Exactly. I've proven this when racing my friend's 2005 OZ MT.

 

Here's my guess as to why I think the CVT has the potential to be faster than the MT:

In order to accelerate, you want to be in the lowest gear possible. Low gear means more torque at the wheels. (Think of riding a ten-speed bicycle.) If a stock MT '08 Lancer could stay in 1st gear up to 120 MPH, it would beat Porsches and Ferraris in quarter-mile runs. Of course, increased vehicle speed means increased engine speed, and for various reasons you have to shift to 2nd before 120 MPH. In a manual transmission Lancer it seems that the optimal shift point is just before the 6500 RPM red line. Going from 1st gear to 2nd gear, you go from a gear ratio of 3.54 to a ratio of 1.91. This leads to a 45% decrease in torque at the wheels! (The actual drop in torque will be somewhat less than this, because the shift puts you on a higher spot on the torque curve.) Anyway, the point is that every time you shift gears in a manual tranny car you get a pretty big drop in torque to the wheels.

A CVT will also have to lower the gear ratio as the velocity of the car increases. However, it seems to me that it should be able to do so with a steady reduction in gear ratio, rather than big jumps. This should give the CVT an advantage in acceleration.

If I'm thinking properly, the CVT should do something like the following. Perhaps someone with a CVT can let me know if I'm anywhere in the right ballpark . . .

According to Mitsu's web site, the CVT allows gear ratios from 2.35 to 0.39. So, when accelerating with the gas pushed all the way to the floor, you would want the CVT at the highest gear ratio (the lowest gear), which is 2.35. You would want the car to hold this ratio as the engine revs to the redline and the car accelerates. At this point, if the car is to go any faster, then the gear ratio has to drop (moving to a higher gear). The potential advantage to the CVT is that it can allow the gear ratio to drop slowly, 2.35, 2.34, 2.33, etc., rather than dropping dramatically like the manual, 3.54 to 1.91. The CVT should be able to keep more torque to the wheels.

I imagine if what I am thinking is correct, then if you floor the gas in auto mode, then the engine would rev up close to 6500 RPM, then hold the revs near that point while the CVT gradually lowers the gear ratio. Is this what happens???

I found it interesting that the range of gear ratios of the MT and CVT are so different. It seems that the MT has a much shorter 1st gear than the CVT. However, the CVT has a better final drive ratio.

MT: 1st gear X final drive = 3.54 X 4.24 = 14.98
CVT: lowest gear X final drive = 2.35 X 6.12 = 14.38

Anyway, the MT does have an advantage here when starting out, with a slightly better combined gear ratio.

While a car accelerates faster with a higher gear ratio (lower gear), it gets better gas mileage with a lower gear ratio (higher gear). So, Mitsu has reason to keep the transmission from being used to its fullest performance potential--better fuel economy.

More food for thought. Anyone want to run with this???

 

I think I follow you on that, but it comes back to the saem thing, and my whole position on this is as the two cars are right now, from the factory, the 5 SPEED WILL WIN.

reason being is, there is a brain in the Transmission that is optimized for smoother acceleration and drivability comfort.

If you can get a CVT ECU flash that is geared for power. its a different story. All the ratios that are possible to attain can be carried out, as with the information by Mark.

If you could RAM THE PEDAL and the car knows exactly how long to remain in the 4500RPM range and when to move beyond that to the HP peak point when your well off and on your way. its sick.

If you set those cars up bumper to bumper. the CVT torque wise would be able to surgically drag the 5SP around and around.

again it all comes back to Current Vs. Potential.

thats always going to be my vote I beleive in CVT, but am a slave to reality as it stands.

The project manager has been quoted saying it him self, the Transmissions intellegence is geared towards comfort

 

Alright, the way the CVT works is a bit like this.

In first gear, i can go to ~40mph before shifting in MCVT. When shifting the car drops ~1kRPMs, so i figure the best way to shift it is @ ~5500 giving you the max curve on the torque after shift but this does make second, third, and fourth very short gears, and 5th and 6th are technical cruising gears.

In ACVT, you can floor it and it keeps the RPMs at ~6000RPMs which is where you get Max HP on the curve and roughly ~110tq which is about 10 less than max on the curve. As far as the fastest way to get to that point, i believe it would still be MCVT first gear then instead of shifting to second you just put it into D with your foot to the floor and it will actually adjust to a <1gear ratio and put your RPMs higher IIRC. Ill double check today.

Yesterday i went around a bend and then floored it on a straight away getting up to speed for the highway in which i, for the first time, finally just floored it in ACVT. i started at ~25mph which is really high in the RPMs for ACVT and it stayed at ~6000rpms all the way till i let off at ~80mph. I must say i felt like my car was gonna blow up lol, its so weird "red lining" for a 50mph increase but the whole time its shifting. The sound pitch and feel never changes, its constantly adjusting and accelerating, you NEVER feel a shift of any form.

And, if you have a CVT, rule of thumb is, if you want to really have fun, bring your car to ~20mph around a turn downshift to first and floor it out of the turn, its so fun <3. I wanna be a race car driver

 

This whole MT vs CVT has been beaten to death.

 

manual is faster than cvt, off curse

 

another thing I love with the padle shifting that I think beats a manual is the engine breaking. I am saving my brakes big time with this engine braking.

hardly a big thing, but it saves a bunch when it comes to your brake job.