ausmini
https://ausmini.com/forums/

CVT - Constantly variable transmission
https://ausmini.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=22294		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  JC [ Thu Sep 07, 2006 12:23 pm ]
Post subject:  CVT - Constantly variable transmission
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/cvt.htm

Not engine conversion related but a damn good read nonetheless.

I started out reading about ordinary manual gearboxs (well, column shifted manual gearboxs) then worked my way through the auto gearbox to then get to the CVT. Truely an incredible idea.

This site is an awesome site to bookmark if there is anything you want to read about.

JC
Author:  Morris 1100 [ Thu Sep 07, 2006 5:51 pm ]
Post subject: 
I don't know if you have ever used a CVT but they are horrible! If you lift the foot slightly in a corner your power just disappears!
:shock: You sort of have to wind the rubber band back up again! The engine pulley returns to the idle position and the driven pulley stays at the right spot, then when you power on the engine pulley has to close up again.
To drive it fast you need to left foot brake while holding the right foot down.
A manual gearbox is much more efficient.
I did a little rally stuff with a CVT a long time ago and it was rubbish! :lol:
Author:  JC [ Thu Sep 07, 2006 6:39 pm ]
Post subject: 
How long ago Morris? I think its an amzing idea. Obviously with further development they will overcome 'issues'.
Author:  Morris 1100 [ Thu Sep 07, 2006 6:44 pm ]
Post subject: 
They have been developing CVT for 45 years and they have not improved much. Maybe with full computer control they would be a bit better but they still have a loss of efficiency compared to a manual box. (they consume more power just to run the thing)

I mucked around with them in the late 80's. :wink:
Author:  feralsprint [ Thu Sep 07, 2006 7:57 pm ]
Post subject: 
The Nissan Micra ran a CVT tran and they were very good for a small style auto type, much better than a auto but like auto boxes there is a power loss over a manual but better than a full auto, if you get a chance to try one I think it will be a surprise :D

Jon
Author:  drmini in aust [ Thu Sep 07, 2006 7:59 pm ]
Post subject: 
1st car ever to use this CVT idea was DAF, back in the 60s. Jack Brabham built a Formula 1 or 2 race car with one, but they didn't persevere with it.... :lol:
Author:  Morris 1100 [ Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:14 pm ]
Post subject: 
drmini in aust wrote:
1st car ever to use this CVT idea was DAF, back in the 60s. Jack Brabham built a Formula 1 or 2 race car with one, but they didn't persevere with it.... :lol:
Brabham built a couple of F3's with the DAF Variomatic (CVT) but he never raced them. According to Ron Tauranac they were not worth the trouble.

They would be OK for a city car, better than a full auto and easier to drive than a manual. Probably a nice thing for mum to drive. 8)
Author:  KLAS [ Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:21 pm ]
Post subject: 
Rover offered one for nearly every model they had, very nice to drive in a Rover 25
Author:  bnicho [ Fri Sep 08, 2006 1:24 pm ]
Post subject: 
feralsprint wrote:
The Nissan Micra ran a CVT tran and they were very good for a small style auto type, much better than a auto but like auto boxes there is a power loss over a manual but better than a full auto, if you get a chance to try one I think it will be a surprise :D

Jon


Yeah, I've been thinking about trying a Micra CVT driveline in the Moke. The Micra driveline is very compact, about the same size as a Suzi GTi. But will I ever do it? Probably not. :oops:
Author:  glenno [ Tue Sep 12, 2006 2:14 pm ]
Post subject: 
My partner owns a 1998 Rover 200 with a K series 1600 twin cam in it....CVT and its one of the quickest things you could want to drive........
And no the Torque doesn't disappear when you lift your foot......
Its very peppy and cruises well on the open road....120kmhr at 3K revs...
depending on how hard you squeeze as too how hard it picks up......
No hesitation in pulling out to pass in it.........
You dont feel any changes as in the autos.......

And yes....I've looked and measured and i think it would fit........ :wink:

Glenno
Author:  Joske [ Tue Mar 27, 2007 8:53 pm ]
Post subject: 
Hi, guys, I have been reading your ideas about cvt.
I have been working for over 20 years in develpoment on CVT, rubber belt type, metal belt type and cones.
I see ou are interested in the metal cvt, as used for the metro, 200, 400 and MGF. The metro, 200 and 400 are hydraulic controlled types and are very easy to modify. The 25, 45 and MGF have electronic control (step functions) and are difficult to adapt in an other car, as it needs to be adapted on the vehicle electronics.
The hydraulic controlled types can be modified very easily for competition. Just a pressure gauge and know which shim and bolt you have to adjust in the valve body. The production transmission can be modified up to 240 Nm engine torque, of course with limited lifetime (about 2 races)
I have build race transmissions for a dutch team from 1994 till 2003. In 2001 we became belgian champion rallye cross 2 litre engine. More info can be found on www.wilteurlings.nl. However, the site is not in english.

I have raced myself in hillclimb with the cvt. In a formula Ford Van Diemen chassis I have build the Rover 200 driveline. Quite fun to drive.
Since 3 months I moved from Belgium to Sydney, Kellyville Ridge. If somebody wants to know more about the CVT, how to use it or how to race with it, you can contact me. I will try to help.
I have seen an Engineer at Rover (about 5 years ago) who modified his mini, with the metro 1.4 K16 engine and CVT. He used it for slalom racing.

Regards, Jo
Author:  sgc [ Tue Mar 27, 2007 9:54 pm ]
Post subject: 
When I had my Bini and it went in for service (or recall, they had *lots* on the early cars..) they'd always give me a CVT loan car, and what an utter piece of S#$T that was. I would never, ever, inflict that transmission on anyone, intentionally or otherwise.

I'm as big a fan of tech and clever ideas as anyone, and logic says the CVT should be superior to a slushbox auto and even a trad manual, but my god, those things are truly horrible to drive.
Author:  9YaTaH [ Tue Mar 27, 2007 10:06 pm ]
Post subject:  Iced
Volvo 360 = CVT
Author:  sgc [ Tue Mar 27, 2007 11:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Iced
9YaTaH wrote:
Volvo 360 = CVT


Say no more :lol: :lol: :lol:
Author:  JC [ Wed Mar 28, 2007 8:14 am ]
Post subject: 
Joske wrote:
Hi, guys, I have been reading your ideas about cvt.
I have been working for over 20 years in develpoment on CVT, rubber belt type, metal belt type and cones.
I see ou are interested in the metal cvt, as used for the metro, 200, 400 and MGF. The metro, 200 and 400 are hydraulic controlled types and are very easy to modify. The 25, 45 and MGF have electronic control (step functions) and are difficult to adapt in an other car, as it needs to be adapted on the vehicle electronics.
The hydraulic controlled types can be modified very easily for competition. Just a pressure gauge and know which shim and bolt you have to adjust in the valve body. The production transmission can be modified up to 240 Nm engine torque, of course with limited lifetime (about 2 races)
I have build race transmissions for a dutch team from 1994 till 2003. In 2001 we became belgian champion rallye cross 2 litre engine. More info can be found on www.wilteurlings.nl. However, the site is not in english.

I have raced myself in hillclimb with the cvt. In a formula Ford Van Diemen chassis I have build the Rover 200 driveline. Quite fun to drive.
Since 3 months I moved from Belgium to Sydney, Kellyville Ridge. If somebody wants to know more about the CVT, how to use it or how to race with it, you can contact me. I will try to help.
I have seen an Engineer at Rover (about 5 years ago) who modified his mini, with the metro 1.4 K16 engine and CVT. He used it for slalom racing.

Regards, Jo


Welcome Joske,

Stick around, you sound like a handy bloke to have know.

JC
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC + 10 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/