Keep in mind diesels that meet CARB emissions are expensive. Does the current diesel smart do so? If not they may need to add expensive urea injection systems to clean the emissions further.
It would certainly make a better effort at carving out a niche, but it would still be a small niche.
What they need to do first is nix that awful transmission.
You won't see the diesel Smart sold in the USA. The cost of emissions far outweighs the value. Who is going to pay $20k + for a Smart car with diesel? VW will be the first to offer smaller diesel vehicles to the US market. The Polo TDI gets nearly as good a mileage as the Smart Diesel. For about the same price. We managed to make the Smart a near worthless vehicle with regulations.
As far as I can tell they can no longer pass the Canadian emissions and are not even sold up there. They are still listed in the UK for 10,400 pounds what ever that is in USD. The Brits like them because they only emit 86 G/KM of CO2. The Prius is at 92 G/KM.
I wonder if the Smart EV has yet a different charger than the Volt and Leaf? OR do you plunk down $3000 every time you get a different EV.
For the mot part, they are similar. They us the SAE J1772 connector, but there are 3 levels and 3 charge types. There is a level 1 and level 2 AC charge and a level 3 DC-DC charger that uses a different connector. Level 1, if I am not screwing this up, is basically an extension cord with some smarts. A level 2 is a wall mounted "EVSE" that operates at a higher amperage and thus a faster charge. Some BEVs may be able to take better or worse advantage of the higher current. DC-DC voltage charging is at a ridiculously high amperage and would have its own, separate connector.
Some of the EVSEs have some smarts in them to talk to the vehicle and the utility infrastructure.
So the connector is common, for the most part. The DC-DC one is still being worked out.
The IQ is Butt ugly. The Scion tC and first xB were the only decent looking cars they have built. And their sales show it. I am not even sure why they have the brand. This one might be fun to go cruising in.
New categories - "we have 12 mostly new categories like Most Wanted Car We Can't Have, Most Wanted Exotic, Most Wanted Cheap Car, Most Wanted Fuel Sipper, Most Wanted Hatchback, Most Wanted Hot Rod Division things you actually care about."
I thought the IQ looked ok at the auto show, but I've always liked most Scions. The trick is whether it'll be fun to drive. Can a CVT be fun to drive?
Why yes, our 2008 Mitsubishi Lancer GTS with automatic CVT and paddle shifters is really fun to drive. The CVT really works well in this car, I like to use it on freeway off-ramps to slow the car down and not have to use our brakes, works like a champ.
But that's not the only way I use the CVT/paddle shifters. Going up short hills I like to pop the car over on the gated shifter to paddle shifting and go right in to 3rd "gear." If you're going 25-35 mph in 'D' and pop in to CVT the "gear" you'll be in will be 3rd. Punching it at that point works very effectively to get you up the hill. Then you can shift paddle "gears" as you may or as you like. It really is a nice option and has taken away my need to row my own gears with a real stick shift.
Really. It has.
It is snirky and not quirky and snorty and not dorky. It works very quickly in the Lancer and I love how Mitsu set this thing up. It has been a pleasant surprise for us in this car.
I test drove a 2011 Subaru Outback with a 4 cylinder and CVT and absolutely hated it. Going up a long high speed hill it never seems to know where it should be. The engine screaming for mercy. Never would I own a CVT trashmission. They belong in a snow machine. Then I don't think I would ever own a gas 4 cylinder. Too noisy out on the highway pulling the hills.
Subaru will have to bring their diesel to America for me to look at them again.
CVT reminds me of the old Buick Dynaflop transmissions from the 1950s. Hated those also.
Put a list together of all the greenest cars for sale today, then take out all the ones that are offered only with a godawful CVT, and what do you have left? Precious little.
VW TDIs with exploding fuel pumps not covered under warranty.
Some of the newest "40 mpg" compacts are fairly green and offer manuals and traditional automatics, which I guess is the best one can get at the current time: Civic (now PZEV, didn't used to be, that's good), Focus (has been PZEV for a while, is the 2012 still?), Cruze Eco, Elantra (don't know about emissions of the last two). None of these are any fun to drive by my standards - numb electric steering and suspension designed to remove the driver from what the wheels are doing are the name of the game in this group.
Besides that group you have the CRZ, which is a hybrid with only two seats but at least offers a 6-speed manual, perhaps the Fiat 500 and Mini Cooper which both make mid-30s for combined mpg and also offer manuals if not traditional automatics (the Mini's is a CVT, right? Not sure about the 500's).
Pretty slim pickins if you, as I fervently do, avoid CVTs like the plague. :-(
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
The new Accent gets 30/40 and offers a 6 speed manual or auto, plus it actually looks good now. Or it's Kia twin. Both are a lot more power than competitors in that size/weight class, so they could be fun.
Elantra, Focus SFE, Fiesta, Cruze Eco, Civic HF, and Mazda3 SkyActiv are others. Hopefully that Mazda3 is fun - that 2.0l actually makes more power, too.
Impreza if you want AWD, too.
All of the above are 36+ EPA highway. I call that good enough. Question is, which ones are fun?
My money's on the Subaru and the Mazda.
What's the mpg on the 500? I sorta like the 500c, but the Abarth will be the fun one.
30/38 with the stick IIRC. Best of all the subcompacts except the Smart, and best city rating of any gas-only car including all the supposedly "40 mpg" compacts.
Ties the new Accent/Rio in the city though, from what you wrote above. When are they available? Neither will be any fun to drive in their base 30/40 mpg form, but I wonder if Hyundai will do an Accent SE again with the big rims and the stiffer suspension, and if so if that will also make 30/40....
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I can see how CVT would remind you of the Dynaflows, but, as I'm sure you know, modern CVTs are far more efficient in terms of power loss.
I rented a Dodge Caliber with CVT, and it seemed to work fine. I drove it close to 800 miles throughout Idaho. While it was different from a conventional automatic, in terms of sound and driving dynamics, I found it interesting.
Where on this green earth created by the only true God are you getting this stuff? It is not loud and it works smoothly. Please test drive the 2008 and/on Mitsubishi Lancer GTS with the automatic CVT transmission before slandering it's performance like that. You're making me want to puke with your selfishness, nauseating behavior.
Let's compare two different green cars. First: the 2005 Passat TDI Wagon I owned in 2006. Driving on Interstate 8 from El Cajon to Alpine the elevation goes from 400 feet to 2100 feet in about 7 miles. There are several rather steep grades. The speed limit is 70 MPH. The Passat would run that route at the speed limit without ever downshifting to 4th gear or going over 2000 RPM. Quiet smooth and averaged 40 MPG.
Second: I test drove the 2011 Subaru Outback that I do like the looks of. It was the 4 cylinder model with CVT. On that same route. On several of the hills the engine ROARED over 4500 RPM to maintain a rather pokey 70 MPH. That to me is unacceptable. I don't know the mileage it was getting. My guess was less than 24 MPG EPA estimate. The CVT offers too many compromises to get slightly better mileage on flat highway driving. Something I see very little of here. Hearing a little four banger scream may be your idea of fun driving. It is NOT mine.
As far as the environmental aspects. Subaru offers MUCH Better solutions. Just not in the USA. The Outback diesel sold in the UK gets 42 MPG US out on the highway and is a full second faster 0-60 MPH. No screaming little gas engine trying to keep up with traffic. So don't blame me from the environmental angle. That falls squarely on the government.
If you had the Lancer diesel offered in the UK, you would be getting 45 MPG out on the highway. And really helping to save our environment.
Hearing a little four banger scream may be your idea of fun driving. It is NOT mine.
You missed my point entirely. I said test drive a 2008 and on Mitsubishi Lancer GTS with the automatic CVT and get back ta me. Period. You're slandering my car without test-driving it. Clue ta you: it doesn't scream, it roars! As in picks right up and goes. You're driving with a built-in bias for 4-cyl cars, Gary, I know you are because I've known you on here for a long, long, long, long, time.
The whole dorky nation does this all the time. We're such know-it-alls about everyone else's car yet we don't have a valid clue what we're talking about because we're going on hear-say.
As in, I hear-say those Ford Focii, Mitsubishi Lancer's, oh, let's see...Dodge Caliber's...etc., etc...strain and scream with their li'l 4-bangers. Oh, let me go get 'em. Strike up the band I'm goin' ta get 'em.
And then they mention some other manufacturer's car as an example. Skewed data. Not even close to being accurate. Get a good solid clue (in other words test drive the exact same car I'm talking about here, a 2008 and on Mitsubishi Lancer GTS with an automatic CVT transmission) then get on here and make an educated comment.
Not hearsay. Judge Judy won't listen to hearsay and neither do I. And neither should you, American car nut. Period.
Get a good solid clue (in other words test drive the exact same car I'm talking about here, a 2008 and on Mitsubishi Lancer GTS with an automatic CVT transmission) then get on here and make an educated comment.
I am not going to waste my time and a dealers time test driving a vehicle I would never in a 100 years buy. I test drove the Outback as it was a possible vehicle for me to buy. I hate sedans, will never buy a sedan if that is all that is offered. I like wagons and possibly though unlikely a hatch. If I downgrade it will more than likely be from an SUV to a CUV. It will have to be comfortable and quiet and get double the MPG of the Sequoia. When I was a teenager I loved that roar. I don't anymore. I would tolerate it in a Porsche Carrera. We are on different planets when it comes to vehicular transportation. Once you have driven one of these you will not be happy with your Lancer.
That EJ25 engine makes peak torque in the ~4000rpm range, so the CVT just put the engine in its sweet spot.
A few observations, though...
Diesels rev much lower than gas, so not really fair to compare. Look at the TDI's redline, it's much lower than the gasser.
TDI: 4700rpm EJ25: 6400rpm
That TDI wagon was FWD and probably a bit lighter than the new, bigger Outback. So there was more weight to pull up that hill. Hence more revs were called for. You were still about 2000rpm below the redline, so plenty of revs left in it.
And while those revs seem high, the CVT actually uses very low gearing on flat land to lower RPMs a lot. At 70+mph you're only revving at around 2000rpm. In a big, heavy, AWD wagon. Not bad.
So there are pros and cons. 4400rpm is not really that high for that engine.
Shoot, take a spin in my Miata. 2000 rpm is only 42 mph. In SIXTH. 3000rpm is about 63mph. To drive 85 (the speed limit in parts of Montana) you'd be screaming along at 4048rpm...on level ground!
I can comment because I actually rented and drove a Lancer CVT across Puerto Rico recently.
We got a very basic, stripped base model, so it was really nothing special, but I'll limit my observations to the powertrain.
In normal driving, the CVT is fine. Unintrusive, smooth, and keeps the engine at low revs to promote fuel economy. Nothing wrong with that I guess.
Floor the throttle and the revs shoot right up, though. I think it also goes straight to where the little 2 liter makes its peak torque. And yes, it gets noisy. The engine was not that smooth so it would bother me if I drove hard like that all the time. Again, base model, could have less insulation than higher trims, in fact I bet it does.
PR is pretty flat so I can't comment on hill climbs.
We only average low/mid 20s MPG, so I was sort of disappointed. 2 adults and 2 kids with no cargo at all, so it wasn't weighed down too much.
I guess I have mixed feelings about CVTs. They find the sweet spot, and can maximize both fuel economy and acceleration. The lack of shifts means no steps like a normal transmission, also, so it's smoother in that way.
On the other hand, you still don't have control of the RPMs at times, so revs can shoot up and get noisy (for me that was when merging, passing, etc.).
Some cars with CVTs offer paddle shifters - including the Outback. If you use those you can manually select 6 ratios, and I think Gary may have liked that a lot better. Leave it in auto mode when loafing around to keep revs low and maximize economy, then hit the paddle shifters when you want to avoid the "motorboating" effect of constant, non-variable high revs.
Overall gimme a manual, no doubt. But I'd take a CVT over a slushbox so long as I had a manual override.
points well taken by both of you. This car admiring, researching, driving then buying gig is all very personal and only done by one person competently. Me. Just kidding. Not really...I'm serious. I would buy one of these over one of those even if I had Jay Leno's stash of cash. Seriously folks. I'm being personal and honest. I can't handle these over-hyped, over-priced Germ-o-bia's at all. Even the silly VW Bulli Microbus idea in new world order fashion is going the way of Dennis Rodman to me.
Sweet and nice...ummmm
Gag me with one of Dennis Rodman's used, dirty spoons
An EVO is as far removed from a Lancer as you can get. Notice they don't use no stinking CVT in the Mitsu EVO. It is a 6 speed auto manual. I could get a kick out of driving one of those. What it proves is Mitsubishi is capable of building great cars. But you pay for them. No Free Lunch. A well equipped EVO will cost you $43k.
I just happened to stumble on the Lexus LS 600h L hybrid a few minutes ago - it comes with a "Dual Mode Electronically Controlled Continously Variable Transmission (ECVT)".
Could be. Like the Porsche 918 RSR. Note that it also has a "Sequential Multi-Mode Shifter" to keep owners happy. Maybe it hunts less?
I'm still irritated that the Porsche "hybrid" was only at the Detroit auto show for the press days and I didn't get to see it. It has a "six-speed constant-mesh transmission". Whatever that is. Almost sounds like a CVT flavor.
my car a "baby EVO" in their description of the car back in 2007 when it was just coming out. I studied this online article intensely including the slide show from the product manager before parting dollars for my own Lancer GTS.
Great value for the money, one handsome dude, close your eyes and you'll feel like you're driving a top notch european sedan (it was benchmarked against the Alfa Romeo 156 and Mazda 3).
The Bad: Manual needs a 6th gear, Steering wheel needs to telescope out further for tall drivers.
The Ugly: IT'S NOT THE EVO!!!
This car has taught me what a great car Mitsubishi can make
A Salinas car manufacturing company that was expected to build environmentally friendly electric cars and create new jobs folded before almost any vehicles could run off the assembly line.
The city of Salinas had invested more than half a million dollars in Green Vehicles, an electric car start-up company.
All of that money is now gone, according to Green Vehicles President and Co-Founder Mike Ryan.
The start-up company promised city leaders that it would create 70 new jobs and pay $700,000 in taxes a year to Salinas.
Green Vehicles was supposed to be up and running by March 2010 inside their 80,000-square-foot space at Firestone Business Park off of Abbot Street.
Electric-Car Firm That Received Biden Visit and $118M in Stimulus Funds Files for Bankruptcy By Fred Lucas January 26, 2012
Ener1--a company that manufactures batteries for electric cars, and that received $118.5 million in federal stimulus money, and that Vice President Joe Biden visited last year the day after President Obama’s State of the Union Address—announced today that it has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Instead of going for economy, BMW is still shooting for faster 0-60 times in their SUVs. The first diesel X5 offered here is a rocket. Why didn't they try and break the 30 MPG combined barrier instead of the sound barrier?
Increased diesel power and an M-specific set-up make the BMW X5 M50d and BMW X6 M50d even more assured performers. The engine developed for the BMW M Performance Automobiles generates maximum output of 280 kW/381 hp and peak torque of 740 Newton metres (546 lb-ft), making the two BMW X models the envy of every other diesel-engined model in this segment. The BMW X5 M50d races from 0 to 100 km/h (62 mph) in 5.4 seconds, while the BMW X6 M50d brings that time down to 5.3 seconds. Both models also benefit from the immense reserves of power provided by their diesel engine when it comes to short sprints at higher speeds. Top speed is electronically limited to 250 km/h (155 mph) in both cases.
PS I am sure they are fun to drive. How many cars are in the low 5 second range?
Comments
It would certainly make a better effort at carving out a niche, but it would still be a small niche.
What they need to do first is nix that awful transmission.
Usually diesels cost a couple grand more, so $14.5k is viable, if it meets CARB standards. A manual could be even less.
If it can't pass CARB's sniff test, there's no point, because ~17 states adhere to CARB emissions standards.
How does that price compare to the Yaris in the same market?
Hopefully Smart could offer the diesel with a manual for close to the current price of the gasser with the semi-auto.
If so it could make a small comeback.
The Scion iQ is simply going to bury the current ForTwo. They need to change something ASAP.
For the mot part, they are similar. They us the SAE J1772 connector, but there are 3 levels and 3 charge types. There is a level 1 and level 2 AC charge and a level 3 DC-DC charger that uses a different connector. Level 1, if I am not screwing this up, is basically an extension cord with some smarts. A level 2 is a wall mounted "EVSE" that operates at a higher amperage and thus a faster charge. Some BEVs may be able to take better or worse advantage of the higher current. DC-DC voltage charging is at a ridiculously high amperage and would have its own, separate connector.
Some of the EVSEs have some smarts in them to talk to the vehicle and the utility infrastructure.
So the connector is common, for the most part. The DC-DC one is still being worked out.
4 passenger utility, hatchback, about the same mileage, regular fuel, Asian vs. European reliability, etc.
2011 Edmunds' Inside Line Readers' Most Wanted Awards
Why yes, our 2008 Mitsubishi Lancer GTS with automatic CVT and paddle shifters is really fun to drive. The CVT really works well in this car, I like to use it on freeway off-ramps to slow the car down and not have to use our brakes, works like a champ.
But that's not the only way I use the CVT/paddle shifters. Going up short hills I like to pop the car over on the gated shifter to paddle shifting and go right in to 3rd "gear." If you're going 25-35 mph in 'D' and pop in to CVT the "gear" you'll be in will be 3rd. Punching it at that point works very effectively to get you up the hill. Then you can shift paddle "gears" as you may or as you like. It really is a nice option and has taken away my need to row my own gears with a real stick shift.
Really. It has.
It is snirky and not quirky and snorty and not dorky. It works very quickly in the Lancer and I love how Mitsu set this thing up. It has been a pleasant surprise for us in this car.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Subaru will have to bring their diesel to America for me to look at them again.
CVT reminds me of the old Buick Dynaflop transmissions from the 1950s. Hated those also.
Ironically, that's what an Outback is to every New Englander...
That is a good one.
They also have the better option of a 6 cylinder with 5 speed auto.
I think Subaru is at a handicap because all their cars are AWD, yet they have to meet CAFE just like everyone else, who sells FWD and/or RWD.
So the CVT eeks out every last MPG, which they'll need. They were already borderline, right at the 27.5mpg CAFE limit.
The Legacy CVT gets 31mpg highway, the Outback 29 I think, and the new Impreze 2.0l CVT will get 36mpg.
All with AWD, too. So from that point of view, it's working.
Real-world mileage on the manuals is better, though, and they're all offered that way, and would be my choice.
VW TDIs with exploding fuel pumps not covered under warranty.
Some of the newest "40 mpg" compacts are fairly green and offer manuals and traditional automatics, which I guess is the best one can get at the current time: Civic (now PZEV, didn't used to be, that's good), Focus (has been PZEV for a while, is the 2012 still?), Cruze Eco, Elantra (don't know about emissions of the last two). None of these are any fun to drive by my standards - numb electric steering and suspension designed to remove the driver from what the wheels are doing are the name of the game in this group.
Besides that group you have the CRZ, which is a hybrid with only two seats but at least offers a 6-speed manual, perhaps the Fiat 500 and Mini Cooper which both make mid-30s for combined mpg and also offer manuals if not traditional automatics (the Mini's is a CVT, right? Not sure about the 500's).
Pretty slim pickins if you, as I fervently do, avoid CVTs like the plague. :-(
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
The new Accent gets 30/40 and offers a 6 speed manual or auto, plus it actually looks good now. Or it's Kia twin. Both are a lot more power than competitors in that size/weight class, so they could be fun.
Elantra, Focus SFE, Fiesta, Cruze Eco, Civic HF, and Mazda3 SkyActiv are others. Hopefully that Mazda3 is fun - that 2.0l actually makes more power, too.
Impreza if you want AWD, too.
All of the above are 36+ EPA highway. I call that good enough. Question is, which ones are fun?
My money's on the Subaru and the Mazda.
What's the mpg on the 500? I sorta like the 500c, but the Abarth will be the fun one.
30/38 with the stick IIRC. Best of all the subcompacts except the Smart, and best city rating of any gas-only car including all the supposedly "40 mpg" compacts.
Ties the new Accent/Rio in the city though, from what you wrote above. When are they available? Neither will be any fun to drive in their base 30/40 mpg form, but I wonder if Hyundai will do an Accent SE again with the big rims and the stiffer suspension, and if so if that will also make 30/40....
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
I rented a Dodge Caliber with CVT, and it seemed to work fine. I drove it close to 800 miles throughout Idaho. While it was different from a conventional automatic, in terms of sound and driving dynamics, I found it interesting.
Not sure when they'll be for sale but they debuted at the NY Auto Show, so probably summer/fall.
Too noisy out on the highway pulling the hills.
Where on this green earth created by the only true God are you getting this stuff? It is not loud and it works smoothly. Please test drive the 2008 and/on Mitsubishi Lancer GTS with the automatic CVT transmission before slandering it's performance like that. You're making me want to puke with your selfishness, nauseating behavior.
Barffy-warrfyyy!! :sick:
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
First: the 2005 Passat TDI Wagon I owned in 2006. Driving on Interstate 8 from El Cajon to Alpine the elevation goes from 400 feet to 2100 feet in about 7 miles. There are several rather steep grades. The speed limit is 70 MPH. The Passat would run that route at the speed limit without ever downshifting to 4th gear or going over 2000 RPM. Quiet smooth and averaged 40 MPG.
Second: I test drove the 2011 Subaru Outback that I do like the looks of. It was the 4 cylinder model with CVT. On that same route. On several of the hills the engine ROARED over 4500 RPM to maintain a rather pokey 70 MPH. That to me is unacceptable. I don't know the mileage it was getting. My guess was less than 24 MPG EPA estimate.
The CVT offers too many compromises to get slightly better mileage on flat highway driving. Something I see very little of here. Hearing a little four banger scream may be your idea of fun driving. It is NOT mine.
As far as the environmental aspects. Subaru offers MUCH Better solutions. Just not in the USA. The Outback diesel sold in the UK gets 42 MPG US out on the highway and is a full second faster 0-60 MPH. No screaming little gas engine trying to keep up with traffic. So don't blame me from the environmental angle. That falls squarely on the government.
If you had the Lancer diesel offered in the UK, you would be getting 45 MPG out on the highway. And really helping to save our environment.
Hearing a little four banger scream may be your idea of fun driving. It is NOT mine.
You missed my point entirely. I said test drive a 2008 and on Mitsubishi Lancer GTS with the automatic CVT and get back ta me. Period. You're slandering my car without test-driving it. Clue ta you: it doesn't scream, it roars! As in picks right up and goes. You're driving with a built-in bias for 4-cyl cars, Gary, I know you are because I've known you on here for a long, long, long, long, time.
The whole dorky nation does this all the time. We're such know-it-alls about everyone else's car yet we don't have a valid clue what we're talking about because we're going on hear-say.
As in, I hear-say those Ford Focii, Mitsubishi Lancer's, oh, let's see...Dodge Caliber's...etc., etc...strain and scream with their li'l 4-bangers. Oh, let me go get 'em. Strike up the band I'm goin' ta get 'em.
And then they mention some other manufacturer's car as an example. Skewed data. Not even close to being accurate. Get a good solid clue (in other words test drive the exact same car I'm talking about here, a 2008 and on Mitsubishi Lancer GTS with an automatic CVT transmission) then get on here and make an educated comment.
Not hearsay. Judge Judy won't listen to hearsay and neither do I. And neither should you, American car nut. Period.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
I am not going to waste my time and a dealers time test driving a vehicle I would never in a 100 years buy. I test drove the Outback as it was a possible vehicle for me to buy. I hate sedans, will never buy a sedan if that is all that is offered. I like wagons and possibly though unlikely a hatch. If I downgrade it will more than likely be from an SUV to a CUV. It will have to be comfortable and quiet and get double the MPG of the Sequoia. When I was a teenager I loved that roar. I don't anymore. I would tolerate it in a Porsche Carrera. We are on different planets when it comes to vehicular transportation. Once you have driven one of these you will not be happy with your Lancer.
A few observations, though...
Diesels rev much lower than gas, so not really fair to compare. Look at the TDI's redline, it's much lower than the gasser.
TDI: 4700rpm
EJ25: 6400rpm
That TDI wagon was FWD and probably a bit lighter than the new, bigger Outback. So there was more weight to pull up that hill. Hence more revs were called for. You were still about 2000rpm below the redline, so plenty of revs left in it.
And while those revs seem high, the CVT actually uses very low gearing on flat land to lower RPMs a lot. At 70+mph you're only revving at around 2000rpm. In a big, heavy, AWD wagon. Not bad.
So there are pros and cons. 4400rpm is not really that high for that engine.
Shoot, take a spin in my Miata. 2000 rpm is only 42 mph. In SIXTH. 3000rpm is about 63mph. To drive 85 (the speed limit in parts of Montana) you'd be screaming along at 4048rpm...on level ground!
We got a very basic, stripped base model, so it was really nothing special, but I'll limit my observations to the powertrain.
In normal driving, the CVT is fine. Unintrusive, smooth, and keeps the engine at low revs to promote fuel economy. Nothing wrong with that I guess.
Floor the throttle and the revs shoot right up, though. I think it also goes straight to where the little 2 liter makes its peak torque. And yes, it gets noisy. The engine was not that smooth so it would bother me if I drove hard like that all the time. Again, base model, could have less insulation than higher trims, in fact I bet it does.
PR is pretty flat so I can't comment on hill climbs.
We only average low/mid 20s MPG, so I was sort of disappointed. 2 adults and 2 kids with no cargo at all, so it wasn't weighed down too much.
I guess I have mixed feelings about CVTs. They find the sweet spot, and can maximize both fuel economy and acceleration. The lack of shifts means no steps like a normal transmission, also, so it's smoother in that way.
On the other hand, you still don't have control of the RPMs at times, so revs can shoot up and get noisy (for me that was when merging, passing, etc.).
Some cars with CVTs offer paddle shifters - including the Outback. If you use those you can manually select 6 ratios, and I think Gary may have liked that a lot better. Leave it in auto mode when loafing around to keep revs low and maximize economy, then hit the paddle shifters when you want to avoid the "motorboating" effect of constant, non-variable high revs.
Overall gimme a manual, no doubt. But I'd take a CVT over a slushbox so long as I had a manual override.
Sweet and nice...ummmm
Gag me with one of Dennis Rodman's used, dirty spoons
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Within a given class, I will tend towards the more efficient choices, though. For many reasons, operating costs among them.
An EVO is as far removed from a Lancer as you can get. Notice they don't use no stinking CVT in the Mitsu EVO. It is a 6 speed auto manual. I could get a kick out of driving one of those. What it proves is Mitsubishi is capable of building great cars. But you pay for them. No Free Lunch. A well equipped EVO will cost you $43k.
That doesn't mean a CVT is suitable for mainstream compacts, though.
And 438 net horsepower. (link)
I'm still irritated that the Porsche "hybrid" was only at the Detroit auto show for the press days and I didn't get to see it. It has a "six-speed constant-mesh transmission". Whatever that is. Almost sounds like a CVT flavor.
http://www.autospies.com/news/Spies-give-you-an-early-preview-of-the-next-Mitsub- - - ishi-EVO-12186/
The Good:
Great value for the money, one handsome dude, close your eyes and you'll feel like you're driving a top notch european sedan (it was benchmarked against the Alfa Romeo 156 and Mazda 3).
The Bad: Manual needs a 6th gear, Steering wheel needs to telescope out further for tall drivers.
The Ugly: IT'S NOT THE EVO!!!
This car has taught me what a great car Mitsubishi can make
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
A Salinas car manufacturing company that was expected to build environmentally friendly electric cars and create new jobs folded before almost any vehicles could run off the assembly line.
The city of Salinas had invested more than half a million dollars in Green Vehicles, an electric car start-up company.
All of that money is now gone, according to Green Vehicles President and Co-Founder Mike Ryan.
The start-up company promised city leaders that it would create 70 new jobs and pay $700,000 in taxes a year to Salinas.
Green Vehicles was supposed to be up and running by March 2010 inside their 80,000-square-foot space at Firestone Business Park off of Abbot Street.
http://www.ksbw.com/r/28586219/detail.html
This is one I have never heard of. I guess we won't see any Triac or Moose on the road.
By Fred Lucas
January 26, 2012
Ener1--a company that manufactures batteries for electric cars, and that received $118.5 million in federal stimulus money, and that Vice President Joe Biden visited last year the day after President Obama’s State of the Union Address—announced today that it has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/electric-car-firm-received-biden-visit-and-118m-- stimulus-funds-files-bankruptcy
GM went all the way to Korea for the batteries on the Volt.
Let's tell the rest of the story: Compact Power is building a plant in Holland for the US batteries will be US supplied.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Volt
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Transmission made in Japan, FWIW.
Increased diesel power and an M-specific set-up make the BMW X5 M50d and BMW X6 M50d even more assured performers. The engine developed for the BMW M Performance Automobiles generates maximum output of 280 kW/381 hp and peak torque of 740 Newton metres (546 lb-ft), making the two BMW X models the envy of every other diesel-engined model in this segment. The BMW X5 M50d races from 0 to 100 km/h (62 mph) in 5.4 seconds, while the BMW X6 M50d brings that time down to 5.3 seconds. Both models also benefit from the immense reserves of power provided by their diesel engine when it comes to short sprints at higher speeds. Top speed is electronically limited to 250 km/h (155 mph) in both cases.
PS
I am sure they are fun to drive. How many cars are in the low 5 second range?