The Ferrari, Jag, BMW paddle-shift transmission allows the driver to brake, downshift, and rev-match the engine at the same time. Heel-toe shifting a manual allows the driver to brake, downshift, and rev-match the engine at the same time. So, I think my statement that, "This is the automatic transmission equivalent of a heel-toe downshift," is a reasonable statement to make.

Somewhat back on topic:

A traditional MT tranny allows one to use either the brakes or the engine to decelerate the wheels.

The paddle-shift mode of the Lancer CVT allows one to use either the brakes or the engine to decelerate the wheels.

The automatic mode of the Lancer CVT does not allow use of the engine to decelerate the wheels.

The paddle-shift mode w/rev-matching as described for Ferrari, etc. also does not allow use of the engine to decelerate the wheels.

So, either the MT or the CVT in paddle-shift gives you the choice of brakes or engine to decelerate the wheels. Down a steep hill I will use a low gear to allow the engine to maintain speed down the grade. Other than that, I choose to use the brakes to slow/stop the car. They work wonderfully well for that purpose. To those who prefer to use the engine to slow/stop their cars, go for it!

 

It's not heel-toe though, that is a very specific action done in a very specific situation.

 

Well, you should go try it. Even w/rev-matching, the engine will decelerate the wheels.

The whole idea of rev-matching is avoid transmission shock, during downshift. Once the downshift is done, the deceleration will begin, and it will be the same as MT when you don't step on the gas.

 

That is completely correct. If the car is in gear and there is no foot on the gas pedal, then compression/friction from the engine (and friction from other sources) will tend to decelerate the car regardless of the type of transmission.

However, I had in mind the need to slow or stop the car with some sense of urgency (red light, sharp turn, person steps into the street, etc.). Situations where simply lifting off the gas and coasting won't do.

 

My Mitsu Mighty Max that I bought new in 1992 had a manual and the clutch lasted over 10 years. The original brake pads lasted over 10 years, too. It got mixed driving... babied a lot in city traffic, and flogged a lot on country roads, but not racing flogged unless you count going 0 to the speed limit as quickly as possible. I'm a habitual engine braker. So, that's probably what made the original brake pads last so long. But that clutch... it was just a beast, I did things to it I won't do to a clutch anymore, like holding it in for an entire red-light, riding it in stop and go traffic, riding it on a hill to keep the car stationary at a light. Pretty much all the things they tell you not to do to a manual, I did for years.

Anyways, people like different things in their cars and like to drive them in different ways. Personally, I'll ~never~ tire of manual transmissions. The clutch on my Lancer is like stepping on creme puffs made of clouds compared to my old car. It takes 0 effort to move the pedal.

It's obvious the CVT is not your 'average' auto. Flappy paddles or not, it's still not a manual to me, and I'll not have one. I think the only "non-manual" transmission that sounds fun to me is the SST-blah-blah-blah twin clutch transmission they're putting in the EvoX MR, but I think that's mostly because in concept it's basically a manual transmission (it has clutches and NOT Torque converters) that auto shifts...

The only problem with the CVT, as I see it right now, is that it is pretty much a complete unknown. No one really knows what it'll with stand, and until someone out there bites the bullet and tests one to destruction we'll never know. Until that happens, I don't think we'll know how much power you can put through it and still have a reliable car.

Oh, and the worst case scenario in a CVT isn't a slipping belt, it's the belt snapping, which puts you in the same boat as the guy that lost 200 teeth out of a few of the gears in his manual. Granted, the belt ~should~ start slipping long before it snaps, but weirder things have happened when cars and engine mods come together.

 

Correct me if i'm wrong but doesn't CVT (Continuosly Variable Transmission) mean no gears. A couple years ago when my parents got their nissan Murano, which is CVT, I asked the guys at nissan and they said there are no gears in a CVT. I got a MT because the thought of shifting gears that dont exist just seems stupid to me. Manual (with clutch pedal) is more fun for me anyways.

 

uhh... yup... CVT means no gears.... with the paddles you're selecting 1 of 6 preset pulley ratios... when in D the pulleys continuously alter their size in an attempt to optimize economy and performance...

 

Was there a point to this, or were you just posting to call all CVT owners stupid?

 

When it comes to choosing between any kind of automatic or a manual it's basically a personal choice. Personally I got the MT because I wanted to experiment something new, I wanted to feel the "sportiness of the MT" that everybody was talking about. I'm 17, enthusiastic and I don't mind having to do the extra work to drive the manual, although in the first week i was doubting my choice because I was stalling at every incline or launching with some wheelspin .
The CVT has advantages compared to the conventional automatics, but in theory it's supposed to be faster than the MT but it isn't.
And last but not least there's a big difference in the price of CVT vs MT.

 

Did i say anyone was stupid? Just the concept of shifting gears in a gearless tranny. E-Gear and SST are okay with me because there are actual gears.

 

thats why we have warrenties my friend

in 8 years from now most of us are gonna have turbos or voided the warrenty in some way anyway..

 

I've had both. I look at it like this, MV vs AT=MT, MT vs CVT=CVT.

I was getting 30 mpg with my MT 06 tC in the city, in traffic, IN LAS VEGAS! I would shift 1st 3rd 5th at 2500 rpms. Great fuel saving effort and really worked! It was hard to give that up with gas at $3.25+ for regular. Driving my CVT I get that and sometimes more. I have no need to accel fast b/c of the heavy traffic. I keep the rpms between 2000 and 2750. When I hit the speed limit I set the cruse control. The rpms rest at 1500 to 1700 my whole 30 min comute to work.

It is ultra smooth. I like the fact that if I want to play I still can. I also like that I can leave it in D and go to sport mode with out moving the stick. I just down shift with the paddle and hit the gas. The next time I stop, it goes back to D automaticly!

Pardon the spelling, I'm from the south!

It really fits my needs to be fun, family friendly, great on gas, super smooth, and really easy to operate.

CVT for me!

Scott

 

I have no idea how you can get 30 mpg in traffic . Simply, it's impossible. And the tC has a 2.4 l engine if I'm not mistaken. I get 11 mpg in city traffic but I accelerate like I'm crazy so my mileage doesn't matter . And your spelling is way better than most of the people here.

 

well when gas cracked $3.00 per gallon, i had to do something. 6 tanks in a row i got 390 miles from 13 gallons of gas. math don't lie. traffic isnt to bad on my way to work, and i can time all the lights so 45 mph for 13 miles both ways with the cruise controll on, makes for good milage.

my first 3 tanks on the GTS i have gotten 27+ in the city. driving the came way.

 

^^^ Oooh, 45 mph is not bad