CVT is sh*t

[ReeceCozaa]

Yeah that makes sense, I always thought the 1st gear really goes on for quite some time, I actually have to try chucking it into auto at 4K rpm that’d be interesting! And I agree, the noise it produces can be unpleasant at times especially with deeper frequencies, oh boy the cvt and loud exhausts don’t match

[Lancer1993]

Again this is where a proper manual rules, dropping down through the gears is so much fun, and better with a nice exhaust note!

[ReeceCozaa]

That’s the only thing I would love, next car has gotta he manual!

[burfadel]

The CVT needs to be matched to the right engine and vehicle. A low powered engine means the CVT needs to be in a lower ratio for the same effect. I suspect a 140 kW engine with say, 250 NM of torque would be ideal for the vehicle weight. There are heavier duty versions of the CVT like used in the new Pathfinder.

[Lancer1993]

The Nissan CVTs are particularly bad. I know someone who had the new Pulsar (now gone) and within 2 years the CVT shit its self, luckily covered by the warranty, still they were without their new car for almost 2 months!

[Viking]

Plus with an auto you can change 'gears' mid corner and not have the worry of coordinating arms and legs and just concentrate on taking the turn, and with hills if you get it wrong there is no risk of 'bogging down' when you have to down shift all in all fool proof.

Just to play "Devil's Advocate" here, if you get your gear right before you enter the corner then you don't need to change half-way through the corner. Knowing what gear to be in takes time and driving experience.

Use engine braking on the way into the corner, keep the revs in the 'sweet range', and you'll be a lot faster than the "point and squirt" brigade.

Auto gearboxes (sequential) can be fun and fast, just look at any major motorsport (Supercars, World Rally etc.).

No argument there.

[burfadel]

The Nissan CVTs are particularly bad. I know someone who had the new Pulsar (now gone) and within 2 years the CVT shit its self, luckily covered by the warranty, still they were without their new car for almost 2 months!

The Lancer and other Mitsubishi CVT's are the same as used in Nissan. Mitsubishi is Jatco, owned by Nissan. They are made by Jatco, a Nissan owned company, like Mitsubishi Motors (majority stakeholder).

[ReeceCozaa]

I simply wish they just made a stronger belt.. I mean come on that’s the weak link in the tranny right? Then atleast a turbo kit would be a tiny bit worth it

[Mooman]

Just to play "Devil's Advocate" here, if you get your gear right before you enter the corner then you don't need to change half-way through the corner. Knowing what gear to be in takes time and driving experience.

Totally agree that experience plays a large factor. What was interesting was that during the Melbourne GP coverage they showed on-board footage of Hamilton (may have been during his quali lap) and seeing when he changed gears, quick change down on corner entry for engine braking (plus brake bias change), shift ups where they weren't expected etc. I know a Lancer can't compare to a hybrid power unit but still interesting to see at top level.

Here's youtube fotage:
Lewis Hamilton Melbourne GP 2018 qualifying lap.

I simply wish they just made a stronger belt.. I mean come on that’s the weak link in the tranny right? Then atleast a turbo kit would be a tiny bit worth it

One of the funny things though it that a lot of the new small SUVs like Toyota C-HR, Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross, etc. are coming out with small turbo engines and CVT, often with more torque than our aging 4B series engines (Interestingly the Eclipse Cross has a 4B40 engine), so heavier vehicles with higher peak torque engines.

It would be interesting to compare how the Lancer CVTs evolved, from J1 to J4 spec and the newer CVT8 units with a broader ratio range. But I guess we'll never know.

[ReeceCozaa]

Hmmmm, maybe the lancers CVT box can be saved with a swap or interchangeable parts, I’m suprised no company made the time to make a stronger CVT belt

[Quismiff]

Hmmmm, maybe the lancers CVT box can be saved with a swap or interchangeable parts, I’m suprised no company made the time to make a stronger CVT belt

Wiki has heaps of info on this, it is used in heavy industry and was even banned from F1 which goes to show if F1 had made it viable then perhaps the production versions would have been stronger/better sooner?

[aspir3]

Hmmmm, maybe the lancers CVT box can be saved with a swap or interchangeable parts, I’m suprised no company made the time to make a stronger CVT belt

I've never heard of the belt having an issue.

[Quismiff]

Hmmmm, maybe the lancers CVT box can be saved with a swap or interchangeable parts, I’m suprised no company made the time to make a stronger CVT belt

I've never heard of the belt having an issue.

Early Nissan CVT transmissions had rumours of belts breaking and being generally crap, but they were merely rumours as I too never heard of one or knew anyone who could verify the statement. I am to understand that most CVTs use a belt of steel or metallic construction.

One and a half years later in November 1988, Subaru also brought out the Justy 4WD ECVT, a Justy with part-time 4WD and the ECVT gearbox. Production was limited to 500 units per month as Van Doorne's could only produce this many steel belts for them

[ReeceCozaa]

The belt is the biggest issue when you chuck a turbo kit on it, excessive heat produced by the added torque cause it to go boom

[Mooman]

Yeah it's 2 steel banded belts reinforced by metal plates. It's also a push belt not a pull belt so that it is always under compression and won't stretch.

Here's a good tear down video so you can see the internals.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ry_gN3QVswk

An interesting point is that GSR Lancers have a different ratio range: 2.349 - 0.394 compared to 2.631 - 0.378 for say an ES Sport and a different 1st and 2nd ratios 2.349 and 1.517 compared to 2.631 and 1.397. 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th gears are all the same.

They also have a different final drive ratio of 6.120 compared to 6.026 and a different reverse of 1.750 to 1.960.

I'm assuming the GSR has the newer CVT8 hence the larger range (or modified software). The fixed ratios seem to catered more to a smoother 1st to 2nd transition and the taller final drive for more torque and better acceleration with the downside of higher RPM at speed.

In the video you can see how easy it is to change the diff and transfer gear, they just pull out. Would be nice to swap in the GSR versions (if they fit) and see how it affects low down punch.