Original Post — Direct link

So I'm about to buy a Subaru, and the one complaint is keep hearing is "It's a CVT'. Like a general good impression of the car, but with kind of a sigh and "But, it is a CVT though."

And I get CVT not being as good as some other transmissions for some niche applications, like rock crawling or something, but other than that, I don't understand the general negative.

Aren't CVTs incredibly efficient with their use of power? Isn't that their who thing? All else being equal, in an otherwise same car with the same engine, a CVT will get you up to speed faster than a manual or automatic and then operate more fuel efficiently once you're at speed, right? But it's a smooth gradient instead of the sort of undulating shifts? In fact as best I can tell Subaru incorporates "fake shifts" just to replicate that automatic or manual (if you're in manual mode) feel, but that actually makes it slower and less efficient, you'd actually get slight better 0-60 if you took out the fake shifts and just made it linear? At least that is my understanding.

So yeah, what's the hate? Is it literally just a tactile thing? People like the feeling of the shift up when accelerating, and that's really it? Or is there something else I am missing? Other than, again, niche applications like offroading or maybe as a dragster.

External link →
almost 3 years ago - /u/Frost_monk - Direct link

Originally posted by rusty735

Hey look OP someone answered your question with some what reliable data. Also saying CVT's are "incredibly efficient" is an overstatement. They are more efficient for sure than a geared automatic transmission but by a small amount. Not enough to make a huge difference to you a individual car owner but enough to make a difference to manufacturers trying to meet federal/global fuel economy standards.

Yep