Hydrostatic or manual??

[RayH]

.

May be time to start looking at Korean cars.

We bought a Kia last year. Of course we looked at Honda, Toyota, Ford, Nissan, VW and Mazda. We ended up with the Kia because it seemed to be just as much car for a lower price and with a better warranty. I feel we took a chance, it may pay off and it may not, time will tell.
Its got 18000 on it with no reliability or fit and function problems. It has had an intermitant check engine light/loss of power issue. Its happened 3 times in 18000 miles while driving it for just a couple of seconds per occurance. The dealer cant find the problem. Other than that, so far so good.

 

[turnkey4099]

The original CVT (belt driven) was the DAF, not sure what country but I think it was Dutch.

I drove a 500 with one while my 500 standard tranny was in the shop. Would take some getting used to as the mechanical sounds are strange in that the engine maintians the same rpm (and sound) regardless what is happening to road speed.

The advantage to the CVT is that the engine runs at optimum settings and can be tuned for max mileage and cleanest burn. Doesn't have to allow for changing rpm conditions.

Not an engineer but I can't see that manufacturing them wouild be any more costly or complex than a stick or auto is.

Except for sport type cars, I think CVT will be pretty much standard before long.

Harry K

 

[N80]

The gas mileage think is puzzling. The gas mileage on our Murano _stinks_. We never break 20 mpg. Again, it isn't a small car and the engine has pretty good hp, but 19 mpg highway is just awful. Maybe it would be less with a standard auto tranny?

 

[3RRL]

I just got a new Jeep Compass Sport with the CVT in it. Pretty cool little SUV. Mine is a 178hp 4cyl 4x4 (no transfer case) and gets great mileage. So far 25.1mpg average over 2980 miles of all kinds of driving including a little off road. I had to get used to the CVT.... you floor it and it revs to 6000rpm and stays there. You go faster and faster and faster....weird man.