Fiesta SE Turbo?

[Wunmanband]

The Chevy Aveo is one of the worst stick shifts I've ever driven, but I'd still take it over an automatic. 1 of 4 of my vehicles is an auto... but if I had the parts I would make it a manual for sure.

A manual Bronco will probably hold it's value pretty well if they axe it early on.

What was so bad about the Aveo? (Aside from being a Chevy) and I agree about the bronco. I think that if it's really the wrangler killer they're going for, I'm sure that the standard will stick around

 

[manbearpig]

Clutch with zero feel, stick felt like a spoon in oatmeal, never knew for sure what gear you'd end up in. Plastic shift knob that felt like a toy.

The Fiesta is the only Ford I own, I have three GM vehicles (all at least 20 years old). I can tell you that anything to do with Daewoo (now GM Korea) is utter garbage.

 

[Wunmanband]

Clutch with zero feel, stick felt like a spoon in oatmeal, never knew for sure what gear you'd end up in. Plastic shift knob that felt like a toy.

The Fiesta is the only Ford I own, I have three GM vehicles (all at least 20 years old). I can tell you that anything to do with Daewoo (now GM Korea) is utter garbage.

Yeah that sounds pretty terrible. I'll have to pass on that one!

 

[scotman]

Yeah that sounds pretty terrible. I'll have to pass on that one!

Those issues were just the beginning! The early Avro, prior to 07, had a grossly undersized crank pulley. As the miles went up and the timing belt aged, there was not enough surface area of cogged belt on pulley. The torque shear was greater than the belt cogs could bear and bad things often happened to valves and pistons.
The suspension was minimally adequate for U.S. roads and the front ball joints were done by 40k.
They were originally sold by Daewoo in global markets as Kalos. They were cars that Americans would only recognize if they could remember seeing news footage of them in flash floods in pacific rim nations. Those mud baths were the best thing for them!
The Sonic that GM turned the Aveo into was a much better car. The Aveo was an improved Kalos. Which was an absolute piece of shit with an audio system.

 

[manbearpig]

Those issues were just the beginning! The early Avro, prior to 07, had a grossly undersized crank pulley. As the miles went up and the timing belt aged, there was not enough surface area of cogged belt on pulley. The torque shear was greater than the belt cogs could bear and bad things often happened to valves and pistons.
The suspension was minimally adequate for U.S. roads and the front ball joints were done by 40k.
They were originally sold by Daewoo in global markets as Kalos. They were cars that Americans would only recognize if they could remember seeing news footage of them in flash floods in pacific rim nations. Those mud baths were the best thing for them!
The Sonic that GM turned the Aveo into was a much better car. The Aveo was an improved Kalos. Which was an absolute piece of shit with an audio system.

I think the Daewoo Lanos is my favorite. You loved the already outdated new for 1988 Pontiac LeMans?(also built by Daewoo) Well, we put a new body on it, should sell like hotcakes!

 

[econoboxrocks]

I think the Daewoo Lanos is my favorite. You loved the already outdated new for 1988 Pontiac LeMans?(also built by Daewoo) Well, we put a new body on it, should sell like hotcakes!

 

[econoboxrocks]

That linked me to a free movie. Looks interesting. Jeff Bridges, Francis Ford Coppola. Don't know why I've never seen it.

 

[Calebdrums1985]

I will agree that I wish I went with the manual trans. The powershift in sport mode is actually quite fun and has rev matching on the downshift. Ive been beating the shit out of it lately and have to say its still driving good.

 

[LionsTooth]

It's all in your perspective. My powershift is not a 5 speed that I have to row through. If I had my way, I would have Cayman with paddles (not gearbox). Shifting with a shifter is pretty fun and yes, affords a level of control; I didn't drive my car as an auto until 6 years ago after 36 years of rowing a gearbox. But do I need a gearbox to do go quickly? I tell you what, not many can outdo me in a corner with a car 10 times as expensive with a manual. I simply brake later, carry more mid-corner spend and with it more momentum to exit with. All the while watching the other car get smaller behind me. There is nothing as sweet as seeing a 30-something in a car they have no clue how to drive, running up behind me, all in tizzy, and then I simply drive away from them when it gets twisty. These cars are incredibly nimble. After I get my suspension upgraded, I plan to AX my SE. I can't wait to see some of the faces when they get smoked by an "automatic"! So is a gearbox better than a powershift? Depends on the pilot. Plus, and this is the bottom line....whatever works for you is just what you need. No one else gets to tell you that you are right or wrong.

End of soapbox....stepping down.

 

[manbearpig]

Gearbox will last longer and will be easier to maintain hands down, and that's most if not all car manufacturers.

 

[scotman]

That linked me to a free movie. Looks interesting. Jeff Bridges, Francis Ford Coppola. Don't know why I've never seen it.

One of the fiberglass replica "Movie Tucker 48's" is in a Museum in Ypsilanti, mi. It was built on a 1975 ford LTD chassis and was said to be driveable. The paint and detail finnish of it is very rough. The Jeff Bridges movie was pretty good.

 

[scotman]

It's all in your perspective. My powershift is not a 5 speed that I have to row through. If I had my way, I would have Cayman with paddles (not gearbox). Shifting with a shifter is pretty fun and yes, affords a level of control; I didn't drive my car as an auto until 6 years ago after 36 years of rowing a gearbox. But do I need a gearbox to do go quickly? I tell you what, not many can outdo me in a corner with a car 10 times as expensive with a manual. I simply brake later, carry more mid-corner spend and with it more momentum to exit with. All the while watching the other car get smaller behind me. There is nothing as sweet as seeing a 30-something in a car they have no clue how to drive, running up behind me, all in tizzy, and then I simply drive away from them when it gets twisty. These cars are incredibly nimble. After I get my suspension upgraded, I plan to AX my SE. I can't wait to see some of the faces when they get smoked by an "automatic"! So is a gearbox better than a powershift? Depends on the pilot. Plus, and this is the bottom line....whatever works for you is just what you need. No one else gets to tell you that you are right or wrong.

End of soapbox....stepping down.

I found the Powershift to be a faster autox car on a big course than the manual transmission fiesta.
I rented a powershift hatchback and prepared it the same as my , then new, 2011 m/t Fiesta. Then i let two very experienced drivers flog the crap outta them at a regional SCCA event! They both came back with the verdict that the DPS6 was the faster of the two.

 

[LionsTooth]

Gearbox will last longer and will be easier to maintain hands down, and that's most if not all car manufacturers.

Well, not sure I agree with the premise of your statement. Since the powershift is a 5-speed gearbox on two shafts (dual clutch), not an automatic, I cannot agree on a maintenance level. Now because it has a computer to move the tines and operate the clutch that is something I cannot speak from experience, yet. But in general none of the general maintenance issues you see with a slush-box automatic, apply here.

 

[manbearpig]

It shifts automatically... So it is an automatic. A CVT is also an automatic that is not a "slushbox". Look how easy they are to maintain. To say Ford's Powershift transmissions are in general reliable is kind of a joke considering all of the problems they've had with them.

Manuals will usually last the life of the car, and that includes the clutch and hydraulic system. In the event of failure, manuals are cheaper by far to rebuild and diagnose problems.

BTW, I thought the Powershift was a 6 speed auto, not 5.

 

[Calebdrums1985]

It shifts automatically... So it is an automatic. A CVT is also an automatic that is not a "slushbox". Look how easy they are to maintain. To say Ford's Powershift transmissions are in general reliable is kind of a joke considering all of the problems they've had with them.

Manuals will usually last the life of they car, and that includes the clutch and hydraulic system. In the event of failure, manuals are cheaper by far to rebuild and diagnose problems.

BTW, I thought the Powershift was a 6 speed auto, not 5.

The powershift is a 6speed but as we all know 6th gear is a gas saving cruise gear....so yeah.

 

[manbearpig]

Also if you think driving a manual is about going faster than someone else, you are sorely mistaken.

 

[Handy Andy]

CVT Technology can take a simple 3-speed Auto tranny with it's torque converter and make it highly efficient - as long as the engine and the load it has to push thru that tranny - is light. Hence your marshmallow feel to the drive...Faster? Kinda relative - depends on your launch and how you decide to launch. Dead stop? one effort, the downshift to pass or exit? That's' another.

When the load or the demand on torque increases, the CVT is just like any typical auto tranny - with one exception - the torque converter itself is forced to change ratios in order to meet the demand. It's also not a typical torque converter - it can sit there and spin for several seconds until it makes up it's mind on what gear to launch from - have to be aware of this when you are in panic jumps - might want to turn off that eco and leave it in sport to hold the gear longer.

So to counter that some on todays newer vehicles are offering a optional "X - speed" (non-CVT) transmission with the "X" being the extra band of gears - doesn't mean it's faster - just means the torque ratios are closer together covering an advantage of efficiency and torque - you don't get smoother shifts than the CVT - you just feel the shifting "jump" of the older days of the "long gear intermediate" a lot less in-between the bands covering that level of torque.

The Manual is a throwback, to a simpler time - but also provide the most control left to the driver on any of the above options. You decide the throttle, pressure of the plate and the gear thru your input and sensory of the conditions - not the best efficiency but it does provide the best level of control being left to the driver to decide.

So if they offer more gears in manual - you stand a better chance to reach the shift ranges thru speed shifting - that can occur faster than trying to clutch thru those gears - let the syncros in the gearbox help the engine find those gears.

To me 8 gears in a manual may seem like a lot, but it's not when you're an everyday drive commuter - the higher gear bands can provide that higher level of cruise efficiency - at the price of shifting a lot more if you're in commuter traffic, but the closer ratio of bands allows you to choose the right gear per load and feel of how you wish to be in control as a speed shifter - quicker to keep with and even pass the autos' that wait for their PCM/Drive Train to decide how to arrive to the next gear.

It's the engine that can suffer the loading a bogging down from those that want to keep the engine at near idle driving thru city streets at 40MPH.

CVT or non-CVT versus Manual - the torque converters bear the brunt of that load shift and impact and don't "lockup" unless the engine and road speeds are high enough to warrant the lockup then the efficiency takes over - it's just not very efficient in getting to that point.

 

[scotman]

My 2011 had such intrusive nannies that one of the few things i could feel was the stability controls and abs conspiring to slow me down.

 

[scotman]

CVT Technology can take a simple 3-speed Auto tranny with it's torque converter and make it highly efficient - as long as the engine and the load it has to push thru that tranny - is light. Hence your marshmallow feel to the drive...Faster? Kinda relative - depends on your launch and how you decide to launch. Dead stop? one effort, the downshift to pass or exit? That's' another.

When the load or the demand on torque increases, the CVT is just like any typical auto tranny - with one exception - the torque converter itself is forced to change ratios in order to meet the demand. It's also not a typical torque converter - it can sit there and spin for several seconds until it makes up it's mind on what gear to launch from - have to be aware of this when you are in panic jumps - might want to turn off that eco and leave it in sport to hold the gear longer.

So to counter that some on todays newer vehicles are offering a optional "X - speed" (non-CVT) transmission with the "X" being the extra band of gears - doesn't mean it's faster - just means the torque ratios are closer together covering an advantage of efficiency and torque - you don't get smoother shifts than the CVT - you just feel the shifting "jump" of the older days of the "long gear intermediate" a lot less in-between the bands covering that level of torque.

The Manual is a throwback, to a simpler time - but also provide the most control left to the driver on any of the above options. You decide the throttle, pressure of the plate and the gear thru your input and sensory of the conditions - not the best efficiency but it does provide the best level of control being left to the driver to decide.

So if they offer more gears in manual - you stand a better chance to reach the shift ranges thru speed shifting - that can occur faster than trying to clutch thru those gears - let the syncros in the gearbox help the engine find those gears.

To me 8 gears in a manual may seem like a lot, but it's not when you're an everyday drive commuter - the higher gear bands can provide that higher level of cruise efficiency - at the price of shifting a lot more if you're in commuter traffic, but the closer ratio of bands allows you to choose the right gear per load and feel of how you wish to be in control as a speed shifter - quicker to keep with and even pass the autos' that wait for their PCM/Drive Train to decide how to arrive to the next gear.

It's the engine that can suffer the loading a bogging down from those that want to keep the engine at near idle driving thru city streets at 40MPH.

CVT or non-CVT versus Manual - the torque converters bear the brunt of that load shift and impact and don't "lockup" unless the engine and road speeds are high enough to warrant the lockup then the efficiency takes over - it's just not very efficient in getting to that point.

We always refer to the cvt acceleration-shift feel as "stretchy". I have never driven a cvt that I liked. I understand that the ratios are always in the sweet spot of the power band. But, it still has such a strange feel that I just don't know how to find a way to appreciate.

 

[Handy Andy]

My 2011 had such intrusive nannies that one of the few things i could feel was the stability controls and abs conspiring to slow me down.

Whoo Hoo!

The "Conspiring" part is what makes this so true...