|
Compared to regular transmissions? I'm not so sure. In any case I meant that the AWD wasn't an issue. If CVTs really were so great then the competition would adopt it too.
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 15:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 01:31 |
|
|
Which they are. Right now we're probably at the point where there's still enough efficiency to be gained in a variety of areas that it's not necessary to hit the current fuel economy targets. In a few years, it will be increasingly difficult to hit targets and we'll see even more manufacturers going to CVT.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 16:04
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Which they are. Right now we're probably at the point where there's still enough efficiency to be gained in a variety of areas that it's not necessary to hit the current fuel economy targets. In a few years, it will be increasingly difficult to hit targets and we'll see even more manufacturers going to CVT. Why does the automotive press hate the CVT so much? Are there mechanical and performance issues or is it just the added cost to maintain it?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 16:13
|
|
|
When they first came out 10 or 15 years ago they were touted as the future when they wound up being pretty mediocre and breaking after less than 100k miles. I'm sure the technology has improved since then but automotive perceptions always seem to lag about 10 years.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 16:14
|
|
|
DerDestroyer posted:Why does the automotive press hate the CVT so much? Are there mechanical and performance issues or is it just the added cost to maintain it? They're un-fun to drive and my extremely anecdotal experience indicates they have a worse throttle response, and they keep the wheezy 4 cylinders they are usually paired to at an RPM range that just sounds like moaning to be put out of its misery.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 16:17
|
|
|
DerDestroyer posted:Why does the automotive press hate the CVT so much? Are there mechanical and performance issues or is it just the added cost to maintain it? The automotive press never cares about stuff like maintenance. It's purely because they're inherently weird/unfamiliar compared to normal transmission and often made extra-weird by adding fake gears and other nonsense. You'd think they'd optimize the engines to not sound like poo poo at the most common RPMs, but they don't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 16:40
|
|
|
Do all CVT transmissions use fake gearing? If i had one i'd want it to stay at one RPM, Williams FW15C-style. (if you dont know what im talking about : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3UpBKXMRto)
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 17:07
|
|
|
Well the earlier models put into Audis and Fords did have a lot of issues, not really so much because they were CVTs as much as because VW/Audi and Ford are just terrible at everything. The Nissan ones weren't so bad on the small cars but the larger cars and SUVs had problems. They've probably got them sorted now. The Nissan CVTs on Dodge/Chrysler and Subaru cars seem to be fine. CVTs advantages: - infinite ratios obviously. - for small car applications they can be made very small and light, much smaller than a regular planetary gearbox with more than 4 gears. Disadvantages: - last time I read they were less efficient and had more friction losses than a gear box. - the small boxes were limited in the range of ratios that they could accommodate, because of the nature of the belt drive mechanism. To give it a wider range of ratios the box needs to be made bigger. Both of these tend to negate a lot of the advantages. CVTs were really popular in Japanese kei size cars, because they were small, and mostly just drove in city traffic so a CVT only needs to shuffle in between a small range of ratios. On larger North American cars that do lots of highway miles there isn't very much of an advantage, especially compared to a 6-7-8 speed gearbox that just locks into a tall overdrive gear for efficient highway driving. Nissan supposedly has a re-designed CVT on the 2013 Altima, with a wider range of ratios specifically for North American driving styles and drivetrain losses "reduced by up to 40%" compared to the last year model, and the 2013 Altima is indeed rated for very high mpg. I don't know if that makes it more efficient than a regular gearbox, especially considering other marques already use 8 speed gear boxes on their RWD models and ZF is coming out with a 9 speed FWD gearbox that will be going into the next generation Chryslers. quote:Targeted Class-Leading Highway Fuel Economy Notably Nissan doesn't use a CVT on their RWD models, not even the low powered ones. Throatwarbler fucked around with this message at 17:15 on Nov 13, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 17:11
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:Notably Nissan doesn't use a CVT on their RWD models, not even the low powered ones. What do they have that's low-powered and RWD? The base Frontier?
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 18:59
|
|
|
PT6A posted:What do they have that's low-powered and RWD? The base Frontier? Skyline 250GT? Not sure if that's low powered enough for this discussion.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 19:46
|
|
|
grover posted:I'm wondering how long Subaru will be able to keep an all-AWD lineup while meeting emissions and mpg requirements. AWD isnt NOT that big of a l/km / emissions problem. quote:Wait, what? I don't know what's going on in Australia, but if that feeling is company wide, why in the gently caress did they make the car in the first place? WHy does it even matter when it's making them money in an environment where other car manufacturers (Europe in particular) are taking a big hit? Subaru makes the cars, every one Toyota sells is money for Subaru - the partnership with Toyota allowed them to get new production facilities. Plus, have a look at the sales list - Subaru even during the GFC was and still is selling every car they can make almost before it lands in the dealers lot.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 19:59
|
|
|
PT6A posted:What do they have that's low-powered and RWD? The base Frontier? The base Frontier has 265hp and 270 lb/ft. Not exactly low powered.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 21:12
|
|
|
For what it's worth I had a new rental Altima yesterday and it wasn't too bad. The engine sounds loving terrible, but the actual gearbox was pretty drat good. I agree that it doesn't matter as much on a flat interstate, but especially with the way the current EPA test is configured, I'd imagine that the CVT has notable advantages.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 21:31
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:For what it's worth I had a new rental Altima yesterday and it wasn't too bad. The engine sounds loving terrible, but the actual gearbox was pretty drat good. Wrong thread to post in.
|
|
#
?
Nov 13, 2012 23:12
|
|
|
Well, it's certainly... an article. http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/drives/2014-scion-fr-s-coupe-engineering-prototype  quote:Toyota wants to introduce a couple more sports cars, which will bracket the FR-S in price and power. Increasing the engine power too much would bring FR-S into contention with what Tada-san admits will be a new Supra model. quote:In fact, a turbo would be difficult to engineer for the Subaru flat-four-cylinder engine without seriously raising the center of gravity and Tada-san’s team is investigating other options. These include a supercharger, boring the engine beyond its 2.0-liter capacity and a hybrid system completely redesigned from the Prius THS system, which could also be used by Toyota’s Lexus brand. A test model FR-S is running in Japan with such a system, which uses the high-torque electric motor output to boost the engine in a similar way to Formula-One kinetic energy recovery systems. Tada-san also wants to reduce the weight of the FR-S by at least 220 lbs., although he says that greater weight savings than that will require the use of exotic and expensive materials. edit: and have a pistonheads article: http://www.pistonheads.com/news/default.asp?storyId=26650 Hog Obituary fucked around with this message at 08:27 on Nov 14, 2012 |
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2012 08:14
|
|
|
My boss has an Audi A6 2.7 TDI Avant with the CVT, he seems to be quite satisfied with it. I think it sounds really odd accelerating without increasing in revs. Toyobaru-related, I saw my first one today, a red Toyota GT-86. It looks really great and is a lot smaller than I imagined. Now I just want one even more.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2012 10:22
|
|
|
Hog Obituary posted:Well, it's certainly... an article. I can see why Subaru might be a good bit upset about this. Subaru is probably pissed that Toyota is launching an entire model line around Subaru's engine design (and even possibly altering it) and Subaru isn't making much off the deal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2012 10:31
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:Notably Nissan doesn't use a CVT on their RWD models, not even the low powered ones. Well they did do a disastrous CVT on a couple of Japanese models back in the early 2000s but went back to conventional autos after a couple of years. Actually Nissan's earlier CVTs were terrible in general, both to drive and for reliability. Those and the Honda Jazz/Fit and Civic (which have since reverted to a normal auto) totally trashed the reputation of CVTs in New Zealand.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2012 10:45
|
|
|
Devyl posted:I can see why Subaru might be a good bit upset about this. Subaru is probably pissed that Toyota is launching an entire model line around Subaru's engine design (and even possibly altering it) and Subaru isn't making much off the deal. Why would they be that bothered, given it's still Subaru making every Toybaru and then getting royalty money for their base engine designs? The program is paying for factories and budgets to bring out new models that they are more focused on so I cant really see why they care that much what Toyota will be asking Subaru to build. Besides, it's becoming more clear Subaru are using Toybaru money to produce new engines and give them the chance to produce a standalone WRX/STI line. I really doubt Subaru are too bothered at all.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2012 11:44
|
|
|
Hog Obituary posted:Well, it's certainly... an article. I respect the thinking behind not making this a turbo car but really that is the weakest excuse he could've used, it makes no sense at all. Where does he think a turbo would be mounted, on top of the engine?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2012 14:32
|
|
|
For that matter, where would the supercharger go, if not on top of the engine?
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2012 14:42
|
|
|
Snowdens Secret posted:For that matter, where would the supercharger go, if not on top of the engine? Well heres a nice pic of the vortech supercharger kit.  The bulk of it appears to be placed infront of the the motor, not directly ontop. So I guess it messes with his weightu distributionu.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2012 14:53
|
|
|
dissss posted:Well they did do a disastrous CVT on a couple of Japanese models back in the early 2000s but went back to conventional autos after a couple of years. The ones they used in the Skyline was a different kind of mechanism, a "toroid" type dealy that used rollers and cones instead of a belt. Who know if they were good or not but they don't seem to be using it anymore, so that says something.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2012 15:14
|
|
|
Devyl posted:I can see why Subaru might be a good bit upset about this. Subaru is probably pissed that Toyota is launching an entire model line around Subaru's engine design (and even possibly altering it) and Subaru isn't making much off the deal. Plus wasnt the entire point of the exercise with this car to develop an initial base car and then have divergent trains of upgrading and modification.
|
|
#
?
Nov 14, 2012 22:37
|
|
|
I think Subaru should take the BRZ platform and keep making incremental powertrain and chassis upgrades to it until they build a Porsche 911 equivalent.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2012 00:55
|
|
|
If CT's correct, they're already acting like Porsche - refusing to proceed down what may actually be a better path out of bloody-minded obsession with their precious halo car.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2012 00:57
|
|
|
Got a chance to drive the Chasebays FR-S this past weekend. It only has an exhaust, lowering springs, and BBS LMs right now. Holy poo poo! The car was everthing it's been cracked up to be. I might be designing some parts for it this winter!
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2012 01:12
|
|
|
Party Alarm posted:Got a chance to drive the Chasebays FR-S this past weekend. It only has an exhaust, lowering springs, and BBS LMs right now. Holy poo poo! The car was everthing it's been cracked up to be. I might be designing some parts for it this winter! What tires?
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2012 03:04
|
|
|
I left a voicemail yesterday for my preferred salesguy about getting a BRZ. We shall see what happens.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2012 05:44
|
|
|
Throatwarbler posted:The ones they used in the Skyline was a different kind of mechanism, a "toroid" type dealy that used rollers and cones instead of a belt. Who know if they were good or not but they don't seem to be using it anymore, so that says something. All I know is being a one off model its impossible to get repaired and they absolutely require a special fluid (different to what the normal Nissan CVTs use) which is expensive and not commonly available.
|
|
#
?
Nov 15, 2012 06:14
|
|
|
That Vortech supercharger kit looks fairly OEM. If I were Toyota and Subaru I'd let the aftermarket do all the R&D and then copy whatever ends up being the most efficient system.
|
|
#
?
Nov 16, 2012 02:01
|
|
|
My calls to the dealerships in my area (Seattle) haven't been fruitful. It seems that even those that have BRZs sitting on their lots are still expecting MSRP+delivery. If I could bring myself to be ok with an FRS, I'd still have to pay more for one than MSRP since they've all seem to got stupid poo poo added on. I don't know that I can bring myself to pay MSRP for what is essentially a "fun economy car" (to me at least). I guess for now I'll just sit on it and see what happens over the next few months. I'm kind of surprised that the process seems so difficult... I would have thought that with the world economy being as tempestuous as it is right now that Subaru and Toyota would recognize a good seller and improve/increase production to take advantage of the demand.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2012 05:41
|
|
|
Mat_Drinks posted:My calls to the dealerships in my area (Seattle) haven't been fruitful. It seems that even those that have BRZs sitting on their lots are still expecting MSRP+delivery. If I could bring myself to be ok with an FRS, I'd still have to pay more for one than MSRP since they've all seem to got stupid poo poo added on. I'm in the Seattle area as well, what do you mean by "they've all seem to got stupid poo poo added on" with respect to the FR-S? I thought the only options were dumb accessories or extended warranty plans.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2012 15:48
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:I'm in the Seattle area as well, what do you mean by "they've all seem to got stupid poo poo added on" with respect to the FR-S? I thought the only options were dumb accessories or extended warranty plans. They always try to add on a window tint in Arizona, and then pass the cost on to you with margin of course. I had to practically argue with them to not do it (I'm going to go with Huper Optik on my own), luckily I was engaged with them as soon as it rolled off the truck. Also the ones the dealerships order or get allotted always seem to come with the bumper applique, trunk cargo mat, and wheel locks by default at least. They are part of the VIN and can't be removed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2012 22:11
|
|
|
OldPueblo's got it. Bits and pieces like tint and film at ridiculous markups without the materials necessarily even being that great. The bumper aplique is LITERALLY a $50 "scion" sticker on the bumper. It's that kind of crap that makes me almost unwilling to even consider the Scion. Since I'm already posting, earlier today I was looking at the invoice prices of the BRZ and it made me feel more steadfast about waiting. At this time I cannot bring myself to pay $3-4k over invoice, I just can't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2012 05:25
|
|
|
Christ, gently caress dealerships.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2012 05:54
|
|
|
At the Toyota/Scion dealership I was at recently, all of their models featured a $1300 markup for what was plastic in the door sills, rear bumper applique & some sort of paint protection. Unreal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2012 06:02
|
|
|
Mat_Drinks posted:OldPueblo's got it. Bits and pieces like tint and film at ridiculous markups without the materials necessarily even being that great. Well to be fair the bumper applique does protect the bumper from scratches when sliding stuff in or setting stuff on it while loading. But what also works just as well and costs nothing is... me.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2012 06:27
|
|
|
you guys paying a few grand for tint and an applique, at leas you're getting something. Any of the units sitting on lots in australia are the base model, auto, and are being marked up in excess of $15,000. with no extras. AT ALL.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2012 06:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 01:31 |
|
|
FWIW the Subaru dealerships seem to be less prone to adding stupid crap in order to markup their cars. So with what the Scion dealers are doing you could spend the same money on a bunch of garbage you don't need or you could spend it on HID lights, nicer seats / interior, touchscreen navigation / radio, etc. etc.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2012 15:28
|
|
