|
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
05-04-2013, 08:51 AM | #26 |
Scooby Guru
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:2012 2.0i Sport 5MT DGM |
How about we don't feed the troll in every thread?
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
|
05-04-2013, 10:26 AM | #27 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 315643
Join Date: Apr 2012
Chapter/Region:
South East
Location: Atlanta Ga
|
If you are going to decide between the MT and CVT deciding between 32mpg and 34mpg is a ridiculous. It should be between are you willing to drive a MT, Knowing how much the individual tranmissions cost to maintain, and reliability record. Im sure they come out even if you include a clutch disk change.
for me i had to go with Reliability record since this was my daily driver. People argued that they have been using CVT for years but not on this car. First years already have alot of question marks i didnt want to add another. (that was my thought process on the MT vs CVT) i also had a finite amount to spend on the car so 1000 was a decent chunk. |
05-04-2013, 12:18 PM | #28 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 340297
Join Date: Dec 2012
Chapter/Region:
MWSOC
Location: Cincinnati
Vehicle:2013 Impreza 5sp Prm Ice Silver |
Could we just get over the lunacy of arguing about CVT vs MT for fuel inefficiencies sake and get down to the facts? Some people like CVT better, some like MT better. Enthusiasts generally prefer MT better, it's more engaging. Some just prefer to relax more and get where they need to be without having to worry about the cars transmission that much. They like CVT. Get what you prefer to drive, because the MPG difference will be basically meaningless.
|
05-04-2013, 12:19 PM | #29 | |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region:
SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:2013 Impreza Spt cvt Silver |
Quote:
Zeeper, thanks for pointing out and continually referring to the fuelly.com thread. Then thanks to BigFatHorse for compiling the Impreza data at the bottom of this link. If you look at the averages of the MT's vs. the CVT's, you will see that, no matter how much Zeeper complains about the data from a website he continually refers to and how much he attempts to spin it, the MT gets better mpg than the CVT. Next, I'm not talking about what I think of the MT's mpg. I'm just pointing to the data. Then, the statement about being geared higher automatically getting better mpg than a lower geared car fails the reality test. If it didn't, all cars would be geared much higher. Engines have different efficiency at different rpm. So, if a car is geared too high it's below it's optimum efficiency and lugs. That would mean the CVT would hardly hold any grade at all in 6th gear or even with a mild headwind. Gee, sounds like my CVT... Finally, (or about his first paragraph (or sentence, whichever you prefer) Zeeper says his MT gets crap mileage at 75 mph. Well, I didn't say the MT gets good mpg compared to other makes, just compared to the real world mpg vs. the EPA estimate of the CVT compared to its real world mileage. Coincidentally, I switched cars this week for a mpg test. I got on the freeway and set the cruise control to the mode of the traffic speed (for you Zeeper that's the speed at which the highest percentage of traffic is flowing) which is typically 80 mph and with my 36 mpg EPA highway rated 5 speed Corolla on my two way trip I got 39.5 mpg. The next day I did the same with the Impreza, also rated at 36 mpg highway EPA. I got 28 mpg. And I really tried, by switching to manual mode and allowing it to slow going up hills, to maximize the mpg. It's not like I'm here making up a story and I'm trying to manufacture falsehoods. I do like the car - except for the crappy mpg. Last edited by stevehnm; 05-04-2013 at 12:41 PM. |
|
05-04-2013, 12:22 PM | #30 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region:
SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:2013 Impreza Spt cvt Silver |
|
05-04-2013, 12:26 PM | #31 | |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region:
SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:2013 Impreza Spt cvt Silver |
Quote:
Despite the EPA numbers Subaru has provided, there is basically no difference between the two, so don't buy a CVT for the increased mpg. That's all I'm saying. Then the real trolls attacked... |
|
05-04-2013, 12:52 PM | #32 | |
Scooby Guru
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:2012 2.0i Sport 5MT DGM |
Quote:
|
|
05-04-2013, 01:52 PM | #33 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region:
SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:2013 Impreza Spt cvt Silver |
|
05-04-2013, 01:57 PM | #34 |
Scooby Guru
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:2012 2.0i Sport 5MT DGM |
2nd line of first post, I understand reading comprehension is difficult for trolls
Just because you have buyers remorse doesn't mean you need to go into every thread and bitch about your mpg. Last edited by flyboy1100; 05-04-2013 at 02:08 PM. |
05-04-2013, 02:41 PM | #35 | |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 209172
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Omaha, NE
Vehicle:2012 Impreza CLL BL2 |
Quote:
|
|
05-04-2013, 02:49 PM | #36 | |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region:
SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:2013 Impreza Spt cvt Silver |
Quote:
Not only do I not see where he says the '13 he drove is a CVT, the subject line is about a '12 that he is thinking of buying. Strike 2 on you. Then, you had two chances, so that's strike three. You have to go sit in the corner for the weekend. |
|
05-04-2013, 03:33 PM | #37 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 299286
Join Date: Oct 2011
Chapter/Region:
NESIC
Location: Upstate NY
Vehicle:2017 Legacy Limited White |
Comparing the average combined mpg using fuelly data, without knowing or taking into account certain buying behaviors (such as people who drive in stop and go traffic most of the time being more likely to buy an automatic), is moronic.
City mileage is lower than highway mileage, and if a higher percent of the driving among the vehicles on fuelly (CVT or 5 Speed) is in the city, overall combined mpg for all cars shown will be lower. On the same drive, at the same speed, a CVT will get better mileage than a 5 Speed on the highway. A fact that is obvious and shown in the EPA testing, which rates a CVT Sport at 36mpg while a 5 speed Sport is only rated for 33mpg highway. You could also just look at the forums to see that those reporting the highest highway mpg's are, wait for it, you guessed it, driving a CVT version of the Impreza. Of course some of the drivers getting the lowest are also driving a CVT, but don't tell them that how the car is driven affects mpg's... Shhh don't tell the troll, he will sling another spreadsheet at you... Last edited by Zeeper; 05-04-2013 at 03:40 PM. |
05-05-2013, 10:37 AM | #38 | |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region:
SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:2013 Impreza Spt cvt Silver |
Quote:
First off, I find driving in the city with an automatic much more bothersome since I have to keep using the brakes so much, so I would prefer a manual in that situation. That's all I know, and apparently all you know is that you would prefer an automatic. So what is moronic here is your assumption you know that more city drivers would prefer the CVT over the MT. Second, your assumption that a CVT will always beat a manual on the highway "on the same drive, at the same speed" shows your definitive lack of knowledge of the limitations of a CVT. There is always energy loss through a CVT that makes that statement ludicrous. While it may be compensated for in some situations by the CVT's ability to maintain a programmed engine speed, that is also be done by a skilled MT driver. (I think that also says something about your driving ability). With today's valve, ignition, and fuel mixture (at least) on the fly adjustments the ability of an engine to maintain optimum efficiency over a wider range of rpm's widens the speed variability where the MT equipped vehicle is more efficient in changing fuel into work, which means mpg to you. Most definitely there are highway speeds and terrain where the MT is more efficient. On the highway in cruise control my CVT will sometimes wind to 6,000 rpm on hills to maintain speed, where the display on instantaneous shows less than 10 mpg. Strike three on you too, is that although the differences in real world performance of the CVT vs. the MT compared to their EPA highway estimate claims by Subaru are quite apparent and have been shown repetitively, you still refer to the EPA estimate difference of the CVT's 36 mpg highway EPA estimate vs. the 33 of the MT, showing you are either indeed the one trolling here, or appear to be quite stupid when it comes to the mechanics involved in this discussion. |
|
05-05-2013, 11:30 AM | #39 | |
Scooby Guru
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:2012 2.0i Sport 5MT DGM |
Quote:
|
|
05-05-2013, 11:54 AM | #40 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 299286
Join Date: Oct 2011
Chapter/Region:
NESIC
Location: Upstate NY
Vehicle:2017 Legacy Limited White |
CVT's are such power sucking nightmares that, when tested on the same equipment as a 5 speed, they return higher mpg's. Yes, you are filled with mechanical aptitude, given you dispute that outright.
I guess the reports of forum members posting their CVT derived HWY mpg numbers (you know, the mpg's higher than my car can achieve) are as meaningless as the EPA testing. Maybe I just don't know how to correctly shift to 5th and set the cruise at 65mph, you must have a secret I don't know about how to do that more skillfully. You hate your CVT, at this point I am glad you are stuck with it, but please, please, please do not trade it for a 5 speed because then we would be subject to your next round of bitching, "when I drive my 5 speed at 75+ MPH up the side of a mountain, I don't get 33 mpg" ....(insert custom dope-slap emoticon here) Oh, and even a scientifically challenged math guru such as yourself should know that using Combined MPG's to discuss HWY MPG's is invalid. I don't think the data on fuelly is bad, just how you are attempting to spin it. Last edited by Zeeper; 05-05-2013 at 12:15 PM. |
05-05-2013, 12:37 PM | #41 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 322264
Join Date: Jun 2012
Chapter/Region:
Tri-State
Location: Webster, NY
Vehicle:2012 Impreza Sp 5sp Obs Blk Prl/Drk Gray Mtl |
^^Guys, instead of debating him, why don't we just add him to our ignore lists? That would keep all of these threads from going to ****.
I've just done it, and I suggest that others who find his posts unhelpful should do the same. |
05-05-2013, 12:54 PM | #42 | ||
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region:
SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:2013 Impreza Spt cvt Silver |
Quote:
Quote:
Oh, and here is some information for you on the inefficiency of CVT's: http://www.lib.ucdavis.edu/dept/pse/...s/04CVT-56.pdf That will be true until the belts and pulleys or whatever is used are made of unobtainium that will transfer an infinite amount of friction per unit area, so the inherent friction losses are done away with. Of course that link is for the benefit of others - I wouldn't expect you or flyboy to understand it even if you were to challenge your assumptions and read it. P.S. Flyboy - to avoid repetitive postings, I'm still not sure where he says the vehicle he drove was a CVT (even under your mandate that it was a typo) |
||
05-05-2013, 01:14 PM | #43 |
Scooby Guru
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:2012 2.0i Sport 5MT DGM |
|
05-05-2013, 03:10 PM | #44 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 329526
Join Date: Aug 2012
Chapter/Region:
SWIC
Location: Ground Control
Vehicle:2013 Impreza Spt cvt Silver |
Gee, so have I! Or not...
|
05-07-2013, 02:15 AM | #45 | |
Scooby Newbie
Member#: 355316
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Portland, Oregon
|
Quote:
All warranties. All records. I'm buying for 21k, transfer of warranty $35. The mileage is nothing. The car has no problems. And tires alone add another 1.5k in value. |
|
05-07-2013, 02:21 AM | #46 |
Scooby Newbie
Member#: 355316
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Portland, Oregon
|
BTW I wasn't asking about MT vs CVT. I don't care. I wanted automatic. Less pain in the ass to drive. I drive in traffic a lot.
Thanks for hijacking most my thread troll! |
05-07-2013, 06:45 AM | #47 |
Scooby Guru
Member#: 314216
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: ND
Vehicle:2012 2.0i Sport 5MT DGM |
|
05-07-2013, 11:32 AM | #48 |
Scooby Newbie
Member#: 355316
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Portland, Oregon
|
|
05-07-2013, 12:13 PM | #49 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 315643
Join Date: Apr 2012
Chapter/Region:
South East
Location: Atlanta Ga
|
|
05-07-2013, 06:23 PM | #50 |
Scooby Specialist
Member#: 354284
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Midwest
Vehicle:2013 Imp Sport CVT SWP |
Congrats on the car!!!
It's always a great deal if you feel good about it. It will be money well spent, I just wish I would have bought mine earlier. I didn't know what I was missing. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|