Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
ANyway, turns out that the slushbox got better mileage than the CVT. I think it was due to the higher parasitic losses in the CVT (just took more out of the engine to keep in turning).
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
Sorry my friend, like it or not, believe it or not, in the real world, the CVT is incapable of delivering better mileage than a well driven car with a properly thought out manual transmission.
I think a moron with a CVT will do better than a moron with a slushbox will do better than a moron with a manual. I think a well driven manual will hold its own in real world driving conditions in either case.
I also think the shift patterns and "firmware" for the rubberbands and slushies is tuned for the EPA test more than real world FE.
I've already shown you a prime example of a vehicle (the Audi A4 2.0T) that is available with well designed examples of both manual and CVT types, and that per the scientific and repeatable EPA tests, matches the CVT in fuel economy. This in spite of the fact that the manual transmission version is saddled with the weight and drag of AWD hardware whereas the CVT version is FWD. You apparently ignored that too.
Question: Does the logical mind ignore input if it doesn't want to believe said input?
I can easily get 56-59 mpg @ 75 mph on a 1.9 T (liter) engine, 5 spd manual. It has a less than "optimized", but optimal ( IF, you HAVE to have a) 5 speed manual transmission. (for the US market)
It actually was paired with a 6 spd manual in the European market. What this does (along with .205 injectors vs .184 US injectors) is easily let one get 1 to 2 mpg BETTER; and probably more germanely @ 5 to 10 mph FASTER !!!!
It would be easy to hypothesize that the regulators that be, do not want many to achieve this, let alone it become common knowledge. Why? Because it literally blows the doors off the platform/s they champion... hybrid (i.e., Prius) Indeed they changed a PERFECTLY good and verifiable 40 or so year old EPA testing procedure; knowing full well it skews the results in the hybrid's favor and at 50-65 mph vs 80 to 85 mph !!!
So does my '92 Sentra SE-R. Or, a taller 5th gear.
While this took me some (early) research to discover, 1. this is app 300-900 rpms past max torque (1750 to 2250 rpms) but probably not coincidently 2. RIGHT at the RPMS necessary to keep the turbo comfortably on boost, which down stream 3. keeps the variable vanes functioning optimally and from sticking. 4. it is starting to fall of the optimum RPM's for MAX mpg.
This stuff is really at the engineering level. To use these individual examples, this is (the kind of ) stuff that should be researched and decided upon BEFORE one buys. I think often times one just "lives with it" so to speak.
But to be fair, this stuff is fairly well decided in advance by the engineers and most likely influenced by the bean counters regulators, etc. It is more an after action discussion to consumers, so to speak.
The real diehards among us, actually do stuff like..."gear swaps", add a 6 speed manual transmission.
I would wager that for most of the time even the champions of manuals "here" would agree that the majority of the time they would much rather leave the driving, "stirring" to an ECU.
A stick shift can be, is, a lot of fun on certain roads and/or in certain situations but NOT for long distance tedious driving.
?? Actually if one does longer distance driving, the best IS a tall/taller gear manual transmission !! ?? There are a host of technical and practical reasons.
Some vehicles (Corvette for example) have what is euphemistically called double over drive gears (5/6 th gears). @ 75 mph, the rpms are just BARELY above idle.
By "preminum" I assume you mean lack of need to "stir", since in that situation the "lossy" converter would be heavily used lowering FE.
Many of the newer/modern V6 engines with legacy V8 HP/torque range and with 6-speed automatics have the top two gears OD, actual OD.
In the case of the Corvette, they have the top two gears as you describe and STILL have to drop the axle ratio and it still delivers less mpg than the manual and costs 1,100 to 1250 dollars more.
Oh God no. You would most certainly lose that wager in my case.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Over the years I've lived in most of the largest and congested metropolitan areas in the United States, and I've driven (and enjoyed) a stick through them all. Errr, that is up until 2005 when finances dictated that I turn my leased car in and start using our old "Home Depot Hack" (a 1998 Dodge Grand Caravan) as my daily driver. Yes, the van was functional, yes, I could tote lots of kids and/or stuff in it, and yes, it was ridiculously reliable, but oh geez did I miss driving a stick.
Last fall, with the old girl fast approaching the 200,000 mile mark I finally traded her in on a 2009 Mazda3 with a 5-Speed, and to be perfectly honest, in spite of the fact that I'm commuting into Boston daily, I cannot tell you how much more enjoyable it is to drive a stick again. And yes, that even includes days when it takes me two hours to drive thirty miles.
Best regards,
Shipo
Note - this is different than how you drive an automatic vehicle. The goal isn't to retain a close distance at all costs but to shift less and maintain a steady speed within a specific gear. This means that gaps open up and you tend to stay at higher RPMs than in an automatic. If you try to drive a manual in a traffic jam like an automatic, you'll end up tired and frustrated. Sometimes people jump in front of you and that just happens.(see a typical Semi in traffic for a reference). Though, usually, because I'm running at higher rpms, I am the one who usually gets the jump on people. :P
I've driven several miles in heavy traffic every day for years and I usually only shift maybe 5-6 times during the entire 3-4 mile section where it's bad. Usually between 2nd and 3rd, because 3rd is roughly good for 20mph-60mph on my vehicle. 2nd I can keep in as long as it's over ~2-3 mph. Technically I could start it in 2nd but the thing starts to get jerky below about 2mph...
I still remember my oldest daughter taking her driver's test on my '82 Mazda 626 - manual. She failed the first time. The reason the testing officer gave was that she had "taken her hand off the wheel to shift". This MVA low-life had absolutely no idea what a stick was and that, yes, you have to take a hand off the wheel to shift!
For her re-test, we went to a different MVA office out in the boonies where we figured those administering the tests would be more likely to drive a stick. Bingo, it worked. She passed with no problems.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
Not that I am a glutton for punishment, but there have been times where I have strung 3/4 area traffic jams together in a day. 1. bay area, sf,south bay 2. farm land areas (believe it or not- harvest season) 3. la la land 4. san diego.
Here in the US my Ford Ranger I4 w/5-speed stick quickly "tells" me I need to upshift and/or downshift.
The thing is, with a "tall" top gear and a wide power band you can remain in that top gear from, say, 55MPH all the way UP. In the meantime the engine RPM rises from ~2200 RPM all the way to REDLINE, ~7000 RPM, frictional losses RISING all the while. Okay SPLIT the difference, 5th gear from 55MPM (3200 RPM) to 80MPH, 6th gear (back down to 3200RPM) thereafter.
With the power (band) of the Autobahn engine and a CVT the RPM might have stayed within 2200-2500 thereby improving my FE at the time from 25-26 to 30ish....??
Sorry, the math, simple math, just cannot be made to work out for a MT over a
CVT.
Look at it this way, with a CVT you can ALWAYS, ALWAYS be in the "TALLEST" gear ratio the engine's power band will support.
Nevertheless here is the "readers digest version" How CVT's Work
Once again, your information is grossly incorrect. Like it or not, CVTs have an upper and lower range of net gearing, just as every other multi-speed transmission on the planet. Said another way, once the top designed in ratio is reached (which is typically no taller than any other transmission out there), engines coupled to the wheels via a CVT rev no lower than an automatic or a manual in top gear.
Given the nature of gearbox reduction and the tooth geometry required, there is a practical limit to how wide this ratio spread can be, given manufacturing costs, size constraints as well as other issues like wear and tear, planned longevity, torque capacity and noise considerations, but that is a whole 'nother discussion.
And yes, this statement applies to CVTs too.
A further intriguing spin off would be: repair/replacement costs LOWER than 1. 5/6 spd manual transmissions 2. automatic slushboxes 3. DSG's 4. SMG's 5. hybrid 6. etc.
A primary (which has become secondary to most folks) is; is is cheaper as the "standard" transmission? (normally the 5/6 speed manual) Or, have they merely raised the price for the CVT (as the standard transmission), so you have no real way to tell.
The issue of cost effectiveness remains.
So for example, the CVT on an 09 Nissan Sentra costs $1,320 more than a 6 M manual. The CVT gets 1 mpg (EPA combined: 28 vs 27 mpg) BETTER than the 6 spd manual. Basically it would take app 341,667 miles to B/E. Given the invoice price (or whatever price you wish to use, that is app 9% of the cost of the vehicle !!!!! Convenience/options can be VERY expensive....
Interestingly enough, the cost of a paddle shifter automatic on a Corvette is $1,250., vs a 6 spd manual transmission (almost bullet proof TREMEC 6060)
So, yes, the CVT's lowest, "tallest" gear ratio MUST closely match the "top" gear in an AT (converter locked) or MT with the same engine, and the highest CVT gear ratio must closely match 1st gear in an MT or 1st and unlocked converter in an AT. Pretty wide range overall ratio for a single CVT so at least one of the Lexus cars use two CVTs (PSD..??) in tandom.
But I fail to understand why you would post a link that fully and firmly supports my EVERY point in favor of CVTs....??
B/E in 341,667 miles is hardly a strong case for CVT's !!?? You have also failed to post comparison parasitic numbers on the CVT's.
Ergo... you are probably hoping nobody raises the issue of probably massive CVT repair costs over the manual transmission, WHEN a CVT goes... south. !!??
The repair costs of A/T (slushbox) are literally 2.5 to 5 x times greater over a like model manual, i.e., $ 725. for a clutch upgrade on a Jetta TDI vs a min of $2,000 for an A/T.
Around "here" any such hope would be warrantless.
"...massive CVT repair costs.."
Having rebuilt more than my share of transmissions over my life's span (examples, Ford C4, C6 for AT and '65 Mustang and 84 Pinto for MT) I don't see that rebuilding a CVT could possibly involve massive costs in comparison to an MT, and certainly not in comparison to an AT.
Simple equals cheap, not necessarily efficient. Besides which, it's all relative -- a manual transmission is much cheaper than an automatic, plus which it's more efficient. A CVT is cheaper than a manual, but. . .
Rubber bands are cheaper than steel gears, last I heard (even in China). Rubber bands (or steel belts) running on cones generate more heat than gears, even if they're not spur gears (most efficient, but noisy). I'm guessing that cheap trumps almost everything else these days -- that'd be first cost cheap, not lifecycle cheap.
Pricing something higher to reap bigger margins often works (most time it's tried). Witness the Mercedes Benz situation in NA relative to Germany. Hey, it costs more -- must be worth it. Right?
No, "simple" = NOT complex.
And simple in concept, as in this case, a (mechanical) CVT, does not necessarily equal simple in design or production.
"...generate more heat.."
Like your MT clutch, only slippage of the frictional surfaces, interface surfaces, would be cause for heat generation above and beyond an actual MT & clutch. Without actual knowledge I would still make the guess that the CVTs we are seeing in the market have designs that remove that aspect. And for that same reason I would bet that DBW is a big enabler of the more widespread use of CVTs that we are currently seeing in the marketplace.
Don't let the engine provide more torque than the CVT can "handle".
I intentionally EXCLUDE the Toyota HSD CVT technique from my thought process because it is more properly termed a PSD, Power Split Device. Slippage in the PSD is only via a magnetic field, not a frictional surface.
"...Pricing something higher.."
Is sometimes called VALUE pricing, as in what's the value, often perceived value, to the consumer, not the value relating to the overall cost of the product.
Hmm that could be propagating a couple of myths.
First the PSD term is a marketing error. It should be referred to as a TSD or Torque Split Device. The planetary which is the heart of the Toyota HSD splits the engine torque in the ratio of 1/3.6 to the sun gear and 2.6/3.6 to the internal tooth ring gear. The max torque of the 1NZ-FXE engine (82lbs-ft) splits 22lbs-ft to the sun gear connected to the MG1 servo and the remaining 59lbs-ft to the ring gear and thence to the wheels via a 4.113 step down.
It is of specific importance to know that the current flowing in MG1 would be 100 amps at this time. If this current were ever to drop to zero then MG1 will freewheel and prevent the engine, which directly drives the planetary carrier, from delivering any torque over to the ring gear (and therefore supplying any power to the road wheels).
Effectively when MG1 current is zero then the engine output torque is also zero. It is by knowledge of this current that the HSD controller can estimate engine torque. Most of the time you want max torque, the engine RPM will therefore be dependent on the amount of power the traction inverter and other hotel loads require. The Engine Control Unit will alter the fuel injection pulse duration to achieve this RPM. I would be interested to know how a mechanical CVT would compare in its ability to consistently accomplish this.
Secondly nothing "slips" in the HSD's brushless machines. Neither in MG1 which behaves mostly as a generator nor in MG2 which behaves mostly as the road wheels traction motor. The applied stator currents are always synchronous to the physical position of the neodymium magnets on the rotor. However it is by shifting the direction of power flowing between these two machines (up to 30Kw max) that the engine can either be caused to lug thus simulating overdrive or alternatively allowed to race, thus instantly achieving full power. But nothing slips and wastes power!!
Hmmm... well actually if you were to call me on it I'd have to admit there is a significant waste of power in the Toyota system but I have to respect that this is not a hybrid thread so I'll leave it at that for now.
T2
There will always be the manual transmission as long as:
1. the oem's continue to offer them as standard equipment
2. folks still buy them.
There will be continued growth, albeit @ a faster rate than CVT's, DSG's, hybrid's, etc.The manual transmission passenger vehicle fleet is certainly bigger than any of the mentioned "automatic" transmissions.
If anything the ubiquitous automatic "slush box" will continue to lose market share much faster than manual transmission.
(gov figures 255.4 M passenger vehicles)
Here is the problem and opportunity however for the hybrid driver
HYBRID LUXURY SUV ALL CARS GENDER Male 53.45% 52.47% 56.23% Female 46.55% 47.53% 43.77% PRINCIPAL DRIVER AGE Median 54 48 50 2006 HOUSEHOLD INCOME Median $111,170 $172,014 $84,406 EDUCATION 4-Year College Degree 24.08% 30.03% 22.57% Advanced Degree 37.21% 26.28% 17.23% CENSUS REGIONS Northeast 17.59% 18.91% 18.48% Midwest 15.77% 16.99% 24.1% South 29.65% 32.98% 36.95% West 36.98% 31.12% 20.47% MAGAZINES HYBRID BUYERS ARE MORE LIKELY TO READ THAN AVERAGE NEW CAR BUYER
link title
This is PURELY anecdotal. A 79 year old man (self employed, sent by the insurance co) came out to my house to fix a ping on my windshield. The car he used in his business is a Toyota Camry with automatic transmission. Somehow the subject got around to manual transmissions. He said the only reason he got an A/T was his SO. He sort of joked that if he "crapped" out, his wife would not be able to drive him to the ER.
LOL - I agree. That's why my wife can drive a stick :P
Reminds me of the story someone posted here last year about the crooks who couldn't make their getaway because they couldn't figure out how to shift the car they tried to steal.
Better...??
That's the way I see this going...
So as the article so aptedly described "automated" is more an adjective, MANUAL (transmission) being the noun.
..."Hopefully it's becoming clear why the DCT is classified as an automated manual transmission. In principle, the DCT behaves just like a standard manual transmission: It's got input and auxiliary shafts to house gears, synchronizers and a clutch. What it doesn't have is a clutch pedal, because computers, solenoids and hydraulics do the actual shifting."...
Well... I think we can argue/banter the semantics, as even VW has had issues in its description. Edmunds.com 's shorthand for it is/was A/M (automatic manual) . The distinctions are CLEARLY not sound bite able. What might be is a pedal LESS dual clutch??
However it does illustrate what I said about (DSG) taking automatic "slush box" market share. VW (Jetta) offer's it in 6 speed manual (standard) or 6 spd DSG :optional (direct shift gearbox- $1,100 option, NO automatic OPTIONAL, slush box).
The VW DSG (made by Borg Warner) (while having been around for years in the European markets) has only been offered recently (starting 2006). Currently at best, the population of DSG in relation to the passenger vehicle fleet (255.4 M) is literally not measurable, percentage wise. ...but WAIT....
..."That's the way I see this going... "
So does BW Borg Warner Braces For a Five Fold Increase In DSG Transmission Production
My take is if you have to have an automated manual.... that is the way I see it going also. As noted the 6 spd manual is standard and the 6 spd (automated) MANUAL (DSG) is optional. So if anything the (automated) manual transmission will GAIN in population, NOT lose as some have postulated.
As I have written before, mostly to PHEV proponents, the Prius is not about being an electric car it is in fact all about being an electrical transmission. It gives you the ability to extract more power from the engine than a skillfully manipulated manual transmission can.
In this manner a 1.5L engine can perform as well as a 2.4L or that same 2.4L behave as a V6. Car guys seem far too enamoured with the multi-ratio mechanical transmission to see what is going on here.
In the last ten years just as image capturing devices have transitioned from chemical to flash card storage while image displays have eschewed the CRT for the flat screen we are also about to see the increasing use of electrical transmissions whether the term "hybrid" is applied to these vehicles or not.
T2
The PSD should not be assumed to be a CVT in actuality, only in functionality.
There is also work on putting a dry clutch DSG system with 7 spds, which presumably will exact even less real world mpg penalty.link title
Indeed a dry clutch 7 spd DSG will yield 10% better mpg than 6 spd wet clutch DSG and 6% better than manual link title My only question is how practical would a 7 spd manual be?
Dry clutch 6 speed automated manual transmission is replacing the slushbox in smaller Fords. In Europe they have a wet clutch version. So far, this is primarily replacing the autos. Apparently, its needed for fuel economy targets the regular slushies can't hit, and also gets rid of some efficiency losses in the slushies and lets them use smaller, weaker motors since the power gets to the wheels.
Of course you can save $1000, get a manual with a clutch pedal, and have the same effect. Who knew?
Indeed it is an almost lock step, albeit slower march toward DSG's (automated) manual transmissions (away from the AUTOMATIC (slush boxes) !!!
As such, the STANDARD has always been and seemingly remains,....the standard transmission (5/6 spd w/"CLUTCH" pedal) It is almost impossible for it to go "away" when it is at the literal CORE of "the all important" EPA mpg ratings.
Betamax
But ... my wife shattered her left leg back in February and has a rod and 9 screws holding it together. Soon to be 8 screws as one is backing out, but I'll spare y'all the gory details. At least she's off the crutches and cane as of last month, and was able to test drive a stick xD ok a couple of weeks ago.
Since we tend to buy one new car and drive it for a decade, we are concerned about how her leg is going to hold up over the next few years and how it's going to handle the clutch work.
I don't suppose anyone makes a 6 speed MT with paddle shifters that would substitute for hand controls....
It makes me wonder what percentage of MT sales are to us older boomers who are starting to get a bit weatherbeaten.
So for me, I have a pretty clear and focused caveat. IF I have to get a automatic, (slush box)... THEN a DSG is preferable.
As an op/ed: the days of the slush box might be numbered.... Certainly the mpg is way better over a slush box.
There is an app -1 mpg penalty over a 6 speed manual, to a more promising 6% advantage (DSG w dry clutch 7 spd) over a 6 spd manual. (but still a 1,000 + premium)
More on topic, the DSG would probably be the ticket with, w/o paddle shifting. Out of the 4 drivers who have used (our) the DSG, aka D/S, I am the only one to really have used it and I have yet to see the real utility for the +/- shift gate, other than the F1 fantasy.
VW Jetta TDI has the +/- "sequential" gate. Sure, it is great: as you can literally flip gates and shift it on the fly. Don't get me wrong, the dsg has a certain utility and when you are in the mood, it is FUN.... I even use it for the 0 miles thru 60,000 miles break in procedure. But since LESS than 2% have to do an up to 60,000 miles break in procedure, it appeals to a VERY limited audience.
After market vendors offer a $290 dollar steering wheel paddle shifter option.
So far it seems like Audi, VW and Ford offers DSG. This of course at the present time greatly limits the field.
I know of very few boomers percentage wise opting for 6 spd manuals.
But now maybe a time to reflect on how to be nice to your wife and put her out of her misery. That a vehicle with a difficult clutch could well exacerbate.
Now far from me to be putting ideas into your head but a 2009 Prius, while you can still get them, would be a much kinder vehicle both to her limbs and your pocketbook over the longterm.
The 2010 doesn't look to be significantly advantageous over a 2009 and will come with an early adopter premium. The 2009 embodies the NHW20 design that has been out 6 years meaning that the knowledge base and service support is mature. Right now some may have end of model year discounting replete with favorable low interest rate deals. So you get a car that performs better than one propelled by the most skilled use of a manual transmission with that size engine. And great fuel economy. What's not to like here ?