CVTs appear far less complex than DSGs and I always wondered why they went out of favour.

Limitations in power transmission ability, transmission losses and probably also technical issues.

I do remember tfe DAF/Volvo 66 (?). Wasnt pure fun...

the old DAF's used to rev high and the pulleys on the belt expanded as the car picked up speed, always sounded as though clutch was slipping

 

I think the economy was pretty poor as the engine was always revving so high

 

the newer type CVT's I think require a fair bit of maint and regular belt changes so economics are a bit like hybrid / electric vehicles at the moment

CVTs appear far less complex than DSGs and I always wondered why they went out of favour.

 

They haven't. They still widely used in Japanese cars. VAG just dropped them as they didn't make a good one.

 

Limitations in power transmission ability, transmission losses and probably also technical issues.

I do remember tfe DAF/Volvo 66 (?). Wasnt pure fun...

 

The CVT in my Subaru is rated for 400NM and doesn't require maintenance. Its quite far beyond the rubber bands of old.

 

As to transmission losses, they are the least lossy type, since it is a direct mechanical connection all the time and can keep the engine in the most efficient (or max power) band at all time. The one in mine is linked through a torque converter, but it locks pretty much immediately. There is a very subtle nudge just after you set off and as you come to a stop as it locks/unlocks.

 

There is no hunting around for gears as it slides end to end quickly and depending on which mode I have the car in is actually very good at giving me what I need.

 

I've driven DSGs and manuals and now wouldn't want anything other than a modern CVT. I get a lot of stick for it, but since noone who is giving me the stick has driven my car or a similar one, I don't really care what they have to say.

 

Long term reliability, however, is an unknown, I'll admit, but the car came with a decent length warranty (5yr) so I'm not too worried.

I think it best to try and get a test drive of a 1.2 DSG and then make my decision, i too have had ' old ' auto's and as long as the DSG box is as smooth as those then i will be happy, especially having similar 0-60 times as a manual and decent fuel economy.

We also compared the i20 to the Fabia but the reason we settled on the Fabia was due to the engines, they are so far behind and we are being so pushed for cleaner cars we couldn't ignore the huge difference, it was emissions that made us also look at the KIA Rio 3 1.4 as it was cleaner but just no where as nice to drive and the one we drove was year old and 5000 miles but looked and felt it had been to the moon and back. Can't comment on the DSG gearbox other than I tried it on the mk2 vRS but didn't like the lag time from pressing the go peddle to it going.

As for the sports seats was at the Geneva motor show yesterday and they had the Monte Carlo on display which has the sports seats which felt really comfy and actually bit softer than the std seats, have to say love the carbon dash trim insert on the monte, wish I could have specked it on the SE L.

all the engines in the new i20 range are EU6 compliant, so emissions are good, worst unit is the 1.4 petrol as it is the oldest design

 

the thing to remember is the government stats are weighted in favour of stop start engines due to the simulated traffic at a standstill

 

after doing nearly 200 miles in mine, the engine is improving rapidly (power and economy)