Which has the best A/T: Montero Sport, Fortuner, Everest or Alterra?

[Starex_Gold]

FOR ME

2.7 VVTI A/T TOYOTA FORTUNER

IS THE BEST ..

[SIZE=4]REMINDER:

Do not post messages in ALL CAPS. It is equal to SHOUTING.


Read the rules.

Ignorance of the rules is not an excuse.

Repeat offenses will lead to banning.[/SIZE]

[renzo_d10]

FOR ME

2.7 VVTI A/T TOYOTA FORTUNER

IS THE BEST ..

Galit ka ?

[arsen]

Hwow. Artificial intelligence. What a laugh. Almost all manufacturers use adaptive fuzzy logic in their transmissions nowadays, so INVECS isn't really any different from anything else.

Hahah let me share laughter with you…
“Technology like INVECS LEARNS your driving habits and responds accordingly by altering shift points resulting to a car that knows how you like to drive”.
We talk about automatic transmission here, the machine and INVECS, an adaptive automatic transmission. Not the type of programming used in the machine.
Isn’t it enough that the machine observes (sensors), LEARNS (ECU), do actions (change gears), stores and remembers how you like to drive in order to be called an “Artificial Intelligence” ?
What other output do we want from an adaptive automatic transmission other than to change gears? Do we need the machine to talk, listen and recognize voice? and do other human like actions in order to be called a machine with “Artificial Intelligence”?

Just look at here the other applications of artificial intelligence hope this help clear some fuzziness.
Applications_of_artificial_intelligence

Here, we're not even talking about calibration, reprogramming or electronics diagnosis. We're talking about actual, physical damage and destruction.

Physical damage and destruction does not happen in an instant. There should always be an early sign, followed by malfunction (may already have physical damage during malfunction) which at worst could lead to destruction. Yung mga early signs at malfunctions ay narerepair. Pero kapag damage lalo na destroyed ay basura na talaga. Kaya nasabi ko na “Baka naman kaya po kayo nagkaroon ng unfortunate experience sa repair ay either palpak ang maintenance or palpak ang mechanic”. So I am referring to the early signs and malfunctions kasi yun lang naman ang narerepair.

To be fair po, meron talagang shortcomings ang early design the automatic transmissions or shall I say not designed for worldwide use ang ibang model. Lalo na yung mga gumamamit ng external heat exchangers. Kasi may ibang auto transmission ay walang flow papuntang external oil cooler kung hindi naka engage sa drive ang shifter. So ang ATF ay paikot –ikot lang sa torque converter at sa transmission casing kaya prone sa overheating at nagkukulay itim kaagad ang ATF lalo na yung hinahayaang matagal na nakaandar ang makina na naka neutral lang. Wala naman tayong snow para mag dissipate ng excessive heat. Saka di siguro nag expect ang designer na marami pala tayong panggasolina na gagamitin pala natin ng matagal ang makina para lang matulog na nakabukas ang aircon. Pero lumang design po yan. Halos lahat naman siguro ay nag-improve na and learned from the past. Ngayon po karamihan ay passive heatsink na at integrated na rin sa transmission casing. Pero wag sana pa kampante ang iba. Kung madalas nyo po ginagawa ito (matulog sa sasakyan at naka aircon) lagi nyo rin check ang kulay ng ATF for sign of deterioration. Simpleng visual lang po yan pero effective for early detection.
Isa pa po pala, nakalagay naman siguro sa mga owner's manual ang caution na "Do not rev in P or N" usong uso pa naman sa atin ang e revolution ng todo ang makina bago patayin. Lalo na po yung mga matatanda naku ang hirap pagsabihan na hindi na pwede ang lumang kinagawian.
Yung may mga bad experience naman po mas maganda sana kung may konting details something like: my transmission failed after 10,000 kms, 20,000 kms and etc. Kasi kung general statement lang na it failed, lahat naman at papunta talaga sa failure meron lang pre-mature meron naman matagal.

[niky]

Hahah let me share laughter with you…
“Technology like INVECS LEARNS your driving habits and responds accordingly by altering shift points resulting to a car that knows how you like to drive”.
We talk about automatic transmission here, the machine and INVECS, an adaptive automatic transmission. Not the type of programming used in the machine.
Isn’t it enough that the machine observes (sensors), LEARNS (ECU), do actions (change gears), stores and remembers how you like to drive in order to be called an “Artificial Intelligence” ?
What other output do we want from an adaptive automatic transmission other than to change gears? Do we need the machine to talk, listen and recognize voice? and do other human like actions in order to be called a machine with “Artificial Intelligence”?

Just look at here the other applications of artificial intelligence hope this help clear some fuzziness.
Applications_of_artificial_intelligence

Nowadays, almost all automatic transmissions are adaptive. Mitsubishi is no longer unique in that regard.

And I say it's a laugh because I used to drive an INVECS-equipped Lancer GSR. Really didn't see any benefit or difference in it compared to our automatic-equipped Sentra of the same vintage, except for the manual shifting mode, which wasn't all that responsive, anyway.

I say adaptive transmissions are a laugh because I've driven dozens of them over the past few years for magazine tests. Only once did I feel that a car had actually adapted to my driving style... and many of them were indecisive and did not allow proper manual control.

I want an adaptive automatic to change gears when I want it to change gears. Not before or after. And if it won't change gears when I want, I want it to let me change gears myself.

I have never driven an INVECS transmission that did that. And I've driven most of them. From the four-speed in the GSR to the four-speed in the Lancer 2.0 GT (one of the worst!) to the INVECS in the Outlander (a bit better) to the INVECS in the Montero Sport (meh).

But: Mitsubishi's CVTs and dual-clutches are wonderful. No lag like in Honda, and great power transmission. And they allow nearly full manual control. Only thing bad about the CVT is that they don't allow drag racing... but heck...drag race with an automatic and you're just asking for expensive repair bills.

Physical damage and destruction does not happen in an instant. There should always be an early sign, followed by malfunction (may already have physical damage during malfunction) which at worst could lead to destruction. Yung mga early signs at malfunctions ay narerepair. Pero kapag damage lalo na destroyed ay basura na talaga. Kaya nasabi ko na “Baka naman kaya po kayo nagkaroon ng unfortunate experience sa repair ay either palpak ang maintenance or palpak ang mechanic”. So I am referring to the early signs and malfunctions kasi yun lang naman ang narerepair.

To be fair po, meron talagang shortcomings ang early design the automatic transmissions or shall I say not designed for worldwide use ang ibang model. Lalo na yung mga gumamamit ng external heat exchangers. Kasi may ibang auto transmission ay walang flow papuntang external oil cooler kung hindi naka engage sa drive ang shifter. So ang ATF ay paikot –ikot lang sa torque converter at sa transmission casing kaya prone sa overheating at nagkukulay itim kaagad ang ATF lalo na yung hinahayaang matagal na nakaandar ang makina na naka neutral lang. Wala naman tayong snow para mag dissipate ng excessive heat. Saka di siguro nag expect ang designer na marami pala tayong panggasolina na gagamitin pala natin ng matagal ang makina para lang matulog na nakabukas ang aircon. Pero lumang design po yan. Halos lahat naman siguro ay nag-improve na and learned from the past. Ngayon po karamihan ay passive heatsink na at integrated na rin sa transmission casing. Pero wag sana pa kampante ang iba. Kung madalas nyo po ginagawa ito (matulog sa sasakyan at naka aircon) lagi nyo rin check ang kulay ng ATF for sign of deterioration. Simpleng visual lang po yan pero effective for early detection.
Isa pa po pala, nakalagay naman siguro sa mga owner's manual ang caution na "Do not rev in P or N" usong uso pa naman sa atin ang e revolution ng todo ang makina bago patayin. Lalo na po yung mga matatanda naku ang hirap pagsabihan na hindi na pwede ang lumang kinagawian.
Yung may mga bad experience naman po mas maganda sana kung may konting details something like: my transmission failed after 10,000 kms, 20,000 kms and etc. Kasi kung general statement lang na it failed, lahat naman at papunta talaga sa failure meron lang pre-mature meron naman matagal.

To be fair, yes, physical damage is not immediate. But the statement was in reaction to someone saying that Mitsubishi transmissions are the toughest around. At most, I'd agree that they aren't the worst, but they're not indestructible.

[arsen]

Nowadays, almost all automatic transmissions are adaptive. Mitsubishi is no longer unique in that regard.

And I say it's a laugh because I used to drive an INVECS-equipped Lancer GSR. Really didn't see any benefit or difference in it compared to our automatic-equipped Sentra of the same vintage, except for the manual shifting mode, which wasn't all that responsive, anyway.

I say adaptive transmissions are a laugh because I've driven dozens of them over the past few years for magazine tests. Only once did I feel that a car had actually adapted to my driving style... and many of them were indecisive and did not allow proper manual control.

I want an adaptive automatic to change gears when I want it to change gears. Not before or after. And if it won't change gears when I want, I want it to let me change gears myself.

I have never driven an INVECS transmission that did that. And I've driven most of them. From the four-speed in the GSR to the four-speed in the Lancer 2.0 GT (one of the worst!) to the INVECS in the Outlander (a bit better) to the INVECS in the Montero Sport (meh).

But: Mitsubishi's CVTs and dual-clutches are wonderful. No lag like in Honda, and great power transmission. And they allow nearly full manual control. Only thing bad about the CVT is that they don't allow drag racing... but heck...drag race with an automatic and you're just asking for expensive repair bills.



To be fair, yes, physical damage is not immediate. But the statement was in reaction to someone saying that Mitsubishi transmissions are the toughest around. At most, I'd agree that they aren't the worst, but they're not indestructible.

Fair enough

And connecting those experience and statement of your's can lead us to a conclusion of what kind of "driving style" most adaptive transmissions failed to adapt. But glad to know then that all the cars with adaptive transmissions (that you have driven for magazine tests) have performed pretty well except for one that is suicidal.

Like CVT, all other automatic transmission of mass produced cars are basically not designed for people with race car like driving style.
Adaptive transmissions technology share common goal which is "to avoid frequent and unnecessary shifting" because:
1. It is wasteful (it increases fuel costs and causes additional wear on the engine and transmission).
2. Frequent and unnecessary shifting causes discomfort for both driver and passengers because of the additional noise and vibration.
Whereas cars that were designed for racing are completely the opposite.

So.. Isn't it amazing that because of the technology enhancement, cars with adaptive automatic transmissions can avoid people who has the potentials and tendencies to destroy them earlier than their design life?

[niky]

Fair enough

And connecting those experience and statement of your's can lead us to a conclusion of what kind of "driving style" most adaptive transmissions failed to adapt. But glad to know then that all the cars with adaptive transmissions (that you have driven for magazine tests) have performed pretty well except for one that is suicidal.

:hysterical: Go ahead, try again. You can take cheap shots at me all week long if you'd like.

Like CVT, all other automatic transmission of mass produced cars are basically not designed for people with race car like driving style.
Adaptive transmissions technology share common goal which is "to avoid frequent and unnecessary shifting" because:

1. It is wasteful (it increases fuel costs and causes additional wear on the engine and transmission).
2. Frequent and unnecessary shifting causes discomfort for both driver and passengers because of the additional noise and vibration.
Whereas cars that were designed for racing are completely the opposite.

The goal for adaptive transmissions is to suit the driver and the situation. If the situation is that the driver wants to overtake, indecisiveness and hesitation can put the driver in a dangerous situation where he has less power than he expects at one moment and too much power at the next... which leads to accidents.

If frequent and un-necessary shifting were such a bad thing, all transmissions would basically only have one gear. The goal of a good automatic is to match the engine's performance/economy envelope to the driving situation as needed.

Isn't it strange that the most advanced transmissions shift all the way to overdrive gears right away? That's constant shifting... just to save gasoline! Somebody tell the guys with DCTs and 6-speed to 8-speed automatics that shifting wastes gas!

Unnecessary shifting is bad... and... oh, come on... I was complaining about that, too, wasn't I? Transmissions that would shift erratically whether you wanted them to or not...

I do drive fast at times, but as a road-tester, I test a car in all its aspects. Cruising, traffic, performance. You'll note that some of my complaints in car tests about automatics and automatic-equipped cars are in regard to them downshifting too eagerly or surging on throttle application. Dangerous behavior that gives a driver too much speed at the wheels when he is not expecting such to happen.

You'll note that I've heaped tons of praise on CVTs. Transmissions which "suicidal" drivers hate. Because they're buzzy, boring, blah blah blah. There's where your generalization of me being a redneck driver falls apart... what I look for in an automatic is one that upshifts gently and quickly when I'm pressing lightly on the throttle, and that downshifts or holds gears when I'm pressing harder. "Sports" automatics downshift aggressively... all the time. Which is quite annoying. CVTs almost always give you exactly as much acceleration or engine braking as you desire, which provides the smoothest and most comfortable experience for driver and passengers. They don't give you that "fun" kick in the back as gears change and they can cause the engine to drone, but in my opinion, such "fun" behavior is over-rated and unnecessary on daily driven cars.

So.. Isn't it amazing that because of the technology enhancement, cars with adaptive automatic transmissions can avoid people who has the potentials and tendencies to destroy them earlier than their design life?

Yes, it is. I see automobiles creeping away from teenagers and octogenerians in parking lots all the time... their flashers blinking on and off in horror as their GPS locators frantically try to signal the nearest police station.

Oh... you mean... isn't it amazing that adaptive automatics work to prevent damage to themselves? Yes, I agree.





But didn't I say that already?

Only thing bad about the CVT is that they don't allow drag racing... but heck...drag race with an automatic and you're just asking for expensive repair bills.

-

I really do like Mitsubishi CVTs and the Ralliart DCT is the best dual-clutch I've ever driven, hands down (most DCTs are garbage in comparison), smooth and economical on regular mode and responsive in Sport. But I've never been fond of the regular INVECS automatics. I'm sorry if my opinion of INVECS isn't to your liking, but it's an opinion born of experience, not the reading of marketing literature off the internet...

[ghosthunter]

And connecting those experience and statement of your's can lead us to a conclusion of what kind of "driving style" most adaptive transmissions failed to adapt. But glad to know then that all the cars with adaptive transmissions (that you have driven for magazine tests) have performed pretty well except for one that is suicidal.

Niky and I have similar driving styles, often described as "lunatics" or "maniacs" but not suicidal since we do end up back here to write for you guys.

[ghosthunter]

“Technology like INVECS LEARNS your driving habits and responds accordingly by altering shift points resulting to a car that knows how you like to drive”.
We talk about automatic transmission here, the machine and INVECS, an adaptive automatic transmission. Not the type of programming used in the machine.
Isn’t it enough that the machine observes (sensors), LEARNS (ECU), do actions (change gears), stores and remembers how you like to drive in order to be called an “Artificial Intelligence” ?
What other output do we want from an adaptive automatic transmission other than to change gears? Do we need the machine to talk, listen and recognize voice? and do other human like actions in order to be called a machine with “Artificial Intelligence”?

Well, since you asked, one of two things I want from my intelligent AT, when to change gears and when NOT to change gears.

[arsen]

The goal for adaptive transmissions is to suit the driver and the situation. If the situation is that the driver wants to overtake, indecisiveness and hesitation can put the driver in a dangerous situation where he has less power than he expects at one moment and too much power at the next... which leads to accidents.

Are you referring to the goal of the technology or your wish/expectations?
Do you know were to find the goal of the technology? Where it is written?

I have to say NO to your statement for the safety of others expecting that capability to adapt with such dangerous but avoidable situation. Kasi unang una pa lang eh bakit ka naman kasi mag overtake ng alanganin?

Kaya po siguro kayo nag expect ng ganito kasi may alam kayo na “ADAPTIVE” fuzzy logic since adaptive, it must suit with the driver. Kung walang kumontra sa inyo doon sa sinabi nyo na adaptive fuzzy logic akalain nyo naman tama.

Di po nagvavary ang program parameters to suit with ALL styles and mental state ng driver. kaya wala pong ADAPTIVE fuzzy logic. Mga parameters po ay pre-set at predetermined. Siguro tatawa kayo pagsinabi ko na actually, maraming driver ang meron sa computer. At pipili ang computer kung alin doon ang optimum para sa kasalukuyang nagmamaneho. Ang mga driver po na meron ang computer ay yaong may mga tendencies ng mga good/behave drivers and ibang driver naman ng computer ay mga nagmamaneho ng by the book.

Ang situation po sa example ninyo ay tanging mata lang ang makakapagdetermine (or mga technology kagaya ng sa Google Earth). Wala pa pong mass produced car na may MATA at alam ang daan na kanyang tatahakin para malaman kung may kasalubong or may sharp curve sa unahan.

Going forward po, meron na naimbento which can suit with situations like sa example ninyo. Yan po ang mga tiptronic, +/-, paddle shifters para ma manually override ng driver ang system lalo na kapag kailangang kailangan nya magshift. Separate technology po yan covered by intellectual property rights kaya di lahat malayang makagamit.

If frequent and un-necessary shifting were such a bad thing, all transmissions would basically only have one gear. The goal of a good automatic is to match the engine's performance/economy envelope to the driving situation as needed.

Isn't it strange that the most advanced transmissions shift all the way to overdrive gears right away? That's constant shifting... just to save gasoline! Somebody tell the guys with DCTs and 6-speed to 8-speed automatics that shifting wastes gas!

Unnecessary shifting is bad... and... oh, come on... I was complaining about that, too, wasn't I? Transmissions that would shift erratically whether you wanted them to or not...

“Frequent and unnecessary shifting” sa Tagalog, madalas at di kinakailangan pagkambyo. Example: Sa conventional automatic transmission ay yung mga nasa third gear na tapos pag ni release ng driver ang accelerator pedal from depression dahil may kurbada pero nakuha pang mag-up-shift ng transmission from 3-4 then pag na lampasan na ang curve pag-apak sa accelerator magdodownshift nman from 4-3 then upshift ulet from 3-4. Kakainis di ba?
Di ba unnecessary po yan? papasok na sa curve nag-upshift pa, lumampas na sa curve nag downshift pa tapos up-shift na naman ulet. Kung madalas mangyari yan di ba frequent po yan sa English? Kung minsan naman mangyari yan eh di hinde frequent.

Whereas your example discuss about fast/speedy shifting, mabilis magkambyo. Mabuti at alam na alam nyo na ang DCTs.
Madagdag ko lang na ang DCT ay another technology, a separate invention. Integrated lang po yan sa adaptive transmission technology kagaya ng ginawa sa tiptronic. Dinagdag lang po yan para ma meet ang ibang requirement/expectations ng car owner. Hindi po lahat ng manufacturer makakagamit nyan ng walang license dahil sa intellectual property rights.

I do drive fast at times, but as a road-tester, I test a car in all its aspects. Cruising, traffic, performance. You'll note that some of my complaints in car tests about automatics and automatic-equipped cars are in regard to them downshifting too eagerly or surging on throttle application. Dangerous behavior that gives a driver too much speed at the wheels when he is not expecting such to happen.

You'll note that I've heaped tons of praise on CVTs. Transmissions which "suicidal" drivers hate. Because they're buzzy, boring, blah blah blah. There's where your generalization of me being a redneck driver falls apart... what I look for in an automatic is one that upshifts gently and quickly when I'm pressing lightly on the throttle, and that downshifts or holds gears when I'm pressing harder. "Sports" automatics downshift aggressively... all the time. Which is quite annoying. CVTs almost always give you exactly as much acceleration or engine braking as you desire, which provides the smoothest and most comfortable experience for driver and passengers. They don't give you that "fun" kick in the back as gears change and they can cause the engine to drone, but in my opinion, such "fun" behavior is over-rated and unnecessary on daily driven cars.
Yes, it is. I see automobiles creeping away from teenagers and octogenerians in parking lots all the time... their flashers blinking on and off in horror as their GPS locators frantically try to signal the nearest police station.

Oh... you mean... isn't it amazing that adaptive automatics work to prevent damage to themselves? Yes, I agree.

But didn't I say that already?

The suicidal is the lone car among the dozens of cars that you have driven.

I really do like Mitsubishi CVTs and the Ralliart DCT is the best dual-clutch I've ever driven, hands down (most DCTs are garbage in comparison), smooth and economical on regular mode and responsive in Sport. But I've never been fond of the regular INVECS automatics. I'm sorry if my opinion of INVECS isn't to your liking, but it's an opinion born of experience, not the reading of marketing literature off the internet...

I posted here the goal and some basic concept of the technology hoping that someone expecting something (either for pleasure or safety) will realize that such expectations is not covered by that particular technology.
But the good thing is, there are additional/new technologies that once integrated to the existing one can meet those expectations.
What I am doing is, I am sharing these things I learned about the technology. It’s not from marketing literature. It’s from a certified true, containing unique ideas and they are legally enforced documents.

[arsen]

Well, since you asked, one of two things I want from my intelligent AT, when to change gears and when NOT to change gears.

Sorry bro but I am not asking question actually. Its something like: Ano pa ba ang kailangan nyan gawin para masabi mo na may "artificial intelligence" yan.

But good for you that your AT is doing well.