The idea of a CVT has been around for many years - because - in theory - they are more efficient than a geared transmission. The Dutch car maker DAF had considerable success in the 1960s in small, light cars; in those days it was a completely mechanical system using belts and variable ratio pulleys. It worked well enough for Volvo to buy DAF to secure the patents. Other companies tried their own designs with less success on larger, heavier cars.
Ford took the plunge with the 2005 Five Hundred: didn't sell as well as it should have because it was offered as a more expensive option than their regular geared automatic. I have a 2007 with CVT and AWD and it is GREAT. Example: I have a very steep, long driveway . . . with every car we have owned it was necessary to manually shift from Drive to Low immediately upon turning onto our drive to prevent the engine from lugging . . . . but not necessary with the CVT it is ALWAYS and INSTANTLY in the correct ratio. The difference between the Ford system and older designs is that the Ford uses computers to continually adjust the ratios. The Ford Five Hundred got an incorrect reputation as being a Volvo design because of its styling and the fact that it offered the AWD and CVT and the fact that Ford owned Volvo at the time. In fact - although the AWD and CVT may share some ideas and patents with Volvo and even use Volvo lubricants, the transmission was designed and built in the US.......the body/chassis design was shared with Volvo, not vice versa.
Unfortunately, the transmission got a bad rap for early failure and expensive repairs that isn't warranted........BUT the transmission needs to be maintained to Ford's recommendation. Their conventional automatics should have fluid changed at 100,000 . . . . but the CVT needs fluid changed at 60,000 miles to renew the anti-wear additives needed by the drive chains.....the service is expensive because it includes the unique trans fluids and there are two hard-to-reach filters to be replaced. Owners either didn't have the service performed, or had some know-nothing quick-lube joint "flush" the transmission with their machine and fill with the wrong fluid. Result: transmission failure . . . local dealers & shops don't know how or want to try rebuilding the CVT . . . the fix becomes a $6000 new transmission replacement. We had ours service as recommended and it continues to function as new with 180,000 miles on it.
YES . . . we like the sensation of no gear changes. Strange that automatics we had in the 1960s-2000s shifted inperceptively, but as makers went to 5, 6, 7 speed automatics - the ones we had shifted abruptly. Not to mention that the CVT reminds us of our '64 Buick Electra with Super Turbine.
And NO - I am not opposed to stick shift - had plenty of them, including a 1959 Alfa-Romeo with a 5-speed that I had to explain to everyone. And I can assure you that it cost more to replace a clutch in that thing than to maintain an automatic!!
While it's a great idea to make a vehicle more efficient I'll wager it all came down to being cheaper to make than the present design we've had in the past. Hey look at it this way. When there are no more gasoline motors available it won't seem so odd driving an electric car that doesn't have shift points ether!
The CVT was created because it ( theoretically ) is a much better design than a conventional transmission.
I would not say that ( all ) of them break down easily though. Look at scooters and snowmobiles for example. They have been using CVT transmission for years and many of those last the life of the machine. CVT's are really only now becoming more common place in cars.
Continuously Variable Transmissions (CVT) are designed to keep the engine turning at the most efficient engine speed (RPM) to conserve fuel. A potentially good idea that hasn't reached its optimum development yet.
I have CVT on my Roketa 150 scooter and I love it. Smooth and quick with zero maintenance problems.
Because they are completely variable and direct drive, they are supposed to be more fuel efficient
They feel odd
They break down easily
Short lifespan
My interpretation is that CVTs were created for weird people who cannot stand the feel of gear shifting, even in automatics. Those who find them traumatic.
If not, why have CVTs in the first place?
