Go Back   EcoModder Forum > EcoModding > EcoModding Central
Register Now
 Register Now
 

Reply  Post New Thread
 
Submit Tools LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 05-07-2020, 12:20 AM   #11 (permalink)
EV convert
 
oil pan 4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: NewMexico (USA)
Posts: 8,686

Sub - '84 Chevy Diesel Suburban C10
SUV
90 day: 19.5 mpg (US)

camaro - '85 Chevy Camaro Z28

Riot - '03 Kia Rio POS
Team Hyundai
90 day: 30.21 mpg (US)

Bug - '01 VW Beetle GLSturbo
90 day: 26.43 mpg (US)

Sub2500 - '86 GMC Suburban C2500
90 day: 11.95 mpg (US)

Snow flake - '11 Nissan Leaf SL
SUV
90 day: 141.63 mpg (US)
Thanks: 210
Thanked 2,867 Times in 2,243 Posts
Just because they're new doesn't mean they are better.
CVT does no favors for the consumer.

__________________
1984 chevy suburban, custom made 6.5L diesel turbocharged with a Garrett T76 and Holset HE351VE, 22:1 compression 13psi of intercooled boost.
1989 firebird mostly stock. Aside from the 6-speed manual trans, corvette gen 5 front brakes, 1LE drive shaft, 4th Gen disc brake fbody rear end.
2011 leaf SL, white, portable 240v CHAdeMO, trailer hitch, new batt as of 2014.
  Reply With Quote
Alt Today
Popular topics

Other popular topics in this forum...

   
Old 05-07-2020, 12:37 AM   #12 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Memphis, Tn
Posts: 309
Thanks: 189
Thanked 52 Times in 39 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by California98Civic View Post
Huh, I thunk you are right. I thought I had read over on d-series.org about a guy swapping a D17 trans onto a D16 block and working around the immobiliser but now I can't find that problem cited. A 1996-00 HX would be next tallest with the 3.722 FD. Then maybe the DX/LX with like a 4.011 FD or something.

Definitiely, by rep, manual is more durable than the CVT. But maybe you'll not abuse it and maybe with maintenance it ain't so bad.
Maybe the CVT transmissions are just more delicate and don't tolerate abuse like ignoring the fluid for 200K miles or changing directions while moving. I don't know how reliable the CVT would be when driven and maintained correctly, but my opinion is that a lot of decent products get a bad reputation simply because they are owned by an idiot who abuses it or has unreasonable expectations and I wouldn't be surprised if that is the case with these CVTs as well. People complain about Honda autos all the time, but I got 243K miles out of mine before it failed, likely because it has been maintained correctly since it was new and has never been abused. Getting nearly 1/4 million miles out of a transmission isn't too bad IMO.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to EcoCivic For This Useful Post:
California98Civic (05-07-2020)
Old 05-07-2020, 12:48 AM   #13 (permalink)
Cyborg ECU
 
California98Civic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Coastal Southern California
Posts: 5,935

Black and Green - '98 Honda Civic DX Coupe
Team Honda
90 day: 66.42 mpg (US)

Black and Red - '00 Nashbar Custom built eBike
90 day: 3671.43 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2,223
Thanked 1,918 Times in 1,307 Posts
Yeah. That's wise skepticism.
__________________
See my car's mod & maintenance thread and my electric bicycle's thread for ongoing projects. I will rebuild Black and Green over decades as parts die, until it becomes a different car of roughly the same shape and color. My minimum fuel economy goal is 55 mpg while averaging posted speed limits. I generally top 60 mpg. See also my Honda manual transmission specs thread.



  Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2020, 12:09 PM   #14 (permalink)
It's all about Diesel
 
cRiPpLe_rOoStEr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil
Posts: 8,111
Thanks: 0
Thanked 880 Times in 780 Posts
CVTs are still often pointed out to be more suitable to lower torque outputs. But anyway, they are substantially different from a traditional geared automatic. It's a matter of understanding its operating principles. I'd be more concerned about the integration between the ECU and the electronic controllers of the CVT itself.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to cRiPpLe_rOoStEr For This Useful Post:
EcoCivic (05-07-2020)
Old 05-07-2020, 12:53 PM   #15 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Memphis, Tn
Posts: 309
Thanks: 189
Thanked 52 Times in 39 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr View Post
CVTs are still often pointed out to be more suitable to lower torque outputs. But anyway, they are substantially different from a traditional geared automatic. It's a matter of understanding its operating principles. I'd be more concerned about the integration between the ECU and the electronic controllers of the CVT itself.
Thank you. I'm not worried about the ECU's integration, my plan is to get a CVT ECU and harness and everything will plug right in.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2020, 01:43 PM   #16 (permalink)
Cyborg ECU
 
California98Civic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Coastal Southern California
Posts: 5,935

Black and Green - '98 Honda Civic DX Coupe
Team Honda
90 day: 66.42 mpg (US)

Black and Red - '00 Nashbar Custom built eBike
90 day: 3671.43 mpg (US)
Thanks: 2,223
Thanked 1,918 Times in 1,307 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by oil pan 4 View Post
.. CVT does no favors for the consumer.
Why so? Curious.
__________________
See my car's mod & maintenance thread and my electric bicycle's thread for ongoing projects. I will rebuild Black and Green over decades as parts die, until it becomes a different car of roughly the same shape and color. My minimum fuel economy goal is 55 mpg while averaging posted speed limits. I generally top 60 mpg. See also my Honda manual transmission specs thread.



  Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2020, 03:57 PM   #17 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Memphis, Tn
Posts: 309
Thanks: 189
Thanked 52 Times in 39 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by California98Civic View Post
Why so? Curious.
I'm curious about this as well. Presuming a CVT is reliable, and I see no reason why it couldn't be, I see it as a good option for someone who wants the fastest and most fuel efficient automatic transmission possible. I'm one of the people who doesn't hate the feel of a CVT, likely because I understand the undeniable benefits that they provide.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2020, 05:55 PM   #18 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Ecky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 3,964

Gaptooth (retired) - '00 Honda Insight
Team Honda
Gen-1 Insights
90 day: 54.26 mpg (US)

Such Fit - '07 Honda Fit Sport
90 day: 41.27 mpg (US)

Connect - '15 Ford Transit Connect XL
90 day: 25.19 mpg (US)

K-sight - '00 Honda K-sight
Team Honda
90 day: 45.06 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,724
Thanked 1,681 Times in 1,072 Posts
I can't speak for the HX CVT. I can speak for the Insight CVT, however.

-Generally speaking, an Insight CVT will get 55-60mpg where a manual would be getting 80+. Part of this is due to the manual having a higher top ratio.
-The CVT Insights purportedly have better acceleration down low, where the manual doesn't have many ratios to choose from. They're favored for autocross.
-The CVT is considerably heavier than the manual - something like 65lbs vs 180lbs
-The CVTs have a reputation for early failure. The manuals can last 500k+ miles, whereas it isn't unheard of to see Insight CVT failures before 150k even with 30k fluid changes, and a 250k mile CVT is a rare beast indeed. And, it isn't just one point of failure either.

This CVT is a contemporary to the HX's, being produced from 2000-2006. I would not buy a CVT Insight, if that helps.
  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Ecky For This Useful Post:
EcoCivic (05-07-2020)
Old 05-07-2020, 06:35 PM   #19 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Memphis, Tn
Posts: 309
Thanks: 189
Thanked 52 Times in 39 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ecky View Post
I can't speak for the HX CVT. I can speak for the Insight CVT, however.

-Generally speaking, an Insight CVT will get 55-60mpg where a manual would be getting 80+. Part of this is due to the manual having a higher top ratio.
-The CVT Insights purportedly have better acceleration down low, where the manual doesn't have many ratios to choose from. They're favored for autocross.
-The CVT is considerably heavier than the manual - something like 65lbs vs 180lbs
-The CVTs have a reputation for early failure. The manuals can last 500k+ miles, whereas it isn't unheard of to see Insight CVT failures before 150k even with 30k fluid changes, and a 250k mile CVT is a rare beast indeed. And, it isn't just one point of failure either.

This CVT is a contemporary to the HX's, being produced from 2000-2006. I would not buy a CVT Insight, if that helps.
That is good to know, thank you for the information! One reason I wanted to go with a CVT is that I can floor it at pretty much any speed and get maximum power. Unlike a manual, it holds the RPMs right at the power peak at full throttle, has a wide range of ratios, and still allows me to cruise down the highway at a low RPM.

With the EX 5 speed (the one I would probably go with) I would be at about 3200 RPM going 70, but I could drop that to around 3000 if I change the 5th gear to the DX/LX gears. With a CVT I could cruise at 2500 RPM going 70 and still have maximum power available at almost any speed.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2020, 08:30 PM   #20 (permalink)
Master EcoModder
 
Ecky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Vermont
Posts: 3,964

Gaptooth (retired) - '00 Honda Insight
Team Honda
Gen-1 Insights
90 day: 54.26 mpg (US)

Such Fit - '07 Honda Fit Sport
90 day: 41.27 mpg (US)

Connect - '15 Ford Transit Connect XL
90 day: 25.19 mpg (US)

K-sight - '00 Honda K-sight
Team Honda
90 day: 45.06 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,724
Thanked 1,681 Times in 1,072 Posts
It's a shame there were no 6 speed D series gearboxes.

  Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Ecky For This Useful Post:
19bonestock88 (05-08-2020)
Reply  Post New Thread


Thread Tools




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.5.2
All content copyright EcoModder.com