.5 Muranos and Altimas.
I like the look of the Murano but not the thought of the fuel bills!
|
|
|
Here's something to make ya'll larf ... imagine the 'ultimate driving machines' being fitted with a CVT (hahahahaha!)
Erm....You are not a fan of BMW, are you?
|
|
|
|
|
|
In a somewhat cruder fashion, the technology goes back to the Rudge Multi motorcycle built during the early years of the last century.
|
|
My mum had a 1979 Honda Accord 'Hondamatic'. Think that was CVT. Smooth, accelerated well too. Revved like a banshee on the motorway though. Was doing something like 4500 at 70-80. Think it only had 2 speeds. 'Low' (to 50 MPH) and Drive.
|
i had forgotten about the hondamatic
lovely auto boxes with the star for the overdrive
never thought of them as cvt so interesting
|
|
"never thought of them as cvt" .....That'll be because they weren't - conventional auto box.
|
Actually, "Hondamatic" was a type all of its own.
See en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hondamatic
And yes, it did originally have just two forward gears!
|
>>> Erm....You are not a fan of BMW, are you? <<<
Sure am! I was sticking my neck out actually as I wasn't sure that BMW hadn't gone weird and fitted a CVT to any of its models (yet!)
p.s. the 2 Hondamatics that I owned were an improvement on the daft-Daf set-up but I still prefer a good old gas-guzzling liquid flywheel plus me planet & sun gears.
If they were banned overnight, and there's no telling with THIS government - I could possibly be pursuaded to go DSG, if I had my arm bent up my back and was hit over the head with a cudgel
|
It is certainly -as the cliche goes - a funny old world! We both like Automatic Gearboxes and BMWs, but diverge completely from there.
I think that the humble 2 litre diesel engine in my BMW is great. I wouldn't swap it for any other 4 pot diesel. It is great with a manual gearbox, however the torque converter/planetary gear automatic box ruin the driving experience IMHO. (And I have driven several examples of the car, all the same). You really notice how much the power is getting sapped by the auto box, and it changes gear far too quickly, even in "sport" mode.
I think that the engine is crying out for a DSG-type gearbox. I tried an Audi with a DSG and I was well impressed. Oh well! As you say, at least they don't fit CVT gearboxes!
P.S. the MINI did have a CVT gearbox - I don't know if that counts as a BMW.
|
Alas, I'm one of those sad types that don't own a BMW, but I have had a couple - a 320 and a 525e which were both petrol auto's
Some injuns just don't suit an autobox IMO - and that comes from mucho experience.
My present chariot is an 05 Almera 1.8 auto which seems (to me) an ideal engine gearbox mating and although I've owned it for an awful long time (for me!) of 2.5 years - I'm lothe to swap it as its going so well but ... I have had my beedie little eye on a few 3 series coupe's :)
>>> P.S. the MINI did have a CVT gearbox - I don't know if that counts as a BMW. <<<
Hahaha! - you might have me there comrade?
|
My present chariot is an 05 Almera 1.8 auto which seems (to me) an ideal engine gearbox mating>>
Yep, I really liked mine: surprising fun to drive for the 5.5 years of ownership of what many people think of as a stodgy car.
Qashqai is smoother and I can see it being kept at least as long.
BTW the ultimate driving machine doesn't have to go fast all the time to be that, does it?
|
BTW the ultimate driving machine doesn't have to go fast all the time to be that, does it?
Very true. It's all about the car feeling RIGHT. Personally, I don't drive fast at all, actually. I'm very laid back, in fact, and speed limit concious. I don't accelerate hard and everyone beats me away from lights! I have no points on my licence.
My criticism with the BMW gearbox is that it doesn't feel right in the car, compared to a manual. It changes at the wrong time, such as halfway round a bend.
Prior to this I had an 97-reg Nissan Primera Automatic with a 2 litre petrol engine. Now that DID feel right. Nowhere near as quick as my current car on paper, but it felt perfect to drive.
I would have replaced it with another Primera, but they had stopped making them, and I don't like the replacement one little bit (the "Cash Cow"). Shame.
|
>>> Yep, I really liked mine: surprising fun to drive for the 5.5 years of ownership of what many people think of as a stodgy car. <<<
Yes!, the Almera does have a somewhat staid image although the later ones were much improved ... also, I'm not overfond of the Auris/Corolla/Astra/Focus, asthetically speaking but I think the Qashqai is grrrrrrrrrreat!
>>> BTW the ultimate driving machine doesn't have to go fast all the time to be that, does it? <<<
Nay, I was refering to a BMW ... mind you. I did take the Almera up to 70MPH on my way back from B & Q this morning :-D
|
This topic of transmission is a complete mystery to me. One way to deal with it is:
Buy Astra 1.6 manual transmission in 1994. Run it for 14+ years and 150,000 miles and do not change transmission oil. Have no problems, change gear perfectly umpteen times with no effort.
Buy Honda Jazz manual, and repeat above, except that they want transmission oil changed after several years. Find that gear change is even better and even less effort.
|
|
Why is it a mystery? The OP either needs one (out of necessity, perhaps) or simply wants one. No problem with either. Totally agree that the course you've recommended is sensible and practical - but the topic in hand does ask about autos and not manuals and need not be mysterious.
|
I just wondered how these type of gear boxes worked and if in reality they actually worked well.
I have never driven a CVT based car so I could not comment if they were any good.
|
|
As the OP to this thread, and after all the replies attempting to be helpful, how do you feel about CVT gearboxes now?
|
I actually like the idea of how these gear boxes work.
I would imagine there are less losses in power compared to a conventional automatic.
I may drive one some day just to see what they are like.
Thanks for all of the answers, certainly educated myself.
|
|
Fair question then diddy...and of the 31 cars I've owned only two have been auto and the most recent, the Jazz, is CVT. The other was the Yaris auto - which was fine by me. Personally, I think it's absolutely fine and would have another.....but then I'd also have a conventional autobox as well....it just happens that the Jazz auto came as a CVT - I drove the new one (automated manual) and didn't like it as much but that has been covered elsewhere here. The CVT generally seems to be out of favour with most here - which is fine by me, I simply take it for what it is. Round town I find it the easiest thing in the world to drive - smooth and quiet, and on the open road it goes as well as the manual and cruises at a lower rpm than the manual, as I understand it by reference to HJ's tests. It costs more - but so what. It could be that the automated manuals are OK if you get used to them and I'd give them more attention if need be but for the present I'm very happy to mimse around town in this one......maybe I just need to slip that Panama hat on that's in the cupboard... :-)
|
My dad had an E reg 340 CVT for a year or so around 1990 - despite my protestations on the test drive that it had the economy of a 2.8 Granada Scorpio coupled to the performance of a 950 Fiesta I think he bought the cursed thing just to prove me wrong.
He then proceeded to drive it everywhere never revving the engine over 2500rpm in the name of economy, which made for even slower progress than you'd expect as the gearbox hunted between the ratio for acceleration and the ratio for a steady cruise... A feather-light touch on the throttle would send the revs skywards with no corresponding increase in urge - the equivalent action in a manual would be to continually change from 4th to 2nd and back again at a steady 30mph. while matching the revs to maintain a rock-steady road speed.
He let me have a go in it once not long after passing my driving test, then promptly told me to stop after I accelerated it smartly to 30mph and allowed it to settle into a higher ratio. This was because I was "thrashing" it...
Dave TD
|
|
Must admit that the theory sounds good but I do not like the way they scream up to high revs and the rest of the car catches up. Later ones might be better though....
|
|
|
|
I would have told Audi, whoever they are, to stick their gearbox where the sun don't shine.
How old was this car? 5K Pah!
I am constantly amazed............MD
|
|
I'd imagine that they are much better in a bigger engined car where you don't have the "slipping clutch" effect that you do in smaller cars. A friend of mine had this box in a motability supplied Escort and Rover Metro and both snapped belts. I understand the metal belts used now are better however.
|
Awful horrid whiney things.
engines sound best when working up and down the rev range, not whining along at the same revs.
|
>>where you don't have the "slipping clutch" effect that you do in smaller cars
That's a key and important part of CVT operation.
To get the theoretical best possible acceleration from a car, you must hold the engine at the speed for maximum power, and adjust the ratios accordingly as the car speeds up to keep it there.
Despite sounding wrong to someone used to a manual gearbox, this is the optimum; the best!
To then be able to go to the other end of the gearing spectrum while cruising gives you good economy.
If these gearboxes can be made to last, then I would be very happy with one. As yet, I remain to be convinced on that score.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
