I love the concept of CVTs; boy was I disappointed when I found out that in nearly every actual use of a CVT in a vehicle, they do wonky inefficient power-reducing things just to make them "seem" more like a traditional transmission to the user. When I put my foot down, I want that needle to immediately jump to peak power RPM and stay there until I let off, and when I'm cruising efficiently I want those RPMs as low as possible for the current power demand.
Try a Subaru. There are 5 on my family. In the real everyday world, sometimes in heavy rush hour traffic, there is nothing to compare. Plus, using the active cruise control makes things a lot different. We are on year 2.023 I used to drive and love stick shifts, but not anymore.
@@housco11 On the plus side; at least if you go deaf you won't miss hearing high revving down-shifts, induction noises or the sound of your vehicle getting stolen, as automatics are FAR more prone to car theft! But now you have features like back up cameras, lane assist and adaptive cruise control! All the things you need to pay less attention while driving - perfect!
As a Subaru tech, I 100% agree. I was impressed with the cvt on the new WRX. It’s much improved over the last generation. That being said, reliability is another factor.
CVT's seem to be reliable enough imo~ Maybe not in Nissan/Jatco's case but everyone else seems to do just fine w/ their CVT's. Ive had less CVT issues than DCT ones in my experience.
This is encouraging, but my main concern is still long-term CVT durability, and the need for meticulous maintenance (likely much more often than what Subaru prescribes), especially when accommodating relatively-high output. That is what I'd like to learn about from an engineer.
@@0xKennethchanging that fluid way more often than an auto. But why in the hell is anyone considering a manual for a car like this? Way more fun and engaging.
Change the cvt fluid every 30,000 to 40,000 miles and you will be fine. Go the 100,000 miles they recommend if you want to buy a new transmission in the future
Yeah, I wish the user modes gave you a bit more control over transmission operation and allowed for the driver to pick how it operates, because there are not only efficiency, but also performance advantages to be had if it operates like a CVT can.
Exactly, my Subaru is from before they added the fake shifts and when I punch it, it shoots up to rock steady 5600 RPM and hauls butt, and it's super smooth for daily driving.
I actually hate the fake gear ratio thing it completely defeats the purpose of a cvt. One reason I hate driving automatics is that you can't predict when they're going to shift and jerk the car especially around a corner so a cvt is actually preferable in this regard.
I've never had a problem predicting when my car was going to shift and it also doesn't jerk the car enough to cause any upset in its balance in my experience
@@Nick_Gir The car is certainly not garbage, or eIse I wouldn't have spent over $25,000 recently to get a 2017 V6 Honda Accord Coupe. It's a decent car overall. However, the transmission is 100% garbage. Constantly aggressively downshifting and engine braking as soon as I let off of the gas pedal, and hesitating between gears 5 and 6 when driving at 40mph.
@@JustinDaniels lmfao you can tell yourself it's not garbage all you want but you bought trash. Not saying my choice is better than yours but I kinda am saying that.
It's a good thing for folks like me with disabilities that the auto version of this car doesn't suck! I really miss driving manual from my able-bodied days, but the reality is that my spine isn't gonna start working again. So cars that are engaging with an automatic are excellent for accessibility, since I can still drive them with hand controls. Edit: to clarify I drive a Tesla Model 3 LR now and used to drive a '06 Miata with a 5 speed. The Tesla is less engaging, but it's good enough for me. I'm just overall glad there's effort going into experiences that everyone can use, whenever they're EV or dual clutch or CVT or slushbox.
Agreed, i think transmission technology has been the most underrated aspect of overall vehicle performance in recent years. Autos used to be considered the worst of the worst, but have leapfrogged manuals so dramatically over just the past 10-15 years.
@@ALMX5DP I mean autos are super good, but cvts arent great. My experiance with the cvt in cars is with the 2015 outback where it is unresponsive, slow, and just a washy feeling in the pedal. I dont know about modern cvts, but ones even 3 years ago, were terrible especially compared to manuals and good autos. There are great autos, just not the cvt.
Just wanted to chime in, I have a WRX GT and it is fantastic. If you put the car in sport# mode, it hangs on to revs and it down shifts super aggressively. It is honestly better than any dual clutch I’ve driven in fully automatic mode.
While I don't hate the way the CVT feels like in my Impreza I did hate having to replace the entire transmission at 70,000 miles. They are prone to mechanical failures.
That's why, "Subaru has Not proven everyone wrong with CVT`s". Same thing happened with me, with a CVT, had to replace the whole thing. With that said, I don't think CVT`s excel in the area of durability.
I understand they won't take full advantage, because customers will whine about the "no gears" feeling. But I wish they would let you select a mode that would let the transmission run that way if you wanted to. Completely optimized for economy at low throttle settings, and for power delivery at high throttle settings, with a linear transition between those things across the mid-throttle range. Maybe I wouldn't use that mode all the time, but it might be nice to use it sometimes.
My Camry Hybrid's eCVT has exactly this in the Eco, Normal, and Power buttons. Eco is great in snow, offroad, and parking lots & neighborhoods. (20 is plenty.) Power is great on dry pavement and freeway but has too much torque for rain and I spin out too often. Normal for city driving and rainy days.
My 6 yo Impreza does that almost as described. At partial accelerator setting it optimizes efficiency and at full accel it optimizes power. Ideally the accelerator should be a "power setting" input to a control system. You dial up the power you want and it gives that power (or as much as it can) in the most efficient way possible. The Impreza almost does this, I have heard that the newer Levorg does it exactly. No need for extra buttons and stuff!
@@HughCStevenson1 I know that's how modern Volkswagons work. The potentiometer on the throttle pedal sends a signal to the computer, which the computer interprets as a percentage of torque demanded. Then the computer tries to make the engine deliver that torque value. The details are over my head, but that's what's going on. I suspect its similar logic in most, if not all, modern cars.
One thing we discovered while researching/tuning CVTs for drag racing is there is a substantial loss in efficiency while it is continuously shifting, especially at WOT. What actually happened is while the clutches are shifting gear ratios (constantly) and the belt is moving up and down in the clutch sheaves there is both an increase in friction and a small amount of slippage that occurs. As a result, you lose about 10-15% in efficiency while the CVT is (constantly) shifting. You do get the benefit from running the engine at the optimal rpm for power (or efficiency if going for best fuel economy) but we found that isn't enough to overcome the loss in efficiency. By configuring the CVT to behave as if it had discrete gears (we found 7 to 10 virtual gears was best) we were able to shave off over 0.4 seconds at the drag strip. If Subaru is making their CVT behave as if it has discrete gears during WOT acceleration, I would bet this is for the same reason we did it - quickest acceleration. One of the big reasons you can do better with virtual fixed gear ratios is you can get away with less clamping force in the sheaves. The slippage that naturally occurs while a CVT shifts gears requires a good ~20% greater clamping force in order to control this slippage.
@@AySz88 We is a bunch of local guys racing their ATVs and snowmobiles and spending a lot of money and time optimizing their CVTs, plus a local university research team that confirmed what we found with automotive CVTs from around 2015. A few of the guys even have CVT dynos, with electric motors providing the input and variable load generators providing the dynamic load. Some CVTs might not lose as much power and efficiency while shifting but it does make sense that all are more efficient while fixed at a constant gear ratio.
A CVT feature I'd love to try is a manual ratio lever - kind of like a prop pitch lever in an airplane. Lever in low, pin the throttle, and manually push the lever forward for higher ratios as the car accelerates. Like a fretless bass - you can pick off tune ratios if that's your mood or learn to fine tune the ratio for your driving style. Thoughts?
I explored this idea when I was making a presentation on IVT transmissions in college over 25 years ago. In practice, it would be a LOT harder to drive than you think, so it would need to be fully computer controlled -- just like a CVT.
Your talking about a hydrostatic drive. In the 70s and 80s garden tractor brands started doing the idea. Pick your throttle amount then adjust the vehicle speed by a lever.
If the manual CVT control lever set a particular engine RPM, like the prop pitch lever in an airplane, it would be low driver workload, easy to drive. Full forward = max RPM = max power. Leave it there and do whatever you want with the gas pedal, when you floor it, it will instantly give max acceleration for whatever speed you're going. Pull it back to peak economy RPM (perhaps 1800 RPM), and you're getting peak fuel economy for whatever speed you're driving. That would be unique and fun.
CVT in my six cyl subi died at 62,000 miles. Subaru replaced it under warranty, but I lost my faith in them. Also have a Nissan Rogue with a CVT that I've started replacing the fluid in routinely in an attempt to get more than 70,000 miles out of the belt. Also picked up a RAV4 hybrid with an eCVT and think it is a far superior mechanical system. The new subi Crosstrek hybrid is using a variation of the Toyota eCVT. The eCVT has no belts, only gears on gears. My advice for belt based CVT owners - never manually shift.
Dude, while that shitty Rogue is less than 84K miles, get it to Nissan. There's a class action suit against Nissan. Though they may warrant till 60K, the suit forced them to replace, but 84K is the max. Google it. My Rogue, when I found out was 86K and no amount of going to corporate made a difference. No more Nissan in my life. I drive a subi WRX. Manual shift. Don't know if I can do the CVT with what I've seen on it. Which isn't much.
@@ajhurtekant8364 Yes but when the manufacturer says its a lifetime fluid and some dealerships will even refuse to change the fluid. It falls on manufacturer not the customer for the failed units (which is also why they have such a long extended warranty on them now)
I hate the fake shifting. That's not how the transmission is supposed to work. Might as well use an automatic if you want defined gears like that. Toyota still makes a pretty good CVT. I know the Mitsubishi CVTs worked properly back when they first came out, but I am not sure on their reliability.
@@ebels3 The Toyota CVT does the fake shifting when you fully press the peddal, RPM go up to redline and then drop. I just want my transmition to work at is fullest when I am passing that truck in the highway. At least in economy driving it works wondefully, and the launch gear works well too.
@@alejogonzalez4997 That's how an CVT is supposed to work. It doesn't shift gear ratios, it keep the engine at max power and efficiency. The engine will go to redline and slowly drop. The first gear for launching IS awesome.
The only problem I have with CVTs is their (perceived) reliability. Hopefully the newer generations of them have solved those issues but I'm not going to put down $40k+ to find out. On another note, I really like the eCVT that Toyota uses. It's a super clever and interesting design and it would be great to get a video on how it works.
Subaru's CVTs aren't bad but they recommend no maintenance. That means it most likely won't last you too long without regular fluid changes. Edit: I believe Hyundai/kia CVTs are similar to the Toyota eCVT. It has a planetary 1st gear then goes to CVT.
@@wigletron2846 Toyota also has long recommended service intervals, which I think will harm the lifespan of their vehicles. E.g. they don't recommend a first oil change until 10k miles.
@@graham1034 a lot of manufacturers are recommending 10k oil changes now which is crazy. Its planned obsolescence imo. They don't want people driving cars for 200k miles anymore.
They base the service intervals pretty much on how little can be done and still make it to the end of the warranty. If nearly all of them can make it without any servicing then they sell that as a feature. Regardless of that also meaning that the trans will fail not long after warranty. Some even make them nearly unserviceable where changing fluid and filters takes much more work than it should if it's even something a home mechanic can reasonably do.
Nissan's awful Jatco CVT gave all other CVTs a bad reputation. Jatco makes great transmissions outside CVTs.... but their CVT reliability is embarrassing.
Had a 2015 WRX with CVT that was just a casual daily driver. Twice the transmission had to be replaced, once was under warranty and the second I passed on down the road to the dealership that had no idea what I was trading in. Great cars, in my luck terrible transmission.
There you go, nail, head. This is something I've seen missing from engineering explained videos. What about the second, or third owner? What about longevity? How does it compare over time. Not everyone can afford brand new cars. He's missing probably 1/2 of his base.
@@SR-ry6hs I like Subaru's I've owned many. The only reason I bought a CVT WRX was because all I own is manual sports cars and the wife wanted something sporty she could drive so we bought a 2015 model in 2016. It was a 1 owner car and I got it with 25,000 miles on it. The CVT didn't make it to 42k miles before it had to be replaced. While I owned it, it was never beat on and I was always up on every single maintenance item as I like to keep all my cars in top tip shape. I got rid of it at 85k miles cause the CVT was going out again and this time it wasn't under warranty and the Subaru dealership wanted like $12k to replace it. No thanks.
@@SR-ry6hs 1/2 only in US where new cars are funny cheap. Where I live, for such an WRX you need to pay 2 years of income. Of WHOLE income (not just the savings) or take loan for 10-15 years ;)
I have a '15, I was at least the 2nd owner. Had some tasteful mods and I got a VERY good deal since I worked at the dealership. I haven't had a single issue out of the trans. I pick up nails in my tires like I have a magnet hanging in front of the wheels but thats about it. It has about 70K miles so far, I drive it like a pissed off teenager, no matter how hard I try to be an adult(I'm 43 and ashamed). I wish I had held out for a manual to come thru but my wife can drive this if needed. I've heard the CVT trans is kinda hit/miss with the durability. That being said, I wouldn't buy it again.
@@wb3191 glad to hear it’s held up. I hear ya on the nail magnet 😂 I was always getting punctures as well but that’s just the nature of the beast sometimes.
As someone with manual, CVT and conventional autos, the CVT is confusing to drive in winter. Aside from a blinking traction control light, it's tough to know whether you've lost traction or it's just deciding to increase revs. With manual or conventional autos you at least know that RPM is proportional to speed.
Im coming up to 2 months ownership of my wrx rs cvt (mid spec in Australia) and couldnt be happier with selecting the cvt. Being almost 50 and driving manuals all my life ive paid my penance and its time to relax a little. Coming from a previous gen manual rex I think the cvt here is exceptional. In comfort mode it just cruises along nicely and particularly in heavy traffic its so good not to have that jerky start stop motion that you can get from traditional autos. Then is sport# it is a beast. You can select to have your revs exactly where you want them at any time and the power is instant. Torque right across the powerband and responsiveness that matches any DCT ive driven. Like the video said its easy to just slag off the CVT, and mostly it comes from a a background of simple ignorance.
I just got an Audi RS3 and quite happy with it. I have owned several dual clutch cars including PDK, I wonder how the CVT makes difference from the DCT in sports driving.
Agreed with your points as I'm still the current owner of MY16 Rexy (WRB Premium model). S-mode is enough to pull away someone else who pushed me under non-sense distance. I-mode has capable to save fuel consumption for cruising. I rarely to choose S# as it makes the rexy like a bull even I throttle the pedal a little bit. For my own opinion, I won't use Lineartronic for track day unless you installed CVT cooler (seems the kit at Super Autobacs, Tokyo in 2019) Note: I'm still driving manual car in daily :)
Thanks for this. I rented a BRZ last week and had a great time. However, I live near the city and need a daily for work. Manual sucks in stop and go traffic. Years ago, slow shifting autos didn't hold a candle to the fun of a manual and so I went manual. Just like some won't get a DCT, the same won't get a CVT, but there is no longer a performance benefit to manual. Just like a loud exhaust, manual doesn't make the car faster, so it's not necessary. If Subie can make a CVT that locks up like a DCT, then we have the best of both worlds.
I think CVT's as a concept are good. But it's going to take me plenty of convincing now to trust a Subaru CVT. A close friend of mine bought his Subaru Forester new with a CVT many years back. He kept to the scheduled services, and wasn't putting a huge amount of mileage on it, but just after 100,000 kms, his transmission more or less failed, needing a complete replacement. Fortunately, he was just barely inside the warranty, so it was replaced under warranty, and he wrote it off as just bad luck. But after a further 90,000 kms, the transmission had another severe issue and needed another full replacement.
CVTs are a terrible idea. A manual is going to give you the same efficiency with the right ratios, and it's far more reliable, cheaper to repair, and doesn't have 14 computer modules and sensors.
I think that you left out the greatest disadvantage, at least as currently implemented, and that is reliability. I have never owned a car with a CVT but I have read many accounts of them not even lasting 100,000 miles. I like the idea of a CVT but until they can be made to operate as reliably as other types of transmissions, I will give them a pass.
+1000 I try to keep my cars 10+ years (200,000km or so) and have never had a problem with any transmission. I doubt that any CVT vehicle could regularly do this kind of mileage without problems (sure there are outliers, but I am talking the bulk of them).
I agree, it's going to make you feel more acceleration, but the peaks could be cancelled out by the RPM loss in shifting. A lower, but steady RPM would theoretically produce the same average power while using less fuel to do it!
@@ryanhill906 there's a big loss in efficiency while the transmission is changing ratio. changing the gear ratio in steps means that the belt spends much less time slipping.
i drive a 2015 CVT honda city handed down from my brother. it's no sports car, but neither me nor him have ever had any issues with the transmission. it's been smooth and reliable from the moment we bought the car. i really don't get the hate, it feels so much nicer to drive than an automatic
I'd love to try a CVT just doing its thing. I've watched many of your videos on CVTs but today's the first time I've heard (or maybe i just didn't pay attention earlier) that you can be accelerating and the rpms be going down, that's so interesting.
Our Impreza does the virtual gear thing when accelerating hard, but when driving moderately it is quite cool. When accelerating it drops the rpm but it just keeps pulling with no interruption
I'm glad you mentioned something about Subaru's 'notchiness' between ratios on their CVTs. My cousin has a newer Crosstrek and under just plain 'ol auto mode it has the annoying (to me) aspect that under more heavier acceleration it does the 'fake gears' instead of holding a peak power RPM that it would normally do under lighter acceleration. Having driven it under these circumstances, it definitely feels like there's that momentary loss of power when it jumps between the fixed ratios and when trying to get up to speed quick on the highway for example it feels a little unnerving. My personal vehicle is a Ford C-Max with an eCVT. Comparatively my brother has an older Crosstrek that doesn't do the fixed ratio jumps unless you specifically put it in manual mode and I very much have gotten comfortable and prefer having the engine just staying at one peak RPM and just accelerate with the constantly adjusted ratio. I wish Subaru had the option to disable the forced fake gear changes under heavy acceleration especially on something like the Crosstrek which isn't really made to be a sports car like the WRX.
Interesting, I can't say I ever paid enough attention to notice it in my wrx, or maybe I didn't know what to notice. But I'm thinking that my stage 1+ tune could have possibly removed that, amongst changing other things, and is part of why it feels so much better now.
The theoretical idea of CVT is great. Like You said in video - it can get max efficiency or max acceleration of the same engine, but (as You also said) it does not always happen in real world. Like in that Subaru - previous gen. was worse than manual, that gen. is "even" but still not significantly better. I think it still need some improvements in CVT so we can definitely said: "yup, it's better"
My last 3 Audi’s have all had Dual Clutch transmissions and I highly prefer the positive clutch take up (like a well driven manual) when accelerating from a stop than the sensations of a torque convert automatic. At least new torque converter autos are not the “slip and slide with Powerglide” slush boxes of my youth. 😊
Drive something sporty that has the ZF 8 speed (most BMWs run it), best conventional automatic out there hands down. GM has also been able to get their 8 speed automatic down to DCT level shift speeds, though I think they only ran this tuning on the C7 Vette, I don't think their 10 speed auto can match those shift speeds and of course the C8 is DCT.
Totally agree,DSG is like a perfect manual shift over and over,crazy fast. My favorite DSG is 7 speed found in old 1.2 TSI engines,crazy fast compared to more modern DSG,sport mode is very sporty up&down shifts
Well Luke Duke, either you've been freeze-dried or doing hard time in a cave, but the way of the world now and for quite some time is virtually nothing, in regard to public consumer purchase, is engineered and manufactured for true longevity. This goes from everything to light bulbs, clothing, appliances, electronics, hardware, and yes....especially auto parts. Of course, there are always a few exceptions, but I'm talking about the overall global standard of quality production, or to clarify, the lack thereof. It's not in the best interests and especially profit margin of any of these corporations to make their products truly over-engineered and bulletproof.
@@blaineedwards8078 I strongly disagree. Cars last vastly longer than they used to, and the average age of vehicles on the road is increasing over time, not decreasing. In the '80s if a car made it to 100k it was seen as a true accomplishment. Now, everyone expects a car to hit 200k with no major issues.
Cvts need to be more repairable. Then they wouldn't be so feared. If you have one break, the only option is to replace it, and that's usually 5 to 8 grand
Had a Nissan Versa with a CVT years ago. It was a bit like driving with turbo lag but it was an excellent commuter car that consistently had great milage.
My only experience with a cvt in in my partner's '05 civic hybrid. Its doesn't do the fake gear think and if you put your foot to the floor it holds at 5k rpm. I wish all cvt cars had a mode to do that because that's the best for absolute acceleration and efficiency. Also, liked for waterfall notification
Okay I need to ask. I had an 05 Civic Hybrid and did you experience any jerking motion when letting off or applying that gas? From what I read it had to deal with the CVT and oh my god it drove me crazy. Passengers would think I would just randomly slap the break hard for no reason lol
@@gageemlen2075 yeah sometimes there's a vibration when first taking off and occasionally it jerks back and forth while under acceleration. It feels like it's randomly changing the gear ratio. It used to do it under deceleration but we got a software update when we took it in for the airbag recall that fixed it. I guess that was the regenerative braking
@@GF-mf7ml i have a civic touring that uses a CVT and i like it better than the traditional. It is FBO and Tuned and it holds power great. Stays in full boost the entire time my foot is planted. Manual transmission beats it off the line but after that there is no comparison.
Joseph You mean where the engine rpm stays constant(relatively), while the ratios change to give accelleration? Toyota Synergy hybrids do that as an e-CVT. ZF builds tractor CVTs that can be discribed as semi hydrostatic. They can be programmed to all sorts of driving strategies including what I mentioned above.
What?! This is exactly why haters hate cvts. When they all first came out in the mid 2000s, that is exactly how they functioned and not a single person thought it felt or sounded normal...so manufacturers started making them shift like gears. Lmao.
So disappointed that the WRX GT doesn’t come with a manual option. It’s a great car, with great seats. I test drove one and loved it, except the transmission. I’m buying a GR86 instead.
My main concern with the CVT is what happens when it breaks, those things are expennnnnnnnnnsive whereas a manual is much cheaper to fix. Performance is fun and I would like it but it's secondary to reliability for me. Will probably end up with the Forester though which there is no manual option :( But still considering the Crosstrek, which also will have a manual parking brake which even if the electric brake never fails, the analog nature of *knowing* my parking brake is up and doesn't need electricity to function gives me better peace of mind than an electric brake, even if I know there are manual overrides if the power fails. Crosstrek should have a couple more MPGs too, but the Forester will have a bunch more space. I'll figure it out eventually.
reliability/longevity of the cvt has always been it's drawback. Smooth non jerky acceleration and proper maintenance has been decent for cvts, but knowing the market for those who drive a wrx, I don't see how they will last. Unless there is something more that has helped prolong longeviity
high torque/starting is bad for CVT, that is why the toyota has eCVT (hybird electric motor assisted) and the CVT + fixed 1st gear. Either of these design solutions will address the downsides of a conventional CVT
I don't think most people have an issue with concept or utility of a cvt. The the only gripe I hear about is that they can never seem to make it past 100k miles with many going out around 50-75k, which is atrocious and absolutely unacceptable when compared with a standard automatic.
Have you noticed, the previous gen model was doing 0 t0 60 in 5.1 secs vs t the current which does 5.7, this doesn't make the cvt faster, but it makes the manual slower
Fun fact: Japan's home grown battle tank uses a CVT, allowing it to drive in reverse to get back behind cover after a shot faster than any other main battle tank.
@@johnrobinson1328 oh yeah the justy was an early adopter as well as other city cars such as the March etc but we started seeing more mainstream use in the late 90s early 00s. And this is the period that created the bad reputatuon
Isn't the speed of the CVT "shifting" a bit of a deception based on the tachometer? You can hear the engine RPM's catch up slower than the actual needle speed. I noticed most tachometers in cars move faster than the actual rpm based on a calculated RPM after each shift, mostly noticeable on newer Mercedes AMG's with the digital tachos and I suspect this WRX is doing the same thing
or the pulleys haven't fully finished adjusting, so the engine got there quickly, but you cant apply all the torque juuuust yet so it's like it's not exactly "fully in gear"
Agreed, it's all fakeness. Every part about it. Cvts will always suck and manufacturers keep trying to convince us otherwise with so much trickery and fake sportiness.
@@SuperRisingdeath no, he won't be a real hater until he has to pay to get a cvt fixed, that's when the rage will start, compare how much cvt transmissions cost to fix if they break and you will never buy one ever again....
I like the CVT in my Subaru, even though it needed some getting used to the lack of "punch" when accelerating, but I absolutely hate the pre-set fake shifting. I have figured out, that in automatic mode, it does not use it as long as you are gentle with the throttle pedal. So if you don't floor it, but rather slowly push the pedal down, it actually does the CVT thing as it is supposed to. So you can learn how to drive it as a proper CVT if you stay in the upper half of the throttle path. However, I would still love to disable the pre-set gears completely. The acceleration is so soft, that it doesn't do anything for the driving experience. It's just loud, slow and annoying. I'm having much more fun whenever I manage to keep it in the variable mode.
I have a Outback and Subaru has had major reliability issues with CVTs. recent recalls from premature belt failure is a major problem. Stay away. I wish I did.
@@eleventy-seven Subarus are sold in my country with 5-year/200k km warranty, extendable up to 7-year/250k km for about 500-1000€, so I hope I will get a new car before any reliability issues hit my wallet :-)).
I have a CVT and it sucks. It feels exactly like a normal auto transmission. I hate the jumpiness when you accelerate. I thought the whole point of a continuous transmission was it’d feel like one single gear, similar to an EV.
It was supposed to be that way. The early ones that came out around 2009-2010 were actually continuous, but apparently people complained about the monotonous drone so they programmed them to jump to discreet ratios to simulate gear shifts. It really is a mad idea. They should have put their efforts into making the car quieter so the drone doesn't bother people and retain the efficiency. I'm sure this rapid shifting of ratios also contributes to the poor reliability and belt damage.
My 2016 prius is extremely smooth at all times. It uses the hybrid system to provide instant torque in daily driving scenarios, so it feels like an EV. I’m really glad that it doesn’t do the fake shifting BS that newer CVT-equipped vehicles do.
@@andoletube Yea, that’s the exact reason why I hate it. The companies gave into the complaints from monkey-brained people who can’t handle a little bit of change. Programming in the fake gear-shift feel is like imitating a flaw that doesn’t need to exist.
@@WilliamStrealy I have a new Corolla hatchback. So maybe I should look into the new Prius. The new one is pretty sexy. And hopefully, it feels the same way as how you describe yours
I drove both a rubber band (DAF) and a metal belt (FIAT/Fuji) CVT for some years and I found them working very well just as they were intended, without artificial "gears" so with constant rpm, but the metal belt one with a computerised hydraulic control that (amongst other things) kept that constant rpm lower during acceleration in cases where max power wasn't needed.
The red exterior and Recaros look great! This video makes the CVT look decent, but all my friends with Subaru CVT experience have complained about it one way or another. Like most people, I would be worried about longevity.
That's what I would worry about also is longevity. Farm Craft 101 just did a video where he replaced a CVT transmission. He said some guys say they wear out fast and another guy has had his for 150,000 miles but he changes the oil every 20,000 miles. An oil and filter change in that CVT transmission cost 200 bucks. I know some people are lucky to get the oil changed in their engine for 35-50 so good luck with an extra $200 oil change every 6-7 oil changes.
@@keithyinger3326 - I change the CVT fluid myself in the wife's Civic every spring. It's not hard to do. The right Honda fluid isn't cheap, so it's about 50 bucks. The car has a little over 120k with zero issues since new.
All in all CVT's are/were designed for economy driving not performance which is probably why they don't seem to last as long when driven as performance nor are repairable... they can only be replaced ($8k recent dealership quote for my buddy's legacy and that was 2 years ago before inflation). You make valid points however my cvt started going out at 110k mileage (I had fluid changed twice) and quickly dumped the car / trade in for a Toyota real automatic and will never own another cvt as a result. Thanks for your your overall very interesting and educational videos.
Correct me if im wrong, this is just something ive noticed.. These digital displays that are being used today are often designed to respond to the "Input" of the gear change (To make them seem faster), not the "Outcome" of it which is the Increase in rpms. Where's "most" physical needle gauges respond to the rpm change after the gear change occurs (The Outcome). This means that if your going to shift from 3>4 causing (for argument's sake) a 500 rpm change. The digital display will instantly drop the rpm at which point it still takes the mechanical components and engine another roughly 400 milliseconds to adjust its rpm and power delivery.. so in other words, appearance isn't always actuality in these cases
Good point, I wonder how the sound/feel is in the car, and whether a discrepancy between the time of the dial change and the time of sound change exists.
One thing I'm realizing is you didn't talk about long-term life of these transmissions I've driven a few cvts and they are pretty smooth but the biggest problem is every car I've driven with a cvt the transmission is going out you can't accelerate hard cause then they jerk I have not come across a car with a good taken care cvt transmission the problem is to make them last you have to do a fluid change way more often and from what I've heard doing that then voids your warranty and I've had friends with cars with cvt transmissions and they have been like well can we replace it and I say yes we could but good luck finding a good transmission in the junkyard and to buy a new one always costs more than what the car is worth yet you get a normal automatic and I've had great luck with junkyard transmissions
@@loge2001 Hang on this sounds like fun........can I have a go ? I have been doing a lot of research about CVT as I am looking to replace my V6 Accord with over 200,000km so I wanted to get a 4WD and in Australia the ONLY non-diesel 4WDs are Subaru (OK, it's AWD) and Suzuki Jimny (too small for me - it's even worse on the highway than my DR650 but I digress...) lots of reading suggests the Subarus CVTs are a bit better than Nissan (for example) and there is a Facebook Australia group of Subaru owners who are really pissed about their CVT problems - some of these people are hard core Subaru Fan Boiz and some have said "never again" so this really rings alarm bells for me but there are the odd owners that get a good run out of a CVT but these are few and far between it seems to me that most who say they have no issues tend to get new vehicles after 3-5 years again this sets off alarm bells for me so I am now looking at diesel but finding the greenie/leftie local councils are trying to shut down ICE engines and in particular diesels thus I am in a quandary and do not know what to get there are some people who say diesel will stay for a long time (for essential transport of good and services etc) but I suspect that one will need a Govt issued license before a service depot will allow you to buy diesel for your private vehicle.
Didn't really address the main complaint I see people having with CVT which is basically that it doesn't last and isn't particularly rebuildable when it does go out.
Your videos are some of the only "longer" videos that I watch without some form of skipping. Great engagement, helpful explanation of concepts and great quality overall. Thank you!
Sadly, there were no words regarding reliability differences between CVT anf manual. My guess is that the CVT just won't be as reliable over the long term. Also, I wonder what the recommended service requirement differences are; fluid changes every N miles? Rebuild every N miles? Etc.
I've never heard of a reliable CVT. Edit: I know on Ford's CVTs, the transmissions are sealed and the fluid is not supposed to be changed for the life of the vehicle. Probably one of the MANY reasons why these CVTs fail like clockwork. There are two filters in them, one is fairly easily accessible through the driver's side wheel well, while the other one is at the bottom of the pan and not "designed" to be serviced. Again, you can imagine how well this works in practice.
@@davidmccarthy6061yeah just ignore the rate in which they need major rebuilding/replacing of gears/belts. Or that a clutch job is a DIY job, while try replacing the belts on your cvt in your driveway. Not even remotely comparable nor “relative.”
@@davidmccarthy6061 "Autos need maintenance and repairs." Tell that to Ford. Their CVT is basically designed for zero maintenance. The only maintenance that is SUPPOSED to be done for the life of the vehicle is changing the smaller of the two transmission filters every 100k miles. Good luck reaching that milestone before the CVT breaks.
@@danielwatson5595 I'm not aware of ANYONE that actually works on CVTs. As far as I know, when they break, you buy a whole new one. I would imagine even despite their inflated price tag a new CVT from the factory is probably still cheaper than parts and labor for a belt repair.
CVTs reputation was ruined early on by Nissan CVTs being grenades. If early models had been like the one in the new WRX I feel attitudes would be different
@@Leetshifter I've heard from at least 2 people about replacing CVTs in Nissan X-Trail (older one, T31) and Quashqai (new one, I believe they are called Rogue Sport in USA). Yes, Jatco CVTs are still trash.
@@mojojoji5493 Mopeds use rubber belts for the CVT, but cars use a steel chain. I'm still not convinced with their long term durability. They've been getting better, but only time will tell. At least with the mopeds the belt is cheap and very easy to replace. Costs 20 bucks and only takes 10 minutes to replace. Sadly, that's not the case with cars that have a CVT.
My brother's 2013 Honda Accord with a CVT has over 160K and still shifts like a new car. You know what he does? He replaces the transmission fluid every 25k with Amsoil full synthetic.
CVTs issue isn’t their performance, it’s more their reliability. Nissan’s history of CVTs grenading in almost all of their vehicles in the last 20 years didn’t help them much either. People not doing their maintenances are also to blame. I recommended doing it every 30k if they are prone to failures like Nissans(basically any brand that isn’t a toyota) and every 60k miles for ones from Toyota and Hondas who have proven they have reliable CVTs. Yeah you can do the Toyota/Honda ones early if you want, won’t cause any issue that’s for sure.
Loved the video. Wish you could talk a bit more about reliability. Seems so many brands are having problems when the driver is engaged in even minimally spirited driving.
Fantastic video and in-depth explanation! I am definitely a manual transmission fan and am having a hard time getting onboard with the cvt craze! I guess I am still afraid of the horror stories of failed cvts and their past inadequacies, but it seems to be that manufacturers are finally getting them to be more reliable and longer lasting. Thank you for the great work!
My prior 2 cars were CVT cars and they were... sufficient... the first (Subaru) had a constant speed cvt (didn't have those clear 'gear steps'). I'm sure it was more efficient use of the power but it was dull and ALWAYS felt sluggish/mushy. However... it got me to work and back for many years. The second was on a Mini and it was a bit better. It had the set ratio thing and felt more like a traditional automatic so not as mushy but shifting was very lazy (hit the floppy paddle shifter in "M" mode and wait for a while or worse yet... put your foot to the floor and wait as it takes a second to decide to go) which REALLY made it feel like a crappy automatic. My new Mini has a DCT and it doesn't feel different from an in-gear perspective but the shifts are faster and are much more immediate in "Manual" mode - which makes the floppy paddle shifter something more than steering wheel ornaments. So while the theoretical performance of cvt high... I've yet to drive a car with one that was anywhere near as solid feeling as a DCT.
there's nothing wrong with the idea of the CVT. The engine staying at the best RPM for power or efficiency is ideal. The problem with CVTs is increased maintenance, fake shifting points, and something subaru is notorious for, thermal protection mode is experienced too often instead of making the cooler bigger. Then you have some models with high failure rates.
@Ryzen it'll be interesting if tfl gets their hands on one, every outback they've tested won't let the vehicle go up a slope in a controlled manner, it just stops and goes into thermal protection.
@@Flyinghook But TFL isn't really knowing what they are doing: they don't drive vehicles as they are designed to be driven and they fail at driving in general. Whatever they say must be taken with very big grains of salt.
I don't know EE. The CVT may perform, but that longevity for 80k miles+ just is not there. The car owner should put all the money they save in gas in a bank account for when the transmission eventually grenades. Speaking as someone who had a Nissan CVT crap out 300miles over the mileage Nissan was replacing them...a tank of gas messed it up.
I happen to also be a Mechanical Engineer. I bought my '16 Maxima SV brand new, I now have 132,000 miles on it. Not one issue with this car (yes, even the CVT); change that fluid, people!
My son's 2019 Subaru just grenaded the transmission. $10K to fix - supposedly there's a class action settlement that extends the warranty. They're waiting to hear right now.
Among the 3 most common transmissions, manual, torque converter automatic and CVT, none of them is inherently superior to the others. I remember when torque converter automatic transmission was way slower and less efficient than manual some decades ago. It just took time for it to improve and eventually become both faster and more efficient than manual. CVT will continually "improve" also, although I think in some aspects, it's regressing just because the journalists don't like it. I actually do like the earlier versions of the CVTs because adding the fake shifts hurts both speed and efficiency, just for the sake of not getting the "rubber bending" effect, which I don't mind at all.
Agreed. I always have said that any automotive component is only as good as you build it. A cheaply made manual/tc auto/cvt/dct are all equally crappy. If companies make the investment in them, they can all be great equally great, but CVTs are trickier and they’re mostly used in economy cars, so you get some crappy ones. I had a Civic with a CVT and tuned it. Once that tune was in, man it was fun. People would be shocked I had a CVT in there. Thing just took off like a jet. It’s only limitation was high torque/low speed situations. That’s why I’d still prefer a traditional auto or DCT on a track, but on the street, a properly built and tuned CVT can be a lot fun.
Reliability is the issue I think many have. The tech is on paper makes a lot of sense but the fake auto-shifting ratios makes no sense in a CVT and the only reason they exist at all is because people who don't know any better.
Not true, actually. The CVT loses about 10% efficiency during shifts. So by reducing the amount of shifting occurring (through programming discrete steps) it increases power, efficiency, and reliability. This may allow current Gen CVTs to not be hot garbage like Gen 1 was. I'd still take a manual any day. That said, it is hilarious, as the engineers are basically admitting that the entire concept of a CVT is flawed. Which it very much is.
I have no problem with a CVT. I DO have a problem with the long term reliablity. My family has had a number of Subarus. I still own a 2013 with a 5 speed that is running at 140,000 miles. The problem is the durability of that CVT. My parents 2014 with just over 100,000 miles lost its CVT transmission due to failure. The 2016 with 85,000 miles lost its CVT. So if you want the car for less than 80,000 miles, buy the CVT. If you want it longer than that, get the manual or another car.
I have a '19 Outback 3.6R (so it has the CVT). My only two complaints with the CVT is the uneven torque application during low speed acceleration, and the minor exhaust drone on the freeway. The second is not so much on Subaru as on me because I replaced the factory mufflers with Nameless 5" axle-back mufflers. The plus side is that on hard acceleration and above 3500rpms it sounds like a Porsche flat six.
It would be interesting to make a clip of how a cvt works in a sxs or atv. How the helix responds to torque and all the different settings of the weights, springs and so on. It's different technology than that used in cars. Thanks.
Just on principle the idea that they made the mid trim and up (edit: I have been corrected. Only the top trim is ->) CVT only to try and encourage people to buy it to save their development cost for making it better instead of just making what people actually want to buy is infuriating, so I think a lot of people are just gonna continue to ignore this thing
Theoretically, a CVT can be made more durable than a traditional toothed transmission, with no wearable parts (other than fluid). In practice, nissan keeps trying to cut costs in areas it shouldn't, so it ends up borking after like 50k. Also the dumbass marketing campaign of "lifetime" fluid.
@@iddqd339 The last bit is the kicker. Nearly every manufacturer says the fluid is lifetime. However, there's always an asterisk. For "severe duty" it's every 30k miles. And "severe" duty is basically anyone who either A.) Doesn't drive 100% highway miles (i.e. everyone) or B.) people who live in a state that gets to 32F (nearly everyone). With such low requirements to qualify as severe, why even bother with the lifetime schtick? It's causing more harm than good.
@@Erdie5 I suspect some OEM, to whom poor reliability is seen as a feature (eg: BMW or Mercedes) started advertising lifetime fluids, and then everyone else's marketing department could not allow for a transmission fluid lifespan gap.
Great video, thank you! I might be wrong, but I have a feeling that the very fast transition speeds are somehow manipulated in the dashboard to look like they are faster than they really are. It is hard to tell just from the video, but I guess the engine sound does not really follow the RPM reading so quickly and ramps up a little slower. Can you please share your thoughts on this? Thanks!
@@octaviangeorge5455 Belts? The belts don't have to move. There's no reason the pulleys can't shift in and out that quickly. They only have to move a very small amount. I think the delay in engine noise is likely the torque converter unlocking temporarily to reduce stress.
Here is what I don't get: If the CVT is a reliability problem, if it is less fun to drive than a manual or even a regular automatic, if the car-buying public hates CVTs, and it gets poorer fuel mileage in this CAFE standard era, why the heck does Subaru persist with these abominations? (I have driven one).
I like CVTs. I only ever drove two vehicles without them, torque converter automatics, and while they can be good, I really like the CVT and the way they feel. I think that people dislike the CVT because it feels so different, not because the concept is inherently bad. That's my feel.
So I've driven this car, and I have no idea what he is talking about in this video. That transmission is terrible, arguably the worst automatic transmission in any performance oriented car in any segment. The CVT is far less offensive in a normal car, but here it's a glaring weakness. I know this is old, but please if you are watching this and thinking about buying a WRX then you should know that it's actually crap, and it's obviously not a DSG from the seat of the pants impression. The manual otoh, is a good one, and far more mechanical in feel than other C segment competitors. Subaru is a tiny company, and as such they are stuck with the corporate purchasing decisions as they stand after the mainstream models are specced out. That's why this car has a CVT, there's not a single other reason. If you want a good/close alternative to a DSG then it's going to be a very new torque converter setup, like Mazda has.
Getting better every year, though! Most of them don't have the ultra-low range anymore and opt for an actual gear for "1st gear". A lot less movement around cities operating like that.
The big reason people don't like CVT's is that they're notoriously unreliable. Really disappointing to see a CVT comparison video that doesn't say a single thing about reliability.
CVT's are run by a chain sliding on two V shaped pullies. I'd love to see which one makes it to 200,000 miles without major repairs. I'd also like to see how much power makes it to the ground in both.
My 2008 Altima has 227k miles on the original CVT. Draining and filling every 30k and being deliberate going from reverse to drive and vice versa (completely stopping and waiting until the transmission engages) has helped my car stay on the road.
It’s really interesting that this video is coming out today. I was listening to two of my friends have a conversation about this yesterday. One is a Subaru mechanic and the other wants to buy a WRX. The Subaru mechanic said don’t buy a CVT cause his dealership is replacing about 1 per week. They work in theory, not in practicality
My issue is the money involved: - more expensive to buy - more expensive to repair (and fairly often they break and the fix is to replace it with the exact same component which will break again, rinse and repeat...) - worse fuel economy (a belt is less efficient than gears. CVTs can optimize for efficiency, but they often don't)
I think a CVT has some good places like fleet vehicles and high efficiency vehicles. But considering a DSG is about the same weight, I'll stick with that. Plus, what are the durability numbers like? How often does that belt need replacing? Is it prone to weakness in certain situations?
@@GreenBlueWalkthrough CVT? I dunno man, how would they hold up to the punishment a race car's transmission would have to endure? Plus it isn't all max rpm all the time unless it's ovals.
Fleets are the last place you want a Cvt, the maintenance costs/ reliability and then cost of replacement will destroy any potential savings in fuel. Cvt belts are not really replaceable, there is almost no market for rebuilding them. When they break you pretty much have to replace the whole cvt, and they are around 7-10k.
@@jjampong only DSG I have experience with is the VW which is based on the Porsche and I just traded in a car with over 150K miles on it, no issues with the DSG. Can't comment on other manufacturers but I think the VW was the first production car to have one (R32 IIRC).
Not all CVTs are the same. Many Toyota and some Honda hybrids use CVTs with planetary toothed gearsets (no belts). The catch is you have to introduce another electric motor, the rate the electric motor spins is what varies the gear ratios. These are much more durable than "belt" hybrids. Chains and belts just wear out. This wouldn't be such an issue if CVT makers didn't seal them up completely or otherwise make them very difficult to service.
Loved that you showed the rpm when shifting manually with the CVT. Could you do that with more cars? ie any recent BMW with the 8HP from ZF or cars with the DSG gearbox. I'd love to see the response time of those
Agree. Also the ford/gm 10 speed, i can speak for it in the camaro that is an awesome transmission. Really is proof we dont need dcts when we can make that good of a conventional automatic.
That gross spongy feeling of a CVT under accel is a HUGE turnoff, and it is absolutely still there on the new WRX. The lack of being pushed back in your seat (ie CVT torque being slowly and gradually fed in vs basically dumped in with direct engagement) is part of that feeling. Also, rpm decreasing while accelerating is also one of the saddest sounds ever. Finally, the CVT inability to hold barely more that stock power/torque is a MASSIVE reason to stay away. Don’t get me wrong, CVT are great transmissions for their intended purpose: economy and efficiency. Performance however, not so much. Not yet anyway.
Did you... actually watch the video? I think your definition of performance is different to that of most, your first two points are more regarding driving experience/fun not performance and re spongey feeling, not all CVT's are the same, EE also stated in simulated gears mode you wouldn't be able to tell the difference to an auto in the new WRX. In any actual *performance* metric the CVT keeps up with or outperforms the manual in this gen WRX. There is no DCT offered in the WRX so it would be unfair to automatically class Subaru's CVT efforts as subpar to a DCT performance wise.
My issue with CVT is not the performance but the reliability, especially from Subaru. My old Outback CVT failed with less than 100K miles and a decade later Subaru its still having issues.
@@username8644 I had 5 friends with wrx’s in high school and there was a 100% failure rate in those engines. They all blew a piston out of their block. Subaru has no idea how to make an engine which is astounding
For me, longevity is key. I don't really care how nice a CVT is if it only lasts not much more than 100k miles before having to spend thousands to get it fixed. I can replace a clutch in a manual at 100k miles for FAR far less
Honda and Toyota CVTs last quite a while. I've seen some Prius and Civic models for sale online with 200,000 or more miles on them still using the original CVTs according to their service records.
@@dave_riots Prius doesn't have conventional CVT, they emulate CVT with two electric motors coupled with a planetary gear set, there are no belts or chains involved.
Alright RELAX. Subaru's CVTs are still constantly getting recalled, and this new one hasn't even been publicly available long enough to start showing their usual problems. Why don't we wait and see how it goes instead of declaring something brand new good or bad... Not to mention that this CVT isn't at all representative of other non-performance oriented CVTs on the market in any capacity. Sure *this* *one* could be good, but it doesn't fix all the other ones.
Thanks for the info on the new CVT in the WRX. I owned a '15 WRX with the CVT and it was a love/hate relationship. One of the things I hated was the fact that, when in manual mode, there was no rev match for downshifts, resulting in the typical momentary deceleration as the transmission dropped to the next lower ratio and the engine RPM was required to increase. From what I understand, this issue has been addressed in the new CVT. This is something you did not address in this video. I'm wondering if you could comment on that.
![ARGENTINA vs. PERÚ [1-0] | RESUMEN | ELIMINATORIAS SUDAMERICANAS | FECHA 12](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/xtI25ENDDSY/mqdefault.jpg)
![Coheed and Cambria - Searching for Tomorrow [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/hDsYGLbmadg/mqdefault.jpg)
I love the concept of CVTs; boy was I disappointed when I found out that in nearly every actual use of a CVT in a vehicle, they do wonky inefficient power-reducing things just to make them "seem" more like a traditional transmission to the user. When I put my foot down, I want that needle to immediately jump to peak power RPM and stay there until I let off, and when I'm cruising efficiently I want those RPMs as low as possible for the current power demand.
Yeah. Kinda like electric cars with fake engine noise, just why? Why do we need go dress up our new tech to look like old tech?
Try a Subaru. There are 5 on my family. In the real everyday world, sometimes in heavy rush hour traffic, there is nothing to compare. Plus, using the active cruise control makes things a lot different. We are on year 2.023
I used to drive and love stick shifts, but not anymore.
@@housco11 On the plus side; at least if you go deaf you won't miss hearing high revving down-shifts, induction noises or the sound of your vehicle getting stolen, as automatics are FAR more prone to car theft! But now you have features like back up cameras, lane assist and adaptive cruise control! All the things you need to pay less attention while driving - perfect!
they work quite well actually on small cars.
My rav4 prime is like that more or less and combined with the electric motor helping, it does just that: responsive power
As a Subaru tech, I 100% agree. I was impressed with the cvt on the new WRX. It’s much improved over the last generation. That being said, reliability is another factor.
Wrx reliability is not great to begin with.
Is it really that much worse? I guess the belt has to be replaced right?
@@Mr.Marbles Well, that's the problem. It can't be replaced.
@@Mr.Marbles you mean replace the transmission? Lol
CVT's seem to be reliable enough imo~ Maybe not in Nissan/Jatco's case but everyone else seems to do just fine w/ their CVT's. Ive had less CVT issues than DCT ones in my experience.
This is encouraging, but my main concern is still long-term CVT durability, and the need for meticulous maintenance (likely much more often than what Subaru prescribes), especially when accommodating relatively-high output. That is what I'd like to learn about from an engineer.
Meticulous maintenance? Like changing CVT fluid? There's nothing else you can do to the CVT.
@@0xKennethchanging that fluid way more often than an auto. But why in the hell is anyone considering a manual for a car like this? Way more fun and engaging.
Change the cvt fluid every 30,000 to 40,000 miles and you will be fine. Go the 100,000 miles they recommend if you want to buy a new transmission in the future
I love the idea of a CVT working like a CVT was designed (at least in eco mode)
Yeah, I wish the user modes gave you a bit more control over transmission operation and allowed for the driver to pick how it operates, because there are not only efficiency, but also performance advantages to be had if it operates like a CVT can.
1000000% the same
Probably this is part of the reason why it still has worse economy figures.
@@petrkubena yeah but one-1 mile per gallon? I'd say they have pretty much closed the gap there, don't yah think?
Exactly, my Subaru is from before they added the fake shifts and when I punch it, it shoots up to rock steady 5600 RPM and hauls butt, and it's super smooth for daily driving.
I actually hate the fake gear ratio thing it completely defeats the purpose of a cvt. One reason I hate driving automatics is that you can't predict when they're going to shift and jerk the car especially around a corner so a cvt is actually preferable in this regard.
I've never had a problem predicting when my car was going to shift and it also doesn't jerk the car enough to cause any upset in its balance in my experience
@@Schmuly You've clearly never driven a 6-speed automatic transmission V6 Honda Accord then...
@@JustinDaniels yeah sorry not everyone drives that kind of garbage.
@@Nick_Gir The car is certainly not garbage, or eIse I wouldn't have spent over $25,000 recently to get a 2017 V6 Honda Accord Coupe. It's a decent car overall.
However, the transmission is 100% garbage. Constantly aggressively downshifting and engine braking as soon as I let off of the gas pedal, and hesitating between gears 5 and 6 when driving at 40mph.
@@JustinDaniels lmfao you can tell yourself it's not garbage all you want but you bought trash. Not saying my choice is better than yours but I kinda am saying that.
It's a good thing for folks like me with disabilities that the auto version of this car doesn't suck! I really miss driving manual from my able-bodied days, but the reality is that my spine isn't gonna start working again. So cars that are engaging with an automatic are excellent for accessibility, since I can still drive them with hand controls.
Edit: to clarify I drive a Tesla Model 3 LR now and used to drive a '06 Miata with a 5 speed. The Tesla is less engaging, but it's good enough for me. I'm just overall glad there's effort going into experiences that everyone can use, whenever they're EV or dual clutch or CVT or slushbox.
Agreed, i think transmission technology has been the most underrated aspect of overall vehicle performance in recent years. Autos used to be considered the worst of the worst, but have leapfrogged manuals so dramatically over just the past 10-15 years.
Totally agree with that 💯
@@ALMX5DP I mean autos are super good, but cvts arent great. My experiance with the cvt in cars is with the 2015 outback where it is unresponsive, slow, and just a washy feeling in the pedal. I dont know about modern cvts, but ones even 3 years ago, were terrible especially compared to manuals and good autos. There are great autos, just not the cvt.
Just wanted to chime in, I have a WRX GT and it is fantastic. If you put the car in sport# mode, it hangs on to revs and it down shifts super aggressively. It is honestly better than any dual clutch I’ve driven in fully automatic mode.
@@charliemaybe did you even watch the video you’re commenting on?
While I don't hate the way the CVT feels like in my Impreza I did hate having to replace the entire transmission at 70,000 miles. They are prone to mechanical failures.
Did you change the fluid at 50k? If not, that's your fault.
It’s “lifetime” fluid per factory Subaru factory specs.
@@TheBilliardCorner only in the US, every other country? Nope
CVT is meant to be driven gently.
That's why, "Subaru has Not proven everyone wrong with CVT`s". Same thing happened with me, with a CVT, had to replace the whole thing. With that said, I don't think CVT`s excel in the area of durability.
I understand they won't take full advantage, because customers will whine about the "no gears" feeling. But I wish they would let you select a mode that would let the transmission run that way if you wanted to. Completely optimized for economy at low throttle settings, and for power delivery at high throttle settings, with a linear transition between those things across the mid-throttle range. Maybe I wouldn't use that mode all the time, but it might be nice to use it sometimes.
My Camry Hybrid's eCVT has exactly this in the Eco, Normal, and Power buttons. Eco is great in snow, offroad, and parking lots & neighborhoods. (20 is plenty.) Power is great on dry pavement and freeway but has too much torque for rain and I spin out too often. Normal for city driving and rainy days.
My 6 yo Impreza does that almost as described. At partial accelerator setting it optimizes efficiency and at full accel it optimizes power. Ideally the accelerator should be a "power setting" input to a control system. You dial up the power you want and it gives that power (or as much as it can) in the most efficient way possible. The Impreza almost does this, I have heard that the newer Levorg does it exactly. No need for extra buttons and stuff!
@@HughCStevenson1 I know that's how modern Volkswagons work. The potentiometer on the throttle pedal sends a signal to the computer, which the computer interprets as a percentage of torque demanded. Then the computer tries to make the engine deliver that torque value. The details are over my head, but that's what's going on. I suspect its similar logic in most, if not all, modern cars.
Let a buyer choose between the crap CVT or a conventional automatic.
The VB WRX with SPT trans (CVT) has SI drive modes and effect throttle input and shift logic. (Source, I own one)
One thing we discovered while researching/tuning CVTs for drag racing is there is a substantial loss in efficiency while it is continuously shifting, especially at WOT.
What actually happened is while the clutches are shifting gear ratios (constantly) and the belt is moving up and down in the clutch sheaves there is both an increase in friction and a small amount of slippage that occurs.
As a result, you lose about 10-15% in efficiency while the CVT is (constantly) shifting. You do get the benefit from running the engine at the optimal rpm for power (or efficiency if going for best fuel economy) but we found that isn't enough to overcome the loss in efficiency.
By configuring the CVT to behave as if it had discrete gears (we found 7 to 10 virtual gears was best) we were able to shave off over 0.4 seconds at the drag strip.
If Subaru is making their CVT behave as if it has discrete gears during WOT acceleration, I would bet this is for the same reason we did it - quickest acceleration.
One of the big reasons you can do better with virtual fixed gear ratios is you can get away with less clamping force in the sheaves. The slippage that naturally occurs while a CVT shifts gears requires a good ~20% greater clamping force in order to control this slippage.
Just curious, who is "we"? Is this a quote from somewhere?
And what's WOT? World of Tanks?
@@Forke13 If you're not just making a pun, I'm guessing "wide open throttle".
@@AySz88 Thanks. I really don't get abbreviations.
@@AySz88 We is a bunch of local guys racing their ATVs and snowmobiles and spending a lot of money and time optimizing their CVTs, plus a local university research team that confirmed what we found with automotive CVTs from around 2015. A few of the guys even have CVT dynos, with electric motors providing the input and variable load generators providing the dynamic load.
Some CVTs might not lose as much power and efficiency while shifting but it does make sense that all are more efficient while fixed at a constant gear ratio.
A CVT feature I'd love to try is a manual ratio lever - kind of like a prop pitch lever in an airplane. Lever in low, pin the throttle, and manually push the lever forward for higher ratios as the car accelerates. Like a fretless bass - you can pick off tune ratios if that's your mood or learn to fine tune the ratio for your driving style. Thoughts?
I explored this idea when I was making a presentation on IVT transmissions in college over 25 years ago. In practice, it would be a LOT harder to drive than you think, so it would need to be fully computer controlled -- just like a CVT.
Your talking about a hydrostatic drive. In the 70s and 80s garden tractor brands started doing the idea. Pick your throttle amount then adjust the vehicle speed by a lever.
If the manual CVT control lever set a particular engine RPM, like the prop pitch lever in an airplane, it would be low driver workload, easy to drive. Full forward = max RPM = max power. Leave it there and do whatever you want with the gas pedal, when you floor it, it will instantly give max acceleration for whatever speed you're going. Pull it back to peak economy RPM (perhaps 1800 RPM), and you're getting peak fuel economy for whatever speed you're driving. That would be unique and fun.
Nice, I'm a fretless guy
@@bearwithit glad your anxiety is low enough that you don't have to fret
CVT in my six cyl subi died at 62,000 miles. Subaru replaced it under warranty, but I lost my faith in them. Also have a Nissan Rogue with a CVT that I've started replacing the fluid in routinely in an attempt to get more than 70,000 miles out of the belt. Also picked up a RAV4 hybrid with an eCVT and think it is a far superior mechanical system. The new subi Crosstrek hybrid is using a variation of the Toyota eCVT. The eCVT has no belts, only gears on gears. My advice for belt based CVT owners - never manually shift.
Dude, while that shitty Rogue is less than 84K miles, get it to Nissan. There's a class action suit against Nissan. Though they may warrant till 60K, the suit forced them to replace, but 84K is the max. Google it. My Rogue, when I found out was 86K and no amount of going to corporate made a difference. No more Nissan in my life. I drive a subi WRX. Manual shift. Don't know if I can do the CVT with what I've seen on it. Which isn't much.
Why not shift manually?
@@natas12rmIt increases the wear on the belt
The problem with cvts isn’t necessarily performance (often is), but rather their tendency to grenade.
My 2015 WRX CVT died under stock power at 140k km, hopefully this new one does better.
@@MystElectric did you change the fluid every 50k?
Often it’s the maintenance. If everyone changed their cvt fluid as religiously as they change their oil they would last longer.
@@514aam Changed fluid at 105k km (when I purchased the car)
@@ajhurtekant8364 Yes but when the manufacturer says its a lifetime fluid and some dealerships will even refuse to change the fluid. It falls on manufacturer not the customer for the failed units (which is also why they have such a long extended warranty on them now)
I love CVT when it stays in one gear and it doesn't fake shift.
I love when CVT is not in my car ;)
I hate the fake shifting. That's not how the transmission is supposed to work. Might as well use an automatic if you want defined gears like that. Toyota still makes a pretty good CVT. I know the Mitsubishi CVTs worked properly back when they first came out, but I am not sure on their reliability.
Technically that would be “rolling through infinitely many gears” if it’s accelerating but not fake shifting.
@@ebels3 The Toyota CVT does the fake shifting when you fully press the peddal, RPM go up to redline and then drop. I just want my transmition to work at is fullest when I am passing that truck in the highway. At least in economy driving it works wondefully, and the launch gear works well too.
@@alejogonzalez4997 That's how an CVT is supposed to work. It doesn't shift gear ratios, it keep the engine at max power and efficiency. The engine will go to redline and slowly drop. The first gear for launching IS awesome.
The only problem I have with CVTs is their (perceived) reliability. Hopefully the newer generations of them have solved those issues but I'm not going to put down $40k+ to find out.
On another note, I really like the eCVT that Toyota uses. It's a super clever and interesting design and it would be great to get a video on how it works.
Subaru's CVTs aren't bad but they recommend no maintenance. That means it most likely won't last you too long without regular fluid changes.
Edit: I believe Hyundai/kia CVTs are similar to the Toyota eCVT. It has a planetary 1st gear then goes to CVT.
@@wigletron2846 Toyota also has long recommended service intervals, which I think will harm the lifespan of their vehicles. E.g. they don't recommend a first oil change until 10k miles.
@@graham1034 a lot of manufacturers are recommending 10k oil changes now which is crazy. Its planned obsolescence imo. They don't want people driving cars for 200k miles anymore.
They base the service intervals pretty much on how little can be done and still make it to the end of the warranty. If nearly all of them can make it without any servicing then they sell that as a feature. Regardless of that also meaning that the trans will fail not long after warranty. Some even make them nearly unserviceable where changing fluid and filters takes much more work than it should if it's even something a home mechanic can reasonably do.
Nissan's awful Jatco CVT gave all other CVTs a bad reputation. Jatco makes great transmissions outside CVTs.... but their CVT reliability is embarrassing.
Had a 2015 WRX with CVT that was just a casual daily driver. Twice the transmission had to be replaced, once was under warranty and the second I passed on down the road to the dealership that had no idea what I was trading in. Great cars, in my luck terrible transmission.
There you go, nail, head. This is something I've seen missing from engineering explained videos. What about the second, or third owner? What about longevity? How does it compare over time. Not everyone can afford brand new cars. He's missing probably 1/2 of his base.
@@SR-ry6hs I like Subaru's I've owned many. The only reason I bought a CVT WRX was because all I own is manual sports cars and the wife wanted something sporty she could drive so we bought a 2015 model in 2016. It was a 1 owner car and I got it with 25,000 miles on it. The CVT didn't make it to 42k miles before it had to be replaced. While I owned it, it was never beat on and I was always up on every single maintenance item as I like to keep all my cars in top tip shape. I got rid of it at 85k miles cause the CVT was going out again and this time it wasn't under warranty and the Subaru dealership wanted like $12k to replace it. No thanks.
@@SR-ry6hs 1/2 only in US where new cars are funny cheap.
Where I live, for such an WRX you need to pay 2 years of income. Of WHOLE income (not just the savings) or take loan for 10-15 years ;)
I have a '15, I was at least the 2nd owner. Had some tasteful mods and I got a VERY good deal since I worked at the dealership. I haven't had a single issue out of the trans. I pick up nails in my tires like I have a magnet hanging in front of the wheels but thats about it. It has about 70K miles so far, I drive it like a pissed off teenager, no matter how hard I try to be an adult(I'm 43 and ashamed). I wish I had held out for a manual to come thru but my wife can drive this if needed. I've heard the CVT trans is kinda hit/miss with the durability. That being said, I wouldn't buy it again.
@@wb3191 glad to hear it’s held up. I hear ya on the nail magnet 😂 I was always getting punctures as well but that’s just the nature of the beast sometimes.
As someone with manual, CVT and conventional autos, the CVT is confusing to drive in winter. Aside from a blinking traction control light, it's tough to know whether you've lost traction or it's just deciding to increase revs. With manual or conventional autos you at least know that RPM is proportional to speed.
Im coming up to 2 months ownership of my wrx rs cvt (mid spec in Australia) and couldnt be happier with selecting the cvt. Being almost 50 and driving manuals all my life ive paid my penance and its time to relax a little. Coming from a previous gen manual rex I think the cvt here is exceptional. In comfort mode it just cruises along nicely and particularly in heavy traffic its so good not to have that jerky start stop motion that you can get from traditional autos. Then is sport# it is a beast. You can select to have your revs exactly where you want them at any time and the power is instant. Torque right across the powerband and responsiveness that matches any DCT ive driven. Like the video said its easy to just slag off the CVT, and mostly it comes from a a background of simple ignorance.
I just got an Audi RS3 and quite happy with it. I have owned several dual clutch cars including PDK, I wonder how the CVT makes difference from the DCT in sports driving.
how is the nvh? i know not to expect much from these types of cars... but itd be nice to know if its not too terrible
Agreed with your points as I'm still the current owner of MY16 Rexy (WRB Premium model). S-mode is enough to pull away someone else who pushed me under non-sense distance. I-mode has capable to save fuel consumption for cruising. I rarely to choose S# as it makes the rexy like a bull even I throttle the pedal a little bit. For my own opinion, I won't use Lineartronic for track day unless you installed CVT cooler (seems the kit at Super Autobacs, Tokyo in 2019)
Note: I'm still driving manual car in daily :)
Thanks for this. I rented a BRZ last week and had a great time. However, I live near the city and need a daily for work. Manual sucks in stop and go traffic. Years ago, slow shifting autos didn't hold a candle to the fun of a manual and so I went manual. Just like some won't get a DCT, the same won't get a CVT, but there is no longer a performance benefit to manual. Just like a loud exhaust, manual doesn't make the car faster, so it's not necessary. If Subie can make a CVT that locks up like a DCT, then we have the best of both worlds.
I think CVT's as a concept are good. But it's going to take me plenty of convincing now to trust a Subaru CVT. A close friend of mine bought his Subaru Forester new with a CVT many years back. He kept to the scheduled services, and wasn't putting a huge amount of mileage on it, but just after 100,000 kms, his transmission more or less failed, needing a complete replacement. Fortunately, he was just barely inside the warranty, so it was replaced under warranty, and he wrote it off as just bad luck. But after a further 90,000 kms, the transmission had another severe issue and needed another full replacement.
CVTs are a terrible idea. A manual is going to give you the same efficiency with the right ratios, and it's far more reliable, cheaper to repair, and doesn't have 14 computer modules and sensors.
Doesn't the direct injection on the Subarus also ruin the engine?
I think that you left out the greatest disadvantage, at least as currently implemented, and that is reliability. I have never owned a car with a CVT but I have read many accounts of them not even lasting 100,000 miles. I like the idea of a CVT but until they can be made to operate as reliably as other types of transmissions, I will give them a pass.
+1000 I try to keep my cars 10+ years (200,000km or so) and have never had a problem with any transmission. I doubt that any CVT vehicle could regularly do this kind of mileage without problems (sure there are outliers, but I am talking the bulk of them).
To me, the traditional shifting with a CVT is a step back to the potential benefit of the CVT.
I agree, it's going to make you feel more acceleration, but the peaks could be cancelled out by the RPM loss in shifting. A lower, but steady RPM would theoretically produce the same average power while using less fuel to do it!
downhill control engine braking is possible with downshifts
@@ryanhill906 there's a big loss in efficiency while the transmission is changing ratio. changing the gear ratio in steps means that the belt spends much less time slipping.
i drive a 2015 CVT honda city handed down from my brother. it's no sports car, but neither me nor him have ever had any issues with the transmission. it's been smooth and reliable from the moment we bought the car. i really don't get the hate, it feels so much nicer to drive than an automatic
I'd love to try a CVT just doing its thing. I've watched many of your videos on CVTs but today's the first time I've heard (or maybe i just didn't pay attention earlier) that you can be accelerating and the rpms be going down, that's so interesting.
Just drive a Prius bro
Our Impreza does the virtual gear thing when accelerating hard, but when driving moderately it is quite cool.
When accelerating it drops the rpm but it just keeps pulling with no interruption
Drive a utv or snowmobile.
I'm glad you mentioned something about Subaru's 'notchiness' between ratios on their CVTs. My cousin has a newer Crosstrek and under just plain 'ol auto mode it has the annoying (to me) aspect that under more heavier acceleration it does the 'fake gears' instead of holding a peak power RPM that it would normally do under lighter acceleration. Having driven it under these circumstances, it definitely feels like there's that momentary loss of power when it jumps between the fixed ratios and when trying to get up to speed quick on the highway for example it feels a little unnerving.
My personal vehicle is a Ford C-Max with an eCVT. Comparatively my brother has an older Crosstrek that doesn't do the fixed ratio jumps unless you specifically put it in manual mode and I very much have gotten comfortable and prefer having the engine just staying at one peak RPM and just accelerate with the constantly adjusted ratio. I wish Subaru had the option to disable the forced fake gear changes under heavy acceleration especially on something like the Crosstrek which isn't really made to be a sports car like the WRX.
Interesting, I can't say I ever paid enough attention to notice it in my wrx, or maybe I didn't know what to notice.
But I'm thinking that my stage 1+ tune could have possibly removed that, amongst changing other things, and is part of why it feels so much better now.
I agree. That would offer the best of both worlds. I wish the stepped changing could be switched on/off.
Completely different CVT
The theoretical idea of CVT is great. Like You said in video - it can get max efficiency or max acceleration of the same engine, but (as You also said) it does not always happen in real world. Like in that Subaru - previous gen. was worse than manual, that gen. is "even" but still not significantly better. I think it still need some improvements in CVT so we can definitely said: "yup, it's better"
I'd guess that had subaru not nerfed the cvt with fake shifts, it might edge out a victory in 0-60 times by some 0.2sec
The fake gears actually make it slower as per Subaru test but people feel it's faster.
My last 3 Audi’s have all had Dual Clutch transmissions and I highly prefer the positive clutch take up (like a well driven manual) when accelerating from a stop than the sensations of a torque convert automatic. At least new torque converter autos are not the “slip and slide with Powerglide” slush boxes of my youth. 😊
What's the difference in sensation?
@@Kavafy More direct. Like letting a clutch out on a manual.
Drive something sporty that has the ZF 8 speed (most BMWs run it), best conventional automatic out there hands down. GM has also been able to get their 8 speed automatic down to DCT level shift speeds, though I think they only ran this tuning on the C7 Vette, I don't think their 10 speed auto can match those shift speeds and of course the C8 is DCT.
The new 8 & 10 speeds are pretty damn good but dual clutch trans are still better unless you want to swap out the TC for a big stall.
Totally agree,DSG is like a perfect manual shift over and over,crazy fast. My favorite DSG is 7 speed found in old 1.2 TSI engines,crazy fast compared to more modern DSG,sport mode is very sporty up&down shifts
My only hangup on CVTs is their reputation for not lasting…I don’t think you brought up long-term potential issues
I don't know that most dual clutches are much better
@@questioner1596 Traditional automatic transmissions and traditional manual transmissions are still the way to go for reliability.
Well Luke Duke, either you've been freeze-dried or doing hard time in a cave, but the way of the world now and for quite some time is virtually nothing, in regard to public consumer purchase, is engineered and manufactured for true longevity. This goes from everything to light bulbs, clothing, appliances, electronics, hardware, and yes....especially auto parts. Of course, there are always a few exceptions, but I'm talking about the overall global standard of quality production, or to clarify, the lack thereof. It's not in the best interests and especially profit margin of any of these corporations to make their products truly over-engineered and bulletproof.
@@blaineedwards8078 I strongly disagree. Cars last vastly longer than they used to, and the average age of vehicles on the road is increasing over time, not decreasing. In the '80s if a car made it to 100k it was seen as a true accomplishment. Now, everyone expects a car to hit 200k with no major issues.
Cvts need to be more repairable. Then they wouldn't be so feared. If you have one break, the only option is to replace it, and that's usually 5 to 8 grand
Had a Nissan Versa with a CVT years ago. It was a bit like driving with turbo lag but it was an excellent commuter car that consistently had great milage.
My grandfather had one too. Now he's trying to get his money back for the transmission he had to buy.
@@bigtimber my cvt lasted 160000 Km. Waste of money.
My only experience with a cvt in in my partner's '05 civic hybrid. Its doesn't do the fake gear think and if you put your foot to the floor it holds at 5k rpm. I wish all cvt cars had a mode to do that because that's the best for absolute acceleration and efficiency. Also, liked for waterfall notification
My GF's accord is the same way. Boring appliance, but it acts like a CVT should.
@@JoshuaTootell exactly. She's not really into cars the way I am so a correctly working cvt is perfect because it gets the most out of the little 1.3
Okay I need to ask. I had an 05 Civic Hybrid and did you experience any jerking motion when letting off or applying that gas? From what I read it had to deal with the CVT and oh my god it drove me crazy. Passengers would think I would just randomly slap the break hard for no reason lol
@@gageemlen2075 yeah sometimes there's a vibration when first taking off and occasionally it jerks back and forth while under acceleration. It feels like it's randomly changing the gear ratio. It used to do it under deceleration but we got a software update when we took it in for the airbag recall that fixed it. I guess that was the regenerative braking
Hybrid CVTs are eCVTs...they are different.
It'll be interesting to see if we start seeing CVT tuners to maximize power and make it work like an actual CVT.
I hope semi truck use CVT to maximize durability.
@@GF-mf7ml i have a civic touring that uses a CVT and i like it better than the traditional. It is FBO and Tuned and it holds power great. Stays in full boost the entire time my foot is planted. Manual transmission beats it off the line but after that there is no comparison.
@@GF-mf7ml Farm tractors use a planetary gear set style CVT. That may work with transport trucks.
Joseph You mean where the engine rpm stays constant(relatively), while the ratios change to give accelleration? Toyota Synergy hybrids do that as an e-CVT.
ZF builds tractor CVTs that can be discribed as semi hydrostatic. They can be programmed to all sorts of driving strategies including what I mentioned above.
What?! This is exactly why haters hate cvts. When they all first came out in the mid 2000s, that is exactly how they functioned and not a single person thought it felt or sounded normal...so manufacturers started making them shift like gears. Lmao.
So disappointed that the WRX GT doesn’t come with a manual option. It’s a great car, with great seats. I test drove one and loved it, except the transmission. I’m buying a GR86 instead.
My main concern with the CVT is what happens when it breaks, those things are expennnnnnnnnnsive whereas a manual is much cheaper to fix. Performance is fun and I would like it but it's secondary to reliability for me. Will probably end up with the Forester though which there is no manual option :( But still considering the Crosstrek, which also will have a manual parking brake which even if the electric brake never fails, the analog nature of *knowing* my parking brake is up and doesn't need electricity to function gives me better peace of mind than an electric brake, even if I know there are manual overrides if the power fails. Crosstrek should have a couple more MPGs too, but the Forester will have a bunch more space. I'll figure it out eventually.
Yeah if your CVT craps out after 4yrs or so... you're done. The whole car is paper weight.
@@mattiapresti7295 I know they're not cheap either but they're not *SEVEN THOUSAND DOLLARS*
The Subaru CVT is $10k, it is pretty much like having a Sword of Damocle🗡️ on your neck.
you know how to Avoid that?
dont buy nissan CVT, dont buy Kia cvt , dont buy hyundai cvt.
you are welcome
@@tocreatee3585 still living in 2010 😆
reliability/longevity of the cvt has always been it's drawback. Smooth non jerky acceleration and proper maintenance has been decent for cvts, but knowing the market for those who drive a wrx, I don't see how they will last. Unless there is something more that has helped prolong longeviity
I think it’s ok since wrx tend to blow
The best thing for longevity is Cobb refusing to support them
That's what keeps me from buying the new civic. I don't trust the cvt or the turbo to take me to 300k miles
All CVT's use Oil with too low a spec.
Step up, Oil Extreme Concentrate and pour it.
Your CVT will work smooth as Butter
Toyota offloads the CVT on the Prius by using the electric motor from a standstill.
My old Jeep Patriot had CVT. I lovingly referred to it as a “city jeep”, but it still made for a fun camping trip. RIP Patty. I still love you.
How is reliability? Can you do a video on CVTs and why they always break / how this could be prevented.
It's because they operate with bands and belts instead of gears.
Fast shifts + belts = slip
Some CVTs that shift slower are more reliable (for example, tractor transmissions)
Friction contact on the CVT belt is on the sides. It's a transmission designed for failure.
high torque/starting is bad for CVT, that is why the toyota has eCVT (hybird electric motor assisted) and the CVT + fixed 1st gear. Either of these design solutions will address the downsides of a conventional CVT
Been driving a tuned 2020 VA WRX CVT and haven't had any issues. :)
I wonder how much drivetrain loss you get with the CVT compared to the manual. Would love to see both of them on the dyno.
You can't dyno a cvt (at least in "regular" mode)
It probably only matters on paper. The car is already more capable than 99% of owners driving skills.
Most cvts have an efficiency of about 92-98% with the torque converter locked up
Just drag race the two. That's more relevant than a dyno.
@@gardenia1738 what's stopping you
I don't think most people have an issue with concept or utility of a cvt. The the only gripe I hear about is that they can never seem to make it past 100k miles with many going out around 50-75k, which is atrocious and absolutely unacceptable when compared with a standard automatic.
mine is already 150k.....although now i feel it somewhat slipping at times.....hope it can survive 200k...and it is a lancer cvt from jatco...
Have you noticed, the previous gen model was doing 0 t0 60 in 5.1 secs vs t the current which does 5.7, this doesn't make the cvt faster, but it makes the manual slower
2009-14 WRX 5 speed went 0-60 in only 4.7 seconds.
Yep. Subaru is going the way of Mitsubishi. They decided they didn't want fun cars, they wanted boring cars
@@VanquishedAgain its not they dude, but the clients.
Tell us how good it is in 100,000 miles.
Fun fact: Japan's home grown battle tank uses a CVT, allowing it to drive in reverse to get back behind cover after a shot faster than any other main battle tank.
I would've liked to have heard some discussion about reliability, as what I see in the InnerTubes is that CVTs are less reliable.
A lot of the reputation around reliability relates to cars from 20years ago when cvts were first coming on the market.
@@christopherjohnston6343 Fun fact. The Justy had a CVT in the mid 1980s. I wish that was 20 years ago. But it was not.
@@johnrobinson1328 oh yeah the justy was an early adopter as well as other city cars such as the March etc but we started seeing more mainstream use in the late 90s early 00s. And this is the period that created the bad reputatuon
Isn't the speed of the CVT "shifting" a bit of a deception based on the tachometer? You can hear the engine RPM's catch up slower than the actual needle speed. I noticed most tachometers in cars move faster than the actual rpm based on a calculated RPM after each shift, mostly noticeable on newer Mercedes AMG's with the digital tachos and I suspect this WRX is doing the same thing
or the pulleys haven't fully finished adjusting, so the engine got there quickly, but you cant apply all the torque juuuust yet
so it's like it's not exactly "fully in gear"
Yea, if it was instant like dct it would wear heavily because the chain or belt is getting forced up instead of following and riding up the pulley
Agreed, it's all fakeness. Every part about it. Cvts will always suck and manufacturers keep trying to convince us otherwise with so much trickery and fake sportiness.
@@csdstudio78 wow hater
@@SuperRisingdeath no, he won't be a real hater until he has to pay to get a cvt fixed, that's when the rage will start, compare how much cvt transmissions cost to fix if they break and you will never buy one ever again....
I like the CVT in my Subaru, even though it needed some getting used to the lack of "punch" when accelerating, but I absolutely hate the pre-set fake shifting. I have figured out, that in automatic mode, it does not use it as long as you are gentle with the throttle pedal. So if you don't floor it, but rather slowly push the pedal down, it actually does the CVT thing as it is supposed to. So you can learn how to drive it as a proper CVT if you stay in the upper half of the throttle path. However, I would still love to disable the pre-set gears completely. The acceleration is so soft, that it doesn't do anything for the driving experience. It's just loud, slow and annoying. I'm having much more fun whenever I manage to keep it in the variable mode.
I have a Outback and Subaru has had major reliability issues with CVTs. recent recalls from premature belt failure is a major problem. Stay away. I wish I did.
@@eleventy-seven Subarus are sold in my country with 5-year/200k km warranty, extendable up to 7-year/250k km for about 500-1000€, so I hope I will get a new car before any reliability issues hit my wallet :-)).
@@eleventy-seven Ukraine loves CVT transmissions.
Maybe some geeky guy could program the transmission not to use fake shifting.
I have a CVT and it sucks. It feels exactly like a normal auto transmission. I hate the jumpiness when you accelerate. I thought the whole point of a continuous transmission was it’d feel like one single gear, similar to an EV.
It was supposed to be that way. The early ones that came out around 2009-2010 were actually continuous, but apparently people complained about the monotonous drone so they programmed them to jump to discreet ratios to simulate gear shifts. It really is a mad idea. They should have put their efforts into making the car quieter so the drone doesn't bother people and retain the efficiency. I'm sure this rapid shifting of ratios also contributes to the poor reliability and belt damage.
My 2016 prius is extremely smooth at all times. It uses the hybrid system to provide instant torque in daily driving scenarios, so it feels like an EV. I’m really glad that it doesn’t do the fake shifting BS that newer CVT-equipped vehicles do.
@@andoletube Yea, that’s the exact reason why I hate it. The companies gave into the complaints from monkey-brained people who can’t handle a little bit of change. Programming in the fake gear-shift feel is like imitating a flaw that doesn’t need to exist.
@@WilliamStrealy I have a new Corolla hatchback. So maybe I should look into the new Prius. The new one is pretty sexy. And hopefully, it feels the same way as how you describe yours
I drove both a rubber band (DAF) and a metal belt (FIAT/Fuji) CVT for some years and I found them working very well just as they were intended, without artificial "gears" so with constant rpm, but the metal belt one with a computerised hydraulic control that (amongst other things) kept that constant rpm lower during acceleration in cases where max power wasn't needed.
I love how this channel called Engineering Explained never even explained what a CVT is or what the acronym stands for 5 minutes in
The red exterior and Recaros look great! This video makes the CVT look decent, but all my friends with Subaru CVT experience have complained about it one way or another. Like most people, I would be worried about longevity.
also resale value on CVT WRX is much lower than a manual.
That's what I would worry about also is longevity. Farm Craft 101 just did a video where he replaced a CVT transmission. He said some guys say they wear out fast and another guy has had his for 150,000 miles but he changes the oil every 20,000 miles. An oil and filter change in that CVT transmission cost 200 bucks. I know some people are lucky to get the oil changed in their engine for 35-50 so good luck with an extra $200 oil change every 6-7 oil changes.
@@keithyinger3326 - I change the CVT fluid myself in the wife's Civic every spring. It's not hard to do. The right Honda fluid isn't cheap, so it's about 50 bucks. The car has a little over 120k with zero issues since new.
All in all CVT's are/were designed for economy driving not performance which is probably why they don't seem to last as long when driven as performance nor are repairable... they can only be replaced ($8k recent dealership quote for my buddy's legacy and that was 2 years ago before inflation). You make valid points however my cvt started going out at 110k mileage (I had fluid changed twice) and quickly dumped the car / trade in for a Toyota real automatic and will never own another cvt as a result. Thanks for your your overall very interesting and educational videos.
They are repairable but not economical to do so due to time and part costs.
Correct if you are able to find someone willing and capable to do it.
Correct me if im wrong, this is just something ive noticed.. These digital displays that are being used today are often designed to respond to the "Input" of the gear change (To make them seem faster), not the "Outcome" of it which is the Increase in rpms. Where's "most" physical needle gauges respond to the rpm change after the gear change occurs (The Outcome). This means that if your going to shift from 3>4 causing (for argument's sake) a 500 rpm change. The digital display will instantly drop the rpm at which point it still takes the mechanical components and engine another roughly 400 milliseconds to adjust its rpm and power delivery.. so in other words, appearance isn't always actuality in these cases
Good point, I wonder how the sound/feel is in the car, and whether a discrepancy between the time of the dial change and the time of sound change exists.
One thing I'm realizing is you didn't talk about long-term life of these transmissions I've driven a few cvts and they are pretty smooth but the biggest problem is every car I've driven with a cvt the transmission is going out you can't accelerate hard cause then they jerk I have not come across a car with a good taken care cvt transmission the problem is to make them last you have to do a fluid change way more often and from what I've heard doing that then voids your warranty and I've had friends with cars with cvt transmissions and they have been like well can we replace it and I say yes we could but good luck finding a good transmission in the junkyard and to buy a new one always costs more than what the car is worth yet you get a normal automatic and I've had great luck with junkyard transmissions
Most readable youtube comment
I agree.
@@loge2001 Oh my god, you just made me realize that it IS one long, rambling sentence. Jesus.
@@loge2001 Hang on this sounds like fun........can I have a go ?
I have been doing a lot of research about CVT as I am looking to replace my V6 Accord with over 200,000km so I wanted to get a 4WD and in Australia the ONLY non-diesel 4WDs are Subaru (OK, it's AWD) and Suzuki Jimny (too small for me - it's even worse on the highway than my DR650 but I digress...) lots of reading suggests the Subarus CVTs are a bit better than Nissan (for example) and there is a Facebook Australia group of Subaru owners who are really pissed about their CVT problems - some of these people are hard core Subaru Fan Boiz and some have said "never again" so this really rings alarm bells for me but there are the odd owners that get a good run out of a CVT but these are few and far between it seems to me that most who say they have no issues tend to get new vehicles after 3-5 years again this sets off alarm bells for me so I am now looking at diesel but finding the greenie/leftie local councils are trying to shut down ICE engines and in particular diesels thus I am in a quandary and do not know what to get there are some people who say diesel will stay for a long time (for essential transport of good and services etc) but I suspect that one will need a Govt issued license before a service depot will allow you to buy diesel for your private vehicle.
Didn't really address the main complaint I see people having with CVT which is basically that it doesn't last and isn't particularly rebuildable when it does go out.
Not a fair claim right now, this is a refreshed cvt and we have 0 data to indicate that they die or not
Your videos are some of the only "longer" videos that I watch without some form of skipping.
Great engagement, helpful explanation of concepts and great quality overall.
Thank you!
Sadly, there were no words regarding reliability differences between CVT anf manual. My guess is that the CVT just won't be as reliable over the long term. Also, I wonder what the recommended service requirement differences are; fluid changes every N miles? Rebuild every N miles? Etc.
I've never heard of a reliable CVT.
Edit: I know on Ford's CVTs, the transmissions are sealed and the fluid is not supposed to be changed for the life of the vehicle. Probably one of the MANY reasons why these CVTs fail like clockwork. There are two filters in them, one is fairly easily accessible through the driver's side wheel well, while the other one is at the bottom of the pan and not "designed" to be serviced. Again, you can imagine how well this works in practice.
Reliable is relative. Autos need maintenance and repairs. Manuals need new clutches and some cars go through them fairly quickly.
@@davidmccarthy6061yeah just ignore the rate in which they need major rebuilding/replacing of gears/belts. Or that a clutch job is a DIY job, while try replacing the belts on your cvt in your driveway. Not even remotely comparable nor “relative.”
@@davidmccarthy6061 "Autos need maintenance and repairs."
Tell that to Ford. Their CVT is basically designed for zero maintenance. The only maintenance that is SUPPOSED to be done for the life of the vehicle is changing the smaller of the two transmission filters every 100k miles. Good luck reaching that milestone before the CVT breaks.
@@danielwatson5595 I'm not aware of ANYONE that actually works on CVTs. As far as I know, when they break, you buy a whole new one. I would imagine even despite their inflated price tag a new CVT from the factory is probably still cheaper than parts and labor for a belt repair.
How about reliability? You said no word about it.
"CVT transmission" = "continuously variable transmission transmission"
"ATM machine" = "automated teller machine machine"
"PIN number" = "personal identification number number"
I have had this exact same conversation with my friends and I always get the bad looks but CVT’s are a great idea poorly implemented
CVTs reputation was ruined early on by Nissan CVTs being grenades. If early models had been like the one in the new WRX I feel attitudes would be different
@@srkvhozite2424 Owner of a 2019 Nissan Kicks here, Nissan CVTs are still awful and need to be melted down.
Have 'em drive this, it's fantastic.
@@Leetshifter I've heard from at least 2 people about replacing CVTs in Nissan X-Trail (older one, T31) and Quashqai (new one, I believe they are called Rogue Sport in USA). Yes, Jatco CVTs are still trash.
@@srkvhozite2424 in Europe, the Saab offered CVT in comfort - oriented car.
Imagine comfort with engine non-stop revving on 4,5k r.p.m. xD
Durability long term, 150,000+ miles is what it would take for me to trust a CVT
Cvt is literally a rubber band I don’t trust that to take the shock of mashing the throttle
I call it gummy transmission
@@mojojoji5493 Mopeds use rubber belts for the CVT, but cars use a steel chain. I'm still not convinced with their long term durability. They've been getting better, but only time will tell. At least with the mopeds the belt is cheap and very easy to replace. Costs 20 bucks and only takes 10 minutes to replace. Sadly, that's not the case with cars that have a CVT.
My brother's 2013 Honda Accord with a CVT has over 160K and still shifts like a new car. You know what he does? He replaces the transmission fluid every 25k with Amsoil full synthetic.
CVTs issue isn’t their performance, it’s more their reliability. Nissan’s history of CVTs grenading in almost all of their vehicles in the last 20 years didn’t help them much either.
People not doing their maintenances are also to blame. I recommended doing it every 30k if they are prone to failures like Nissans(basically any brand that isn’t a toyota) and every 60k miles for ones from Toyota and Hondas who have proven they have reliable CVTs. Yeah you can do the Toyota/Honda ones early if you want, won’t cause any issue that’s for sure.
crazy to see in action CVT hunting for the best brake specific fuel consumption and the rpm drops as you accelerate
Loved the video. Wish you could talk a bit more about reliability. Seems so many brands are having problems when the driver is engaged in even minimally spirited driving.
I have used them for decades and never an issue.
Fantastic video and in-depth explanation! I am definitely a manual transmission fan and am having a hard time getting onboard with the cvt craze! I guess I am still afraid of the horror stories of failed cvts and their past inadequacies, but it seems to be that manufacturers are finally getting them to be more reliable and longer lasting.
Thank you for the great work!
My prior 2 cars were CVT cars and they were... sufficient... the first (Subaru) had a constant speed cvt (didn't have those clear 'gear steps'). I'm sure it was more efficient use of the power but it was dull and ALWAYS felt sluggish/mushy. However... it got me to work and back for many years. The second was on a Mini and it was a bit better. It had the set ratio thing and felt more like a traditional automatic so not as mushy but shifting was very lazy (hit the floppy paddle shifter in "M" mode and wait for a while or worse yet... put your foot to the floor and wait as it takes a second to decide to go) which REALLY made it feel like a crappy automatic. My new Mini has a DCT and it doesn't feel different from an in-gear perspective but the shifts are faster and are much more immediate in "Manual" mode - which makes the floppy paddle shifter something more than steering wheel ornaments.
So while the theoretical performance of cvt high... I've yet to drive a car with one that was anywhere near as solid feeling as a DCT.
there's nothing wrong with the idea of the CVT. The engine staying at the best RPM for power or efficiency is ideal. The problem with CVTs is increased maintenance, fake shifting points, and something subaru is notorious for, thermal protection mode is experienced too often instead of making the cooler bigger. Then you have some models with high failure rates.
This needs to go up!
All those problem are inexistant in a car like the Outback Wilderness. It even accelarates faster than the last WRX from a dead stop.
@Ryzen it'll be interesting if tfl gets their hands on one, every outback they've tested won't let the vehicle go up a slope in a controlled manner, it just stops and goes into thermal protection.
@@Flyinghook But TFL isn't really knowing what they are doing: they don't drive vehicles as they are designed to be driven and they fail at driving in general. Whatever they say must be taken with very big grains of salt.
They have, and it did just fine.
I just can’t get over cvts that don’t really simulate shifts, just constant loud “wurr” when accelerating.
I don't know EE. The CVT may perform, but that longevity for 80k miles+ just is not there. The car owner should put all the money they save in gas in a bank account for when the transmission eventually grenades. Speaking as someone who had a Nissan CVT crap out 300miles over the mileage Nissan was replacing them...a tank of gas messed it up.
I happen to also be a Mechanical Engineer. I bought my '16 Maxima SV brand new, I now have 132,000 miles on it. Not one issue with this car (yes, even the CVT); change that fluid, people!
You aren’t even getting better gas mileage with it is the thing, it’s 19 city 26 highway for the manual and 19 city 25 highway for the CVT.
@@mitchl.9207 I had a 18' Sentra Spec. Ed. with ~80k. Duno. I did change the fluid every 45-55k.
My son's 2019 Subaru just grenaded the transmission. $10K to fix - supposedly there's a class action settlement that extends the warranty. They're waiting to hear right now.
@@ohger1 I wish you/your son the best with the case outcome! It's a neat tech, but man when it goes wrong, it's super wrong!
Among the 3 most common transmissions, manual, torque converter automatic and CVT, none of them is inherently superior to the others. I remember when torque converter automatic transmission was way slower and less efficient than manual some decades ago. It just took time for it to improve and eventually become both faster and more efficient than manual. CVT will continually "improve" also, although I think in some aspects, it's regressing just because the journalists don't like it. I actually do like the earlier versions of the CVTs because adding the fake shifts hurts both speed and efficiency, just for the sake of not getting the "rubber bending" effect, which I don't mind at all.
Agreed. I always have said that any automotive component is only as good as you build it. A cheaply made manual/tc auto/cvt/dct are all equally crappy. If companies make the investment in them, they can all be great equally great, but CVTs are trickier and they’re mostly used in economy cars, so you get some crappy ones. I had a Civic with a CVT and tuned it. Once that tune was in, man it was fun. People would be shocked I had a CVT in there. Thing just took off like a jet.
It’s only limitation was high torque/low speed situations. That’s why I’d still prefer a traditional auto or DCT on a track, but on the street, a properly built and tuned CVT can be a lot fun.
Owned one may years ago. Never bought another Subaru after that. That's all I have to say about that.
I have 10k miles on my 2022 CVT. I love it, it isn't perfect, but it isn't nearly as bad as people have made it out to be. S# mode is amazing.
Nothing like your best point being. It's not that bad. Sums up the new wrx
Reliability is the issue I think many have. The tech is on paper makes a lot of sense but the fake auto-shifting ratios makes no sense in a CVT and the only reason they exist at all is because people who don't know any better.
Not true, actually. The CVT loses about 10% efficiency during shifts. So by reducing the amount of shifting occurring (through programming discrete steps) it increases power, efficiency, and reliability. This may allow current Gen CVTs to not be hot garbage like Gen 1 was. I'd still take a manual any day.
That said, it is hilarious, as the engineers are basically admitting that the entire concept of a CVT is flawed. Which it very much is.
I have no problem with a CVT. I DO have a problem with the long term reliablity. My family has had a number of Subarus. I still own a 2013 with a 5 speed that is running at 140,000 miles. The problem is the durability of that CVT. My parents 2014 with just over 100,000 miles lost its CVT transmission due to failure. The 2016 with 85,000 miles lost its CVT. So if you want the car for less than 80,000 miles, buy the CVT. If you want it longer than that, get the manual or another car.
I have a '19 Outback 3.6R (so it has the CVT). My only two complaints with the CVT is the uneven torque application during low speed acceleration, and the minor exhaust drone on the freeway. The second is not so much on Subaru as on me because I replaced the factory mufflers with Nameless 5" axle-back mufflers. The plus side is that on hard acceleration and above 3500rpms it sounds like a Porsche flat six.
It would be interesting to make a clip of how a cvt works in a sxs or atv. How the helix responds to torque and all the different settings of the weights, springs and so on. It's different technology than that used in cars. Thanks.
I'm glad there is EV that is killing argues about which transmission to choose.
Would you think of covering the Toyota Hybrid CVT? It seems to be an entirely different approach.
If you search on RUclips.... Weber auto understanding Toyota RAV4 hybrid... Prof Kelly will give you all you need to know 😀
Just on principle the idea that they made the mid trim and up (edit: I have been corrected. Only the top trim is ->) CVT only to try and encourage people to buy it to save their development cost for making it better instead of just making what people actually want to buy is infuriating, so I think a lot of people are just gonna continue to ignore this thing
This is not accurate, the only trim you can't get manual is the top (GT). Can still get Premium/Limited with 6MT.
@@EngineeringExplained not sure that changes much, but knowledge is knowledge so thanks for the correction
My Honda CRZ still has the original cvt at 160,000 miles no issues I just maintain it.
Zrób zdjęcie licznika to będziemy wierzyc😂🎉
Same with my 2011 Altima at 260k miles. I beat the crap out of it too lol
The main problem with CVT: maintenance cost nightmare and low overall transmission life.
Theoretically, a CVT can be made more durable than a traditional toothed transmission, with no wearable parts (other than fluid). In practice, nissan keeps trying to cut costs in areas it shouldn't, so it ends up borking after like 50k. Also the dumbass marketing campaign of "lifetime" fluid.
@@iddqd339 The last bit is the kicker. Nearly every manufacturer says the fluid is lifetime. However, there's always an asterisk. For "severe duty" it's every 30k miles. And "severe" duty is basically anyone who either A.) Doesn't drive 100% highway miles (i.e. everyone) or B.) people who live in a state that gets to 32F (nearly everyone). With such low requirements to qualify as severe, why even bother with the lifetime schtick? It's causing more harm than good.
@@Erdie5 I suspect some OEM, to whom poor reliability is seen as a feature (eg: BMW or Mercedes) started advertising lifetime fluids, and then everyone else's marketing department could not allow for a transmission fluid lifespan gap.
CVTs will never replace the feel of actual Gears and the practicality of actual transmission.
No use getting excited about CVT transmission in a new car. The problem is they do not last. Automatics are better - you need an 8 speed ZF
Agree to disagree. I'm a mechanic and see these tranmissions with 300k plus all the time. Mine just turned over to 280k.
Great video, thank you! I might be wrong, but I have a feeling that the very fast transition speeds are somehow manipulated in the dashboard to look like they are faster than they really are. It is hard to tell just from the video, but I guess the engine sound does not really follow the RPM reading so quickly and ramps up a little slower. Can you please share your thoughts on this? Thanks!
Exactly. Engine noise are not following the gear chances. That's fake 99% sure. The belt cant move that fast to change the ratios.
@@octaviangeorge5455 Belts? The belts don't have to move. There's no reason the pulleys can't shift in and out that quickly. They only have to move a very small amount. I think the delay in engine noise is likely the torque converter unlocking temporarily to reduce stress.
@@clonkex whatever that is, as long it doesnt sound like it changed the gear it means that it didnt changed the gear.
Give it time, it won't hold up
It’s not a Nissan Altima lol
Here is what I don't get: If the CVT is a reliability problem, if it is less fun to drive than a manual or even a regular automatic, if the car-buying public hates CVTs, and it gets poorer fuel mileage in this CAFE standard era, why the heck does Subaru persist with these abominations? (I have driven one).
I like CVTs. I only ever drove two vehicles without them, torque converter automatics, and while they can be good, I really like the CVT and the way they feel. I think that people dislike the CVT because it feels so different, not because the concept is inherently bad. That's my feel.
People dislike the ctv because once anything goes wrong you have to replace the entire unit.
Take a look at most high performance side by sides - CVTs everywhere and those things are a TON of fun!
I want a side by side but I wish they were available with a manual transmission.
@@volvo09 yamaha has one with a manual
@@rmksledhead63 I'll have to check it out, I thought absolutely none were.
Thanks!
Honda has a dct transmission as well.
Honda Talon DCT is great. Fun as hell to drive as well. Paddle shifters included.
So I've driven this car, and I have no idea what he is talking about in this video. That transmission is terrible, arguably the worst automatic transmission in any performance oriented car in any segment. The CVT is far less offensive in a normal car, but here it's a glaring weakness. I know this is old, but please if you are watching this and thinking about buying a WRX then you should know that it's actually crap, and it's obviously not a DSG from the seat of the pants impression. The manual otoh, is a good one, and far more mechanical in feel than other C segment competitors.
Subaru is a tiny company, and as such they are stuck with the corporate purchasing decisions as they stand after the mainstream models are specced out. That's why this car has a CVT, there's not a single other reason. If you want a good/close alternative to a DSG then it's going to be a very new torque converter setup, like Mazda has.
I like the idea of a CVT, but before I'd consider it, I want to know how reliable they are. So far they don't have a good track record.
R.E.L.I.A.B.I.L.I.T.Y. This is the Achilles heel of CVT thus far
Getting better every year, though! Most of them don't have the ultra-low range anymore and opt for an actual gear for "1st gear". A lot less movement around cities operating like that.
Toyota’s CVT is one of the most reliable transmissions sold today.
@@WilliamStrealy I'm willing to accept that if you have the data.
The big reason people don't like CVT's is that they're notoriously unreliable. Really disappointing to see a CVT comparison video that doesn't say a single thing about reliability.
CVT's are run by a chain sliding on two V shaped pullies. I'd love to see which one makes it to 200,000 miles without major repairs. I'd also like to see how much power makes it to the ground in both.
My 2008 Altima has 227k miles on the original CVT. Draining and filling every 30k and being deliberate going from reverse to drive and vice versa (completely stopping and waiting until the transmission engages) has helped my car stay on the road.
It’s really interesting that this video is coming out today. I was listening to two of my friends have a conversation about this yesterday. One is a Subaru mechanic and the other wants to buy a WRX. The Subaru mechanic said don’t buy a CVT cause his dealership is replacing about 1 per week. They work in theory, not in practicality
That sounds about right. If you buy a CVT, get used to opening up your wallet.
My issue is the money involved:
- more expensive to buy
- more expensive to repair (and fairly often they break and the fix is to replace it with the exact same component which will break again, rinse and repeat...)
- worse fuel economy (a belt is less efficient than gears. CVTs can optimize for efficiency, but they often don't)
I don't know if I'll ever be convinced of a CVT mainly for reliability reasons.
I think a CVT has some good places like fleet vehicles and high efficiency vehicles. But considering a DSG is about the same weight, I'll stick with that. Plus, what are the durability numbers like? How often does that belt need replacing? Is it prone to weakness in certain situations?
And the opsite race cars as max RPM all the time would be great for them.
@@GreenBlueWalkthrough CVT? I dunno man, how would they hold up to the punishment a race car's transmission would have to endure? Plus it isn't all max rpm all the time unless it's ovals.
Fleets are the last place you want a Cvt, the maintenance costs/ reliability and then cost of replacement will destroy any potential savings in fuel. Cvt belts are not really replaceable, there is almost no market for rebuilding them. When they break you pretty much have to replace the whole cvt, and they are around 7-10k.
Aren't DSGs (with the exception of Porsche PDK) just as bad as CVTs in terms of reliability?
@@jjampong only DSG I have experience with is the VW which is based on the Porsche and I just traded in a car with over 150K miles on it, no issues with the DSG. Can't comment on other manufacturers but I think the VW was the first production car to have one (R32 IIRC).
Not all CVTs are the same. Many Toyota and some Honda hybrids use CVTs with planetary toothed gearsets (no belts). The catch is you have to introduce another electric motor, the rate the electric motor spins is what varies the gear ratios. These are much more durable than "belt" hybrids. Chains and belts just wear out. This wouldn't be such an issue if CVT makers didn't seal them up completely or otherwise make them very difficult to service.
Loved that you showed the rpm when shifting manually with the CVT. Could you do that with more cars? ie any recent BMW with the 8HP from ZF or cars with the DSG gearbox.
I'd love to see the response time of those
Agree. Also the ford/gm 10 speed, i can speak for it in the camaro that is an awesome transmission. Really is proof we dont need dcts when we can make that good of a conventional automatic.
That gross spongy feeling of a CVT under accel is a HUGE turnoff, and it is absolutely still there on the new WRX. The lack of being pushed back in your seat (ie CVT torque being slowly and gradually fed in vs basically dumped in with direct engagement) is part of that feeling. Also, rpm decreasing while accelerating is also one of the saddest sounds ever. Finally, the CVT inability to hold barely more that stock power/torque is a MASSIVE reason to stay away.
Don’t get me wrong, CVT are great transmissions for their intended purpose: economy and efficiency.
Performance however, not so much.
Not yet anyway.
Did you... actually watch the video? I think your definition of performance is different to that of most, your first two points are more regarding driving experience/fun not performance and re spongey feeling, not all CVT's are the same, EE also stated in simulated gears mode you wouldn't be able to tell the difference to an auto in the new WRX. In any actual *performance* metric the CVT keeps up with or outperforms the manual in this gen WRX. There is no DCT offered in the WRX so it would be unfair to automatically class Subaru's CVT efforts as subpar to a DCT performance wise.
Yes, the CVT works. But get back to us at 80K to 100K miles and report if that transmission still works.
My issue with CVT is not the performance but the reliability, especially from Subaru. My old Outback CVT failed with less than 100K miles and a decade later Subaru its still having issues.
Subaru has a history of ignoring long standing major issues too. My Forester might need head gaskets, AGAIN..........
That's considered Classic heritage. It ties generations of owners together. You can all talk about the times you had to replace the motors.
@@om617yota7 it’s hilarious how after decades Subaru is like the only company that can’t make a reliable engine
@@bradenmchenry995 Right!? You buy a $5 rusty garage sale lawnmower and the head gasket seals fine, but Subaru can't figure it out........
@@username8644 I had 5 friends with wrx’s in high school and there was a 100% failure rate in those engines. They all blew a piston out of their block. Subaru has no idea how to make an engine which is astounding
For me, longevity is key. I don't really care how nice a CVT is if it only lasts not much more than 100k miles before having to spend thousands to get it fixed. I can replace a clutch in a manual at 100k miles for FAR far less
Honda and Toyota CVTs last quite a while. I've seen some Prius and Civic models for sale online with 200,000 or more miles on them still using the original CVTs according to their service records.
@@dave_riots yeah but that's Honda and Toyota. Not Subaru.
@@dave_riots Prius doesn't have conventional CVT, they emulate CVT with two electric motors coupled with a planetary gear set, there are no belts or chains involved.
My 2017 outback has 163k with no real issues
Alright RELAX. Subaru's CVTs are still constantly getting recalled, and this new one hasn't even been publicly available long enough to start showing their usual problems. Why don't we wait and see how it goes instead of declaring something brand new good or bad... Not to mention that this CVT isn't at all representative of other non-performance oriented CVTs on the market in any capacity. Sure *this* *one* could be good, but it doesn't fix all the other ones.
Thanks for the info on the new CVT in the WRX. I owned a '15 WRX with the CVT and it was a love/hate relationship. One of the things I hated was the fact that, when in manual mode, there was no rev match for downshifts, resulting in the typical momentary deceleration as the transmission dropped to the next lower ratio and the engine RPM was required to increase. From what I understand, this issue has been addressed in the new CVT. This is something you did not address in this video. I'm wondering if you could comment on that.
Looking at how quick the down shifts and how the speedometer was steady at around 4:50, I'd say it's rev-matching.