Mazda- CVT's are not good for high speed - huh?

[buster]

Originally Posted By: brandini
I agree with Mazda.

Since the TC is locked above low speeds it has the effect and feel of the direct gas pedal to the wheels that a manual has. No auto I've ever driven has felt so good. And even better, the programming is pure genius.

If you're tooling along in the new Mazda and stomp the gas (no double pump required) it's going to drop to the lowest possible gear, in a hurry, and up-shifts are crisp as well. And when you release the pedal, it

and i really want emphasis here

STAYS IN THE GEAR IT'S IN!

Because it knows it's playtime. And it only upshifts once it's convinced you're done running for your life.

And it's glorious.


Agree, it's an impressive transmission for sure. In sport mode it's really fun.

 

[buster]

Originally Posted By: flacoman
Kenichiro Saruwatari, chief engineer on the new Mazda3...
There's a cultural disconnect on the language here.
When he refers to high speed , he means spirited driving.
If it was his primary language we would have seen a different phrase.


Ah ok, good to know. TY.

 

[KrisZ]

I think, in general, Mazda has some good programming for their automatic transmissions. Even the 4spd slushbox in my 2006 MZ3 is programmed pretty well. It won't do the fancy stuff like blip the throttle or lock the TC in the low gears, but it will drop out of TC lock and go into the 2nd gear all at once when floored and the speed is right. It also seems to choose the gears pretty well in the D mode and downshift at appropriate times without the need to use excessive gas pedal movements.

 

[emg]

Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
As for CVT - I dont think they are efficient due to belt drive pully losses and hyd pump losses. Recall an old 3 speed T350 would be direct power Xfer through with high efficiency/ low loss in top "gear".
Not going to happen with a belt and two pulleys in oil.


As I understand it, CVTs are a bit less efficient than traditional auto boxes, but they typically cover a wider ratio range and can always be at the right RPM for the amount of acceleration you're demanding, rather than having to keep increasing RPM until they change gear. So you end up with better fuel economy despite the lower efficiency.

As for CVTs at high speed, I believe the WRX acceleration times for the CVT model are noticeably worse than the manual above 100mph, whereas they're only a little worse below that speed. Someone posted numbers on a web forum a few months back.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

Originally Posted By: Pesca
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
Why cant I get over 22 AVE MPG in my new 4 banger rogue? I always best the FED highway MPG on the monronie - but not here. It makes a noise like an old ford PS pump failing- this noticed at warm idle to 1500rpm. Is the CVT tranny pump toast? IIRC car has EPS on the column.

As for CVT - I dont think they are efficient due to belt drive pully losses and hyd pump losses. Recall an old 3 speed T350 would be direct power Xfer through with high efficiency/ low loss in top "gear".
Not going to happen with a belt and two pulleys in oil.


With a CVT, YOU have to change your way of driving.

If you agree with this concept and change, you will get the results. If you drive a Nissan CVT the same way you drive an automatic, you won't get the results.

I always beat the announced fuel economy, and did it too when I got the Rogue, but I had to change my way of driving. But that was my first, and only, automatic car.

I never ever went above 3000 rpm with my Rogue, even when I had to change lane in traffic, always hovering between 1100 and about 2000 rpms.
That's NOT going to happen. I do, though, try to keep the engine from "zinging" to redline by modulating the throttle to keep revs at bay. But anything over 1/16 throttle drops vacuum to near zero and the instant fuel use readout drops to below 10MPG. I cant feather or back-pedal any more than im doing now. Maybe ECT prog is off?

This a major NISSAN FAIL if this car is in proper running condition. Somethings gotta be wrong. Iv read auto mahgs "complaing"about Nissan fuelmilage being way under fed rating.

The engine vibrates a LOT below 1300 rpm and and feels sluggish and its noisy and clattery. VCT fail?

Maybe my oil in the last change was 40 grade by accident? The engine takes 30mins to "loosen up" in freezing weather. It feels like you put 15w40 in a 5w20 engine.

Are these qr25de back-specd to 5w20?

Andnow its just been recalled for coroding wiring harness and my windows mysteriously go down when the cars off. Maybe the 2 are related. And the trans pump sounds like a failing ford PS pump. Another Junk though surprisingly its Japanese built and end of design/life cycle car. Should be good, dangit!

 

[Whitewolf]

Maybe they never saw the Williams Formula One CVT. It never got to race because it was banned. One of the reasons why it was banned was because it was very quick and the technology was not generally available at the time.

 

[buster]

^ true.

I drove the WRX with the CVT and it was fantastic. I love a good manual, but some of the hardcore purists are just being silly and not entirely honest about how good some of the newer AT's/CVT's are. IMO.

 

[badtlc]

Originally Posted By: buster
^ true.

I drove the WRX with the CVT and it was fantastic. I love a good manual, but some of the hardcore purists are just being silly and not entirely honest about how good some of the newer AT's/CVT's are. IMO.


and many are silly and ignorant about how good manuals are.

 

[Pesca]

Originally Posted By: buster
^ true.

I drove the WRX with the CVT and it was fantastic. I love a good manual, but some of the hardcore purists are just being silly and not entirely honest about how good some of the newer AT's/CVT's are. IMO.


This has been discussed before: The question is not which one is better/faster than the other one (we all know the DCT and CVT win), but the pleasure that you got to row your own gears.

As long as I can, physically for me, and if I have the choice, I will always choose a manual over everything else.
Not because it will be faster, not because I believe that I am a better driver, just because I like it way better.

And my now-8 year old daughter will learn to drive manual, no choice. Cannot say the same thing for my future girlfriend... if any.

 

[Pesca]

Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
Originally Posted By: Pesca
Originally Posted By: ARCOgraphite
Why cant I get over 22 AVE MPG in my new 4 banger rogue? I always best the FED highway MPG on the monronie - but not here. It makes a noise like an old ford PS pump failing- this noticed at warm idle to 1500rpm. Is the CVT tranny pump toast? IIRC car has EPS on the column.

As for CVT - I dont think they are efficient due to belt drive pully losses and hyd pump losses. Recall an old 3 speed T350 would be direct power Xfer through with high efficiency/ low loss in top "gear".
Not going to happen with a belt and two pulleys in oil.


With a CVT, YOU have to change your way of driving.

If you agree with this concept and change, you will get the results. If you drive a Nissan CVT the same way you drive an automatic, you won't get the results.

I always beat the announced fuel economy, and did it too when I got the Rogue, but I had to change my way of driving. But that was my first, and only, automatic car.

I never ever went above 3000 rpm with my Rogue, even when I had to change lane in traffic, always hovering between 1100 and about 2000 rpms.
That's NOT going to happen. I do, though, try to keep the engine from "zinging" to redline by modulating the throttle to keep revs at bay. But anything over 1/16 throttle drops vacuum to near zero and the instant fuel use readout drops to below 10MPG. I cant feather or back-pedal any more than im doing now. Maybe ECT prog is off?

This a major NISSAN FAIL if this car is in proper running condition. Somethings gotta be wrong. Iv read auto mahgs "complaing"about Nissan fuelmilage being way under fed rating.

The engine vibrates a LOT below 1300 rpm and and feels sluggish and its noisy and clattery. VCT fail?

Maybe my oil in the last change was 40 grade by accident? The engine takes 30mins to "loosen up" in freezing weather. It feels like you put 15w40 in a 5w20 engine.

Are these qr25de back-specd to 5w20?

Andnow its just been recalled for coroding wiring harness and my windows mysteriously go down when the cars off. Maybe the 2 are related. And the trans pump sounds like a failing ford PS pump. Another Junk though surprisingly its Japanese built and end of design/life cycle car. Should be good, dangit!


Everything that you don't like is why I liked this car.

Do not read too much in what professionnal reviewers say about a car: They are not theirs, they do not care about the cars and gunned them, do not drive them like we will do. I do not know of any car reviewers who did or beat the EPA ratings.



Looks like you did not choose the right car for you.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Most folks complaints about transmissions these days are far more related to programming than actual design. Many examples exist of a trans that behaves very differently depending on the exact application.
The ZF 8 speed in my new Ram is a fantastic slushbox with near telepathic responses and liquid smoothness, yet the same trans is panned in the V6 models.

Mercedes has been using a wet clutch instead of a TC in their 7 speed trans for years in higher performance applications, and it works very well.

CVT's are a popular whipping boy too yet the new Subarus are converting folks like Buster every day.

My sig car was pretty good new but was completely transformed by programming changes that really brought it to life...