Car & Bike Why are used Automatic cars frowned upon ?

AMG said:
"If a car’s engine is constantly decelerating and accelerating, it is not operating at maximum efficiency. To do that it should rev constantly at the optimum point of power and torque."


But in our indian CVT case, replace power and torque with Fuel Efficiency.


http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2007/05/03/banned-continuously-variable-transmission-cvt/
Click to expand...

You say like that is a bad thing. I work from home and yet spend around 8-10k a month on fuel in Chandigarh where the max distance I can travel is 15kms away. In fact I hope this technology gets more and more fuel efficient. Even in diesel cars there is turbo lag. Also the rubber band effect shouldn't be a problem because instead of rubber belts, metal belts are used. In the link I posted, it is clearly stated that CVT cars don't suffer the problem that normal AT cars face in hilly areas.
 
Rubber band effect has nothing to do with rubber belts or metal belts. It refers to the phenomenon that you are pulling a string(power), but instead of coming in your hand, it gets stretched like a rubberband. Thats what rubberband effect is.

There is no way you can spend 8-10K on fuel for 450KM a day, unless you drive a tank.

And as for the Turbo lag, there is a way around it, by timing your shifts in such a manner that you stay in the powerband.
 
AMG said:
"If a car’s engine is constantly decelerating and accelerating, it is not operating at maximum efficiency. To do that it should rev constantly at the optimum point of power and torque."
Click to expand...

but where would you drive a car which "revs constantly at the optimum point of power and torque?" ... probably on a dyno setup?
 
AMG said:
Rubber band effect has nothing to do with rubber belts or metal belts. It refers to the phenomenon that you are pulling a string(power), but instead of coming in your hand, it gets stretched like a rubberband. Thats what rubberband effect is.

There is no way you can spend 8-10K on fuel for 450KM a day, unless you drive a tank.

And as for the Turbo lag, there is a way around it, by timing your shifts in such a manner that you stay in the powerband.
Click to expand...

I might have misunderstood it, but Audi with their Multitronic CVT have supposedly found a way to counter it.
Also by 15km, I was trying to show you that the city I live in is pretty small, not that I travel 15km a day. I think CVT is perfect for city driving and since I drive my manual that way (accelerating slowly), it will only make life easier for me and other like minded individuals. And to me this effect you are talking about is akin to turbo lag because I don't want to floor my car or stay in a lower gear to maintain the revs. I actually don't really care about fuel average from a financial point of view. I just want technologies to become smarter so that we can reduce wastage of important resources.

If you don't mind me asking, can you tell me which cars you drive/have driven and your normal driving conditions so that I can see the perspective of your arguments. I am all for having fun while driving but not on normal roads and not when commuting. I can't wait for the day that cars drive themselves and are super efficient and we have nothing to do in how they get us from point A to point B. Along with that I would also like to have a weekend racing machine that I can use on the tracks on my free day.
 
@rdst_1

I have a cousin living in CHD and I do visit that city often, so I do know about it.
But mate, if I understand you clearly, you want to escape the hassle of changing gears. Then why not a conventional gearbox like one found in Honda City/Hyundai Verna.
Because as long as you put in D mode in start go traffic, it changes the gear for you, and you hardly realize whether you are driving a CVT or a conventional Automatic.
Not to mention the Conventional automatic will be better on the highway.

So the ball's now in your court. Why CVT?

I've already given my reasons for "why not" CVT on the previous page.


Edit: I drive a Petrol Skoda Fabia. Not very fancy machinery, but gets the job done.
 
Last edited:
  • The Audi multitronic sets itself apart from the CVT (continuously variable transmission) systems currently on the market through its numerous modifications, improvements and newly developed features. For example, Audi's technical specialists have modified the variator of the continuously variable transmission by adopting a new transmission element known as the link-plate chain, to handle the high forces and torques that are developed constantly by the six-cylinder engine with a peak torque of 280 Newton-metres. The scope for using a continuously variable transmission has thus been significantly broadened.

    The new variator, with its spread of ratios reaching 6, surpasses all previous types of automatic transmission in respect of the highest and lowest ratio that is possible. Thanks to the high maximum ratio, the variator for example facilitates pulling away, and renders a hydraulic torque converter unnecessary.

    Audi instead uses an oil-cooled multi-plate clutch which not only avoids the typical transmission losses of the torque converter, but also implements a variety of starting strategies. These are selected by the electronic control circuitry in accordance with the driver's preferences, as detected from how the accelerator pedal is being used. The electronic-control multi-plate clutch moreover offers the convenience feature of constant creep behaviour.

    By optimizing the hydraulics, the transmission engineers have made sure that the adjustment processes take place very dynamically and without any trailing effects. The "rubber band effect" or "slipping clutch syndrome", which have been a common source of criticism on conventional CVTs, are thus definitively banished. With an ingenious dual-piston principle on the variator and the separation of the oil flow into high-pressure and cooling circuits, the hydraulic system has in addition been designed in such a way that the pump output is significantly lower than that of a conventional arrangement. This improves the efficiency of the transmission and therefore the road performance that is possible.

    The control procedures of the electronics are in certain respects entirely new, helping to overcome the drawbacks of existing CVTs. The "rubber band effect" mentioned above is avoided by electronically controlled engine speed tracking, producing dynamic driving properties in conjunction with a reassuringly familiar pattern of sound.

    The electronics in addition include the DRP dynamic control program, which monitors both the driver and the driving conditions. It assesses the way the driver is using the accelerator pedal, thus determining whether the emphasis is being placed on performance or economy.

    In the latter instance, it translates the engine speed into propulsion via a low ratio (overdrive), at road speeds from as low as 60 km/h, on the basis of a stored characteristic map placing the emphasis on economy.

    If the driver opens the throttle right up (kick-down), it immediately switches to the stored characteristic map for sports driving and alters the ratio to underdrive, with the result that the high engine speeds that are required for maximum output become available even at low road speeds.

    In normal driving conditions, it selects the most favourable ratio between these two extremes; in contrast to gearshifts by a geared automatic transmission, all changes of ratio take place imperceptibly and entirely without jolting. The electronics in addition detect uphill and downhill gradients, and assist the driver by compensating for the added load or boosting engine braking torque accordingly.

    The most ingenious feature of these electronics is the optional "manual mode" with six fixed transmission stages in the familiar second gearshift plane to the right, with one-touch operation or alternatively controlled by a rocker switch on the steering wheel - again entirely without jerking.

    This concentration of high-tech control systems not only means that the Audi multitronic produces very good on-road performance; it actually achieves outstanding fuel consumption. The Audi A6 with multitronic accelerates from 0 to 100 km/h 1.3 seconds faster than with the geared automatic transmission, and is even one-tenth of a second faster from 0 to 100 km/h than an equivalent model driven with optimum use of the 5-speed gearbox. According to the EU fuel consumption standard, its fuel consumption over 100 kilometres is 0.9 of a litre of premium fuel less than a model with conventional geared automatic transmission, and it actually consumes 0.2 litres per 100 km less than an A6 with manual 5-speed gearbox.

    The multitronic entertains no compromises - whether in terms of dynamism, convenience or economy - in translating the driver's preferences into road performance. As matters stand, it can justifiably claim to be the concept that translates the driver's intentions with the greatest degree of accuracy.

    The market launch of the Audi A6 2.8 multitronic in Germany is scheduled for the end of 1999; the saloon model will carry a price tag of DM 71,050, with the Avant version beginning at DM 74,780.
spacer.gif
Click to expand...


So what Audi has done is that, they have incorporated
a) sensors in the system which detect how hard you press the pedal, so that the CVT default mapping either shifts to Economy or Sports mode
b) sensors for uphill gradient, downhill gradient, load in the car etc
c) manual ratios, like a conventional automatic gearbox, so that when you want to take things in your own hand, you can do so.


So essentially, Audi has tried to incorporate the positives of both kinds of automatics, with the help of some very clever sensors.
 
AMG said:
@rdst_1

I have a cousin living in CHD and I do visit that city often, so I do know about it.
But mate, if I understand you clearly, you want to escape the hassle of changing gears. Then why not a conventional gearbox like one found in Honda City/Hyundai Verna.
Because as long as you put in D mode in start go traffic, it changes the gear for you, and you hardly realize whether you are driving a CVT or a conventional Automatic.
Not to mention the Conventional automatic will be better on the highway.

So the ball's now in your court. Why CVT?

I've already given my reasons for "why not" CVT on the previous page.


Edit: I drive a Petrol Skoda Fabia. Not very fancy machinery, but gets the job done.
Click to expand...

I don't have a bias towards CVT. It's just that the cars I like are using CVT. In Chandigarh, I will be more than happy with just a manual. It is only on my frequent visits to Delhi, that I feel the need for an automatic. Also since we tend to keep vehicles in our family for more than 10 years easily, I believe AT will be a better choice as traffic conditions in Chandigarh will only worsen unless we see strict adherance to lane driving.
I don't wanna buy Hyundai or Honda, because having a Fiat Palio in the family for the past 12 years has made me fall in love with heavy cars. Honda City and Verna feel flimsy in front of Linea or even my old Palio. I remember my friend bringing over his new City to my house. We gathered to get some pics clicked and I put my hand with some weight on the bonnet and it sank in. That same friend also has a Linea and he keeps saying that a single door of the Linea feels more heavy/solid that whole City.
For these reasons, I might be only looking at Fiat, VW and Toyota. I just need a solid commute vehicle. For my fun car, I am always looking out for a good condition Palio 1.6.
 
As regards the build quality, I know what you are about. Believe me, I too bought the Skoda for the same reason. Those Europeans do sure know how to build their cars.

And as for the shortlist of Fiat, VW and Toyota, well then, go for the Vento/Rapid Automatic. That dual clutch automatic DSG gearbox is one of the best.

However, I do understand that yours may be one of the rare case where the Octavia/Jetta may be a little out of budget, and the Vento may appear a class below the Corolla.

And gearbox aside, IMO there is no valid reason to overlook a car as good as the Corolla, provided you do accept that it is a not very fun car.



However in raksrules case, I still cant happen to recommend the Sunny over the Vento/City.
 
Last edited:
AMG said:
As regards the build quality, I know what you are about. Believe me, I too bought the Skoda for the same reason. Those Europeans do sure know how to build their cars.

And as for the shortlist of Fiat, VW and Toyota, well then, go for the Vento/Rapid Automatic. That dual clutch automatic DSG gearbox is one of the best.

However, I do understand that yours may be one of the rare case where the Octavia/Jetta may be a little out of budget, and the Vento may appear a class below the Corolla.

And gearbox aside, IMO there is no valid reason to overlook a car as good as the Corolla, provided you do accept that it is a not very fun car.



However in raksrules case, I still cant happen to recommend the Sunny over the Vento/City.
Click to expand...

Actually since I will be buying a Petrol car for sure, Jetta and Octavia are in the same bracket as the version of Corolla I am considering. The only reason I am leaning towards Toyota is because the local Toyota franchise manager is a friend of a friend and also because both VW and Skoda are nowhere near Toyota when it comes to customer satisfaction in ASS. I do love the look of the new Octavia, but all the bad publicity Skoda has got in the past few years makes me wanna stay away.
 
From where I am looking at, the Octy TSi is 18,25,000 ex-showroom.
And the Corolla is 15.xx

There is no reason for you to get the Octy/Jetta petrols, because with their TSi engines, they are not only incredibly thirsty, but also what can be termed as enthusiasts cars, courtesy their rev happy nature, awesome handling in the petrol TSi variants due to the multilink rear axle, and the <slightly> harsher ride as compared to rivals.

But then, do have a look at the Yeti, the 4x2 variant. Heard some massive discounts on that.[DOUBLEPOST=1403425400][/DOUBLEPOST]Edit: Skoda doesnt have an automatic in the Yeti. Ignore that.
 
Still I would get the new Octavia. First 3 to 5 years it wont give you any trouble. A Skoda Yeti in house hold.

On the same note, got my first used Automatic car few hours back. :)
 
The Yeti is one brilliant car, with its DSG.
Its a pity it didnt sell, and that it was too expensive, and that the automatics had to be dropped, and now it is available only as a manual.

The facelifted Yeti does look hideous, TBH.


@m-jeri
Congrats mate. Which one? I hope its not a CVT, though.
I do expect a detailed ownership thread.
 
Back
Top