CVP transmissions

sure once they fix the issues
such as wear, terrible programming, low power handling.

the chevy volt had the best system. just make use a electric transmission, no wasted power.

why cant you see this is best? yes you op.

>>17867911
This is CVP not CVT

>The beltless design and mechanical clamping system represent a paradigm shift in CVT robustness. Similar to proven ball bearing technology, the VariGlide planetary variator demonstrates equivalent durability characteristics, and eliminates damage associated with belt slip in conventional belt CVTs.

File: 1470287703243.jpg (2MB, 3000x2400px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3000x2400px

>>17867924
dont care, volt has the best most simple one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N34pxHDoGO4

>>17867931
>most simple one
>see pic related
Nope

>>17867931
Even electric motor needs transmission anon

>A case in point is the primary power source in electric vehicles, the electric motor, which shares some common disadvantages with the internal combustion engine. One of these disadvantages is that both the electric motor and its drive/inverter, as well as the internal combustion engine are not equally efficient under different loads and speeds.

why don't we have a continuously variable transmission that doesn't rely on friction?

>>17867893
only if it comes in a clutchless analog manual and can handle sports car levels of torque.

>>17868153
>that doesn't rely on friction
all transmissions rely on friction. its why clutches are rated for only so much torque

>>17868167
come on my dude, you know what I meant.

>>17868178
Any automatic transmission with a torque converter relies on friction

>>17868178
>To efficiently transfer torque, a thin layer of traction fluid flows between the balls. This traction fluid becomes momentarily rigid, allowing the torque to transfer between the balls and discs without slipping. With numerous powerpaths and no abrupt ratio changes, VariGlide technology provides an infinite number of gear ratios for improved shifting, driver comfort, and even greater efficiency when compared to automatic transmissions and CVTs.

>>17868186
yeah, to change the gears (clutches, belts...) but not to transmit power from the front of the transmission to the back, that is all gears

>>17868178
i think you have issue with CVT's being belt driven, not necessarily the friction part.

>>17868202
>but not to transmit power from the front of the transmission to the back, that is all gears

>A torque converter is a type of fluid coupling which transfers rotating power from a prime mover, like an internal combustion engine, to a rotating driven load.

it literally relies on the fluid friction barrier to convert torque and transfer it to the drive shaft

>>17867893
>160 hp max

dropped. come back to me when it can handle 300.

>>17868214
not in the transmission itself

the problem I have with CVTs is that you can't upgrade the amount of torque it can handle with a simple change of a clutch like you can a manual

>>17868224
>the problem I have with CVTs is that you can't upgrade the amount of torque it can handle with a simple change of a clutch like you can a manual
neither can you in any automatic transmission. Good luck changing out an ENTIRE torque converter to "upgrade" your torque allowance.

>>17868219
They can handle any hp by making the balls bigger.

>>17868224
what exactly stops me from giving my CVT a larger stronger belt with two stronger/larger pullies?

>>17868189
that sounds like its going to generate a fuckload of heat

>>17868231
the torque converter isn't the torque bottleneck though. the limiting factor is the strength of the gears and shaft. You wouldn't see many automatics in drag racing if they didn't have a mechanical (non slipping) connection

>>17868242
You know how much heat it generates by looking at the efficiency. And since they claim 10% higher efficiency than belt CVT, it should generate less heat.

>>17868242
probably not, I imagine regular transmission fluid would work.

The friction between the balls and the rings is very low like any ball bearing joint

>>17868240
i'm going to do what my machine design professor told me to do. draw the force diagram and you will see.

>>17868251
No one gives a shit about what the bottleneck is in a transmission. You magically asserting that "I can upgrade my clutch, you can't your CVT" is some copout because you can simply replace any part with a better part.

>>17868258
>I learned in 12th grade physics muh force diagrams

how can you put so many words in a post and say so fucking little? No one fucking cares about torque limits on some automatic transmission.

>>17868240
the parts don't exist, and if they did, it wouldn't be as simple as changing out a clutch, you'd have to open the transmission itself. you'll probably end up fucking something up too since they aren't simple in the slightest.

>>17868262
>I can upgrade my clutch
I can
>you can't your CVT
you can't
that's the problem

>>17868268
>the parts don't exist, and if they did, it wouldn't be as simple as changing out a clutch, you'd have to open the transmission itself. you'll probably end up fucking something up too since they aren't simple in the slightest.
Congrats, thats all automatic transmissions in a nutshell.

>its a problem
There is no problem.
No one gives a fuck about trying to upgrade their automatic transmissions. This transmission isn't designed for performance, its designed for efficiency in consumer automobiles.

So you bitching about how this is such an issue that friction is an issue, torque limits are an issue and not being able to swap transmission parts are an issue is completely baseless and pointless

>>17868278
>Congrats, thats all automatic transmissions in a nutshell.
most of them don't need upgrading since they don't rely on a belt that slips at more than 200hp

>This transmission isn't designed for performance
it's funny because they are capable of transferring massive amounts of torque, not because they were designed to handle so much, it is just inherent in its design. It's no accident that you see so many 4 speed torque converter automatics in drag racing

File: 1494005696571.png (6KB, 472x508px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 472x508px

>>17868278
it seems like you went off half cocked and are arguing for the sake of it when your ideas are impractical or simply unrealistic

>>17868298
>most of them don't need upgrading since they don't rely on a belt that slips at more than 200hp
This is false, A Nissan Maxima and Honda Accord have tons more than 270hp and they have CVT's and they don't slip. Nice try making up stupid shit.

>>17868308
>ideas are impractical or simply unrealistic
says the guy who thinks its an issue he can't swap a cvt because he thinks torque slip is an issue that no one has bitched about ever.

File: 1497842208788.jpg (114KB, 862x1024px) Image search: [Google]

114KB, 862x1024px

>>17868319
>270hp
I can feel the power from here lmao

>>17868327
>200hp is way too much for a CVT it'll slip way too much
>heres two prominent cars that have greater than 200hp with CVT's that don't slip
>LOL WOW 270 THATS NOT A LOT, doesn't count fake news

>>17868298
>>This transmission isn't designed for performance
>it's funny because they are capable of transferring massive amounts of torque
Says the guy who thought CVT's will slip after 200hp but now they're designed for massive amounts of torque

>>17868319
Current Accord V6 is a regular automatic 6spd transmission, only the 4cyl is CVT which is 190hp.
Also Nissan is shit.

File: 1490212926497.png (7KB, 128x128px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 128x128px

>>17868319
>says the guy who
nah im a random guy observing the back and forth

also currently a cvt cannot take any decent torque and thats one of the main problems

>>17868334
>the distance to the store is 20 miles
>no you retard, it's 27 miles! huge difference!

>>17868339
I was talking about a 4 speed torque converter automatic in the part where I said "4 speed torque converter automatic"

>>17868334
also the accord v6 doesnt get a cvt. the i4 that maxes out at 185 hp (138 kW) to 181 lb·ft (245 N·m) does

>>17868345
Oh so the altima doesn't count because you think its shit?

>>17868355
the new 2018 Accord is a 2.0L i4 turbod that makes well over 200hp

>>17868349
>>the distance to the store is 20 miles
>>no you retard, it's 27 miles! huge difference!
70hp is a huge difference from your retarded mouth who says 200hp is too much the CVT will slip

So if the altima with a 270hp engine doesn't slip and the new accord with a CVT and 270hp doesn't slip then what is this made up nonsense that "anything more than 200hp will make a CVT slip"?

>>17868397
>So if the altima with a 270hp engine doesn't slip and the new accord with a CVT and 270hp doesn't slip then what is this made up nonsense that "anything more than 200hp will make a CVT slip"?

>honda accord
>cvt
>270hp

pick two

>>17868418
>>honda accord
>>cvt
>>270hp
>pick two
pick 3

the new accord with the 2.0L has the same engine and turbo as the type-r is reported to make the same power as the old accords did and they'll have CVT's

so yea, tell me more about this "if it has more than 200hp the CVT will slip" because it sounds like you have absolutely no evidence

>>17868433
the accord will have a CVT option sure, but not with 270hp lmao

Didn't someone just announce had developed a new belt material for CVT that was rated over a half a million miles at 300HP or some ridiculous shit like that?

>>17868438
says you, Nissan already does it.

File: 1498594564667.png (4KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

4KB, 225x225px

>>17868397
>the new 2018 Accord is a 2.0L i4 turbod
also a 1.5 that will mos likely get the cvt since there no plan to have a v6 and a 10spd autotragic is on the table

the simple fact is cvts dont take torque with the current design. this is one of the biggest flaws so unless you have a new design or materials then stop chatting shit
pointing out that anons throwaway figure of 200 isnt the max isnt an argument especially when the nissan cvt is apparently a hot slippery mess
https://www.consumeraffairs.com/automotive/nissan_altima.html

>>17868465
>pointing out that anons throwaway figure of 200 isnt the max isnt an argument
oh so now its a throwaway figure because before you were using it as some sort of magical softcap and anything found that it was above that was just fake and doesn't count so you divert and post some consumerreports garbage.

>>17868465
the Subaru WRX Premium and Limited version has a CVT option with well over 200hp

So theres a second car that does it adequately.

File: 1504810006943.png (28KB, 429x459px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 429x459px

>>17868477
>oh so now
no it was immediately obvious to everyone but you he wasnt giving a definitive limit

>you
nope not me

>consumer reports garbage
>hey my cvt assploded
>FUCK YOU LIAR
k

>>17868496
true but its one of the most powerful cars with a cvt that ive seem

>>17868532
>if I Google hard enough all those cvt cars with an amount of power above an arbitrary amount just don't count.

File: 1501689305085.png (159KB, 519x480px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 519x480px

>>17868555
you seem to think that the issues with the nissan are limited and just being used as a dismissal when it it a simple fact that cvts currently do not take torque well. they work just fine or dare i say excellently in scooters but it is not at the same point that torque converter autos, manuals, dcts etc are.

there is no arbitrary amount because anons throwaway figure was never definitive. 250 lb-ft isnt extraordinary when a 2l diesel can give you the same. if cvt is to be considered a viable option then it should be up to the task.

you currently cannot build a cvt for high torque applications. simple fact which isnt even up for debate but do continue to argue because in your head a frictionless cvt( >>17868153) that can withstand massive torque makes sense."just add another pulley" right? theres nothing wrong with cvts right?

>>17868153
We do, its in toyota/ford hybrids. Its an ecvt, it uses two electric motors, and by varying how power flows between the two electric motors and ice, it varies the power to the wheels. No clutches, no friction surfaces, no high presure hydraulics, no belts, no torque convertor, always engaged, nothing to break besides a motor burning out or a bearing wearing out which are unlikely. Go on youtube and look up how the prius transmission works, its amazing. Power flows between MG1 and MG2 and moves the car, but the downside of this transmission type is that a high voltage battery is needed for it to function, the car must be a hybrid to have an ecvt of this type. I drive a 2010 fusion hybrid, and i chose it mainly because it has this type of ecvt. I believe the Chevy volt has a similar transmission.

>>17868796
>using electromagnetism for transmission of power
that is a really fucking good idea. Probably loads of power loss due to heat though

>>17868837
Similar or better efficiency than a conventional auto i believe, worse than a manual though i would think. the prius manages 40+mpg and the fusion hybrid does 6-8more mpg than the regular fusion. I wonder how much of that mpg gain is from the Atkinson cycle engine, engine stop and start, and regeneration braking though. I think i read that the newer chevy volt transmissions have clutches that can engage to lock the ecvt in a fixed ratio for highway cruzing more efficiency

>>17868251
also you need to keep the bands happy that grab the gears.

>>17868224
Almost anything worthwhile you can find an oem uprated tranmission.

for example the 4R100W bolts up to where a 4R70W goes in fords.

>>17868796
Actually the ecvt is not all that efficient, the CVP should be at least 5% more efficient.