2009 Legacy to feature CVT transmission

[rao]

"theoretically" is the key word.

[leggtnut]

No one has stated this, but subaru tried it in the 80's with the justy. And it FAILED. Unless there has been major advancements in reliability of the CVT transmissions, and my little (must emphise that), there has been little to no advancements in it and they will start seeing the transmissions failing a lot, like the justy did. Espically with the higher HP they are putting in them. The just had something like a woping 90hp or something like that and the models with the CVT had issues constantly.

[Viber]

As long as CVT doesnt choke performance, it should do well with consumers

[pillboy]

The 4eat in the new Forester looks better all the time. I have driven one CVT and I did not care for it at all. I will buy a manual before a CVT.

[leggtnut]

pillboy, I fully agree. I have driven a Just from the 80's back in the 90's and that transmsission was a hunk of junk. No wonder Subaru sold the justy to Ford. I have also driven a Ford Freestyle with CVT extensivly. It felt exactly the same. It felt like it was gobeling up all of the power.

[Guest]

I hope this make some people think twice and instead of wussing out, make them buy a manual.

 

 

The 4eat in the new Forester looks better all the time. I have driven one CVT and I did not care for it at all. I will buy a manual before a CVT.

 

That's exactly why I am all for CVTs! :lol:

[Jerboa113]

isnt that the truth.. other than my car almost shutting off on me quite often (it hasn't actually shut off) it isn't really what I'd call "quirky".. its not like my ignition is in the armrest.. or my keyfob and key are a pocket knife like certain other brands.. now those are quirks..

 

I have no idea about this disconnect BS. I want to feel the road.. thats what I love about BMW.. you feel connected.. you know where the road is under you.. I think thats important for any kind of precise driving.

 

people dont just not buy manuals because they are lazy.. lets not go there again.. we've already been down that road over and over.

 

you know what tho.. it seems like as soon as the AT is getting to be close to as good as the MT in most vehicles. the automakers are changing the AT to something suck.. and with MT options on the decline throughout the market.. our children will be laughing at the idea of gears moving their car.. they'll be out there winding up a rubber band with a crank on the front of the car.

 

pic related..

 

http://www.kelvin.com/Merchant2/graphics/00000001/841205.gif

[SLegacy99]

That's exactly why I am all for CVTs! :lol:

 

Touche. If you don't like the CVT, buy the MT version. Maybe Subaru will even upgrade to a 6MT. :lol: NOT!

 

 

And just to make a note here, comparing Ford's failed CVT or the CVT from a 20 year Justy is not a valid comparison for today's CVTs.

[SLegacy99]

Ford doubling use of 6-speed automatics

Fuel efficiency can be equal to or better manual transmissions

The Associated Press

updated 5:52 p.m. ET, Wed., May. 7, 2008

 

STERLING HEIGHTS, Mich. - Ford Motor Co. said Wednesday it plans to double the number of six-speed automatic transmissions in its models by the end of next year, increasing fuel efficiency to the point where it's equal to or better than manual gearboxes.

The company also said that 98 percent of its North American transmissions will be six speeds by the end of 2012 as it moves to meet increasing government fuel economy standards.

 

The computer-controlled transmissions, built at a revamped factory in Sterling Heights, give drivers a 4 percent to 6 percent gas mileage boost compared with the four- and five-speed models now in widespread use in Ford's front-wheel-drive vehicles.

Because the computer calculates when to shift gears so the engine runs at peak efficiency, they can rival the mileage of lighter manual gearboxes, said Ram Krisnaswami, a Ford powertrain engineering manager.

 

"Some of the efficiencies within the transmission, probably the manual will score better than the automatic. But then your driving patterns, and being able to operate in the sweet spot, let the computer do it, then the automatic scores," he said. "As we improve the internal efficiency of the transmission, the automatics approach a well-driven manual by an expert."

 

The new transmissions allow the car to achieve higher speeds with fewer engine revolutions per minute, making it more efficient, Ford said.

 

The Dearborn-based automaker says its 6F35 six-speed transmissions will debut in the 2009-model Ford Escape and Mercury Mariner crossover vehicles, which now have four-speed automatic transmissions. They also will go into the 2009 Mazda Tribute and two other vehicles early next year, Ford said.

 

The new transmissions will also be low-maintenance, with no need to replace the fluid in the gearboxes for the life of the vehicle, Ford said.

 

Ford Vice President Barb Samardzich, head of the company's North American transmission operations, said the new transmissions are key to Ford's planned 30 percent cut in vehicle greenhouse gas emissions by 2020.

 

"They also deliver improved acceleration and smoother shifting, all at a great value for consumers," she said in a statement.

Congress passed a law last year that requires new cars and trucks to meet a fleet average of 35 mpg by 2020, a 40 percent increase from the current average requirement of 25 mpg.

 

Ford said it plans to sell 1.4 million six-speed vehicles in North America by the end of next year. In addition to the 6F35 transmissions, Ford also makes another six-speed transmission that was jointly developed with General Motors Corp.

 

GM recently introduced the six-speed in a four-cylinder version of the Chevrolet Malibu, boosting the midsize car's highway miles per gallon from 30 to 32. GM said last month that the new powertrain would debut immediately in the high-end Malibu LTZ and next year in two lower-priced Malibu models.

 

Ford said it invested $658 million in Sterling Heights and at factories in Livonia and Sharonville, Ohio, to make the transmissions.

Other automakers are coming out with their own high-tech transmissions with six or more speeds. Hyundai Motor Co. plans a six-speed in its new Genesis luxury car, while Daimler AG's Mercedes brand has a seven-speed and Toyota Motor Corp.'s Lexus luxury brand has an eight-speed automatic.

 

Krisnaswami said six speeds are very efficient and cost effective, and automakers have to weigh efficiency gains against added costs, weight and shifting that come with more gears.

[CTlegacy06]

More gears are the answer, not CVT and most automakers are going in that direction (Even Hyundai). Subaru is just too lazy (or retarded) to mate the ALREADY EXISTENT 5EATs to a N/A 2.5i... and then update the line up (turbos/h6s) that uses the 5EAT now with a 6EAT. More gears = better performance ratios in the first 3-4 and then the last 2 can be for highway cruising to keep the rpms low.

[SWP-LegacyGT]

CVT = For the masses

LGT.com = Not the masses.

 

It will expand Subaru's market and again the hardcore Subbieholic will get left off on the sidelines.

 

No big surprises here.

[SLegacy99]

More gears are the answer, not CVT and most automakers are going in that direction (Even Hyundai). Subaru is just too lazy (or retarded) to mate the ALREADY EXISTENT 5EATs to a N/A 2.5i... and then update the line up (turbos/h6s) that uses the 5EAT now with a 6EAT. More gears = better performance ratios in the first 3-4 and then the last 2 can be for highway cruising to keep the rpms low.

 

But Subaru doesn't have a 6EAT and they want the CVT to make their diesel more efficient. They kill two birds with one stone this way. Anyway, take Audi as the perfect example. They added CVTs to 2.0L turbo their vehicles and that boosted fuel economy by an average of 3 MPG. Thats pretty good.

[SLegacy99]

CVT with the diesel could be good but I think I would rather take a 5EAT or a 5MT. It better not be CVT only.

 

I doubt that they would do that. But then you can't get a new Forester with a MT .

 

I am more curious how well a CVT would handle that much torque. But then if the LS600hL can handle the 350+ ft lbs of torque comin outta the 5.0L, why couldn't a CVT handle 258 ft lbs?

[IwannaSportSedan]

CVT = For the *riding lawn-mowers*

LGT.com = Not the masses.

 

It will expand Subaru's market and again the hardcore Subbieholic will get left off on the sidelines.

 

No big surprises here.

 

bit of a correction there, otherwise I agree.

[CTlegacy06]

But Subaru doesn't have a 6EAT and they want the CVT to make their diesel more efficient. They kill two birds with one stone this way. Anyway, take Audi as the perfect example. They added CVTs to 2.0L turbo their vehicles and that boosted fuel economy by an average of 3 MPG. Thats pretty good.

Well ofcourse they don't have a 6EAT, I'm TELLING Subaru to get with the program and join the rest of the automotive community. Every other automaker has a 6speed Auto or one in the works and even the makers that had started on the CVT bandwagen seem to be reverting back to regular gearing or DSG (the best tranny type IMO). Subaru was the first to introduce CVTs but they went away from them because they realized 20yrs ago that Americans don't want them... I'm guessing they've changed management around since and are going to have fun relearning old mistakes.

[NSFW]

It's possible that CVT technology has improved since the Justy.

 

The really tantalizing possiblity is that the CVT control system might be tune-able just like the ECU. If the CVT can handle as much power as the MT or AT, and if the system can be tuned, I want one.

[SLegacy99]

It's possible that CVT technology has improved since the Justy.

 

The really tantalizing possiblity is that the CVT control system might be tune-able just like the ECU. If the CVT can handle as much power as the MT or AT, and if the system can be tuned, I want one.

 

I wonder if a Subaru CVT will feature the fake shifting that Nissan's CVTs do.

 

 

For reference, the Nissan Altima 2.5L (175 hp) with a 4AT was rated for 23/29. With the CVT it went up to 26/34. (Previous method of EPA testing) I'd say thats a pretty substansial increase in fuel economy. The MT was rated for 26/35.

[Jerboa113]

I just want to make sure I understand the cvt concept like I think I do..

 

basically.. its a rubber band (over simplification I know) between 2 adjusting "wheels" that can tighten the band to adjust the drive ratio constantly (thus continuously variable.) So my conclusion is that the ecu effectivley can keep you ALWAYS out of your power band and in "best economy" power ranges if it so deems it correct?

 

if this is correct, then the same thing can be tuned to keep you always IN your power band for best power.. but will take a HUGE fuel econ hit. I'm sure that it eventually would adjust out, but I mean during acceleration just to clarify my statements.

 

and if THAT is correct, isn't this one of those situations where you take something thats good at both (being the "old fashioned" fluid filled doughnut powered gearbox tranny we have now) and replace it with something that can only do 1 or the other at any given time?

 

let me know if I have an error on my conclusions please. thanks.

 

I have grown up with the idea of gears and I drive based on what gear I'm in and where my power band is. my experience with CVTs so far has been annoying because I try to wait for 2nd or 3rd when the rpms are getting in the ideal power band and as soon as I get on the gas the damn transmission changes the ratio and takes me back out of my power band and I get irritated.

[Actuary]

I just want to make sure I understand the cvt concept like I think I do..

 

basically.. its a rubber band (over simplification I know) between 2 adjusting "wheels" that can tighten the band to adjust the drive ratio constantly (thus continuously variable.) So my conclusion is that the ecu effectivley can keep you ALWAYS out of your power band and in "best economy" power ranges if it so deems it correct?

 

if this is correct, then the same thing can be tuned to keep you always IN your power band for best power.. but will take a HUGE fuel econ hit. I'm sure that it eventually would adjust out, but I mean during acceleration just to clarify my statements.

 

and if THAT is correct, isn't this one of those situations where you take something thats good at both (being the "old fashioned" fluid filled doughnut powered gearbox tranny we have now) and replace it with something that can only do 1 or the other at any given time?

 

let me know if I have an error on my conclusions please. thanks.

 

I have grown up with the idea of gears and I drive based on what gear I'm in and where my power band is. my experience with CVTs so far has been annoying because I try to wait for 2nd or 3rd when the rpms are getting in the ideal power band and as soon as I get on the gas the damn transmission changes the ratio and takes me back out of my power band and I get irritated.

 

 

A good CVT should be smart enough to put the engine at the RPM that delivers either optimum fuel econ or optimum accel, depending on driver input (throttle).

 

For example, if you're pushing the gas pedal 1/4 of the way down, it should use a relatively low RPM (maybe 1800). If you push it 1/2 of the way down, it should use a medium RPM (maybe 3000). If you floor it, it should use the RPM which delivers the most HP (maybe 5500). As long as you keep it floored, it should keep it at 5500 RPM in order to maximize acceleration.

 

Conversely, in a fixed gear transmission, a fixed RPM means a fixed speed. This is why people don't like CVTs. They're used to the audio cues (ie increasing RPM) to tell them that they're accelerating (as well as the seat of pants cues). They don't hear any audio cues with the CVT, because at maximum acceleration, the RPM stays constant because the gear ratio is continuously changing instead.

[SLegacy99]

Yeah, I agree about thte audio cues. Thats what really freaks people out about CVTs.

[Ruperts Trooper]

There are CVTs around with electronically "fixed" gear ratios and are much more acceptable to customers from an audio point of view but CVT reliability is regarded very sceptically and European makers only use CVT on low torque economy models.

 

I'm waiting for Subaru to announce the diesel with automatic transmission - maybe 2010 - but if it's a CVT they won't be getting my money!

[G35C_WRX_MX5_MR2]

I was hoping this would NOT happen. I was hoping Subaru would develop a DSG transmission instead , especially since they are cutting back on their offerings of manual transmission cars. ie LGT wagon and Forester XT. If Subaru does not offer a sporty Wagon with Turbo and either a manual or a DSG, my next car will not be a Subaru.

I also agree that more gear automatics (6 or 7 sp) are better than the CVTs I've driven.

[SWP-LegacyGT]

so does this maintain the awd or is it FWD only?

[SWP-LegacyGT]

It will be AWD but I doubt you will feel the same kind of connection to the road as with 5MT/5EAT

Agreed.

 

I just remember hearing CVT and thinking FWD with cars that have that.

[SLegacy99]

Audi's FWDs have CVTs. Perhaps thats what you were thinking of.