On Dec 23, 8:27*am, jim beam > wrote:
> On 12/22/2012 03:53 AM, AD wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 20, 10:51 pm, > *wrote:
> >> Hello,
>
> >> I have always had cars with automatic transmissions.
>
> >> If I remember right, only some of,the Nissan's had a CVT type in the "past".
>
> >> Now, two cars that I am considering apparently have CVT type.
> >> An Accord and the Subaru Outback.
>
> >> Know nothing re CVT transmissions.
>
> >> Might someone please outline for me the pros and cons of a CVT vs the regular kind of transmission.
>
> >> e.g, reliability, smoothness in shifting, etc.
> >> Why don't all cars of this size use fhem ?
>
> > because I-4s with exhaust system that did not receive any love from
> > egineering
> > typically sounds like something your dentist uses all the time ->
> > few folks are looking to the constant 2-3k rpm drone of ****ty
> > sounding engine.
>
> > might've been better with a V-6 and even better with a V-8 but cvts
> > had problem
> > handling extra power a few years back
>
> they're like any other transmission - you cheap out, you have problems.
> * they're not inherently unreliable. *as i understand it, they were
> first used in industrial drives for things like material conveyors.
> heavy average loads, higher peak loads, and long service lives.
>
apparently they are not without a problems or their use would be more
widespread and conventional automatics will die off.
but that does not happen. primarily because a premium car
automatic work is pretty much indistinguishable to continuously
variable type. case to the point is the tune of bmw 335 8 speed.
i don't think many people can feel when that thing shifts.

of course an automatic in a bmw is an abomination but proves
the point that you don't really need a cvt even on a car
with prodigious sound deadening all around
(having lots of power for cvt to digest does not help either
though I'm sure that bmw would've found a way if they
were hurting for a cvt to go into their bread a butter car)