CVT's (non-hybrid) = fewer opportunities for fuel-cut mode (DFCO) when coasting?

[Tahoe_Hybrid]

Originally Posted by Joggernot

Same experience as "2016 Versa"...I have a ScanGage. Immediately upon lifting my foot from the accelerator, it goes into DFCO for about 1/2 second. Then the CVT adjusts and eliminates DFCO. I am trying the EonC just for fun. Can't say it's helping enough to measure. Still getting 29-30 mpg calculated.

that is garbage for a versa 1.6l back in the day the 2006 sentras were getting about 30-32 for the 1.8l

31mpg highway with a 6.0L v8 engine


only doing about 23mpg in the city though not too bad considering a normal 6.0l can barely get 11MPG/14MPG(Suburban 1500 with 6.0L)

DFCO comes into play to get that.. these 6.0L are way more efficient then the L76 since the Highway mode will be 100% ICE

[Tahoe_Hybrid]

Originally Posted by MeteorGray

That is weird.

Are there statistics showing how much better fuel economy a CVT achieves than a standard automatic?

When I bought my Mazda in 2015 I remember reading that they chose to stick with a conventional automatic design instead of a CVT for a couple of reasons, but I don't remember if fuel economy was in there.

40-45MPH = 40-45MPG with the EVT transmission.. considering the engine is barely moving at 1,000-1100 RPM in v4 mode not too bad for 3.0L displacement...


i'm sure this "special mode that it falls into" might be able to get higher then 48mph by improving the Aero dynamics...(mpg falls and it switches to normal mode) so 38 to 45mph is the sweet spot

[MetroMPG]

Originally Posted by Tahoe_Hybrid

that is garbage for a versa 1.6l back in the day the 2006 sentras were getting about 30-32 for the 1.8l

Fuelly says: 27.5 MPG average for the 2006 Sentra, 72 vehicles, 1+ million miles.


31.1 MPG average for the Versa Note (2014-2019)



---


Obviously, hybrids are designed to maximize engine-off coasting & DFCO. Not really what this thread is about. Maybe I should have specified in the title that we're talking about "belt & pulley type" non-hybrid vehicle transmissions -- I'll clarify that.



Having said that, the older belt & pulley style CVT in my dad's '09 Civic does pretty aggressive DFCO.

[2016 Versa]

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Sure the usually wider gear-spread on a CVT compared to a more traditional AT or MT might also be accountable for the MPG improvements.

I'm sure that has a large impact. My brother had an '08 Versa with a 6 speed manual transmission and I think 1.8L engine that he bought new. Just from riding in the car with him a few times I could see that it had really short gearing. As I remember at somewhere around 55-60 MPH in 6th gear his engine was still at over 3,000 RPM. At the time I think I remember him making a comment to me that he was only getting in the low 30's per gallon. At 50MPH if I recall correctly my Versa with CVT is running somewhere between 1400-1500 RPM on flat highway.

[Tahoe_Hybrid]

Originally Posted by MetroMPG

Fuelly says: 27.5 MPG average for the 2006 Sentra, 72 vehicles, 1+ million miles.


31.1 MPG average for the Versa Note (2014-2019)



---


Obviously, hybrids are designed to maximize engine-off coasting & DFCO. Not really what this thread is about. Maybe I should have specified in the title that we're talking about "belt & pulley type" non-hybrid vehicle transmissions -- I'll clarify that.



Having said that, the older belt & pulley style CVT in my dad's '09 Civic does pretty aggressive DFCO.

it's not even a real hybrid that is just marketing "hype"

I might be able to go between 0 and 60 feet before the ICE starts
it's just an aggressive "Auto Stop" system at best.....


remember this battery is 10 years old with less then 15% capacity left.. about 200wh of 1.8kwh..

as a real hybrid will let you run at pretty much any speed with the electric motor it's capped at 29mph not even fast enough to drive in a Metro area(as the limit is 35)

[MetroMPG]

Still apples and oranges.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by 2016 Versa

At 50MPH if I recall correctly my Versa with CVT is running somewhere between 1400-1500 RPM on flat highway.

The same applies to the Brazilian version of the Toyota Yaris.

[alcom]

I have a 2018 Forester. My ScanGauge II shows zero L/100K when coasting with a warm engine. The LOD shows 75-80 percent when accelerating at 20 percent throttle, and I can drive all day without going over 1,500 RPM. Most city driving at 40-60 KPH has the engine at 1,000-1,200 RPM. On the highway, 100 KPH is still just 1,200 RPM.

[CVTCivic]

I drive a 2017 Honda Civic with a CVT, I haven't done any measurements with ODB2 or something like that. I just made various tests by resetting the bordcomputer and driving the same track sections for a few times. I couldn't notice any differences in fuel consumption by going into neutral. So I don't think it helps saving gas on such a relatively modern CVT.

[MeteorGray]

Originally Posted by alcom

I have a 2018 Forester. My ScanGauge II shows zero L/100K when coasting with a warm engine. The LOD shows 75-80 percent when accelerating at 20 percent throttle, and I can drive all day without going over 1,500 RPM. Most city driving at 40-60 KPH has the engine at 1,000-1,200 RPM. On the highway, 100 KPH is still just 1,200 RPM.

Wow: 100KPH / 62MPH at 1200RPM is amazing for a gasoline engine.

That's in heavy diesel truck territory.