CVT - simulated shifts - what are your thoughts and opinions?

What are your thoughts on the Subaru Lineartronic CVT?

 

As a car guy who prefers driving a manual transmissions and merely tolerates automatics for the greater good, I went in with very low expectations regarding how I probably was going to feel about the Subaru lineartronic CVT.

 

My previous CVT experiences were in a Nissan Juke, Nissan Sentra and a Mitsubishi Lancer. All older models, pre 2015. Based on my experiences with these vehicles, I was left with much disappointment with CVTs. I hated that "disconnected" feeling and the "rubberbandyness" of the CVT's I had experienced. I hated not having any shift points.

 

MUCH to my surprise, when I test drove my first 2017 Legacy, I noticed that when I was more aggressive with the throttle, that it would actually "hold" onto the "gears"/ratios to nearly redline and "shift"/transition to the next gear/ratio.....just like an actual "geared" transmission. It actually does a pretty good job of simulating a standard geared transmission IMO.

 

YET, if I am much more gentle with the throttle, the transmission behaves much more like a typical CVT and will bring the car up to the desired speed while continuously varying the RPMs for maximum efficiency. I can leisurely accelerate from 0 - 65mph while hardly ever crossing 2k RPM on the tach. Also, holy crap, does the CVT help this vehicle coast for MILES!

 

The programming of the Subaru Lineartronic CVT as I have described it, is spot on what I would describe as "the best of both worlds" between your "regular" automatic transmissions and "traditional" CVT transmissions.

 

Does anyone else have any experience with CVTs from other manufacturers? I am curious if any other CVTs are behaving this way now or if this is just a Subaru thing?

 

Also, does anyone have any insight as to if this "simulated shifting" has any negative impacts on anything? Besides for the obvious performance impacts.

 

I know that part of what makes CVT transmissions desirable is the fact that they ARE continuously variable and always in the most optimal ratio for what you need. So I would imagine by forcing the CVT to hold onto 6 (or another amount) of ratios is somewhat counter productive to being "continuously variable".....yet, I understand why they do this and actually prefer it myself.

I had a 2012 and I liked the smooth CVT.

 

I got a 2015 and hated the shift points.

 

On the 2017 I still don't like them. Sometimes in light traffic the programming gets confused and there is a thump like and old car that downshifts hard.

 

I have a love/hate relationship with the fake shifts.

To me the simulated shifts just seems stupid. Keeping to the optimal rpm is better.

 

The reason behind it is to avoid catching an rpm that has a nasty resonance and people would complain about that instead.

This is my first CVT but is feels much like any other auto I have had. I can "hold on" using the paddles or if you hit it, you'll head up the RPM line and I have hit 6K once just for grins. I was skeptical till I drove it. Typical driving it does seem to just hang out at 1800-2K. Also in my car at least, the throttle is touchy from stop. Tends to shoot forward a bit quick if you are not light on the pedal. I was also concerned with reliability but this came with 7yr/100K which is longer than I'll have the car. So overall, a good experience. I guess next test will be winter ice and snow.

only driven 2 CVT legacies and, hate for autos in general aside, they aren't bad. but the simulated shifts? they should not be there at all, you lose any advantage that CVT's had to give non car people (the large majority of 5th/6th gen owners) back something they never missed in the first place is just stupid, and if they did it for the enthusiast that didn't work either because any car guy is going to see straight through that garbage to the HP they are giving up not having a manual or even traditional auto. i guess avoiding resonance frequencies makes sense but you'd think they could find a better solution than just setting shifting points, like having a couple RPM's the engine wants to sit at and making none of them a resonance frequency Edited July 6, 2017 by ripstik

I very rarely feel any shifts except downshifting to a stop.

 

Laughing at Oneself and with others is Good for the Soul

It reminds me of something else. In digital telephone systems, they actually inject artificial noise into the signal you hear, because otherwise there would be dead silence when people were not speaking. People would think there was something wrong with the phone. This is known as "comfort noise". So, we are being faked out to make us feel better.

I very rarely feel any shifts except downshifting to a stop.

 

Rowlette, I'm with you. With due respect to some of the other posters on this subject, and I FULLY UNDERSTAND and appreciate that some drivers like to push their vehicles more than others .... I don't have a problem with the CVT. I am a "conservative" driver (but not "a nanny") and I could never be accused of not keeping up with the traffic flow ..... but I ease up to stop lights without coming to a screeching halt, and I don't accelerate hard to take off, and I don't use the paddles to negotiate bends. I find that the 3.6lt gives me enough grunt to stay with the pack, rather than trying to be the leader of the pack.

 

I have owned and driven manuals previously, but I think automatic transmissions have improved greatly since the early days when they were obviously very slow in comparison, and in my humble opinion, apart from those who like to drive hard and push their vehicles to higher limits, the average driver (and by average I don't mean nanny's) will be able to enjoy the power and capabilities of their 3.6lt legacy's without noticing anything "rubberband like" with the CVT.

Rowlette, I'm with you. With due respect to some of the other posters on this subject, and I FULLY UNDERSTAND and appreciate that some drivers like to push their vehicles more than others .... I don't have a problem with the CVT. I am a "conservative" driver (but not "a nanny") and I could never be accused of not keeping up with the traffic flow ..... but I ease up to stop lights without coming to a screeching halt, and I don't accelerate hard to take off, and I don't use the paddles to negotiate bends. I find that the 3.6lt gives me enough grunt to stay with the pack, rather than trying to be the leader of the pack.

 

I have owned and driven manuals previously, but I think automatic transmissions have improved greatly since the early days when they were obviously very slow in comparison, and in my humble opinion, apart from those who like to drive hard and push their vehicles to higher limits, the average driver (and by average I don't mean nanny's) will be able to enjoy the power and capabilities of their 3.6lt legacy's without noticing anything "rubberband like" with the CVT.

 

i agree wholeheartedly that the average driver will love a CVT, half of them don't understand why the revs move around the way they do in the first place. i just don't think they are helping anyone with the faux shifts, average people won't care or notice and enthusiast see straight thru it to the acceleration they are losing having those shift points. lets not forget the CVT's were outlawed from F1 because it made the cars entirely too fast keeping them at peak HP all the time. its more effective with turbo cars, which is why I'd like a go in a CVT WRX.

I have driven both models with and without simulated shifts. after about 5 minutes I don't even notice anymore.

 

I read an interview where Subaru stated that they put the simulated shifts back into the CVT because their customers were not happy with the "shiftless" operation of the CVT.

I, personally, like the simulated shifts. To me it feels "better". My Son has a 13 Impreza and his CVT just holds an RPM and has a strange feel to it. To each their own but I like the way my Legacy and 17 Forester XT shift far better with the "simulated" feel of a conventional automatic.

The simulated shifts are what allowed me to coast from the summit of Pikes Peak to the very bottom at 10 mph. I wish I could tell it to act like a snowmobile CVT for better acceleration though.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

You can use manual mode without having the stupid simulated shifts.

What do you mean? In manual mode my car acts the same as automatic with the exception of me being able to hold gears.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

What do you mean? In manual mode my car acts the same as automatic with the exception of me being able to hold gears.

 

 

That's what I was wondering as well .... I'm not sure what laz means?

 

Also in a previous post you mentioned that you use your CVT to go down a steep slope (which is what I do as well) .... would a "shiftless CVT" allow this???

No, a "shiftless CVT" would change it's belt position based on engine/wheel speed only.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

What are your thoughts on the Subaru Lineartronic CVT?

 

 

http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/a27823/a-dual-clutch-gearbox-is-an-automatic-and-it-isnt-even-the-best-one/

Even the 5th gen had hold able gears via the shift paddles...you could activate it at any time and it would hold whatever gear you wanted while going down hill. The only difference between a shifting CVT and a shiftless one is software programming...

What do you mean? In manual mode my car acts the same as automatic with the exception of me being able to hold gears.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

 

That's what I was wondering as well .... I'm not sure what laz means?

 

Also in a previous post you mentioned that you use your CVT to go down a steep slope (which is what I do as well) .... would a "shiftless CVT" allow this???

 

Gen was talking as to how the simulated shifts helped him coast at 10mph downhill. I'm just stating that you don't need the simulated shifting programming when you can just use the paddle system to downshift and hold a ratio.

... a "shiftless CVT" would change it's belt position based on engine/wheel speed only.

 

Only if you get to define the term "shiftless CVT" ... and you don't.

I didn't mean I was redefining the CVT lol, I only meant a traditional CVT vs ours that has shift points programmed into the TCU.

 

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

I didn't mean I was redefining the CVT ...

 

You originally posted:

The simulated shifts are what allowed me to coast from the summit of Pikes Peak to the very bottom at 10 mph.

 

That is not a description of "simulated shifts," but rather the CVT's Manual Mode. The "simulated shifts" occur only under moderate to full throttle acceleration in Auto Mode, not during deceleration or closed-throttle coasting ... i.e. they are upshifts only.

Edited July 10, 2017 by ammcinnis

I think the misunderstanding here is the wording, I think he means "simulated gearing," not "simulated shifts."

you originally posted:

 

 

That is not a description of "simulated shifts," but rather the cvt's manual mode. The "simulated shifts" occur only under moderate to full throttle acceleration in auto mode, not during deceleration or closed-throttle coasting ... I.e. They are downshifts only.

 

ftfy

You say tomato I say tomato!

 

Laughing at Oneself and with others is Good for the Soul