Manual transmissions are THE most economical gearbox to drive and maintain.
Not from what I’ve read about the CVT. Equal or better performance and zero maintenance. Even 5 and 6 speed autos show little difference and better reliability in high stress (towing, plowing etc) situation. They are more expensive if they break down, but the jury is still out on the CVT and with many fewer moving parts than even a manual tranny, the potential is there to far surpass the manual.
The ultimate transmission that is just over the horizon, is the “electric no tranny motor” as used in the diesel electric loco for that expressed reason.
Most manuals are row sticks for control freaks and offer little or no advantage in most applications. I confess to being one, but reluctantly admit to the overall convenience, safety and durability of the auto.
Broom Belle, You’re Making Too Big A Deal Out Of This. I Own 7 Cars, Some Automatics And Some Manuals. I’m Not Lazy, Not Manitaining 7 Cars, I’m Not!
I live on the shore of a beautiful 10,000 acre lake. I have several boats, too, some sail powered, some pedal powered (excellent for fishing) and some are stink boats, deep-vee and pontoon, including PWCs.
Sometimes I like to drive the sportier cars and shift gears. Sometimes I would rather cruise in comfort in a large, quiet sedan, especially when carrying several passengers.
Sometimes I like to sail when I have extra time and want to relax. Sometimes I take the stink boats to get where I’m going in a reasonable amount of time, for fishing, or again, when I have several passengers, especially the ones who aren’t into sailing.
So, if you see me driving an automatic, don’t judge me. I’m not lazy and you don’t necessarily know enough to know what you’re talking about. I’ve probably been driving manuals since before you were old enough to judge a book by its cover.
By the way, I don’t use cell phones in the car, smoke, or anything else that is distracting. I am TRUE DRIVER.
I have probably forgotten more about cars and driving than you will ever know !
As a Native Born American I cannot understand how somebody coming to live in our fine country could be so narrow-minded.
CSA
Dagosa, what kind of maintenance do CVTs require? Unless they require less maintenance than a manual transmission, or no maintenance at all, it is hard to compare them to manual transmissions. Are you suggesting CVTs save enough fuel to offset the savings you get from being able to service a manual transmission cheaply?
anglosax, if what you say is true, we will see more CVT automatics and fewer manual transmissions. After all, CVTs outperform manuals in regards to fuel economy.
You might already know this, but in case you don’t, consider that 1 European MPG does not equal 1 American MPG. They use imperial gallons over there, which are not the same thing as our gallons.
According to the “Car connection” with respect to the Subaru transmission…
But there?s more to this story. The new CVT, which was designed completely in-house in Japan, requires no maintenance whatsoever for the life of the vehicle, say powertrain engineers. Compared to conventional hydraulic transmissions, that could save hundreds of dollars in transmission fluid and filter changes, flushes, and other adjustments.
As I’ve said…the jury is still out on actual experiences with it’s longevity, cause I’m not a hype believer but, I feel the potential is there. There is no argument according to CR, that the mileage equals the manual and acceleration times are LESS. So, at least potentially, it appears from testing and expectation, that the manual is totally surpassed for Subarus, except for control freaks.
BTW article; http://www.thecarconnection.com/marty-blog/1021716_new-cvt-in-2010-subaru-legacy-promises-low-maintenance-costs
Whitey
Yes I know US gallons are a short measure but only 10% or so so we are talking 3-4 mpg difference and the 2010 US models are hyping over 30 mpg combined consumption - big deal !!
Well I suppose it is when you are used to 15 mpg !!!
Gasoline prices are $12 per galon in UK and 80% of that price is TAX - Now where would a cash strapped US government look to rake in plenty dollars in the next few years ??? Mr Obama are you listening ??
UK govt worked it out long time ago - neglect the public transport system so there is no alternative to using your car - and then whack up the Tax when no one can easily avoid it.
Theres the future in the US - Economics will push the technology and the social choices of the population
Sorry, it’s just about exactly a 20% difference, 1.2 US Gallons = 1.0 imperial. Also, the European mpg test is about 20% higher than the EPA test, so now you’re up to 40%. You’re absolutely right, low US taxes have resulted in more gas use. I favor a tax increase to reduce gas use and improve the crumbling infrastructure. Much better than multi-thousand $$ subsidies for hybrids and EVs.
IF indeed they are “maintenace-free”, then one would save substantial $$ over the life of the car. I change fluid and filter every 30,000 miles at about $90, so 10 times that over 300,000 miles would come to $900+, since some changes might require some work.
However, I seriously doubt if the CVT will last 300,000 miles without any maintenance. Many years ago my aunt bought a Dutch DAF (later Volvo) with the rubber band CVT. It was a maintenance dog, to say the least.
Agree the newer ones have steel belts, but the jury is still out on how much they will cost to keep going over 300,0000 miles. The Japanese dispose of their cars at 10 years, and with only about 80,000 miles on the on average. Only Japanese taxis put on enough miles to really evalute real life wear.
Until the jury is in, my next car will have an oldfashioned automatic.
Anglosax, the problem is that we can save more fuel by improving a 13 MPG vehicle to 15 MPGs (102.56 gallons saved per 10,000 miles) than we can save by improving a 30 MPG vehicle to 35 MPGs (47.62 gallons saved per 10,000 miles). Likewise, improving a vehicle from 35 MPGs to 40 MPGs only saves 35.71 gallons per 10,000 miles.
You obviously aren’t an economist, or you would realize we can save more fuel by focusing on vehicles that get less than 20 MPGs than we can save by focusing on vehicles that get more than 30 MPGs. Just like comparing imperial gallons to American gallons, comparing MPG savings can be just as deceptive. Perhaps if you look at gallons per 10,000 miles, you can more accurately compare fuel usage and find the most effective way to save fuel.
If you don’t believe me, check out the graphic below. If we follow your plan, we will get less bang per buck. Working on the larger vehicles that consume more fuel saves us more fuel with smaller MPG improvements.
Yours is an emotional response based on deceptive statistics. 