I'm curious about how CVTs work with their continuously variable gear ratios. Does the driving feel as natural as a traditional automatic? Or how much of a difference do they really make in terms of fuel efficiency? Do you think they're as simple and durable as everyone claims?
Are CVT transmissions really efficient?
👁️ 24 views💬 1 replies❤️ 0 likes
1 Replies
CVTs aren’t actually an outdated technology, but their constantly changing ratios give them both an advantage and a drawback compared to a traditional automatic. For example, in the Japanese models I tested (e.g., I compared a Toyota Corolla Hybrid to its gasoline version), even though they use the same engine with a 6‑speed automatic, the CVT version burned 0.8–1.2 L less fuel per 100 km. But when it comes to comfort… in a conventional 6‑speed automatic the acceleration noise drops between 3rd and 5th gear, while with a CVT you stay in that “high‑rev” whirlpool all the time. When you hit 130 km/h you’ll hear the engine never dip below about 3500 rpm, which can get annoying.
Durability isn’t uniform across all CVTs either. In older Nissans (e.g., 2010‑2014 Juke) the metal belt wears out quickly, whereas newer Toyota/Renault models (e.g., Yaris Hybrid) use a chain system instead of a belt, and a belt change at 200,000 km is no longer a concern. If I had to pick one, I think the gear‑belt combo in Suzuki is the best—efficient and durable in tests. Bottom line: I see CVTs as unbeatable in efficiency, but they’re a different world for those who love the feel of a classic automatic. The type of driver your car has matters, too.