On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 11:54 PM, paul stenquist <[email protected]> wrote: > It's kind of funny. The post wasn't about manual transmissions. Igor, quite > correctly, noted that consumers rejected CVTs because there was no shift > feel, no jerk from the torque curve change that occurs with a proper shift. > So some manufacturers added an artificial surge or "jerk" to the CVT > acceleration curve. It has nothing to do with being able to shift a manual > trans smoothly. > Paul
Paul, I'd still have to disagree that the shift feel was the reason people rejected CVT's when they were introduced in the late 80's/early 90's. Having driven a few of them, they didn't just feel slower, they outright were slower. I do suspect people blamed the lack of shift points for the poor driving feel, but the poor acceleration was a larger issue that was outright ignored and blamed on people being confused by the lack of shift points. It was bloody hard to get a 80's CVT solidly into the power band for peak acceleration and the ratio change curve on most CVT's seemed designed specifically to never be at the right ratio. Note the fix for the lack of shift points was a staggered gearing curve, which also removed the steady change in gear ratio that was more responsible for poor performance, and of course the significantly more powerful engines used today improve performance greatly. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
