Originally Posted by G2Spfld
I think Zeeper has valid points as well, and in no place I read did it say you can't have opinions on something you don't have. I've read post after post with figures that were derived from averages and means. I'm sure there are fairly accurate percentages stating the differential in mpg with 5 sp vs cvt. so he can calculate it from his 5 sp just as anyone else can calculate from studies and tests from people you can only assume are competent. I mean, there are milages listed from vehicles you guys do not have, and prob never driven. Yet, you feel you have the right to comment on them. That's no different from having a like car, less different tranny.
I disagree here. Zeeper takes a few opinions from people who actually don't even care what mpg they get compared to similarly rated cars but are "happy" because it gets better than their old e.g. 3/4 ton 4x4 pickup, then throws them out as "proof" the CVT mpg is okay, as if somehow those half dozen stories become statistically significant.
Plus, despite the fact the "enthusiasts" here more often drive 5 speeds probably more ... enthusiastically (thus the definition of "enthusiast") a breakdown of fuelly cars shows the 5 speed actually gets better mpg than the CVT - that's probably the most significant factoid of fuelly, if there is one.
Taking a few opinions from this list is different than looking at comparisons from CR and mpgomatic, which clearly show the mpg of CVT's suffers.
Commenting on CR and mpgomatic results is a lot different than deriving opinions from a few tales here.