boominup Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 (edited) I am getting ready to trade my 06 Five Hundred LTD, AWD (BTY the best car I've ever owned). This was my 1st experience ever with a CVT tranny and living in the southern edge of the snowbelt like I do, I couldn't be more impressed with the performance and reliability of this unit. I'm waiting for the launch of the 2010 Taurus and the Fusion and will make up my mind then which way to go but why did Ford drop the CVT?? We have a few of these units amongst family and friends and they are all in agreement with me that it will be sorely missed. Any knowledge on why it was dropped? I heard it was because it couldn't take the greater torque of the 3.5 but if I'm not mistaken, Nissan uses it with their V6s. THANX for any input. Brian Edited March 13, 2009 by boominup Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ravager Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 I Don't remember where I heard it from but I thought Ford was planning to use the transmission in the Hybrid Escape? Great transmission I agree, I was disappointed when it was dropped on the Taurus X. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boominup Posted March 13, 2009 Author Share Posted March 13, 2009 I Don't remember where I heard it from but I thought Ford was planning to use the transmission in the Hybrid Escape? Great transmission I agree, I was disappointed when it was dropped on the Taurus X. I just hope the 6 spd is as seamless as the CVT. It seems to keep that little 3.0 in the right powerband. Brian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Reason the CVT was dropped was the price of the unit vs a 6 speed Auto that provided the same MPGs as the CVT You'll only find CVT's in Hybrid models now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GT40 2 Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Ford still uses them in the Escape hybrid. The upcoming Fusion hybrid will have one too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blksn8k2 Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Ford still uses them in the Escape hybrid. The upcoming Fusion hybrid will have one too. Yep, this from Ford's 2010 Fusion Hybrid press release: "The next-generation hybrid system features: • New 2.5-liter 4-cylinder engine (155 horsepower/136 lb.-ft. of torque) running the proven Atkinson cycle mated to an electronically-controlled continuously variable transmission or e-CVT. " I assume the CVT allows for a more seamless transition from electric to gas than would be possible even with an automatic transmission and it probably works better with the power characteristics of an electric motor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boominup Posted March 13, 2009 Author Share Posted March 13, 2009 Ford still uses them in the Escape hybrid. The upcoming Fusion hybrid will have one too. I'll be testing an 09 Taurus w/ AWD this weekend. I should get a pretty good idea of how the 2010 should feel. THANX guys for the responses. It is a definate that I'll be trading for a 2010. Brian Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macattak1 Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 How much more is a comparible CVT? Are not some Nissans models Only CVTs? If Ford moved to CVTs for more vehicles and made them standard would that reduce costs enough? Would people hate that or get over it quick...if they even had a clue that they were test driving a CVT Explorer, Taurus, Flex, Escape, etc.? Would not a CVT in a Stang make it that much quicker? Or can not just not take that kind of power? Peace and Blessings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rkisler Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 I am getting ready to trade my 06 Five Hundred LTD, AWD (BTY the best car I've ever owned). This was my 1st experience ever with a CVT tranny and living in the southern edge of the snowbelt like I do, I couldn't be more impressed with the performance and reliability of this unit. I'm waiting for the launch of the 2010 Taurus and the Fusion and will make up my mind then which way to go but why did Ford drop the CVT?? We have a few of these units amongst family and friends and they are all in agreement with me that it will be sorely missed. Any knowledge on why it was dropped? I heard it was because it couldn't take the greater torque of the 3.5 but if I'm not mistaken, Nissan uses it with their V6s. THANX for any input. Brian As the other posters have mentioned, the CVT that was used in the 500 has been discontinued. It was a joint venture program with ZF but, as silvrsvt mentions, there was no performance advantage over a 6-speed, but a cost disadvantage. I don't think you're going to see CVT's on non-hybrid models from Ford. Transmissions will be 6-speeds across the board, and smaller cars (Fiesta/Focus) will be dual clutch for added efficiency. The CVT is used on the hybrids for a good reason. They are produced by Aisin Warner in Japan, the same company that supplies transmissions to Toyota for their hybrids. Aisin has good reliability, has developed a good package, and has good economies of scale. However, the fact that they are a Toyota-associated company has caused some issues. When you drive the new Taurus with the 3.5l and 6-speed, I think you will be pleased. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StapRoboSitter Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Reason the CVT was dropped was the price of the unit vs a 6 speed Auto that provided the same MPGs as the CVT You'll only find CVT's in Hybrid models now Ford's Market research also showed that people were weirded out by the feel of the CVT... They weren't comfortable without the lil bump of a gear shift!! Combined with the Cost... and people's reluctance to try "new" technology... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waymondospiff Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 (edited) I can't be bothered to look up the fellow's name now, but recently a Ford higher up (not Farley) was on Autoline Detroit and was asked specifically about CVTs and that the appearance of dropping CVTs as taking a step backward. The engineering fellow replied that CVTs are efficient because they keep engines operating at peak efficiency (the transmission changes ratios instead of the engine changing RPM.) However, Ford is engineering their new engines to be more efficient across the entire operating band. Since the engines no longer have a peak efficiency point, it makes less sense to have a transmission that maintains a constant RPM at peak efficiency. As others have said, CVTs are (apparently) also more expensive than the Aisin or JV 6-speeds and without a gain in efficiency there is little justification for the CVT. Ford is making/has made the transition to 6-speeds and will be introducing another high-tech transmission (the dual-clutch, all automatic, no torque convertor) as cost-effective ways to increase efficiency. I agree with the original poster, I like CVTs, but if they offer no performance advantage then why bother? Scott edited so that sentences would make sense. Edited March 13, 2009 by waymondospiff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Reynolds Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 ^ To add to the above.... CVTs require somewhat costly fluid changes at specified intervals (otherwise you have a ticking time bomb). Considering how most folks maintain vehicles, it's probably a good thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Yep, this from Ford's 2010 Fusion Hybrid press release: "The next-generation hybrid system features: • New 2.5-liter 4-cylinder engine (155 horsepower/136 lb.-ft. of torque) running the proven Atkinson cycle mated to an electronically-controlled continuously variable transmission or e-CVT. " I assume the CVT allows for a more seamless transition from electric to gas than would be possible even with an automatic transmission and it probably works better with the power characteristics of an electric motor. The e-CVT is a very unique transmission, not at all like the CVT that was in the Five Hundred. It is necessary in order to seamless "blend" power from both the engine and the electric motor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 I can't be bothered to look up the fellow's name now, but recently a Ford higher up (not Farley) was on Autoline Detroit and was asked specifically about CVTs and that the appearance of dropping CVTs as taking a step backward. The engineering fellow replied that CVTs are efficient because they keep engines operating at peak efficiency (the transmission changes ratios instead of the engine changing RPM.) However, Ford is engineering their new engines to be more efficient across the entire operating band. Since the engines no longer have a peak efficiency point, it makes less sense to have a transmission that maintains a constant RPM at peak efficiency. That was Gerhard Schmidt. I'm glad you bought his BS ! They were unable to keep the engine operating at a constant RPM and give good performance anyway The truth is the CVT was EXTREMELY expensive (maybe 50-100% more expensive than a 6 speed) ! Partially because Ford had to pay a licensing fee for each one that was built. The current GM-Ford joint venture is much less expensive and can be easily scaled up and down as power output demands (6F35, 6F50, 6F55). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 (edited) ^ To add to the above.... CVTs require somewhat costly fluid changes at specified intervals (otherwise you have a ticking time bomb). Considering how most folks maintain vehicles, it's probably a good thing. I'll bet most trans shops avoid them like the plague ! Getting parts in a couple of years will be next to impossible. It is still too early to tell how durable they are, especially when required maintenance is overlooked ! :rolleyes: Edited March 13, 2009 by theoldwizard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silvrsvt Posted March 13, 2009 Share Posted March 13, 2009 Ford's Market research also showed that people were weirded out by the feel of the CVT... They weren't comfortable without the lil bump of a gear shift!! Combined with the Cost... and people's reluctance to try "new" technology... I had a Caliber rental for a couple weeks with a CVT and it sounded like the engine was always winded out when driving, making the car sound like it was powered by some pissed off Hamsters all the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rmc523 Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 Caliber....was powered by some pissed off Hamsters all the time. Uh, that's actually Chrysler's new powertrain option...they couldn't afford any other technologies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noah Harbinger Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 That was Gerhard Schmidt. I'm glad you bought his BS ! They were unable to keep the engine operating at a constant RPM and give good performance anyway The truth is the CVT was EXTREMELY expensive (maybe 50-100% more expensive than a 6 speed) ! Partially because Ford had to pay a licensing fee for each one that was built. The current GM-Ford joint venture is much less expensive and can be easily scaled up and down as power output demands (6F35, 6F50, 6F55). Then... why wasn't the CVT in the Fivehundred markedly better in either performance or fuel economy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 Then... why wasn't the CVT in the Fivehundred markedly better in either performance or fuel economy? Because it was not significantly better at either performance or fuel economy ! This was truly a case of "putting all of you eggs in the WRONG BASKET" ! For years the "theoretical" folks kept saying how much better the fuel economy could be it they could only operate the engine at a constant speed. In theory a CVT allows this, but not in practice (sorry I don't know the details myself). Someone got a big promotion for pushing this through, without adequate testing to see if the claims were actually true. The joint venture between Ford and ZF broke down half way through the project. ZF packed up its things, sold their half of the plant back to Ford, left the drawing for the transmission and went back to Germany. Thank God that Ford was able to hook up with GM on the current 6F family. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transitman Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 (edited) I currently own a Freestyle (although I've traded it in and I'm waiting for my 2010 Fusion to arrive) and love the performance of the CVT. Under ideal conditions I've gotten as much as 36 mpg and consistently average in summer 20/28 mpg. That's not bad for a vehicle that weighs over 4000 lbs. One of Ford's mistakes was to couple the CVT with one engine in only two vehicle models. Tack on a lack of advertising and average styling with the 500 and FS and it's hard to turn significant profit. I traded my FS because of plummeting value and a concern with CVT long term parts availability, service issues and reliability. There's no guarantee my new 6 speed will be more reliable, but it is more common. Correction: ... weighs over 5000 lbs, 5380 according to the B-pillar sticker. Edited March 14, 2009 by transitman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sterling Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 The sticker on the car does not give the weight of the vehicle. It is labelled GVWR for Gross Vehicle Weight Rating. That is the maximum weight that the vehicle is rated for when fully loaded with passengers and gear. The correct weight for the Freestyle is just over 4000 pounds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theoldwizard Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 (edited) In the industry, cost is king, because low cost leads to high profitability. 36 mpg on a 4000+ lbs car is VERY impressive ! Edited March 14, 2009 by theoldwizard Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
transitman Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 I didn't read the sticker that closely and it did seem a little heavy, 4000+ is what I remember the weight being. Perhaps if Ford had advertised the mpg more the CVT would still be available, at least as an option. It did take some getting used to but I enjoy the seamless gear ratio changes. That 36 mpg was driving westbound across South Dakota with a tail wind and, terrain as flat as, well, South Dakota. I'll miss the utility of the FS, I bought it because I wanted a "station wagon". (My apologies to Freestyle owners who hate the term station wagon). My needs have changed and I'm looking forward to the style and economy of my Fusion SEL, I4, 6 auto. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralph Greene Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 (edited) My wife's (all the cars in our family are my wife's) 2005 FWD Montego with 3.0 and 6 speed Aisin is also an excellent combination. It also gets 30 MPG or so on highway on long trips. I think you will be more than satisfied with the 6 speed automatic in new models. It's also one of the best cars we ever owned. No complaints at all. Conidering the economy, I never once thought it was under powered. These vehicles make excellent used car buys. Edited March 14, 2009 by Ralph Greene Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
92merc Posted March 14, 2009 Share Posted March 14, 2009 I have a 2007 Montego with the 3.0 and older 6speed. I've heard from some test drivers of my same car that they though they were "sluggish". I think the electronic throttle is what throws some people off. Once you drop the hammer on the gas, the car really wakes up. I would bet the CVT does the same. But I purposely didn't by an AWD because I had concerns with the CVT. With it not being a "mainstream" transmission, I thought any repairs could be costly. So I'm glad they went to a new 6 speed. And none of the car journalists have knocked the new 6 speed. Even the journalist places I don't like. So it can't be half bad. I'd have no problem with one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.