Honda to "ditch" conventional automatics

carguy123 wrote:

bravenrace wrote: In reply to integraguy: I will not buy a vehicle with a CVT, evar.

What's that sound? Oh yeah, it's the sound of you eating your words. evar is a long time. I personally have no issues with the concept of the CVT, I actually kinda like it. What I don't like is the making it work like a traditional automatic. From a performance standpoint, thinking autocross here, an engine held to a steady, power making rpm while the gearing moves around to give me the go I want when I want it sounds nice.

Yeah, well check back with me. I have an idea in my head of what a car is, and a shifting trans is part of that. I'm pretty sure that any time between now and when I die I'll be able to buy a car with a manual or conventional automatic, so there will be no CVT's for me. But I guess you know me better than I know myself, so you're probably right. I personally don't think CVT's are a long term solution. The problem they solve is the inherent compromises in the ICE. Every year new technologies are developed that reduce those compromises, and when variable displacement and electric valve actuation become the norm, among other things, the need for CVT's will be greatly reduced. And the value of using one with an electric motor is minimal from a functional standpoint. In any case, a car that doesn't shift isn't a car in my opinion.

Vigo wrote: And here i was recently thinking how glad i was that the OEMs seemed to get getting over their CVT kick. News flash: 6spd auto > CVT. I thought CVTs were something that would go away when manufacturers finally did all the transmission design work they had been putting off to get 6spd autos in all their models. I honestly think the car market can stand to have 6spds in most cars for the next 10+yrs at LEAST.

No kidding. I just rented a Dodge minivan for a business trip. It had a 6 speed auto, and in the lower gears the gear spacing was so close that it a lot of fun to drive. I kept driving it like a sports car just to hear it shift! A MINIVAN! Hearing a vehicle with a decent sounding engine shift, whether I do it myself or not, is a huge part of driving for me. I don't care about any real or perceived advantages to a CVT, I will never buy one. I've done thousands of miles in three very different vehicles with CVTs and hated all of them. Nevar, despite what car kid thinks.

I dont think it matters. Lets not forget Honda's cars are so awesome that they pretty much sell themselves.

Honda; please bring over your diesel civic hatchback.. that is all. continue with auto/cvt/manual debate.

bravenrace wrote:

Vigo wrote: And here i was recently thinking how glad i was that the OEMs seemed to get getting over their CVT kick. News flash: 6spd auto > CVT. I thought CVTs were something that would go away when manufacturers finally did all the transmission design work they had been putting off to get 6spd autos in all their models. I honestly think the car market can stand to have 6spds in most cars for the next 10+yrs at LEAST.

No kidding. I just rented a Dodge minivan for a business trip. It had a 6 speed auto, and in the lower gears the gear spacing was so close that it a lot of fun to drive. I kept driving it like a sports car just to hear it shift! A MINIVAN! Hearing a vehicle with a decent sounding engine shift, whether I do it myself or not, is a huge part of driving for me. I don't care about any real or perceived advantages to a CVT, I will never buy one. I've done thousands of miles in three very different vehicles with CVTs and hated all of them. Nevar, despite what car kid thinks.

I do that in my wifes R350 (7 speed), for an auto its kind of fun.

It's not a matter of what we on this forum think or want. CVTs are coming and there's nothing we can do about it.

A single transmission that can be made to shift upon command like a manual or be driven like an automatic is just what the auto manufacturers want.

I've ridden in a Prius a few times, and maybe that's why I think they come across as THE ULTIMATE car as white appliance. That police car in the Sly Stallone/Sandra Bullock movie (sorry, can't remember the name at the moment) that drove itself? To me, the Prius is that cars father or grandfather.

I was actually more surprised that Honda was going with CVTs instead of DCTs, as those brands of car that REALLY consider themselves to be sporty (BMW and VW, for instance) are going with DCTs.

As far as whether CVTs are the "right" transmissions for cars with little torque down low...as I understand CVTS, a lot of the "problems" with CVTs is the narrowness of the available ratio between lowest and highest "gears". If the two "wheels" are very close in size, the gear spead is minimal. The problem is designing a small/compact transmission with a very wide "gearset".

And as for the argument that "they build them for Europe, so they will always be available for the U.S." if you looked at the specs of some cars available in both the U.S. and Europe you would be surprised/mad? Example? The Nissan Rogue is available with 2 different diesel engines in Europe AND a manual transmission. At one point, the Ford Fiesta (not sure which generation) was available with an optional CVT. The Fiesta has been avilable with a diesel for about 10 years, at least, in Europe...will we ever see a diesel Fiesta in North America?

bravenrace wrote: In reply to integraguy: I will not buy a vehicle with a CVT, evar.

Me either.....I hate CVT in anything.

We recently bought a new atv and the non cvt requirement killed alot of them. We ended up with a new Honda Foreman, which is pretty ironic considering the topic of this thread.

Well, I'm going to throw my 2 cents in here. I agree with the crowd that hates CVT's. Driving a CVT eliminates the gratifying sound of the engine revving, then dropping with the shift, and revving again. I can't see myself buying one. I want a minivan with a conventional manual transmission. Five speeds is plenty. Auto manufacturers: Please get busy on that.

I'll also agree with those that say "never say never" because it may just happen that the only transmission you'll be able to buy in the states is a CVT. If they are proven to be more economical than a conventional automatic, car manufacturers will embrace the efficiency as they seek to meet fuel economy standards in the cheapest way possible.

My Freestyle CVT isn't rebuildable by anyone who can do it properly, but while it is working, I like it. A lot. For a people mover, cruising with the kids or highway or whatnot, it's wonderful. Also 28-30 mpg highway, 24 every day.

1988RedT2 wrote: I'll also agree with those that say "never say never" because it may just happen that the only transmission you'll be able to buy in the states is a CVT. If they are proven to be more economical than a conventional automatic, car manufacturers will embrace the efficiency as they seek to meet fuel economy standards in the cheapest way possible.

I will say never and mean never because I will continue to drive an old beat up piece of E36 M3 rather then touch one of those evil transmissions.

As far as whether CVTs are the "right" transmissions for cars with little torque down low...as I understand CVTS, a lot of the "problems" with CVTs is the narrowness of the available ratio between lowest and highest "gears". If the two "wheels" are very close in size, the gear spead is minimal. The problem is designing a small/compact transmission with a very wide "gearset".

Exactly.

And as for the argument that "they build them for Europe, so they will always be available for the U.S." if you looked at the specs of some cars available in both the U.S. and Europe you would be surprised/mad? Example? The Nissan Rogue is available with 2 different diesel engines in Europe AND a manual transmission. At one point, the Ford Fiesta (not sure which generation) was available with an optional CVT. The Fiesta has been avilable with a diesel for about 10 years, at least, in Europe...will we ever see a diesel Fiesta in North America?

Maybe if we taxed gasoline more than diesel as they do, things would change.

93EXCivic wrote:

1988RedT2 wrote: I'll also agree with those that say "never say never" because it may just happen that the only transmission you'll be able to buy in the states is a CVT. If they are proven to be more economical than a conventional automatic, car manufacturers will embrace the efficiency as they seek to meet fuel economy standards in the cheapest way possible.

I will say never and mean never because I will continue to drive an old beat up piece of E36 M3 rather then touch one of those evil transmissions.

Exactly. What makes people think that non-CVT trans vehicles are going to somehow suddenly disappear from the face of hte earth? I have a '65 Mustang with a T-5, and ironically, several Honda's that I'll drive til the day I die before I buy a CVT.

bravenrace wrote: Exactly. What makes people think that non-CVT trans vehicles are going to somehow suddenly disappear from the face of hte earth? I have a '65 Mustang with a T-5, and ironically, several Honda's that I'll drive til the day I die before I buy a CVT.

I don't think they will, but I do see conventional autos disappearing. When CAFE standards and high gas prices are pushing manufacturers to create more efficient cars, CVTs will win. Most manufacturers could care less if you like the "feel" compared to a conventional auto. Those buyers that are truly concerned about it will buy manuals. Those who need an appliance will buy a CVT, enjoy the economy and be oblivious to the difference.

My only experience with anything CVT has been a Polaris ATV... Hit the throttle and the engine jumps to peak power and the thing RUNS... makes the most of the engine.. I love it..

With one exception... You lose the sensation of speed and shifting gears... It is easy to get going to fast for a given situation because you lose that feedback...

That and banging gears is fun on something like a Blaster 200 or whatever... But then again... YOu are simply shifting gears all the time trying to do what the CVT already does...

I dunno... If the thing is efficient and durable enough.. bring it on..

I'm not saying, nor is anyone else that manual transmissioned cars will completely disappear...just that the ability to buy a new car with a manual transmission is already difficult, will get more difficult in the near future, and pretty much impossible in the space of 5 to 10 years.

It's already difficult (impossible?) to buy a full-size pickup truck with a manual transmission. We all know certain models of cars (Civic EX-L and the top models of Ford Focus and Nissan Sentra) are not available with a manual.

When you consider that in the '60s you could get a car with 5 or 6 different colors of interior and now they have pretty much narrowed the choice to grey or charcoal...

Or how about the latest money saver? Car companies are about to discontinue offering cars with C/D players in the standard radio, since so many folks are using "add-on" devices such as IPods or other hard drive-type storage systems.

Is Honda even relevant any more? The should be cast to the annals of beigedom with Toyota.

e_pie wrote: Is Honda even relevant any more? The should be cast to the annals of beigedom with Toyota.

With Toyota, about to release the most hyped car of the past decade? (FR-S/FT-86/GT-86/whatever)

ProDarwin wrote:

bravenrace wrote: Exactly. What makes people think that non-CVT trans vehicles are going to somehow suddenly disappear from the face of hte earth? I have a '65 Mustang with a T-5, and ironically, several Honda's that I'll drive til the day I die before I buy a CVT.

I don't think they will, but I do see conventional autos disappearing. When CAFE standards and high gas prices are pushing manufacturers to create more efficient cars, CVTs will win. Most manufacturers could care less if you like the "feel" compared to a conventional auto. Those buyers that are truly concerned about it will buy manuals. Those who need an appliance will buy a CVT, enjoy the economy and be oblivious to the difference.

I know that theoretically they are more efficient, but there are many other factors in producing an efficient car. The Altima I rented and put 1k miles on had a CVT and a 4 cylinder. It was loud, and driving it for me was like finger nails on a chaulk board. It averaged 29 MPG. On what was virtually the exact same trip, my wife's 260hp V-6 TL-S averaged 31 MPG with 4 people in it and a lowly 5 speed automatic. I'm not using this example as worth anything more than pointing out that the trans isn't the only factor. And engines and conventional auto transmissions will also become much more efficient in the coming years, possibly reducing the need for CVT's. As I said earlier, the need for CVT's is to overcome the compromises in the ICE. Develop the ICE to the point where the power curve is virtually flat and you no longer need a CVT.
Many people have mentioned in this thread what the car companies "want". What they want is to sell vehicles, and the market will decide if CVT's stay or go. I've owned many Honda products over the years, but you will never find me driving one with a CVT, not unless some new technology makes them very different from what they are now. But like I said, the market will decide.

bravenrace wrote: But like I said, the market will decide.

The market and the cheapest way to meet government regulations will decide.

Duke wrote:

bravenrace wrote: But like I said, the market will decide.

The market **and the cheapest way to meet government regulations** will decide.

If the cheapest way to meet government regulation is to use a component that no one will buy, then it really doesn't matter that the met the regulation. So ultimately the market alone decides.

bravenrace wrote: Develop the ICE to the point where the power curve is virtually flat and you no longer need a CVT.

And the BSFC curve (3-D curve) as well. Good luck making both of those flat.

Yes, car companies WANT to sell you a car, but if they keep chipping away at your choices in different areas and all but refuse to stock THE most popular cars with the most popular options...they will sell you a car, if you want what is in stock, badly enough.

Remember when the Ford Edge first came out? (Not the Ranger trim option, but the almost SUV?) All the ads featured an orange Edge, and 75% of the Edges that Ford dealers had in stock were that orange.

integraguy wrote: When you consider that in the '60s you could get a car with 5 or 6 different colors of interior and now they have pretty much narrowed the choice to grey or charcoal... Or how about the latest money saver? Car companies are about to discontinue offering cars with C/D players in the standard radio, since so many folks are using "add-on" devices such as IPods or other hard drive-type storage systems.

I'm not sure when Americans considered it a norm to have a radio and power everything, but there was a time when people were happy just having a car and going places. That also meant not needing to pay for credit cards with triple compound interest, cable tv with 300 channels that you don't watch anyways and a cell phone that potentially causes brain tumors and sucks your baby juice if placed in you front pockets. We Americans are just plain old spoiled compared to the rest if the world.

That said, I do like the idea of the CVT but I can honestly say I would want to stick with the simplest and most reliable transmission there is, which is the manual. Like many of you though, it's becoming more apparent that cars will become more appliance-like and less thrilling each year. So chances are good that they will be in almost every car in the future.

integraguy wrote: Yes, car companies WANT to sell you a car, but if they keep chipping away at your choices in different areas and all but refuse to stock THE most popular cars with the most popular options...they will sell you a car, if you want what is in stock, badly enough.

No, I won't. I'll buy and drive used vehicles the rest of my life before I spend new car money on something I don't want. In fact, that's primarily why I rarely buy a new vehicle. I can afford it, but I won't spend the money on one unless it's pretty much ideally what I want.
BTW, I think they for the most part do stock the most popular cars, it's just that guys like us don't want those.