Honda Car Forum

Elbert <elbert.clarke@**adelphia.net> wrote in message news:<kj4pm05lbj3591ktffbql4tocm56g3vk7m@4ax.com>. ..
> On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 17:59:57 +0000 (UTC),
> dold@XReXXHXXCi.usenet.us.com wrote:
>
> >Mark <dsffdsa@adsgdsf.com> wrote:
> >> My brother got a '98 HX with CVT this summer with 108k miles. I drove it
> >> on some highway trips while fixing it up for him and was impressed. I
> >> thought it had really nice power and I got into the low 40's for mpg. If
> >> you keep it tuned up, with the manual you should be able to do better.
> >
> >The CVT is such a wonderful device in my Hybrid that I would seriously
> >consider it for the HX. Some Civic Hybrid owners report getting better
> >mileage with the CVT than the 5 speed, but I think that has to do with the
> >odd RPM-torque needs of the Hybrid, and might not apply to the HX.
>
> I've not heard too many people that say they like the CVT in the
> civics, but then again I've only talked to a few guys and the service
> manager of the local honda shop.
>
> Elbert
>
> ----
> elbert.clarke@**us.army.mil
> remove the ** to email

I would hope, and assume, that Honda has improved the CVT in recent
years, but we had a 97 HX and had to dump it after 60k miles. Yes it
got great gas mileage, and yes it had quite a bit of zip for a 4
cylinder, but it had severe tranny problems (minimum $1500, up to
$4500) to repair. Based on what I was told by both the dealership in
my area and the local Aamco, the CVT trannys are not very plentiful,
and the parts can be very hard to come by. I'd opt for the 5 speed.

dold@XReXXHXXCi.usenet.us.com wrote:
> jim beam <nospam@example.net> wrote:
>
>
>>you're talking apples & oranges. your vehicle is driven by an electric
>>motor - you don't have a variable ratio transmission because you don't
>>need it. the rpm's you're looking at are for the electric generator -
>>which is mechanically entirely separate from the mechanical drive - and
>>they stay fairly constant. why this is grounds to criticize variable
>>ratio transmissions is something you still have to explain.
>
>
> Three things wrong with your reply:
> 1- Unless you are calling a four speed a variable ratio, you are
> misunderstanding my position. I favor the CVT over a normal automatic.

which i can understand - i've owned a vehicle with a cvt - it's very
smooth. but your statement was that normal automatics "sucked power".
you've not explained that, especially in the case of a honda.

> 2- I do have a CVT: Constantly variable Transmission.
> 3- The electric motor is not "entirely separate from the mechanical drive".
> It is tightly sandwiched between the engine and transmission and cannot
> turn independently. The RPMs that I am observing are most certainly the
> engine RPM. The electric motor never drives the car without the gas
> engine.

seems you're correct on this point!

>
> <http://automobiles.honda.com/models/model_overview.asp?ModelName=Civic+Hybrid&bhcp=1>
> "Continuously Variable Transmission (CVT) Standard "
>
> "Specifically, the Civic Hybrid utilizes Honda's Integrated Motor Assist
> (IMA) technology, which uses a 1.3-liter VTEC engine for primary power,
> then an ultra-thin electric motor provides added power."
>