Nice compact look driven by emissions goals

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1107615_gm-debuts-9-speed-automatic-offering-2-percent-efficiency-improvement

Nice compact look driven by emissions goals

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1107615_gm-debuts-9-speed-automatic-offering-2-percent-efficiency-improvement

Interesting to see that they are sticking with the "conventional" auto-box, rather than using something like the Subaru CVT.

Warrior193. 

Edited 7 December, 20169 yr by Warrior193

Nice type.

 

9 speed tyranny, I thought there was some Trumpism coming.

 

I suppose there is a risk of a 9 speed Tranny being censored.

 

More speeds, more complexity more chance of failure I'd have thought too.

 

Still struggle to see why 10 fixed speeds over a CVT.

I drove a 9 speed automatic Jeep Renegade a good while back and rather liked it,  & the Fiat 500X is getting the same Auto but i read there are problems with them and delays in builds could be an issue.

Not sure if 9 speed GM boxes are much of a big deal.

When you get more than 7 speed on cars only doing 70 mph or so the difference from being a CVT is very little really,

other than possibly unnecessary complexity & components.

The 10 speed DSG from VW thread a while back in this section went into that.

wonder what the cost is "at cost"  out the factory door?

I guess a conventional box is pretty tried and tested and a lot of people don't like CVT gearboxes.

 

Plus you still need a torque converter or clutch with a CVT anyway.

True that; I didn't like CVTs when all I'd experienced was Daf rubber bands, but the one in my Mum's Jazz is the best self-shifter of any form that I've driven.

If you ask lots of people that express an opinion on a CVT if they have driven one built in this decade they will often not have, 

and if you ask if they like Automatics or if they drive one they will often not.

I love autos (and have driven exclusively autos for over 4 years now) but dislike CVTs.

 

I can appreciate them from a technical point and they're great round town... but flooring it and just hearing the engine drone at a constant RPM is awful.

I love autos (and have driven exclusively autos for over 4 years now) but dislike CVTs.

 

I can appreciate them from a technical point and they're great round town... but flooring it and just hearing the engine drone at a constant RPM is awful.

In a strange way, that's what I like about the modern ones; The Jazz (qv) is selecting the revs I actually want and holding them until it has to start changing up to go faster.

Since i lost my leg i have only had CVT's, Auto.s or Automated Manuals & Servo Clutches, so 2 pedals, sometimes and with hand controls.

Daf's, Volvos, Punto Speedgear, Subaru Justy & Toyota iQ CVT's being particular favourites over the decades.

Smart's being the biggest disaster next to driving VW ASG's as far as auto or automated manuals.

 

All are different and have redeeming features as far as i am concerned, the most expensive disaster ever were Ford Transit and a Dura Shift & a Renault 21.

If you ask lots of people that express an opinion on a CVT if they have driven one built in this decade they will often not have, 

and if you ask if they like Automatics or if they drive one they will often not.

I could express an opinion about CVT's 'cos we owned a DAF 55 Marathon & I've driven DAF 66's as well..........

but then again, we rented a Mazda Demio (Japanese import Mazda2) with a modern CVT in Cyprus in 2014.

 

The're not my most favourite automatics, but you get used to the constant engine speed / varying road speed

& if you are used to diesel rail traction, then it all seems normal.

 

DC

I wouldn't feel comfortable subjecting a CVT to heavy towing because I have this (irrational?) fear that the 'belt' will fail, whereas a torque converter only has to deal with the heat. Or do CVTs have torque converters also.

It always seems to me that a belt is constantly working and thus wearing.

This was discussed before here in a thread on CVT's and Subaru's, you just check out the permissible towing limit of these vehicles.

Higher for some than that of a New Skoda Kodiaq DSG 4x4.

This was discussed before here in a thread on CVT's and Subaru's, you just check out the permissible towing limit of these vehicles.

Higher for some than that of a New Skoda Kodiaq DSG 4x4.

I know,

It's just me

Drove a Jazz CVT as a customer service car and loved it because I'm more into economy rather than performance.

That model had problems so they withdrew it and subsequently replaced it with a better version apparently.

I wouldn't feel comfortable subjecting a CVT to heavy towing because I have this (irrational?) fear that the 'belt' will fail, whereas a torque converter only has to deal with the heat. Or do CVTs have torque converters also.

It always seems to me that a belt is constantly working and thus wearing.

 

I think most of them use a chain (or chains) these days which are lubricated/cooled with oil. And yes they still need a clutch or torque converter to disengage (or slip) the connection to the gearbox when stationary otherwise the engine would stall.

I think most of them use a chain (or chains) these days which are lubricated/cooled with oil. And yes they still need a clutch or torque converter to disengage (or slip) the connection to the gearbox when stationary otherwise the engine would stall.

Yeah, the wear I was worried about is that during the transmission of power. I thought the faces of the pulley may separate sufficiently to enable no wear idling.

Either way, I'd hope a new belt would be an affordable proposition.

Yes, I have a CVT in my Subaru and it uses a thick metal belt/chain. There is a torque converter for starting and stopping. It is also rated to pull 2000KG. I would not want a geared automatic now as it is really smooth and fast to respond. They really have come on a long way.

I hired a Legacy in Oregon a couple of years ago, it had the chain drive, but interestingly, it used some sort of computer control from the paddle-shift system, so that there were "steps" in the shift pattern - I seem to recall 7 or 8, but the steps (up or down) were almost impossible to detect. I was pretty impressed with it as you did not get the slightly "buzzy" feeling as if you are driving a Kart. Only problem was the lack of ground-clearance when I took it out onto soft sand.

Warrior193 

Most older CVT's use torque converters, but a lot of modern ones now use DMF's as they don't have the same losses as a TC. They also don't tend to have a clutch as such, more of a centrifugal mechanism - basically an advanced version of a twist and go moped

My Mum's Jazz (qv) also has a manual (may be called "sport"?) mode that gives it a "7 speed box" controlled by a flappy paddle thing. Neither she nor I have ever felt a need to use it, and I will over-ride full auto on a slushbox when I feel the need.

I hired a Legacy in Oregon a couple of years ago, it had the chain drive, but interestingly, it used some sort of computer control from the paddle-shift system, so that there were "steps" in the shift pattern - I seem to recall 7 or 8, but the steps (up or down) were almost impossible to detect. I was pretty impressed with it as you did not get the slightly "buzzy" feeling as if you are driving a Kart. Only problem was the lack of ground-clearance when I took it out onto soft sand.

Warrior193 

Flipped to manual or in Sports # mode mine will emulate 6 or 8 gears (8 in S#, 6 otherwise). I think the Outback has a flat 7 gears in manual mode, though. The Levorg does, at least. I drove an XV without SI Drive (mode selection) and it wasn't as good as you couldn't tell the box what you expected of it as easily.

 

The coupling is definitely a TC with a lockout clutch. I can just feel it engage when setting off and releasing when I come to a stop.