@@occckid123 check this site if you want to compare speeds and accelerations: zeperfs.com/en/duel6717-6667.htm This is the best and biggest database with a lot of neasurements. Or check any video where they use a V-BOX for measurement. The teal difference between the two cars to 100km/h is below 200ms.
M M - I m ready to buy a 2020 Civic Sport Hatchback and literally debating manual or cvt. I own a 2015 civic with cvt- it’s boring- then again mods on a manual have more potential than cvt.
@@Interestingfv That's a great car. I took the CVT because I have much city traffic around from where I live and I just didn't want to clutch and change gears manually all the time.
M M - You’re just like me a lot of stop and go on my commute to and from work 65+ miles per day. Will most likely do a K tuner or a Honda modification since I read that CVT mods are limited.
We have the 2020 Civic Sport Hatch and the 2020 Civic Coupe EX. The Sport (180hp) clocked 0-60 in 6.9. The Coupe EX (174hp) clocked 7.1 sec. Hope that helps.
@@M4B21S88 We used a stop watch and dashboard dial. This is just to compare the difference those 6 hp make on the 2020 Civic Sport 1.5T (180hp) vs 2020 Civic EX 1.5T (174hp). We bought 2 new cars and ran them at 5k miles. Same driver.
@@islandon22 Okay way to determine if there's a difference between your cars, however, in terms of accuracy, not so much (6.9, and 7.1 sec). Most stock 1.5 civics with the cvt range between 7.4 - 8 sec depending on conditions..
We ran it just to know the difference between the 2 cars. The 0-60 time was academic. We just wanted to see what 6hp could do for performance. But we ran at 90°, 1600' Alt, no wind and premium, top tier fuel filled to the top. Didn't give a hoot about 0-60 time to be honest. It "feels" like about 7-7.5 sec. Both were with a CVT. The EX is a coupe.
@@islandon22 Actually, the turbochargers compensate A LOT when in altitude, unlike the NA counterparts. I read somewhere, you can google this but, for example, someone who lives at 4000 ft of elevation and drives a N/A car can lose up to 40% HP, whereas a turbocharged car in the same altitude, will lose about 10% at most. So at your elevation, youre looking at no more than 10 hp maybe..? HEAT, however, will affect the performance even more, and at 90'sF+ youre not gonna be looking at your most ideal 0-60s... Maybe in 50sF temps would do a 6.9 - 7.2 sec , otherwise youre looking more in the 7.3 - 7.8 sec... Regardless, they can pick up so good gain with a Ktuner, so I hear lol
I think the best thing is to rate speed of both manual and cvt base on RPM. Seems close or the same , depends on the player/driver. CVT is easy to use but really depends if a pro driver use the manual. Still I go through manual for control in racing, reliability 100% , still got lots of advantage. Less stress for driver for CVT thou.
Yes, I'd say if you use the full potential of the MT, it's better in terms of fuel efficiency, probably a little quicker and reliability will be better. But as a standard driver, you're not always able to make the perfect timing on gear shifts, so the CVT might be a bit quicker. At higher speeds, the CVT is slower in every way. For longevity and cost, I'd definitely recommend the MT. But I'm a lazy person and streets here are congested, so I'd chose the CVT
In the UK my 1.5 CVT Civic Sport doesn't fake shift like this in either D or S mode, if I'm at 0 with brake hold on then plant the accelerator, in D it gets the revs as high as it can stays there forever as you accelerate, in S mode from 0 is doesn't actually rev as high as it does in D mode but still just holds the revs where they are. Neither mode in my car does this fake shifting that the car in this video does, I wonder if there are slight differences between the cars in different countries.
Not really sure about that, manual shifting at 6.5k. Would have to check if it's worth for that engine to accelerate a bit more in each gear (doubt that, being turbo and not NA)
@@Schreibtisch1 Ah, ok, i see the indicator is different :) The left MT has km/h and the CVT is indicated with mp/h. So the cvt is faster to 100 km/h. The 1.5 ctv have between 7,2 to 7,5 sek. to 100 km/h. I have the 1.5 T cvt civic too. :) The manual one have 7,5 to 8 sek. but in higher speeds, for examble from 150-200 km/h the mt is faster then cvt.
@@michael1701D You're right, that's exactly what I've noticed between the MT and the CVT. I enjoy this car with the CVT very much. I once managed to get 7,2 seconds from 0-100km/h but that was only recorded via Smartphone GPS, I guess it's not that accurate. Here is the video from that. th-cam.com/video/50NqSvSTWrI/w-d-xo.html Since how long are you owning the car, are you happy with it?
@@davidpistek6241 I would prefer the SI because of the looks, but we in Europe don't have the SI. We only have the sedan and the hatchback. So long story short, SI looks better Hatchback is more practical. Do you plan to buy the car with CVT or MT?
@@nasausaf2 It's not a scientific comparison video. It was made just to get a bit of a feel what the differences are. When I made the video, there were nor others available. 62 mph are 100 kmh by the way.
![[LIVE] BABYMONSTER(베이비몬스터) - DRIP | 두시탈출 컬투쇼](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/UG05pxLGwzc/mqdefault.jpg)
Considering that 61 mph is about 98 km/h the difference is around 100-150 ms. Both cars need around 7.8 seconds to 100 km/h real (GPS) speed.
I'm pretty sure he was timing it with a GPS and not looking at the speed on the dash because it's digital.and inaccurate in that regard.
@@occckid123 check this site if you want to compare speeds and accelerations: zeperfs.com/en/duel6717-6667.htm
This is the best and biggest database with a lot of neasurements.
Or check any video where they use a V-BOX for measurement. The teal difference between the two cars to 100km/h is below 200ms.
Yeah and the best conditions possible, if not it can hit 9 seconds on average conditions.
@@MrjavoiThe Man the MT works at 2° C thats so cold for any engine
The manual also gets a huge jump so it's been pulling in the CVT up until 60mph
Very happy with my 1.5T CVT. Smooth and calm in town, fast and responsive when I need to overtake on the motorway.
What is the average consumption on the motorway when you drive it more aggresively?
Can you tell what is avg consumption?
@@vukcvetic9294 I get 6.4L/100km on eco, calm driving. More aggressively, it would be 6.7-7 I reckon.
@@wildrubis9496 6.4L/100km on eco
Appears the CVT is slightly quicker. Thx 4 sharing.
Your welcome. I uploaded another video with the Civic 2.0 engine. In that case the manual is a bit quicker.
M M - I m ready to buy a 2020 Civic Sport Hatchback and literally debating manual or cvt. I own a 2015 civic with cvt- it’s boring- then again mods on a manual have more potential than cvt.
@@Interestingfv That's a great car. I took the CVT because I have much city traffic around from where I live and I just didn't want to clutch and change gears manually all the time.
M M - You’re just like me a lot of stop and go on my commute to and from work 65+ miles per day. Will most likely do a K tuner or a Honda modification since I read that CVT mods are limited.
It would've been a lot quicker if they didn't program it to imitate the regular transmission and just stayed it RPM range it likes.
We have the 2020 Civic Sport Hatch and the 2020 Civic Coupe EX. The Sport (180hp) clocked 0-60 in 6.9. The Coupe EX (174hp) clocked 7.1 sec.
Hope that helps.
What GPS performance meter do you utilize?
@@M4B21S88 We used a stop watch and dashboard dial. This is just to compare the difference those 6 hp make on the 2020 Civic Sport 1.5T (180hp) vs 2020 Civic EX 1.5T (174hp). We bought 2 new cars and ran them at 5k miles. Same driver.
@@islandon22 Okay way to determine if there's a difference between your cars, however, in terms of accuracy, not so much (6.9, and 7.1 sec).
Most stock 1.5 civics with the cvt range between 7.4 - 8 sec depending on conditions..
We ran it just to know the difference between the 2 cars. The 0-60 time was academic. We just wanted to see what 6hp could do for performance. But we ran at 90°, 1600' Alt, no wind and premium, top tier fuel filled to the top. Didn't give a hoot about 0-60 time to be honest. It "feels" like about 7-7.5 sec. Both were with a CVT. The EX is a coupe.
@@islandon22 Actually, the turbochargers compensate A LOT when in altitude,
unlike the NA counterparts. I read somewhere, you can google this but, for example, someone who lives at 4000 ft of elevation and drives a N/A car can lose up to 40% HP, whereas a turbocharged car in the same altitude, will lose about 10% at most.
So at your elevation, youre looking at no more than 10 hp maybe..?
HEAT, however, will affect the performance even more, and at 90'sF+ youre not gonna be looking at your most ideal 0-60s...
Maybe in 50sF temps would do a 6.9 - 7.2 sec , otherwise youre looking more in the 7.3 - 7.8 sec...
Regardless, they can pick up so good gain with a Ktuner, so I hear lol
I think the best thing is to rate speed of both manual and cvt base on RPM.
Seems close or the same , depends on the player/driver.
CVT is easy to use but really depends if a pro driver use the manual.
Still I go through manual for control in racing, reliability 100% , still got lots of advantage. Less stress for driver for CVT thou.
Yes, I'd say if you use the full potential of the MT, it's better in terms of fuel efficiency, probably a little quicker and reliability will be better. But as a standard driver, you're not always able to make the perfect timing on gear shifts, so the CVT might be a bit quicker. At higher speeds, the CVT is slower in every way. For longevity and cost, I'd definitely recommend the MT. But I'm a lazy person and streets here are congested, so I'd chose the CVT
Miles per gallon don’t matter, what matters are the smiles per gallon
CVT FOR THE WIN BABY!!!
💯🔥💯
I don’t understand why it doesn’t just have the 10spd from the accord. Just as good on gas milage and better reliability.
The cvt is in mph and MT is in kmh😅😅😅
101km for auto and 102km for manual in same time so Auto working quit good .
In the UK my 1.5 CVT Civic Sport doesn't fake shift like this in either D or S mode, if I'm at 0 with brake hold on then plant the accelerator, in D it gets the revs as high as it can stays there forever as you accelerate, in S mode from 0 is doesn't actually rev as high as it does in D mode but still just holds the revs where they are. Neither mode in my car does this fake shifting that the car in this video does, I wonder if there are slight differences between the cars in different countries.
Yea my turbo must be busted it doesn't even get close to hitting the top
lovely video
Your shifting too soon, that’s why your times in the manual are slower. I don’t see a great launch either so this doesn’t really show my anything.
Those were collected videos, it's not me driving
M M ok
Not really sure about that, manual shifting at 6.5k. Would have to check if it's worth for that engine to accelerate a bit more in each gear (doubt that, being turbo and not NA)
not true, they're shifting at 6.5k and the engine makes max power at 6k rpm since the small turbo falls off above that rpm
Why CVT doing fake gear change
Never! the 1.5 cvt is faster to 100 km/h. Maybe the cvt is not the 1.5 T
No it's definitely not a lot faster if you're on a straight road. There are enough other acceleration videos, which show you a pretty similar time.
@@Schreibtisch1 Ah, ok, i see the indicator is different :) The left MT has km/h and the CVT is indicated with mp/h.
So the cvt is faster to 100 km/h. The 1.5 ctv have between 7,2 to 7,5 sek. to 100 km/h. I have the 1.5 T cvt civic too. :)
The manual one have 7,5 to 8 sek. but in higher speeds, for examble from 150-200 km/h the mt is faster then cvt.
@@michael1701D You're right, that's exactly what I've noticed between the MT and the CVT. I enjoy this car with the CVT very much.
I once managed to get 7,2 seconds from 0-100km/h but that was only recorded via Smartphone GPS, I guess it's not that accurate.
Here is the video from that.
th-cam.com/video/50NqSvSTWrI/w-d-xo.html
Since how long are you owning the car, are you happy with it?
I'm debating a sport hatchback or a si any opinion?
@@davidpistek6241 I would prefer the SI because of the looks, but we in Europe don't have the SI. We only have the sedan and the hatchback. So long story short, SI looks better Hatchback is more practical. Do you plan to buy the car with CVT or MT?
I'm not a car expert, and I own the same Civic, but those revs are too high aren't they?
It's pretty normal to rev on the redline if you want accelerate but i think the manual can push more lower timing
Do you have the CVT set to granny mode?
Even granny CVT mode is quicker than manual
@@Schreibtisch1 Not by the looks of this video unless I'm seeing it wrong.
@@Schreibtisch1 Oh just noticed one is in km and on is in mph. Why would anyone make a video that compares mph to kmph??
@@nasausaf2 It's not a scientific comparison video. It was made just to get a bit of a feel what the differences are. When I made the video, there were nor others available. 62 mph are 100 kmh by the way.
If you guys notice that the red one is the honda civic type R and BTW did you see any honda civic that is manual exept honda civic type R
Wouldn't the Type R be much faster than that?
And also in Europe most people drive a normal manual transmission, also on their 1.5 Honda Civic.
Ok my bad
Mine have a red dashboard too but cvt. And yes the civic sport/sport touring hatch has a manual
Civic si is manual and also the lx base model comes manual, i have a 2020 civic si and id never own a cvt
Si is manual only.....
Pft. Straight Racing.
Almost
Setup aynı değil
Moruk sağdaki 1.6 büyük ihtimalle 1.5 cvt var bende de sağdakiyle alakası yok soldakinden daha seri
1.6 da turbo göstergesi yok brocum ikiside turbo
@@efecantalay5921 Beyler sağdaki Mil, soldaki Km/h
Hızlanmalar aynı yani arada bir fark yok gözle görülür düzeyde
@@muratderis Ben de nasıl oluyor diyodun ,😀
Cvt- comfort no sport sport is manuel
CVT is a bit faster up to 160 kmh, after that manual is faster
mph vs kmh? the fuck?
@@SBRLVRG There were no other videos available at that time. Like 62 mph is 100 kmh fyi
Hallo
Bruh u can literally change from kph to mph or vice versa in the guage cluster. Why??? 😂😂 Seems like somebody tryna make the CVT seem faster 🤔
Dude you seriously think those are my cars? 😂😂😂
Eso es mentira
это то, о чем я думал
@@Schreibtisch1 yo tengo un cvt y te digo que se pone a 100 en unos 8 seg, solo hice una prueba, y en D.
Pienso que eso es un 1.0