Launch control
Just think how nice it would have been with a real gearbox.
ALL automatic transmissions rob power and efficiency. The torque converter guarantees that. There is a huge variation in how much, but nothing compares to a mechanical connection.
ALL automatic transmissions rob power and efficiency. The torque converter guarantees that. There is a huge variation in how much, but nothing compares to a mechanical connection.
Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms
Should be a convenience store, not a government agency
Should be a convenience store, not a government agency
I think you have to qualify that. Power, yes. Efficiency? Depends on how you measure. CVTs can actually provide better gas mileage depending on your driving type. With a manual, as you go through the gears, you go in and out of the most fuel efficient RPM range. With a CVT, the transmission can keep the engine at it's most efficient RPM range delivering better fuel economy. Theoretically you should have better acceleration as the the transmission can keep the engine locked into the highest torque and HP range. Most drivers can't do that with a manual. They go in and out and in and out as they go through the gears.Woodie wrote:Just think how nice it would have been with a real gearbox.
ALL automatic transmissions rob power and efficiency. The torque converter guarantees that. There is a huge variation in how much, but nothing compares to a mechanical connection.
The problem with CVTs is that they are good on paper but in actual implementation, often fall short of their proclaimed traits. They are theoretically supposed to be the most fuel efficient and optimal transmission for the engine's powerband. However, in reality, many CVTs offer less performance and even less real-world efficiency than their figures on paper would indicate. While manual transmissions are no longer the most efficient or the best for peak performance, they offer less performance deviation on the part of the mechanical components and more rely on the driver's skill and technique.
CVTs are also far from the best transmissions for durability and reliability. They are actually among the worst and transmission replacements among CVTs are quite high industry-wide. While they are improving in everything from reliability, performance, and efficiency, they still aren't exactly great. Hence, just about every single automaker avoids them for heavy duty usage or performance applications. They are mainly used for cars most people simply use as a transportation appliance.
While I have no doubt the CVT is nice in the new Nissan Maxima, that car drastically fell in reputation since being exclusively fitted with a CVT. The old Maximas used be a venerable vehicle capable of 250,000+ miles with a traditional auto or even a manual transmission. Now, they are more like the sporty alternative to the Toyota Avalon and have greatly lost sense of the "4 Door Sports Car" mantra the Maxima once proclaimed. Consequently, the kind of people driving Maximas changed too. I personally don't see a real reason to buy one given you can get a cheaper Altima with a V6 engine, CVT, and FWD just like a Maxima. Enthusiasts skip over the Maxima and get an Infiniti given these opt for better performance layouts like RWD and traditional autos.
Personally, I think the best type of transmission really depends on the driver and their style and purpose for driving. For performance, a CVT is a dismal choice. It really has neither the performance characteristics nor the durability to keep up with the demanding needs of a performance driver. The fact that the CVT version of the Kizashi was even gutted 5 HP down from the manual version is just evidence these transmissions are second rate when it comes to performance. They are also susceptible to overheating which makes them again terrible for demanding performance driving or heavy duty usage. However, for the causal driver who really drives the car as a transportation appliance, the CVT would seem suitable.
Dual Clutch Transmissions are the opposite of CVTs when it comes to "automatics". These things are rather rough and awkward in low speed city driving. Where they shine is in performance given these operate like manual transmissions except with two clutches that the car operates automatically. It's the choice of performance vehicles and are fitted in vehicles ranging from the Nissan GT-R, Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution MR, to even econoboxes like the Ford Fiesta. While it makes these cars rather awkward to drive in traffic and city conditions, they maximize the performance in more demanding conditions. I've driven an automatic Fiesta with a DCT extensively (GF owned one in CA) and can attest to the fact that the DCT really does make the most out of the tiny 1.6 liter engine when accelerating. I was surprised at how well it could merge onto traffic and even climb a mountain. Similar to a manual transmission, it feels like it really wrings out the most out of a small engine. The cons of the DCT are the rather finicky and abrupt shifting at low speeds. A lot of people complain about this issue with DCTs in city traffic conditions.
Traditional automatics with torque converters are probably still the best automatics even to this day. They are relatively smooth in any condition, quite reliable, and offer a good balance of smoothness and performance. This is why most luxury automakers still use traditional automatics. For example, Audi deliberately chose to use a torque-converter automatic in the new S4 instead of using a finicky DCT or a hesitant CVT.
Acura has tried to mesh the two by offering a DCT with a torque converter to bring about the pros of both autos into one but failed miserably. These transmissions are very problematic and Acura's reliability has since plummeted due to these new transmissions in their new TLX. It's rather sad given they killed the reputable TSX and TL to bring about the TLX but the new car doesn't have the strong reputation of either the TSX or TL which were very good.
Basically, while the technology keeps evolving, there are still good reasons to opt for a manual transmission. These aren't so dependent on sensors, computer input, and other technological advances that can actually be a detriment. The main thing manuals rely on is the skill and technique of the driver. It forces the driver to be more attentive and decisive about they way they drive. I learned how to drive a manual about 7 years after I started driving with only automatics. I can attest to the fact that it made me a more attentive and responsive driver as my shifting is directly proactive with the road I'm driving on. In simple and cheap cars, it's often still the best transmission all things considered and is always cheaper. Manual cars also often make the best used car deals given their lower price and lack of interest among most buyers. Having recently shopped for used cars for the GF, I can certainly say the best deals were with manual transmission cars. They simply had the lowest mileage, best condition, and lowest prices. Given most people gloss over them for autos, they really make the better buy in the used car market.
I think as long as cars have internal combustion engines, the manual transmission has a place and purpose. I certainly like it in the Kizashi and while it's a drag to deal with in the rush hour traffic of Washington, DC daily, it really makes the Kizashi a fun to drive vehicle with excellent reliability.
All this being said, the Kizashi may be my last manual car. It may be surprising and somewhat contradictory given my opinion on various transmissions, but frankly put, I don't think cars should have transmissions much longer. I am a believer in electrified powertrains and think it makes sense for electric motors to drive the wheels rather than a transaxle transferring the engine's power, resulting in significant energy loss in the process. I think PHEVs, Hybrids, and EVs make a lot of sense for drivers like me and I'll likely get a PHEV or hybrid as my next vehicle. Manuals transmissions are largely obsolete with these electrified powertains so they aren't even an option. In fact, most use a proprietary type of e-CVT in which the electric motor and engine can both supply the power to the drivetrain. The electric motor optimizes the operation of the e-CVT, making it significantly better than an ICE with a conventional CVT in everything from acceleration performance to reliability. To me, it just makes more sense given the realities of how I use my car. Electrified powertrains offer significant benefits, minimal compromises, and are getting more and more affordable. While it would seem odd that a car enthusiast would embrace electrified powertrains that take even more control away from the driver, I think it's time we start moving away from what is essentially technology from a 100 years ago that's just been continuously improved. I think it's time for a paradigm shift in automotive powertains.
However, it's not like I'm completely throwing in the towel. My Suzuki SV650S motorcycle has really shown me a whole new realm of motoring in which engines, manual transmissions, and operator skill are all forefront. Everything from the shifting to cornering experience feels amplified in riding a bike and most bikes aren't changing in technology quite yet. Most are manual and most still come with simple internal combustion engines. They keep things traditional while rewarding rider skill more than a car choked full of electronic controls and computer management, regardless of what you drive. Maybe this is why I'm okay with hybrids and EVs as my future vehicles. I can always escape on a motorcycle and unlike their cars, Suzuki is right at the forefront of the industry with motorcycles offering a more direct relationship between man and machine. That being said, the comfortable midsize Honda Accord Hybrid seats 5 people yet gets exactly the same fuel efficiency as my 650cc motorcycle.
CVTs are also far from the best transmissions for durability and reliability. They are actually among the worst and transmission replacements among CVTs are quite high industry-wide. While they are improving in everything from reliability, performance, and efficiency, they still aren't exactly great. Hence, just about every single automaker avoids them for heavy duty usage or performance applications. They are mainly used for cars most people simply use as a transportation appliance.
While I have no doubt the CVT is nice in the new Nissan Maxima, that car drastically fell in reputation since being exclusively fitted with a CVT. The old Maximas used be a venerable vehicle capable of 250,000+ miles with a traditional auto or even a manual transmission. Now, they are more like the sporty alternative to the Toyota Avalon and have greatly lost sense of the "4 Door Sports Car" mantra the Maxima once proclaimed. Consequently, the kind of people driving Maximas changed too. I personally don't see a real reason to buy one given you can get a cheaper Altima with a V6 engine, CVT, and FWD just like a Maxima. Enthusiasts skip over the Maxima and get an Infiniti given these opt for better performance layouts like RWD and traditional autos.
Personally, I think the best type of transmission really depends on the driver and their style and purpose for driving. For performance, a CVT is a dismal choice. It really has neither the performance characteristics nor the durability to keep up with the demanding needs of a performance driver. The fact that the CVT version of the Kizashi was even gutted 5 HP down from the manual version is just evidence these transmissions are second rate when it comes to performance. They are also susceptible to overheating which makes them again terrible for demanding performance driving or heavy duty usage. However, for the causal driver who really drives the car as a transportation appliance, the CVT would seem suitable.
Dual Clutch Transmissions are the opposite of CVTs when it comes to "automatics". These things are rather rough and awkward in low speed city driving. Where they shine is in performance given these operate like manual transmissions except with two clutches that the car operates automatically. It's the choice of performance vehicles and are fitted in vehicles ranging from the Nissan GT-R, Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution MR, to even econoboxes like the Ford Fiesta. While it makes these cars rather awkward to drive in traffic and city conditions, they maximize the performance in more demanding conditions. I've driven an automatic Fiesta with a DCT extensively (GF owned one in CA) and can attest to the fact that the DCT really does make the most out of the tiny 1.6 liter engine when accelerating. I was surprised at how well it could merge onto traffic and even climb a mountain. Similar to a manual transmission, it feels like it really wrings out the most out of a small engine. The cons of the DCT are the rather finicky and abrupt shifting at low speeds. A lot of people complain about this issue with DCTs in city traffic conditions.
Traditional automatics with torque converters are probably still the best automatics even to this day. They are relatively smooth in any condition, quite reliable, and offer a good balance of smoothness and performance. This is why most luxury automakers still use traditional automatics. For example, Audi deliberately chose to use a torque-converter automatic in the new S4 instead of using a finicky DCT or a hesitant CVT.
Acura has tried to mesh the two by offering a DCT with a torque converter to bring about the pros of both autos into one but failed miserably. These transmissions are very problematic and Acura's reliability has since plummeted due to these new transmissions in their new TLX. It's rather sad given they killed the reputable TSX and TL to bring about the TLX but the new car doesn't have the strong reputation of either the TSX or TL which were very good.
Basically, while the technology keeps evolving, there are still good reasons to opt for a manual transmission. These aren't so dependent on sensors, computer input, and other technological advances that can actually be a detriment. The main thing manuals rely on is the skill and technique of the driver. It forces the driver to be more attentive and decisive about they way they drive. I learned how to drive a manual about 7 years after I started driving with only automatics. I can attest to the fact that it made me a more attentive and responsive driver as my shifting is directly proactive with the road I'm driving on. In simple and cheap cars, it's often still the best transmission all things considered and is always cheaper. Manual cars also often make the best used car deals given their lower price and lack of interest among most buyers. Having recently shopped for used cars for the GF, I can certainly say the best deals were with manual transmission cars. They simply had the lowest mileage, best condition, and lowest prices. Given most people gloss over them for autos, they really make the better buy in the used car market.
I think as long as cars have internal combustion engines, the manual transmission has a place and purpose. I certainly like it in the Kizashi and while it's a drag to deal with in the rush hour traffic of Washington, DC daily, it really makes the Kizashi a fun to drive vehicle with excellent reliability.
All this being said, the Kizashi may be my last manual car. It may be surprising and somewhat contradictory given my opinion on various transmissions, but frankly put, I don't think cars should have transmissions much longer. I am a believer in electrified powertrains and think it makes sense for electric motors to drive the wheels rather than a transaxle transferring the engine's power, resulting in significant energy loss in the process. I think PHEVs, Hybrids, and EVs make a lot of sense for drivers like me and I'll likely get a PHEV or hybrid as my next vehicle. Manuals transmissions are largely obsolete with these electrified powertains so they aren't even an option. In fact, most use a proprietary type of e-CVT in which the electric motor and engine can both supply the power to the drivetrain. The electric motor optimizes the operation of the e-CVT, making it significantly better than an ICE with a conventional CVT in everything from acceleration performance to reliability. To me, it just makes more sense given the realities of how I use my car. Electrified powertrains offer significant benefits, minimal compromises, and are getting more and more affordable. While it would seem odd that a car enthusiast would embrace electrified powertrains that take even more control away from the driver, I think it's time we start moving away from what is essentially technology from a 100 years ago that's just been continuously improved. I think it's time for a paradigm shift in automotive powertains.
However, it's not like I'm completely throwing in the towel. My Suzuki SV650S motorcycle has really shown me a whole new realm of motoring in which engines, manual transmissions, and operator skill are all forefront. Everything from the shifting to cornering experience feels amplified in riding a bike and most bikes aren't changing in technology quite yet. Most are manual and most still come with simple internal combustion engines. They keep things traditional while rewarding rider skill more than a car choked full of electronic controls and computer management, regardless of what you drive. Maybe this is why I'm okay with hybrids and EVs as my future vehicles. I can always escape on a motorcycle and unlike their cars, Suzuki is right at the forefront of the industry with motorcycles offering a more direct relationship between man and machine. That being said, the comfortable midsize Honda Accord Hybrid seats 5 people yet gets exactly the same fuel efficiency as my 650cc motorcycle.
2025 Mazda CX-50 Preferred Hybrid
2011 Suzuki Kizashi Sport GTS 6MT (Sold)
2011 Suzuki Kizashi Sport GTS 6MT (Sold)
Industry wide, they're attempting to go too far with the fuel-efficiency-via-transmissions methodology. It isn't working. More and more vehicles are plummeting into the less than stellar drivability/reliability abyss. Even the manuals that are out there anymore, are not that great. The 6-speed Wrangler transmission comes to mind. Let's play "what gear is the shifter going into this time?" Test drove two manuals, with different axle ratios even, to convince myself getting the auto was the better choice. All was great w/ the auto until an un-approved TCM flash. Not quite as happy with it right after that as I was originally.
Ron
2010 Kizashi GTS, CVT, iAWD (3/10 build date)
2011 SX4 Premium Hatch, CVT, iAWD (12/10 build date)
2018 Mazda CX-5 iAWD Touring
2014 Wrangler JKUW (GONE, traded
)
1991 Samurai, 5-Speed, EFI, Soft-Top (
sold)
2010 Kizashi GTS, CVT, iAWD (3/10 build date)
2011 SX4 Premium Hatch, CVT, iAWD (12/10 build date)
2018 Mazda CX-5 iAWD Touring
2014 Wrangler JKUW (GONE, traded
) 1991 Samurai, 5-Speed, EFI, Soft-Top (
sold)Yeah, there is truth in that, even with manuals which some may find surprising. For example, I read some issues about the Mitsubishi Evolution's 5 speed manual vs. the 6 speed. While many scoffed at the fact that the Evo X is ancient with a 5 speed manual, they offered a 6 speed manual in earlier models. The problem was that fitting in 6 cogs made the transmission more delicate and prone to failure for this high powered turbo AWD vehicle. Hence, the latest version reverted to just the 5 speed for the sake of durability. While the Evo is technically older than rivals, it's also more robust and reliable than counterparts including the WRX and STI. I certainly see more older Evos on the road than older WRX and STIs.Ronzuki wrote:Industry wide, they're attempting to go too far with the fuel-efficiency-via-transmissions methodology. It isn't working. More and more vehicles are plummeting into the less than stellar drivability/reliability abyss. Even the manuals that are out there anymore, are not that great. The 6-speed Wrangler transmission comes to mind. Let's play "what gear is the shifter going into this time?" Test drove two manuals, with different axle ratios even, to convince myself getting the auto was the better choice. All was great w/ the auto until an un-approved TCM flash. Not quite as happy with it right after that as I was originally.
It's certainly true that many companies have done all kinds of things with transmissions to improve fuel economy like using 8 and 9 speed autos or CVTs in 4000lb+ vehicles but at the cost of making the driving experience odd and the transmissions unreliable.
2025 Mazda CX-50 Preferred Hybrid
2011 Suzuki Kizashi Sport GTS 6MT (Sold)
2011 Suzuki Kizashi Sport GTS 6MT (Sold)
Automatics in general, but CVTs in particular, can be tuned to perform well on the EPA mileage test. That's why you now see the numbers being the same or even better for some automatics. In real world use this NEVER works out. Well, maybe if the manual driver is an absolute boob.LPSISRL wrote:I think you have to qualify that. Power, yes. Efficiency? Depends on how you measure. CVTs can actually provide better gas mileage depending on your driving type.
Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms
Should be a convenience store, not a government agency
Should be a convenience store, not a government agency
And back to the OP's query:
The CVT KIzashi does not have 'launch control'; instead, its software limits torque off the line to minimize CVT risk ('cause it will get over-stressed by someone like me).
Once it gets rolling a bit full power is ramped in.
Smart software.
But I've noticed that dropping 13--14lbs per wheel/tire, MY CVT AWD KIzashi accelerates much harder (than the last one, and this one with its OEM 18"s), particularly at near-launch. Now just a bit of roll and more power seems available, and sooner!
The CVT KIzashi does not have 'launch control'; instead, its software limits torque off the line to minimize CVT risk ('cause it will get over-stressed by someone like me).
Once it gets rolling a bit full power is ramped in.
Smart software.
But I've noticed that dropping 13--14lbs per wheel/tire, MY CVT AWD KIzashi accelerates much harder (than the last one, and this one with its OEM 18"s), particularly at near-launch. Now just a bit of roll and more power seems available, and sooner!