How's the CVT in this?

You may say CVT is the worst transmission, but until you've driven an EasyTronic you don't know shit. That's depression in gear form.

No, CVT is not garbage.
CVTs used as an alternative to traditional ATs with bullshit artificial 'shift points' are garbage.
Mechanically CVTs are gods gift to mankind. Too bad nobody wants to build them the way the numbers fucking tell them to. 'Muh consumer product.'

>European girl driving her manual Fiat
leave mjet out of this

If we still made cars that were sub 100hp then CVTs would be workable

Belt CVTs are shit-tier and what are being pushed. They have shift points because they die incredibly early deaths otherwise.

To cut through all the bullshit in this thread... I have a 3.6 outback wirh the cvt. It functions perfectly. I have friends that have legacies with well over 100k on the clocks without any issues. There is very little report of any significant issues with the subaru cvts. That said, I've driven a new wrx with and without the cvts and found it pretty satisfying with both transmissions.

The WRX CVTs have been proven to be unable to handle abuse of almost any kind, the fuck are you on about?

Shit, just like every other production CVT.

Kek
>BTFO

...

nice

Subaru cvts are gutless and slow as fuck. Even in the wrx. You can't even chirp tires in it. And I drive then every fucking day. Pic fucking related.

gutter tier trash like the DCT focus'

>Subaru cvts are gutless and slow as fuck.
GEE IT ALMOST SOUNDS LIKE CVTS WERE MADE FOR GETTING GAS MILEAGE INSTEAD OF POWER HMMMM I WONDER WHY

>Subaru hires people this fucking dumb

>sporty trim of vehicle with large rally history
>THE CVT BELONGS IN THERE SO IT CAN GET GOOD GAS MILEAGE AND NOT BE SPORTY AT ALL

You fucking downy, the discussion pertains mostly to the wrx and not a base impreza.

When you buy a WRX, you're not buying it for the gas mileage.

>gas mileage.
but that's why people buy 4-cyl turbos

The new CVT WRX is even advertised with dumbass safety features like lane-departure warnings, which aren't a thing for the manual. They know exactly the kind of faggot who would buy an auto.

All CVT are inherently shit. I test drove one and it's a fuckin snooze fest and tries to "simulate" the feel of real gears

>rage comic
>>>/9gag/
>>>/facebook/

If its anything like the CVT in the Crosstrek/XV; unengaging, loud and hard to get used to.

Pros
>smooth
>feels quite direct when engaging and going up hills

Cons
>loud
>cannot engine brake for shit
>doesn't do much for speed due to how its "geared"
>apparenly not too reliable

I suppose it would be ok with more power and if you live somewhere flat, but with a lot of mountain roads where power is needed uphill and engine braking downhill its a really shit option

>implying the 2005 model wasn't perfect

*2007

Well i like the 2005 version. Buy they changed the lights and grille to that god awful daewoo looking thing just afterwards

> pic unrelated

>retard-face WRX is good and hawkeye is bad
No, dude, no.

hawkeye looks like fucking shit

>giant fucking nose for no reason
>even if it didn't have the nose, ANGRY HEADLIGHTS

If any car deserves angry headlights, it's a sedan that's been turned into a performance monster by some mad scientists. And what "nose"? The nose of any car's "face" is just the badge.

Shit like any CVT in anything.

drove one for too long,
I liked taking it up to the really curvy mountain roads because you could keep it in manual mode and down/upshift at the same time as you were accelerating. not as thrilling as doing it in a manual car but you knew you're going fast

motor and turbo are great, but I'm starting to hear a little bit about people having turbo seal problems in the high mileage and with a few add-ons. Glad I'm out of there now

oh and if you do a transmission fluid swap to keep it from dying, it's about $300 in just fluid alone. no joke.

>putting a fuel economy transmission on a high compression turbo 4 banger
>still gets 21 MPG
>damage controlling this hard
Retard.

>oh and if you do a transmission fluid swap to keep it from dying, it's about $300 in just fluid alone. no joke.
whats the service interval for the fluid change. My lancer had to do it every 30k and it still shit the bead.

>not implying any correlation between mitsu jatco cvts and subaru's cvt.

Why would you drive a cvt wrx?
Fucking christ

/thread

Short and simple answer. If you plan on modding at all the cvt is trash. It will.grenade and die if you try and put more power to it.
If you just want a dd with a hood scoop and a turbo that's prolly fun to drive sometimes I would.think it's not bad.

But it's fucking like 2 grand cheaper to buy a stick why would you want the cvt?

>buying a performance-ish car with a cvt

I didnt even know retards like this exist, but America always proves me wrong.

Did you assume every reasonable poster in this thread was not an american?

Of course not, but only in the US will you find *any* people at all that are willing to buy such a car with cvt.

Is ok but you cant mod it because it cant handle the extra power.

>How's the CVT in this?
Unremarkable. The artificial shift points in it don't feel like a traditional manual transmission or a DCT automatic would. Also cannot take a of the fraction abuse typical to the WRX and the standard manual has issues with this as is.

If you have your heart set on a WRX I'd recommend the manual, even if traffic is an issue. You're still stuck with something that still drinks premium fuel like a pig only without it's usual performance.

If you just want something to commute with but like how it looks just stick a hood scoop on an Impreza and call it a day.

If you've got the 4 cylinder engine, they say that it's got lifetime fluid. If you've got the 6 cylinder, it's 30k, like you said.

Yesterday, I fucked up, and drained all the fluid out of mine (Legacy with CVT) accidentally. I was just going to start a thread about it, but if you guys know some specifics about putting fluid back in, I'm going to piggyback off of this thread. And seriously, am I stuck paying $300? I didn't think it would be THAT bad!

I have the 2017 wrx cvt. I kinda like cvts so i love it. I'm getting 25.9 mpg overall which is impressive, but i do a lot of highway driving.

I didn't like the long.shift throws of the wrx manual when i test drove it. The cvt also had less turbo lag than the manual. Some anons mentioned shift points with the cvt and there's really only one in the wrx in normal mode down low, in si drive it feels like a normal automatic transmission and has strong shift points, in sport + mode it switches to the paddle shifters

Yeah you can, just turn off the traction control.

Hey, question for you, if I use "universal" transmission fluid from Canadian Tire (yes, I live in Canada) to refill my transmission, would that completely fuck it up? I'm this guy

Just fucking re fill it, lmao

uhhh
dont you use that shit.
go away.

Is there a car that does a CVT like it's meant to be done, without the retarded artificial shift points?

I've heard the one in the new civic is really good.

honda offers that kind of cvt. no retarded shift points just a continuous flow of rpm. partly because that cvt is belt driven. all cvt civics are like that. all gens

You could always install a short throw shifter. Ive got a manual wrx with a base stock shifter and I don't feel like the throws are super long. But I also have a 3 inch turbo back exhaust cold air intake and a protune to make it all work. You can't do that with the cvt. No one who tunes them will touch the cvt. Shit man, cobb doesn't even have a stage one shelf map for the cvt cause its so unstable when you put more power to it.

I know how they work, but I've heard too many things about double idiot customers making manufacturers put in "shift points" that don't make sense considering what the CVT is actually for.

They put shift points in belt CVTs because they shit themselves early otherwise.

I have never heard of any customer demand a manufacturer to put "shift points" in a cvt what are you on about