Quote:
Originally Posted by MeteorGray
Are there statistics showing how much better fuel economy a CVT achieves than a standard automatic?
|
Oh yeah, it's a big difference over an older slushbox design.
Here's a telling apples-to-apples comparison that 2016 Versa will appreciate:
For a couple of years, Nissan took the unusual step of offering 3 different transmission choices in the Versa sedan, all with the same HR16DE 109 hp 1.6L engine & as in the Versa Note hatchback:
EG. for 2013...
- 4-speed automatic (w/lock-up torque converter) = 26 city / 35 hwy / 30 combined
- 5-speed manual = 27 city / 35 hwy / 30 combined
- CVT = 31 city / 40 hwy / 35 combined
https://fueleconomy.gov/feg/bymodel/...an_Versa.shtml
(Of course, ecodriving the 5-speed, you would still match or beat the CVT numbers in the same real world conditions. No pulse & glide shenannigans required: just upshifting to the highest gear as soon as practical, and with smart use of neutral coasting and DFCO.)