Only option for 2015 a CVT snowmobile transmisson?

Hi,

I have an '08 LGT that I bought new, and would have gladly replaced it with another new one last year had the present model not been so painfully unattractive.

Fast forward to today when I see pics of the new 2015, and I think maybe I could live with the new styling? At least better than the slab sided Camry with monster truck wheel arches that we have now, but then I read it will only be available with a CVT snowmobile transmission???

IS EVERYONE AT SUBARU ON DRUGS??

I understand that they needed to increase market share, ergo the bigger legacy, but do they truly feel the need to burn every single loyal past owner in the process?

I mean I'd love a manual, but worse case could live with an automatic, but NEVER A CVT!!! Do we really all look that desperate to live the snowmobile experience?

What a huge disappointment this company has turned out to be, no more waiting, Audi or Q50 for me.

 

Paul

You'll have to face reality Paul. Manuals are on their way out since modern automatic transmissions and CVT's are faster and more efficient . I got my first CVT in my 2010 Legacy and I must say I love it...The engine is always on the power band and if I want to shift by myself, there are the paddle shifters on the side or the steering wheel. Best of both worlds. Go try one and you wont miss the manual...;o)))

Paul,

 

I'll not even bring up how unfair it is to Subaru for you to compare them to a model that's $10-20k more expensive than they are...but what specifically do you have against a CVT?

After spending time with a CVT in my kizashi, automatics feel clunky and inefficient.

 

Going CVT makes for a smoother and more efficient driving experience.

 

The best way to describe it is a turbine experience. A constant pull till you redline, the engine keeps giving without pause to think "what gear do I need".

I agree. We have to stop hanging on to a niche market from 2 decades of MT that are becoming more inefficient than a much easier to drive CVT. i was very skeptical when I was searching for my current car about the CVT, but ultimately I gave it a chance and LOVE it. When I feel an urge to feel that pull of the "gears" i switch it into manual mode and paddle-shift. Otherwise, I really like just hitting the gas and going. Like what was said before, best of both worlds.

The main disadvantage with the CVT (and the other AT gearboxes) is that they don't shift up in a timely manner when the engine is cold so you are completely without any decent acceleration during that period - the engine is just revving.

 

And the simulated stepped gearing when you floor it.

 

But those are just software issues, I expect that to get better in the future - or when someone provides a hack for the TCU.

If CVTs are so great, why aren't the high end cars using them?

 

I've known several people with cars that had CVTs, and most had reliability issues.

CVTs, especially HTCVTs from Subaru are actually fairly good nowadays.

Much better than the Nissan CVTs for example.

 

Pair them with an engine that produces a nice fairly flat torque curve (see FA20DIT or EZ36)

and good TCU/TCM programming and most of the subjective cons of a CVT fade away.

 

Some of the other reasons Subaru is going CVTs vs say a DSG include:

 

-compact design (enough room for S-AWD)

-lower weight (since S-AWD already packs on the pounds)

 

Plus they've developed their soft-hybrid around the CVT as well and I'm sure they'll shove it down consumer throats in more upcoming models than just the XV Crosstrek hybrid in the coming years (Legacy/Outback hybrid anyone? America cheers!).

 

We see most of the JDM models outfit with CVTs now too, no more MTs.

And SoAs lineup is heading in that same direction. We see it now, but we also know its true from SoA staff and factory techs, regional reps.

I don't know man... ill take a HTCVT over a 5EAT and a CVT over a 4EAT any minute of the year.

If CVTs are so great, why aren't the high end cars using them?

 

...actually Audi used CVT (aka multitronic) transmissions in the for a little while. I've tried Nissan's CVT in the Altima 3.5SE and really enjoyed it, paired w/a solid motor like the VQ35DE a CVT isn't bad at all. Automatic transmissions aren't my thing but a good CVT is far from horrible.

OP clearly has no CVT experience. They are superior to a traditional geared automatic.

14 months real world use - not a single issue with HTCVT & FA20 DIT...

 

Can't say that would be the case if I was abusing a clutch at every stoplight - I am contunually surprised at the sheer number of posters here who are dealing with clutch and MT issues post-ECU flash but still condemn the HTCVT without ever experiencing one ?

 

Me thinks that if most of those haters had the opportunity to experience a DIT & HTCVT with an open mind for one week, they would enjoy the left leg muscle atrophy

 

Nathan A (FLC) & Johny L (MT) are both self admitted CVT haters BUT when given the chance to drive the new WRX with DIT & HTCVT they were shocked & embarrased into changing their opinions about Subaru's implementation even though they would both have the MT on offer for the sheer nostalgia...

 

If those dyed in the wool haters can see the error of their stereotyping of all CVTs then most here could as well...

OP clearly has no CVT experience. They are superior to a traditional geared automatic.

 

For the record, I have driven several cars with CVT transmissions (rentals), they might be fine for some people in economy cars, but IMHO they have no place in a performance car, or even in a quasi performance car.

As for me, thankfully I can still buy an Audi with their excellent six speed manual, or the Infinity with their fine shifting auto.

 

Paul

I don't know man... ill take a HTCVT over a 5EAT and a CVT over a 4EAT any minute of the year.

 

Same. The WRX CVT would easily rape the 5EAT featured in the 4th gen LGT.

 

Even the fast shifting dual clutch EVO feels chunky and unrefined compared to a smooth operating CVT.

For the record, I have driven several cars with CVT transmissions (rentals), they might be fine for some people in economy cars, but IMHO they have no place in a performance car, or even in a quasi performance car.

As for me, thankfully I can still buy an Audi with their excellent six speed manual, or the Infinity with their fine shifting auto.

 

Paul

 

Take a test drive in the Forester XT with the HTCVT and you may want to revise the opinion of the potential.

 

Some CVT history:

Volvo had the 340/360 with a CVT gearbox with rubber belts, but that was the one that gave the CVT a bad reputation. They purchased that from DAF, and they left a more modern CVT gearbox tech to be sold to Japan at the time.

 

Few companies have as much experience with the CVT gearbox as Subaru has, and they have put a lot of effort into making it work well. Their first attempt at the end of the 80's wasn't bad either, even if it by the standards of today wasn't good it was way better than the Volvo 340/360 variant - and guess what, the ECVT gearbox that was found in the Justy/Trendy was the one that Volvo passed on when they took over DAF. Even at that time the ECVT was more fuel efficient than the MT.

 

And when the authorities the last decades pushed for more fuel efficient cars it was time to dust off the CVT knowledge and put it in a car again. Especially since the CVT is a lot more efficient than the stepped autos that we have seen so far.

 

By starting with the 2.5i and the CVT gearbox it was probably a lot easier too since they didn't have to care about matching the gearbox with a turbo curve. A nice smooth torque curve is a lot easier to match than one that looks like Mount Everest.

 

My experience is that Subaru at least put a lot of effort into the experience for the driver. Both reliability and driving experience are important. The bad reputation for the CVT today seems to be something that Nissan caused by some software for the gearbox that was thrown together in a hurry.

 

Looking at the VW/Audi dual clutch gearboxes - they haven't been without problems either. They have been unreliable enough to be avoided by taxi drivers here. 50k to 80k miles and a new gearbox/clutch pack. And they are still stepped gearboxes.

For the 2.5i the CVT is actually good.

Take a test drive in the Forester XT with the HTCVT and you may want to revise the opinion of the potential.

 

Some CVT history:

Volvo had the 340/360 with a CVT gearbox with rubber belts, but that was the one that gave the CVT a bad reputation. They purchased that from DAF, and they left a more modern CVT gearbox tech to be sold to Japan at the time.

 

Few companies have as much experience with the CVT gearbox as Subaru has, and they have put a lot of effort into making it work well. Their first attempt at the end of the 80's wasn't bad either, even if it by the standards of today wasn't good it was way better than the Volvo 340/360 variant - and guess what, the ECVT gearbox that was found in the Justy/Trendy was the one that Volvo passed on when they took over DAF. Even at that time the ECVT was more fuel efficient than the MT.

 

And when the authorities the last decades pushed for more fuel efficient cars it was time to dust off the CVT knowledge and put it in a car again. Especially since the CVT is a lot more efficient than the stepped autos that we have seen so far.

 

By starting with the 2.5i and the CVT gearbox it was probably a lot easier too since they didn't have to care about matching the gearbox with a turbo curve. A nice smooth torque curve is a lot easier to match than one that looks like Mount Everest.

 

My experience is that Subaru at least put a lot of effort into the experience for the driver. Both reliability and driving experience are important. The bad reputation for the CVT today seems to be something that Nissan caused by some software for the gearbox that was thrown together in a hurry.

 

Looking at the VW/Audi dual clutch gearboxes - they haven't been without problems either. They have been unreliable enough to be avoided by taxi drivers here. 50k to 80k miles and a new gearbox/clutch pack. And they are still stepped gearboxes.

 

ehsnils, don't waste your time on trash like him honestly. Some people just can't let go of the past and move on. There are always going to be people like him who believe everything has to be done by hand. Those slow ass people are dying off anyways.

Manuals are on their way out since modern automatic transmissions and CVT's are faster and more efficient .

 

Production CVT's have not shown to be faster. Legacy and Forester 2.5i CVT have shown to be slower. Due to limitations of drivability and fuel economy for a production CVT, the MT should be faster, this is true for automatic except in rare exceptions. Even the performance HTCVT in the WRX has not shown to be faster than a MT. Here is the magazine tests I have seen.

 

Car Driver 6MT 0-60 4.8 Sec & 1/4 mile 13.6 @ 102mph

Motor Trend CVT 0-60 5.8 Secs & 1/4 Mile 14.5 @ 96mph

 

Even Subaru press release 6MT numbers are 0-60 5.5 & 1/4 of 14.0

 

The CVT's put the engine in more efficient range but I have not seen any testing to see if the driveline loss is less. With the WRX CVT being an enthusiasts car, I will guess that we will see quite a few awd dyno's to see if it has more % than a MT. We should also have a good sample size of drag strip timeslips aswell. Showing that it has a slower mph trap speed in the magazine tests I would guess the % drivetrain loss is greater in a CVT.

The sooner you learn that subaru doesn't care about the sport car enthusiast outside the wrx market the better off you'll be.

Even the fast shifting dual clutch EVO feels chunky and unrefined compared to a smooth operating CVT.

 

An Evo is a purpose built performance car. I would not want a smooth computer controlled manual transmission. A smooth automatic transmission is a slow transmission (and engine with the output being reduce by the computer), same goes for a computer controller MT. I personally hate smooth auto transmissions. This is one of reason why todays car with the high HP outputs run so much slower 1/4 mile times than they should be.

 

A automatic and CVT with torque converter can not replicate the vehicle balance that a MT can on a race track. For me that is not that important but those who race on track day this is very important.

My experience is that Subaru at least put a lot of effort into the experience for the driver. Both reliability and driving experience are important. The bad reputation for the CVT today seems to be something that Nissan caused by some software for the gearbox that was thrown together in a hurry.

 

I think that you are right about poor initial implementation (or usage in appliances like a Prius)

 

I have not driven a Subaru CVT. I rent a lot of cars for work travel and lately I have been seeking a Subaru CVT to test it out given the positive reviews I have seen. One of my friends had an 1st Gen Maxima CVT and he goes out of his way not buy CVT, he won't even test drive another one.

 

The early Nissan CVT (Dodge as well) were absolutely horrible. It feels like a rubber band and sloppy. I have driven some better CVT's than those worse and the rubber band feel is reduced. The maybe better than an automatic, but I prefer the connected feeling of MT. I chose a 2.5i 6MT over the faster 3.6R 5EAT when both were in my budget. My wife is going to be getting a new car this year, it very likely that she will be buy a CVT judging by the different cars she is interested. I will try to slip in a test drive of HTCVT FXT when we are looking at new cars as well.

;D Say what you want. The Golf R DCT is faster than the manual.

 

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsLgIDVCito]2015 Volkswagen Golf R - 2014 Chicago Auto Show - YouTube[/ame]

I have not driven a Subaru CVT. I rent a lot of cars for work travel and lately I have been seeking a Subaru CVT to test it out given the positive reviews I have seen. One of my friends had an 1st Gen Maxima CVT and he goes out of his way not buy CVT, he won't even test drive another one.

 

Honestly anyone who is retarded enough to believe all CVT's are the same seriously needs to go back to grade school and learn the scientific method. Basing opinions on CVT's from a completely different manufacturer to another is the logic of a dumbass first of all.

 

Nissan's CVT's are Nissan's CVT's (actually they're JATCO but for the average dumbass it's the same thing to them). Nissan is known for doing their CVT's very well contrary to shity gossip anyone listens to. Everyone in the automotive journalist industy knows that (AutoBlog, MotorTrend, Cars, ConsumerReports, etc.)

Honestly anyone who is retarded enough to believe all CVT's are the same seriously needs to go back to grade school and learn the scientific method. Basing opinions on CVT's from a completely different manufacturer to another is the logic of a dumbass first of all.

 

In his defense, he bought a brand new car and sold it less than a year later and took a bath on the sale. It left a our taste in his mouth.

;D Say what you want. The Golf R DCT is faster than the manual.

 

Um, the DCT is a computer controller manual. I didn't say anything related to say those being slower than a traditional MT.